I see this as very interesting. I don't think it's a bad thing either.
Just know that Microsoft is going to market this as Windows for the Macintosh. If we're lucky, we'll see improved performance, maybe some 3d acceleration (with support for our actual graphics cards), and maybe a reduction in price since Connectix doesn't have to buy Windows from Microsoft any more.
The downside? We'll probably lose the ability to run any OS other than Windows in the new Virtual PC.
MS will probably tie what's left of Virtual PC exclusively with Windows XP. I'm wondering if they might try and make this very similar to a 'Classic' environment.
I have a bad feeling about this development, in general, but:
Don't forget that Connectix makes Virtual PC for Windows. This actually is cousin to the "virtual machine" technology that IBM and its ilk use in higher end servers, and I can see why MS would be interested in the technology, absent any consideration for the Mac.
That's pretty much the best case. I feel comfortable dismissing their pledges not to mess with the product out of hand - that's a standard line to shut people up. If they want to kill or change VPC as a product, they will.
As for the antitrust suits slowing them down: <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> They basically got a slap on the wrist and a carte blanche to continue as if nothing untoward had happened, because neither Ashcroft nor Bush seems to think they've ever done anything wrong in the first place. They will do as they please, and one way or another they'll either crush or simply outlast anyone who tries to slow them down. MS won't try to kill Apple outright - where would they get their ideas? - but they will certainly do everything they can to keep Apple snug in its niche.
<conspiritory rant>Now all that Microshaft has to aquire is <a href="http://www.dataviz.com/products/macopener/"; target="_blank">DataViz</a> and they'll have Apple by the balls...
Actually, that is more horrifying. Imagine if they did aquire DataViz's MacOpener. Then you wouldn't need a Mac at all to open Mac files on a Windows PC...the horror...the horror... <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> </conspiritory rant>
a) MS is giving a 6 month commitment (lord knows what happens after that)
b) this is a good op for a 3rd party to come out with a new VirtualPC
c) could the fact that X11 was released by Apple have anything to do with this? That Apple knew this was happening and released X11 to alay some fears or show that Mac still has surprises? Compatibility, etc?
I agree with Fawkes. Since MS provides Virtual PC, they may discontinuing all Mac native applications one day, and convince the government it is not a monopolistic practice. Folks can run Windows applications on the Mac with VPC. MS could afford to give away VPC to pull this one off. They could also attempt to convince others to drop Mac versions of applications, since Mac users would have VPC available to them, for free. Just something to think about.
funny quote at Slashdot.. and other ideas that come up. MS Charging for Virtual Liscences... egads
[quote]
Johnny has 25 NT boxes and 19 of them have WVMS (windows virtual machine software) running on them. If 7 of those 19 are running WVMS within WVMS and 3 of those 7 are running Win2k Advanced Server, and the other 4 are running WinXP Pro, while the rest of the 19 are using WinME in the WVMS for backwards compatability issues. How many licenses will you need?
Bonus: How much will this cost including the inflation of the economy and of Microsoft's prices by the year 2004?
M$ just went throught how many years of anti-trust lawsuits. They'd have to be nuts to do any of the stuff your saying. Just think how bad they'd be screwed if they took away office of VPC.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Overreacting?
You've said it yourself-- MS has gone through years of anti-trust suits. The Netscape suit was just the most recent one. Remember DR-DOS? Of course not, because M$ used the same tactic there. M$ lost that anti-trust suit as well.
Get the point? That's their standard operation procedure.
<strong>a) MS is giving a 6 month commitment (lord knows what happens after that)
c) could the fact that X11 was released by Apple have anything to do with this? That Apple knew this was happening and released X11 to alay some fears or show that Mac still has surprises? Compatibility, etc?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
6 months and then I bet they kill it. Especially since the ppc 970 is on the way.
Regarding X11 having to do with this, I would say no. Couldn't microsoft create their own software to do the same thing as X11?
Forgive my ignorace on all this, but what do you all use VPC for? What programs absolutely need to run in windows which don't mind running really slowly?
<strong>Perhaps not now...but it's their little ace in the hole. Frankly it sometimes amazes me why MS even cares what Apple does since it hardly a threat.
Other than us folks here at AI, the world is PC centric and the topic of whether something is Mac compatible rarely is even spoken of in day to day usage.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The thread title should read MS acquires Connectix.
You're all overreacting. MS is salivating over the high end server market, they've just bought themselves a way in. VPC just happend to come along with Connectix. I doubt the OS/2 version will be around much longer, and I'm sure they'll stop selling the Dos only version, but other than that VPC can't exactly get any worse.
Microsoft is not to be trusted. I cringe every time they gobble up another company. <hr></blockquote>
I as thinking the same thing. This is not good new at all.
And for those of you who are saying that this is a good opportunity for a 3rd party, VPC has been in development for many years to reach the state it is in today. Anyone remember Softwindows? VPC soundly beat the competition...this makes me think any upstarts would be YEARS behind connec...I mean M$. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
What's the betting that the first version of VPC under M$'s reign will only support WinXP?
Can't say I've ever had any requirement for VPC (that's what the crappy Windoze box is for), and I hope that Apple is able to consolidate its position so that this doesn't become an issue...
