When they want to make something in windows, they need to put developers, testing, money over to that side. As it is, apple works their employees very hard. My friend is SQA at apple and works an insane amount of hours. Apple has so much up it's sleeve it really doesn't make much sense to go back over to windows and create perfect support for it. IMO it should be something to just get you by. Something I'm most excited about is using autocad on the mac. Even though autocad sucks compared to a lot of cad programs now days, it's still the industry standard no matter where you go!
But to get us back on topic...
Someone mentioned above about Synaptics producing just click-wheels for the upgrades... who's to say Synaptics couldn't produce the screen with the integrated click-wheel?
I think it would get Synaptics right back in there with a grand slam!
I don't think there'd be a true advantage for Apple to deliberately keep some drivers (e.g. iSight) away. The iSight has already been hacked to run on Linux, so it's only a matter of time until someone figures out the same for Windows (it's a matter of extracting the firmware).
Therefore, a third-party driver will inevitably pop up, so Apple's "let's make Mac OS X look better" wouldn't have worked out.
A hacked solution is never going to become widespread. A few people use it, and that's it!
Many times Apple has been taken to task for not supporting features, or technologies themselves, as this is the ONLY way that it will become widespread.
BootCamp itself, is an example. no matter how popular Parallel's software becomes, or Crossover, neither will ever hope to have the impact of a natively supported technology.
So, if some hack comes out, the techies will use it, and no one else.
Well, Parallels is actually very widespread, to the point where Apple even sells it in their retail stores. I do see your point, though, and expected it to come up. But you have to take into account that this could easily be seen as Apple deliberately worsening the Windows experience, and that will give Apple negative press.
Whereas, "you can do everything(!) in Windows with our hardware, but in Mac OS X, you can do it better!" would give positive press.
Well, Parallels is actually very widespread, to the point where Apple even sells it in their retail stores. I do see your point, though, and expected it to come up. But you have to take into account that this could easily be seen as Apple deliberately worsening the Windows experience, and that will give Apple negative press.
Whereas, "you can do everything(!) in Windows with our hardware, but in Mac OS X, you can do it better!" would give positive press.
It could be true about the negative press, though, so that hasn't happened. I'm not sure that most people will think about it too much, except to notice it.
Remember that Apple could sell 5.5 million, or more machines this year, and 6 to 7 million next year.
All of those will have Boot Camp, or the Leopard equivalent. Compared to how many sales of Parallel's or Crossover's software (or anything else)? 25 thousand? 50 thousand? 100 thousand? 200 thousand? Maybe?
Remember that Apple could sell 5.5 million, or more machines this year, and 6 to 7 million next year.
I'm more optimistic than that, myself.
Quote:
All of those will have Boot Camp, or the Leopard equivalent.
How so? Boot Camp requires a download plus a firmware update. Hardly something "all of those will have". Leopard won't even be out this year, unless something really unexpected happens.
So, I'm not sure Boot Camp will in fact be that wildly more popular than Parallels.
Inwardly, I am. But I try to force myself to be more conservative.
Quote:
How so? Boot Camp requires a download plus a firmware update. Hardly something "all of those will have". Leopard won't even be out this year, unless something really unexpected happens.
So, I'm not sure Boot Camp will in fact be that wildly more popular than Parallels.
All machines next year, assuming that Leopard will come out in January, as some think, will have it. It's a free download from Apple. The firmware is only need on the earliest machines, and is easy to apply. So, maybe I'm a bit hasty about this years models, but I'll bet that far more people will be using Boot Camp than will be buying Parallel's software this year.
Also, it's very likely that Apple will continue to include this in Leopard, and whatever comes afterwards, likely much improved, or changed.
No matter how you look at it, whatever Apple supplies, it will far outstrip anything anyone else supplies. That's just the way it is.
That's the same thing that the PC industry went to war with MS about. The fact that MS includes software that kills their businesses, such as the browser. At the time, no one thought that Netscape could be dislodged. But it's amazing what free software, especially when included on every machine, can do.
