What is Digg?65 Comments
- bysin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9He bought a Macintosh...
To install Linux on it...
To virtualize Windows...
This man is confused. - azzurricraze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1windows on a mac... sooo ugly... shudder
- djpolstee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think that we're missing the bigger picture. Why even put XP on a MAC??? That defeats buying the Mac in the first place.
- elroy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1windows belongs in a virtual machine for now. dual booting is a 1990's thing. what i want to see in the future is windows booting in a mach thread, much like running classic. then the windows could run side-by-side with osx apps and all would be well.
- Fentekreel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1wait...you people think your installing Linux on the mac? i guess you didn't really see what burns within your OSX in the background...anyone heard of freebsd? go ahead go ask the "genius" at the apple store they will tell you this magic word that nobody seems to have heard of....the interface is really what your paying for....Linux dudes? have you tried your favorite text command today? could possibly be a OS tag line for what its worth... heh gotta look under the hood before you can know how it works :)
- manfesto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@skyshock - it's a custom build of knoppix. If you check out the other stories on the website, they talk about how they recompiled the kernel and went through a very interesting debugging process to get the framebuffer working with the x1600. They actually have a bootable disk image up for download as well.
- drn666, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, same same as the more astute comments. This is pretty useless - he's running Windows XP via VMWare by booting the Mac into Linux.
When someone gets Linux VMWare running on MacOS X (which isn't so far fetched, given the whole 'project janus' business over at Sun as an example), or even better, VMWare for OS X is released (once again, not so far fetched - it's now Intel hardware and if they're supporting Linux, supporting OS X isn't tough), that's a different story.
Running XP VirtualPC style on top of Intel OS X would be great. All the speed, none of the need to stare at that fisher-price 'my first os' style start button.
dugg for the idea, but the story itself is useless. - starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i think that windows people are way more excited about this than mac people will ever be. virtual PC was easily good enough to use the 10 minutes out of the year that it was easier to do something in Windows rather than mess with it on your Mac. mostly thats file conversions because Windows people are remarkable uninformed about file formats other than .doc. and you often have to change it for them.
- Guspaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Neat, and probably a first with virtualization. People mention QEMU, but unless I'm mistaken, the OSX build of QEMU for Intel doesn't yet support virtualization, only emulation. And I doubt VMWare has been ported to OSx86 yet. And using PowerPC processors, you need emulation, which is SLOW for intensive tasks. Full-PC emulators like VirtualPC don't get any of the advantages that Rosetta has, you know.
On the other hand, virtualization like this is not very useful. Get back to me when you can triple-boot OSX, Linux, and WinXP on the same box. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1People have been praising the new ribbon-based interface, but I think it looks even more cluttered. Humans naturally organize things better in horizontal rows. This looks more packed together and ugly than ever before.
And what's with Microsoft stealing the trademark Aqua glass highlight for everything? Can't this company hire an original graphic designer anywhere, or are they all working for Apple already? - ScoobyRex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Even though there really isn't a very good reason to use an emulation to have XP on a MAC, IMO, it is still one of the biggest changes in the OS world that I can think of (Granted I haven't been around long enough to remember going from MS-DOS to 3.1). Take it for what it is, a changing of the tides and one of the first chances for some of us to try and figure out how to make this new-found ability usable.
- Kriz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Obviously fake - you can tell by the big white box under the "Registed to" text - mine doesn't have that..."
I don't know whether to laugh at the possible sarcasm, or rub my head in adversion to the possible stupidity. - walkingmac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1agree with bysin
why buy a mac to install linux so you can virtualize XP - Misos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Only reason I'd want to use XP is for gaming... and that's not going to happen through VMWare.
- yvesminer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i love virtualization technology: vmware, xen, virtuozzo are all doing great!
thanks to virtualization, shared hosting is about to finish! - bantam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1cant wait till my macbook pro comes. For OSX use only. I have my PC for some games and my mac for everything else.
- Eldoo77, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Cue the cheesy music...
For years those Macs were dull little boxes dutifully performing dull little tasks when they could have been doing so much more. But now that Macs have Windows XP they have been set free! - DonLapre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Fast XP on an intel imac. Dugg.
Qemu is slow. - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0*yawn*. QEmu's been making it happen since shipping day one.
Native support ain't coming (or so says Microsoft), so that wait might be a long one. Hope you brought a sleeping bag. - frem001, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I think i'll wait for a solution that doesn't require that much effort.
- Kitsune818, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't understand why anyone would want to do this.
- I8PP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I can run Windows 3.1 on my Amiga.
- I8PP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Do both, I'll smile either way.
- TenaciousMe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Kinda cool.
Digg. - sammmy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I know one blogger that will be so happy when he can virtualize on his iMac. He posted an article on getting Knoppix to boot on the iMac (http://mip.typepad.com/mips_scan/2006/02/linux_imac.html). I'll point this thread out to him re: virtualization.
