I think 10.5, "Leopard" will have some sort of feature to emulate windows software on an mac, it esp. makes sense because of the switch to intel.
Just puttin the idea out there
Comment from Phil Schiller following the keynote yesterday -
"After the keynote, Apple's Phil Schiller stated that there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."
This is from a very good series of reactions from Mac game developers at www.insidemacgames.com.
That actually sounds interesting. Can you run games?
Yes, some.
Quote:
Some developer over at inside mac games said that once "Win32 virtual machines" get released that Mac Game porting will end.
Another developer over there (anonymously, naturally) claims it is the death of the platform in general. Take with large chunks of salt.
Quote:
Does this mean that we will be able to run windows games on macs? Can you play windows games on machines running Linux?
Some, and some.
WINE isn't a panacea any more than Rosetta is, but it makes a rough but ready migration path. With some refinement, say, a year or so of good solid work, it could be a nice augmentation, like X11.app is now. Use it to run the apps that haven't been made native, that you really really need, and would otherwise stop you from switching.
Kickaha: You could futz with WINE, but I bet some nice solutions for installing Windows itself and dual-booting will appear very quickly.
I can't help but think this is one of the strategic motivations behind this move. How much easier could it be for Windows users to buy a Mac if they can still run Windows apps or even Windows itself if they want to?
Think of the folks who really kinda want a Mac, but there's that *one* app that they can't live without, and it's Windows only. Well, now there's really no excuse not to.
How much easier could it be for Windows users to buy a Mac if they can still run Windows apps or even Windows itself if they want to?
Not much easier.
Before yesterday, your 3 selling point for Macs were basically more advanced processor architecture, better os, and (the most superficial of all) better looking cases.
Apple is phasing out the first selling point. Now you have the os and case designs. If somebody decides that they wan to use XP and/or Longhorn, that only leaves better looking cases. And since we already know how cheap PC consumers can be, that's going to sell a tiny amount of hardware if Apple continues to shoot for high margins.
Apple also still has the huge benefit of having control over the hardware/software combination. It seems to me that a large chunck of apple users (and potentially bigger future chunk) like the machines because they don't need to deal with the mess of technologies that makes up the pc world.
Now that a good night's sleep has helped the confusion, here are some thoughts.
Apple design and Intel chipsets. I am sure that apple will design the Fastest macs that anyone has yet seen. This will be compared with all of the other intel boxes outhere and Blow the Doom crowd out of their seats. Look out alienware because now you can have the simplicity and ease of use of the mac and native windows games!
For the enterprise crowd- You get rock solid stable OS that will run your custom apps if needed. Throw in some Xserves and some other Mac hardware and much of your IT frustrations can be eliminated. Granted this may be the marketing hyperbole but, I do believe that apple will come out swinging.
Now as for PPC I believe that Rosetta will be integrated into Leopard and will allow for future PPC chipsets to be built into the Mac. This will keep the gun away from apple's head and allow them to pick the chip that more easily suits the design. If IBM or Freescale get their s*it together then apple can buy the wiz bang chip from them without much pain. The apple software team will have another 18 months to fit this together.
All in all, I think that the move and this subsequent market strategy will benefit apple. Steve didn't like being made a fool of over the "3GHZ by summer" promise and I do think that he was ready to roll this out before he got sick. In fact It think that this indicates great planning on the part of apple. They will use intel and intel will use Apple. I am sure that Apple has secured a decent contract with Intel to provide it the first batches of the new chips that roll out in consideration for the business.
Otherwise it will be AMD.
Now, as for the orphaning of existing systems. I don't think this is too much of a problem for most users. Your apps will work fine for 18 months and then you will have to upgrade them. For the majority of users the upgrade path is shorter than 18 months anyway.
if you have existing hardware you will still be able to use it effectivly for 2 more years at least.
How much will the cost effectiveness be on an > 2 year old machine vs. a brand new (Rev. MacIntel box in 2.5 years?
I will probably go and get a g5 powermac anyway and hold on for 18 months as I am sure that apple will get the chips into the laptops first. The mac mini will be used as the dev platform.
Or, perhaps there will be a custom card that you can put into your powermac to get the intel compliance.
Apple has thought long and hard on this one and I am betting (with my stock) that it will be a good move.
By 1/06 we will see a laptop! Till then, hold on and go get more memory.
Powermac- at least 1 more year and then a legacy hardware card rolled out with Powermac dual core or quad core.
The anonymous developer has a great point. I don't think this is the death of MacOS gaming, but it looks to me a tremendous blow from which it will take time for the already weak Mac gaming market to recover.
There is no arguing with the notion that porting for two different Mac architectures will take extra time, that's just common sense. And what's bitch #1 for Mac gamers? "Why do we only get our games a year after the PC people?"
The last thing I'd do is build a WINE type thing for Leopard. We need people developing Mac programs and with out of the Box windows support there is no incentive to do that. It'd have the exact opposite effect of what Apple wants.