Adobe had the same thing happen to Persuasion. Powerpoint was always considered to be a poor competitor. It could never compete as a stand alone product. Persuasion had outsold them by 3 to 1.
When MS added Powerpoint to Office, it killed Persuasion. Sales tumbled. Adobe stopped upgrading it, and finally discontinued it. I was surprised that it didn't become part of the federal lawsuit.
Whatever Apple's solution is, even if it isn't the best for some, it will be the dominant one. It will define way it is done, and it will make people pay attention to the Mac as a viable solution.
I'm sure that Apple doesn't care that much how people get persuaded to move over, as long as they do. But it requires a built-in solution to do it, even if people later find what they think is a better one, and for some, Parallels is a better one, just as Crossover will be.
EDIT:
I almost forgot to say that in favor of Crossover, for many people it will be the best solution, because as long as it runs their programs it will be the cheapest solution. It will cost $60, but then you don't need Windows at all.
If someone starts with that, they can always buy Windows later, and either use Parallels, or BootCamp.
Oh, and just one more thing ,
Parallels is working on a solution that might or might not work, but looks interesting. If it does work, it will let you use Windows from your BootCamp partition to run in Parallels, best of two worlds.
I think that of the 3 things I mentioned, the first two are actually neccessary to offer users the full windows experience. Using the trackpad to to control things in Windows is currently not a workable solution, you have to have an external mouse to get anything done. Also, being able to output your signal to s-video is a fairly standard thing across the laptop world (at least with an adapter). I don't think Apple would leave these two features hobbled. The 3rd item I predicted was really just hoping (hence the vagueness).
Melgross-
you say one has to wonder why they haven't already included these features. What about my proposition, that they would like this to be a selling point for Leopard. I think a lot of users would upgrade just to obtain the very features I predicted. If it makes the difference (between upgrading now or much later) to enough users, that could easily justify the relatively small amount of work it would take to implement these features.
you say one has to wonder why they haven't already included these features. What about my proposition, that they would like this to be a selling point for Leopard. I think a lot of users would upgrade just to obtain the very features I predicted. If it makes the difference (between upgrading now or much later) to enough users, that could easily justify the relatively small amount of work it would take to implement these features. [/B]
Comments
Originally posted by melgross
But, of course, I could be wrong as well.
I actually agree with you...
When they want to make something in windows, they need to put developers, testing, money over to that side. As it is, apple works their employees very hard. My friend is SQA at apple and works an insane amount of hours. Apple has so much up it's sleeve it really doesn't make much sense to go back over to windows and create perfect support for it. IMO it should be something to just get you by. Something I'm most excited about is using autocad on the mac. Even though autocad sucks compared to a lot of cad programs now days, it's still the industry standard no matter where you go!
But to get us back on topic...
Someone mentioned above about Synaptics producing just click-wheels for the upgrades... who's to say Synaptics couldn't produce the screen with the integrated click-wheel?
I think it would get Synaptics right back in there with a grand slam!
Originally posted by Chucker
I don't think there'd be a true advantage for Apple to deliberately keep some drivers (e.g. iSight) away. The iSight has already been hacked to run on Linux, so it's only a matter of time until someone figures out the same for Windows (it's a matter of extracting the firmware).
Therefore, a third-party driver will inevitably pop up, so Apple's "let's make Mac OS X look better" wouldn't have worked out.
A hacked solution is never going to become widespread. A few people use it, and that's it!
Many times Apple has been taken to task for not supporting features, or technologies themselves, as this is the ONLY way that it will become widespread.
BootCamp itself, is an example. no matter how popular Parallel's software becomes, or Crossover, neither will ever hope to have the impact of a natively supported technology.
So, if some hack comes out, the techies will use it, and no one else.
Whereas, "you can do everything(!) in Windows with our hardware, but in Mac OS X, you can do it better!" would give positive press.
Originally posted by Chucker
Well, Parallels is actually very widespread, to the point where Apple even sells it in their retail stores. I do see your point, though, and expected it to come up.
