What is Digg?120 Comments
- LaughingMan11, on 10/12/2007, -4/+40Technically, it is already open source... it's called WINE.
- fraggle35, on 10/12/2007, -12/+41A blog!!! it must be true.
Seriously, bloggers should be shot into space. - panique, on 10/12/2007, -14/+39Yes, Apple probably did show you Parallels as a solution if you need to run Windows Apps side-by-side with OS X. And that's probably all they're going to do for the foreseeable future.
All the dope-smokin', rose-colored-glasses wearing fanboys of Apple-bundled virtualization all fail to see this one simple fact: Microsoft recently re-committed to producing Office for OS X. You don't need to be a rocket scientist, or even be a Barista con MBA to know for certain that the only way Microsoft agreed to continue Office development on the Mac platform was to have Apple agree that they would not bundle any type of support for running Windows programs under OS X. If Apple were to provide virtualization or Darwine or anything else like that, there would be no point at all to making an OS X-specific version of Office. For this same reason, Apple will never provide a Windows API nor virtualization support in OS X, because then all App vendors will cease to port their apps to OS X.
As long as there is a cost barrier to running a Windows program on a Mac, like having to buy Parallels, there will always be a market to sell OS X-specific software in, being those that have only a stock Mac. Apple needs this market to exist, otherwise OS X becomes moot and they just sell boxes to run Windows and become another Dell competitor (or acquisition).
So STFU about this virtualization pipe dream that makes absolutely no business sense at all. Well, I suppose it makes sense if you want to make it big by short-selling Apple stock. Obviously, the company directors will never undertake such an obvious plot to divest their shareholders of the value of their stock. - ACalcutt, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19parallels is virtualization... And apple showed that as a solution when they where trying to sell us computers at work
- ckohler, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16No offense but what self-respecting geek hasn't already considered this? I couldn't begin to count the number of "WINE in OSX" speculation threads I've read over the years.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+25I don't know why people keep going on about virtualization. Seriously guys - Boot Camp was a "preview" of something coming in Leopard. Boot Camp was a dual booting solution, Boot Camp was NOT a virtualization solution.
- Clodagh, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14I made a rule for myself last month that if I ever bump in to someone who says they are a Scientologist, I must punch them without hesitation straight in the face!
- thinkdifferent, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Watson was built AFTER Sherlock. Dan Wood (developer of Watson) even said he named it based on Sherlock as a companion to it. What happened to Watson was that Sun bought it & killed it, not Apple.
- kimastergeorge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10@smedstadc
You don't seem to understand... OpenDarwin has nothing to do with it. Darwin is separate from OpenDarwin. Darwin is the kernel of Mac OS X. OpenDarwin is basically the same thing, except it's plain Unix, not OS X, and it's openly developed; while both are open source, Darwin doesn't accept public patches.
Darwine is just a name... a pun. Darwin + wine. Darwin lives on, OpenDarwin dies, and Darwine doesn't care. - toaste, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15Laughingman11 is correct -- Wine exists already, and so does a preliminary port to OSX, Darwine. Given his nick, he'll appreciate the name as well as the logo of a platypus in a BSD hat (Darwin logo) holding a glass of Wine.
Speaking of drinks, I (appropriately) propose a toast -- here's to hoping Apple doesn't code dump on Darwine and do to them what they did to Konqueror. - combatchuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Yes, they do.
"Remember Steve Jobs' first days back at Apple in 1997 as Interim-CEO-for-Life? Trying to save the company, Steve got Bill Gates to invest $150 million in Apple and promise to keep Mac Office going for a few more years in exchange for a five-year patent cross-licensing agreement? The idea in everyone's mind, of course, was that Microsoft would grab lots of Apple technology, which they probably did, and it quite specifically ended an Apple patent infringement suit against Microsoft. But I'm told that the exchange wasn't totally one-way, that Apple, in turn, got some legal right to the Windows API.