The last thing I'd do is build a WINE type thing for Leopard. We need people developing Mac programs and with out of the Box windows support there is no incentive to do that. It'd have the exact opposite effect of what Apple wants.
That's a good point - it's groverat's point, but applied more generally. Will anyone write Mac apps if they can just say "Mac users - boot into Windows to use this," or "Use your emulator."
On the other hand, Apple has dramatically expanded the amount of Apple software in recent years. For better or worse, third-party developers just aren't as important to Apple as they used to be.
Also, consider that if Cocoa is ported to X/Intel, and is written to a nice abstraction layer (such, as oh, I dunno... POSIX), what's stopping Apple from finally producing Cocoa/Windows?
Then you could buy one box, from Apple, run MacOS X on it with Xcode, write to Cocoa, and deploy to Windows... which you can also incidentally boot into.
What, you thought Apple's been pushing Cocoa all this time just to hear themselves talk?
In other words, MacOS X/Intel + WINE = no need for Virtual PC. Run your Windows apps without having to incur the security cost of running the Windows OS.
I've heard about WINE before, but not in much detail, and I've never played with it.
How does WINE handle things like file paths and drive letters, things that don't make a lot of sense in the Linux world, but that Windows apps might be hard-wired to expect? That would certainly be an issue with OS X as well.
Hell, I dunno, I never run the bloody thing, I just have Linuxhead friends who do, and do some amount of gaming on it. I don't think you're going to get fragilicious speed on Unreal 2004 Tournament for instance, but it should be just spiffy for something that isn't quite so intensive.
Nope, direct contradiction of that by Schiller. Telomar is misstating a capability, and you ran with it to 'supported'. Nope.
It depends on your definition of support. Apple isn't going to instruct you on the how but in the end Windows will run quite happily on Apple hardware and Apple isn't hiding that fact, they just won't sell Windows.
This whole transitions reeks of what happened to NeXT and OS/2
How many users did NeXT have? How many users did OS/2 have?
In other words, you are associating something with something else. For the fall of Mac OS X one would preclude it's users switching to another OS. Are you switching because Intel is inside? I could care less what is under the hood as long as Mac OS continues to be the best OS on the planet. I'm sure the majority feels the same way.
This is a move that Apple needs to make - to get itself into the same playing field as Windows. OHHHH yea. Now that both Windows and Mac OS will be running on the same chip, let's see how the apps compare speed wise. This is where the real comparisons will be truly seen, no more excuses about myths.
Comments
Originally posted by icfireball
I think 10.5, "Leopard" will have some sort of feature to emulate windows software on an mac, it esp. makes sense because of the switch to intel.
Just puttin the idea out there
Comment from Phil Schiller following the keynote yesterday -
"After the keynote, Apple's Phil Schiller stated that there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."
This is from a very good series of reactions from Mac game developers at www.insidemacgames.com.
http://www.insidemacgames.com/features/view.php?ID=355
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
Macs will support Windows? Ugggghh, that's a new one. 'Scuse me while I go vomit up another kidney.,
Nope, direct contradiction of that by Schiller. Telomar is misstating a capability, and you ran with it to 'supported'. Nope.
Originally posted by Kickaha
WINE WINE WINE
Run the apps, forget the OS. No 'in a window' crap. Just the apps.
That actually sounds interesting. Can you run games?
Some developer over at inside mac games said that once "Win32 virtual machines" get released that Mac Game porting will end.
Does this mean that we will be able to run windows games on macs? Can you play windows games on machines running Linux?
Originally posted by anand
That actually sounds interesting. Can you run games?
Yes, some.
Some developer over at inside mac games said that once "Win32 virtual machines" get released that Mac Game porting will end.
Another developer over there (anonymously, naturally) claims it is the death of the platform in general. Take with large chunks of salt.
Does this mean that we will be able to run windows games on macs? Can you play windows games on machines running Linux?
Some, and some.
WINE isn't a panacea any more than Rosetta is, but it makes a rough but ready migration path. With some refinement, say, a year or so of good solid work, it could be a nice augmentation, like X11.app is now. Use it to run the apps that haven't been made native, that you really really need, and would otherwise stop you from switching.
I can't help but think this is one of the strategic motivations behind this move. How much easier could it be for Windows users to buy a Mac if they can still run Windows apps or even Windows itself if they want to?
Think of the folks who really kinda want a Mac, but there's that *one* app that they can't live without, and it's Windows only. Well, now there's really no excuse not to.
Originally posted by BRussell
How much easier could it be for Windows users to buy a Mac if they can still run Windows apps or even Windows itself if they want to?
Not much easier.
Before yesterday, your 3 selling point for Macs were basically more advanced processor architecture, better os, and (the most superficial of all) better looking cases.