Whereas, "you can do everything(!) in Windows with our hardware, but in Mac OS X, you can do it better!" would give positive press.
It could be true about the negative press, though, so that hasn't happened. I'm not sure that most people will think about it too much, except to notice it.
Remember that Apple could sell 5.5 million, or more machines this year, and 6 to 7 million next year.
All of those will have Boot Camp, or the Leopard equivalent. Compared to how many sales of Parallel's or Crossover's software (or anything else)? 25 thousand? 50 thousand? 100 thousand? 200 thousand? Maybe?
Originally posted by melgross
Remember that Apple could sell 5.5 million, or more machines this year, and 6 to 7 million next year.
I'm more optimistic than that, myself.
All of those will have Boot Camp, or the Leopard equivalent.
How so? Boot Camp requires a download plus a firmware update. Hardly something "all of those will have". Leopard won't even be out this year, unless something really unexpected happens.
So, I'm not sure Boot Camp will in fact be that wildly more popular than Parallels.
Originally posted by Chucker
I'm more optimistic than that, myself.
Inwardly, I am. But I try to force myself to be more conservative.
Quote:
How so? Boot Camp requires a download plus a firmware update. Hardly something "all of those will have". Leopard won't even be out this year, unless something really unexpected happens.
So, I'm not sure Boot Camp will in fact be that wildly more popular than Parallels.
All machines next year, assuming that Leopard will come out in January, as some think, will have it. It's a free download from Apple. The firmware is only need on the earliest machines, and is easy to apply. So, maybe I'm a bit hasty about this years models, but I'll bet that far more people will be using Boot Camp than will be buying Parallel's software this year.
Also, it's very likely that Apple will continue to include this in Leopard, and whatever comes afterwards, likely much improved, or changed.
No matter how you look at it, whatever Apple supplies, it will far outstrip anything anyone else supplies. That's just the way it is.
That's the same thing that the PC industry went to war with MS about. The fact that MS includes software that kills their businesses, such as the browser. At the time, no one thought that Netscape could be dislodged. But it's amazing what free software, especially when included on every machine, can do.
Adobe had the same thing happen to Persuasion. Powerpoint was always considered to be a poor competitor. It could never compete as a stand alone product. Persuasion had outsold them by 3 to 1.
When MS added Powerpoint to Office, it killed Persuasion. Sales tumbled. Adobe stopped upgrading it, and finally discontinued it. I was surprised that it didn't become part of the federal lawsuit.
Whatever Apple's solution is, even if it isn't the best for some, it will be the dominant one. It will define way it is done, and it will make people pay attention to the Mac as a viable solution.
I'm sure that Apple doesn't care that much how people get persuaded to move over, as long as they do. But it requires a built-in solution to do it, even if people later find what they think is a better one, and for some, Parallels is a better one, just as Crossover will be.
EDIT:
I almost forgot to say that in favor of Crossover, for many people it will be the best solution, because as long as it runs their programs it will be the cheapest solution. It will cost $60, but then you don't need Windows at all.
If someone starts with that, they can always buy Windows later, and either use Parallels, or BootCamp.
Oh, and just one more thing
Parallels is working on a solution that might or might not work, but looks interesting. If it does work, it will let you use Windows from your BootCamp partition to run in Parallels, best of two worlds.
Keep your fingers crossed!
Melgross-
you say one has to wonder why they haven't already included these features. What about my proposition, that they would like this to be a selling point for Leopard. I think a lot of users would upgrade just to obtain the very features I predicted. If it makes the difference (between upgrading now or much later) to enough users, that could easily justify the relatively small amount of work it would take to implement these features.
Originally posted by bdj21ya
Melgross-
you say one has to wonder why they haven't already included these features. What about my proposition, that they would like this to be a selling point for Leopard. I think a lot of users would upgrade just to obtain the very features I predicted. If it makes the difference (between upgrading now or much later) to enough users, that could easily justify the relatively small amount of work it would take to implement these features. [/B]
That's always possible, of course.