That agreement ran for five years, from August, 1997 to August 2002. Even though it has since expired, the rights it conferred at the time still lie with the respective companies. Whatever Microsoft grabbed from Apple they can still use, they just aren't able to grab anything developed since August 2002. Same for Apple using Microsoft technology like that in Office X. But Windows XP shipped October 25, 2001: 10 months before the agreement expired."
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060420.html - toaplan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13I have a virus in an email from a windows sender, why doesn't that just work and infect all my mac files?
Or maybe I don't really want full virtualization like the article suggests that I do. - Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -8/+17"Apple will never provide a Windows API nor virtualization support in OS X, because then all App vendors will cease to port their apps to OS X."
I just don't buy that argument at all. OS X apps nearly always look and behave better then their Windows counterparts, quality will win in the end. - DannoHung, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Maybe Apple should make it so you can run OSX apps on Windows, that way, people will just develop OSX apps.
- ravuya, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14They already tried to do this in the Rhapsody (pre-OSX) developer releases. The Yellow Box, I think they called it. Ran the same way as Classic (Blue Box).
I don't think it took off very well, but it was still there on Rhapsody/i386, albeit for NT only. - JeffH, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13That guy should write fiction novels.
- SPLASTiK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I remember back in 1995 the school I went to had a Apple that booted into Windows 3.11
The computer would startup into OS 7 or System 7? and when you pressed Command+Return the screen would fade to black and in about 2 seconds a DOS prompt would appear. Type Win and Windows would boot.
You then could have an application open in Windows and Command + Return back and forth between the both OS. I thought it was pretty awesome. - greenamp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Well for arguments sake, the Intel and PPC versions of Leopard will have slightly different functionality. Namely, BootCamp.
- macattacks10, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7You seem to not know much about it either. Sherlock 2 found things on the web also. But Sherlock 3 expanded upon it making it more web based before, having the channels to do any number of things. That in a way you could consider copying, but obviously it was going to be the natural progression of the app. Plus Sherlock is dead now too since we have Dashboard.
- Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -9/+15President, he's clearly British. Altough he could arguably be a better president than that current monkey.
- deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Let me paraphrase: "Blah blah blah WINE"
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7and then make a bogus religion and have weirdo movie stars become it's members and spook "normal" people out.
- technique, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8"Looks like Dvorak was on the right track..."
BLASPHEMY! BLASPHEMY! MAY GOD HAVE MERCY UPON YOUR SOUL! - podperson, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Yellow Box was a system for running Mac OS X (or Rhapsody) apps on Windows boxes. You've got it upside down. In essence, Yellow Box (Cocoa) apps would have run cross-platform while legacy (Carbon) apps would have run only on Apple hardware.
- MixedSpleens, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6What do you mean Microsoft would never allow out of the box virtualization! Virtualization requires a windows licence therefore they sell more copys of windows, now as far as a WINE like solution your right, they may have some problems, but I dont think its out of the question. Steve said when he came back something to the effect "we cannot afford to see Microsoft as the enemy, they are our biggest 3rd party developers" the fact of the matter is they most chances could work it out.
- Poco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I seem to remember, once upon a time, another non-Windows OS that could run Windows applications without an emulator, a reboot, or a separate product. They started up quickly and were more reliable than running in Windows.
Everyone here over 30 knows what I'm talking about... That's right, OS/2 - eilorux, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Apple is doing the right thing by not making windows part of the OS. Leave it as a bootable option as a nervous-Nelly safety net for people abandoning windows. I allowed the first Mac purchase to take place a three weeks ago, and it's working charmingly within the windows network, and the employee running the MacBook is keeping pace with the rest of the office staff in terms of work flow. Based on the experience of the past three weeks, including VPN access to our internal network, I'll be migrating the staff to Mac from PC.
- LaughingMan11, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8WINE for OS X?
http://darwine.opendarwin.org/ - omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8But is WINE good enough to go into an Apple product? It needs to be perfect and seamless like Rosetta if it's going to work as an end product instead of a computer geek's tweak. That's what I love about Mac: they focus on a seamless experience for the end user while hiding the powerful stuff under the hood. Perhaps they'll ship WINE as an option, but from what I've heard about it on Lindows/Linspire, it doesn't sound like a complete enough solution to earn the Apple label. But maybe Apple has something else up its sleeve...