Apple is phasing out the first selling point. Now you have the os and case designs. If somebody decides that they wan to use XP and/or Longhorn, that only leaves better looking cases. And since we already know how cheap PC consumers can be, that's going to sell a tiny amount of hardware if Apple continues to shoot for high margins.
Apple design and Intel chipsets. I am sure that apple will design the Fastest macs that anyone has yet seen. This will be compared with all of the other intel boxes outhere and Blow the Doom crowd out of their seats. Look out alienware because now you can have the simplicity and ease of use of the mac and native windows games!
For the enterprise crowd- You get rock solid stable OS that will run your custom apps if needed. Throw in some Xserves and some other Mac hardware and much of your IT frustrations can be eliminated. Granted this may be the marketing hyperbole but, I do believe that apple will come out swinging.
Now as for PPC I believe that Rosetta will be integrated into Leopard and will allow for future PPC chipsets to be built into the Mac. This will keep the gun away from apple's head and allow them to pick the chip that more easily suits the design. If IBM or Freescale get their s*it together then apple can buy the wiz bang chip from them without much pain. The apple software team will have another 18 months to fit this together.
All in all, I think that the move and this subsequent market strategy will benefit apple. Steve didn't like being made a fool of over the "3GHZ by summer" promise and I do think that he was ready to roll this out before he got sick. In fact It think that this indicates great planning on the part of apple. They will use intel and intel will use Apple. I am sure that Apple has secured a decent contract with Intel to provide it the first batches of the new chips that roll out in consideration for the business.
Otherwise it will be AMD.
Now, as for the orphaning of existing systems. I don't think this is too much of a problem for most users. Your apps will work fine for 18 months and then you will have to upgrade them. For the majority of users the upgrade path is shorter than 18 months anyway.
if you have existing hardware you will still be able to use it effectivly for 2 more years at least.
How much will the cost effectiveness be on an > 2 year old machine vs. a brand new (Rev.
I will probably go and get a g5 powermac anyway and hold on for 18 months as I am sure that apple will get the chips into the laptops first. The mac mini will be used as the dev platform.
Or, perhaps there will be a custom card that you can put into your powermac to get the intel compliance.
Apple has thought long and hard on this one and I am betting (with my stock) that it will be a good move.
By 1/06 we will see a laptop! Till then, hold on and go get more memory.
Powermac- at least 1 more year and then a legacy hardware card rolled out with Powermac dual core or quad core.
This is progress.
There is no arguing with the notion that porting for two different Mac architectures will take extra time, that's just common sense. And what's bitch #1 for Mac gamers? "Why do we only get our games a year after the PC people?"
Originally posted by BenRoethig
The last thing I'd do is build a WINE type thing for Leopard. We need people developing Mac programs and with out of the Box windows support there is no incentive to do that. It'd have the exact opposite effect of what Apple wants.
That's a good point - it's groverat's point, but applied more generally. Will anyone write Mac apps if they can just say "Mac users - boot into Windows to use this," or "Use your emulator."
On the other hand, Apple has dramatically expanded the amount of Apple software in recent years. For better or worse, third-party developers just aren't as important to Apple as they used to be.
Then you could buy one box, from Apple, run MacOS X on it with Xcode, write to Cocoa, and deploy to Windows... which you can also incidentally boot into.
What, you thought Apple's been pushing Cocoa all this time just to hear themselves talk?
Originally posted by Kickaha
In other words, MacOS X/Intel + WINE = no need for Virtual PC. Run your Windows apps without having to incur the security cost of running the Windows OS.
I've heard about WINE before, but not in much detail, and I've never played with it.
How does WINE handle things like file paths and drive letters, things that don't make a lot of sense in the Linux world, but that Windows apps might be hard-wired to expect? That would certainly be an issue with OS X as well.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Yes, some.
Wouldn't most work, if one would be using WineX?
Hell, I dunno, I never run the bloody thing, I just have Linuxhead friends who do, and do some amount of gaming on it. I don't think you're going to get fragilicious speed on Unreal 2004 Tournament for instance, but it should be just spiffy for something that isn't quite so intensive.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Nope, direct contradiction of that by Schiller. Telomar is misstating a capability, and you ran with it to 'supported'. Nope.
It depends on your definition of support. Apple isn't going to instruct you on the how but in the end Windows will run quite happily on Apple hardware and Apple isn't hiding that fact, they just won't sell Windows.
Originally posted by gameguy56
This whole transitions reeks of what happened to NeXT and OS/2
How many users did NeXT have? How many users did OS/2 have?
In other words, you are associating something with something else. For the fall of Mac OS X one would preclude it's users switching to another OS. Are you switching because Intel is inside? I could care less what is under the hood as long as Mac OS continues to be the best OS on the planet. I'm sure the majority feels the same way.
This is a move that Apple needs to make - to get itself into the same playing field as Windows. OHHHH yea. Now that both Windows and Mac OS will be running on the same chip, let's see how the apps compare speed wise.