- dbr_onix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I fail to see why you'd ever buy a Mac to install Linux on... Apart from to say "Heh, look what I did", but that's it..
I also fail to see why this is such a big deal..?
- Ben - m4ff3w, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Of course it is much faster than running XP in Virtural PC on a PPC, no need to emulate x86.
- shakin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So... Windows isn't running on an Intel Mac then, it's running on VMWare. Big difference. It boots on the VMWare bios with virtualized hardware and peripherals.
- xLiKx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wow, all that work when they could just get a system with native support...no digg
- TychoQuad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Meh, still waiting for native support.
- BarriedaleNick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I was blown away when i first installed XP on my PC - give it a few months of on time and see how fast it runs then...
- manfesto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@Ben, and a few other detractors
Do you really only run one OS? Even if you do, do you not see the benefit in being able to run multiple OSs without having to switch machines? The example is so overused it's cliche, but seriously - look at cross-platform developers or web developers needing to make sure their sites work across all major browsers or they can get their programs to compile for all major platforms - isn't being able to do this all from the same machine a bit of an advantage? - mpeters13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0this same page has been on digg a million times.. with no updates. stop.
- starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0did i tell you about the time i had 2 linux distros, XP, Classic running under virtual PC... on OS X... all at once because i need them for stuff... on my 800 mhz iMac with a gig of ram? ran fine.
that was of couse before microsoft bought it and crippled it. - vbagate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0why the hell would you want to do this?
- spamdies, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0oddly enough no one wants to run osx in vmware on an xp machine.
- Brutis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0dito slantyyz, emu aint cutting it
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Meh, still waiting for native support."
VMware isn't so much an emulator as it is a hole punched through the host OS to the actual hardware. The only thing that's emulated is the BIOS. So, in a sense, it IS running natively from within VMware's software. But OSes under VMware don't have nearly the access to the hardware as a host OS would. Like TV tuners and other things. - slantyyz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0As a consultant who makes a living off of Windows work but LIVES on a Mac, this is wonderful news. I'd still prefer to see a native VMWare type of app or stable version of WINE (can you hear me, CodeWeavers?)- I'm not interested in dual booting at all. The ability to run Windows applications for work is delaying my MacIntel purchase. The moment I can dual boot off the same drive, I'm signing up for a MacBook.
- metallic07039, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This isn't news. But still very cool and promising.
- jfox00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"going to have to wait for either Vista and dual boot.."
Why wait? I have a dual boot (OSX 10.4.3 and Windows XP Pro) on my Sager laptop right now. Works great! - ravuya, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Not sure I'm really blown away; I've used VMware on x86 rigs before and I'd expect the performance to compare favourably.
- benb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Being able to boot to a VMware Windows image from an Intel Based Mac running a OS X would actually be of use to me. I work a lot with Windows servers and VMware comes in handy when setting up a testing environment. I would like a Macbook Pro, but would prefer to run VMware in OS X - not Linux.
So I guess I'm still out of luck. Going to have to wait for either Vista and dual boot, or VMware to come out with a version for the Intel Macs that runs in OS X. - LubbertDas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is going part of the way there, but what we WANT... what we NEED is a VMware application that runs under MacOSX.
I don't want to run Linux on my MacTel, I want to run OSX... but on some occasions, I might need to run MS-Access, and native VMware would provide the highest performance solution.
Has anyone confirmed that VMware is working on an OSX version of VMworkstation?
no digg - handband2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0....and on my linux machine with vmware-server, Windows XP runs really fast.
- randylovin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1NO OS X...................WTF. I would be impressed if the guy had OS X with Windows in VM, but he just bought an iMac and threw Linux on it. That's easy. Install VMWare. Easy. Put OS X back on it and get it all to run together asshat!
- bishop3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0all they need now is a port of the mac-on-linux, maybe intel-mac-on-linux (iMoL haha) to run the OS X10.4 side by side the XP so you can have all 3 up at once.
- ToadX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well that's cheating... Windows XP running under Linux on an iMac. If it was Windows XP running on Mac OS X on an iMac, now that would be something to talk about. Who the hell would buy a Mac to run Windows on top of Linux. lol
- valis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0*shrugs* Well, isn't that nice.
I can understand why someone would want to do this considering its a bugger to get OSX working on a Intel/AMD PC. Personally I would like to see Apple *sell and license* a copy of OSX for Intel/AMD PCs. This is not likely, however, because Apple understands that OSX stands their hardware apart from the others, and is a strong inducement to buy their hardware.
I'm not very happy with the way Apple mucks with their hardware, but you have to admit the hardware is pretty and tends to look and feel high quality. So Apple will continue to smugly deny a license for OSX on Intel/AMD PCs probably forever, unless forced to do otherwise. It's not in their best interest to have the OS out in the wild. - biter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0This is stupid. No digg.
-
Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is