- ceredon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4orangepc
- combatchuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Opendarwin is ceasing development of the Opendarwin project and shutting down their site. I imagine that most of the hosted projects, Darwine included, will move to Sourceforge.
- totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3stopped reading when he blithely dismisses the Bootcamp and Parallels as "lousy". Whatever, dude.
- aoctavio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Have anyone writing about WINE ever used it? It doesn't work for most applications it has terrible problem with any program that requires context. Yes, it sounds like a great solution, until you try it...
- Pliep, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This is what Apple does not do and will not do.
Simple .exe files like minesweeper may work okay, but what happens if you run an install.exe and try to install an app suite that puts files and DLL's into c:\windows\system or tries to update the insane registry system (which is not present on a non-Windows system)?
It's simply not gonna work.
And even if it does, Steve would not allow ugly windows apps cluttering a beatiful and useful Mac OS X environment. Apple told you so and will tell you in 10.5: use Boot Camp or buy Parallels if you need to run Windows apps. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The title should have been "ANOTHER BLOG POST THAT DOESN'T SAY ***** ABOUT ***** ANYTHING EVER"
- treskel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3that powermac was actually a double CPU system, with a 486dx2 (I think) on a daughterboard
- Poco, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Why should Apple care? It's not like they get paid a license fee to write OSX applications (they don't, do they?). As long as everyone buys a Mac and runs OSX what do they care what you do with it?
The only company that would be concerned with something like this is one that does not believe that their product can survive on its own merit and need to force users to stick with their product by making it too expensive for them to switch. - morphie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Applications run with WINE don't "just work" most of the time.
- greenamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah but Apple also said they would not help users install Windows on their Intel Macs. A few months later they released BootCamp.
- Eccles, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Wine and OpenDarwin are *not* the same. OpenDarwin is an open source OS built on the Darwin kernel, and has nothing to do with Windows or running Windows apps. A source of confusion is that there is also the OpenDarwine project, which is porting Wine to Mac OS X. But Wine is alive and reasonably well, as is its Mac variant.
- Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm a bit iffy on native support for Windows apps in OSX... the ability to run Windows programs means the ability to run Windows viruses and malware too.
- CynicalSquirrel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4CrossOver is based on Wine
http://www.codeweavers.com/products/support_wine/ - Shorties, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Didn't apple officially come out and say they weren't going to do this? Inaccurate?
- nufoto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2no conspiracy just ease of use...these are not the First Mac's that could Boot Windows...Apples old Orange PC cards did this !....since MS is Slow at developing the Soft windows emulation for OSX ..Apple chose another route to run windows Apps! and now there are 3 ways= lots of choices.
I don't know why every one makes this so complicated! - SPLASTiK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Interesting, thanks for that! Everyone thinks I'm crazy when I mention it. I was in grade 6 at the time and thought it was the coolest thing.
I guess they'd be somewhat expensive to manufacture and keep it top of the line though with how fast technology changes. It'd be cool if someone came out with something similar... - combatchuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2OrangePC was a truly novel idea, even if prohibitively expensive.
- DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Correction, BlueBox doesn't run Carbon apps, those run natively in OS X (on a PPC at least).
BlueBox/Classic is a virtualized Mac OS 8-9.x to run older applications that were not carbonized. - combatchuck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I do, in fact, hate Windows. Microsoft doesn't make me all warm and fuzzy either. That said, I would love to be able to run Guild Wars or Hitman 4 on a Mac.
- combatchuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yellowbox is for running Cocoa apps. (Called Cocoa now)
Bluebox is for running Carbon apps. (Called Classic now)
Redbox was for running Windows apps. (hmm...)
http://www.lowendmac.com/musings/boxes.shtml - nufoto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't know why every one makes this so complicated!..Welcome to the new world of computing! nothing beats Apple's innovation!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 120 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is