This may give M$ a neutron bomb, but Apple has two answers up their sleeves: X11 and Darwin on x86. Once OpenOffice is ready for prime time, Apple will probably find they need MSOffice a whole lot less. If not, Apple can make all the rumor sites orgasm by rolling out OSX for x86 bundled with an OSX-optimized WINE. Viola, MSOffice back on Mac.
<strong>Forgive my ignorace on all this, but what do you all use VPC for? What programs absolutely need to run in windows which don't mind running really slowly?
Thanks in advance!</strong><hr></blockquote>
i tried to ask the same question... still not sure..
Comments
Just know that Microsoft is going to market this as Windows for the Macintosh. If we're lucky, we'll see improved performance, maybe some 3d acceleration (with support for our actual graphics cards), and maybe a reduction in price since Connectix doesn't have to buy Windows from Microsoft any more.
The downside? We'll probably lose the ability to run any OS other than Windows in the new Virtual PC.
MS will probably tie what's left of Virtual PC exclusively with Windows XP. I'm wondering if they might try and make this very similar to a 'Classic' environment.
Very interesting to say the least.
me.. never touched it. never needed to.
Microsoft is not to be trusted. I cringe every time they gobble up another company.
Don't forget that Connectix makes Virtual PC for Windows. This actually is cousin to the "virtual machine" technology that IBM and its ilk use in higher end servers, and I can see why MS would be interested in the technology, absent any consideration for the Mac.
That's pretty much the best case. I feel comfortable dismissing their pledges not to mess with the product out of hand - that's a standard line to shut people up. If they want to kill or change VPC as a product, they will.
As for the antitrust suits slowing them down: <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> They basically got a slap on the wrist and a carte blanche to continue as if nothing untoward had happened, because neither Ashcroft nor Bush seems to think they've ever done anything wrong in the first place. They will do as they please, and one way or another they'll either crush or simply outlast anyone who tries to slow them down. MS won't try to kill Apple outright - where would they get their ideas? - but they will certainly do everything they can to keep Apple snug in its niche.
Actually, that is more horrifying. Imagine if they did aquire DataViz's MacOpener. Then you wouldn't need a Mac at all to open Mac files on a Windows PC...the horror...the horror... <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> </conspiritory rant>
b) this is a good op for a 3rd party to come out with a new VirtualPC
c) could the fact that X11 was released by Apple have anything to do with this? That Apple knew this was happening and released X11 to alay some fears or show that Mac still has surprises? Compatibility, etc?
d) VPC, I shall miss thee...
[quote]
Johnny has 25 NT boxes and 19 of them have WVMS (windows virtual machine software) running on them. If 7 of those 19 are running WVMS within WVMS and 3 of those 7 are running Win2k Advanced Server, and the other 4 are running WinXP Pro, while the rest of the 19 are using WinME in the WVMS for backwards compatability issues. How many licenses will you need?
Bonus: How much will this cost including the inflation of the economy and of Microsoft's prices by the year 2004?
<hr></blockquote>
<strong>All of you are overracting.
M$ just went throught how many years of anti-trust lawsuits. They'd have to be nuts to do any of the stuff your saying. Just think how bad they'd be screwed if they took away office of VPC.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Overreacting?
You've said it yourself-- MS has gone through years of anti-trust suits. The Netscape suit was just the most recent one. Remember DR-DOS? Of course not, because M$ used the same tactic there. M$ lost that anti-trust suit as well.
Get the point? That's their standard operation procedure.
<strong>a) MS is giving a 6 month commitment (lord knows what happens after that)
c) could the fact that X11 was released by Apple have anything to do with this? That Apple knew this was happening and released X11 to alay some fears or show that Mac still has surprises? Compatibility, etc?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
6 months and then I bet they kill it. Especially since the ppc 970 is on the way.
Regarding X11 having to do with this, I would say no. Couldn't microsoft create their own software to do the same thing as X11?
Thanks in advance!
<strong>Perhaps not now...but it's their little ace in the hole. Frankly it sometimes amazes me why MS even cares what Apple does since it hardly a threat.
Other than us folks here at AI, the world is PC centric and the topic of whether something is Mac compatible rarely is even spoken of in day to day usage.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The thread title should read MS acquires Connectix.
You're all overreacting. MS is salivating over the high end server market, they've just bought themselves a way in. VPC just happend to come along with Connectix. I doubt the OS/2 version will be around much longer, and I'm sure they'll stop selling the Dos only version, but other than that VPC can't exactly get any worse.
[ 02-19-2003: Message edited by: serrano ]</p>
Microsoft is not to be trusted. I cringe every time they gobble up another company. <hr></blockquote>
I as thinking the same thing. This is not good new at all.
And for those of you who are saying that this is a good opportunity for a 3rd party, VPC has been in development for many years to reach the state it is in today. Anyone remember Softwindows? VPC soundly beat the competition...this makes me think any upstarts would be YEARS behind connec...I mean M$. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
Very Bad...
X-Box on the mac/PC?!
[ 02-19-2003: Message edited by: Paul ]</p>
Can't say I've ever had any requirement for VPC (that's what the crappy Windoze box is for), and I hope that Apple is able to consolidate its position so that this doesn't become an issue...
Interesting times, interesting times...
<strong>Forgive my ignorace on all this, but what do you all use VPC for? What programs absolutely need to run in windows which don't mind running really slowly?
Thanks in advance!</strong><hr></blockquote>
i tried to ask the same question... still not sure..