Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
Apocalypse Now: Apple's Boot Camp
Capt.Montoya
Ranger
in Zocalo v2.0
Register story: [url=http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/05/apple_okays_winxp_on_macs/] Apple blesses Windows XP on Macs[/url]
Apple's page:
[url]http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/[/url]
I'd say that with multiple "you're on your own" and "unsupported" "beware" warnings in that page "blessed" is too strong a word.
But things are getting interesting...
Apple's page:
[url]http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/[/url]
I'd say that with multiple "you're on your own" and "unsupported" "beware" warnings in that page "blessed" is too strong a word.
But things are getting interesting...
Comments
I think its great news.
[B]I think we are all doomed. Macs almost like have ceased to exist now they have been absorbed into bill gates bussom. Or i am just in shock. [/B][/QUOTE]
I don't think so. A lot of people (like my Dad) who would use Macs are forced to stick with Windows machines because of monoplatform software ("Yes, let's make a database everyone in the industry has to use, and make it so it only works on IE 6. We'll be [i]everyone's[/i] favorite, then.")
Being able to duel-boot (or, eventually, virtualize with fantastic speed) means these people can now get the Mac's they've wanted for work and home for years, but couldn't have.
Now, at first, I thought that this rumored Apple API for Windows was the stupidest thing in the world. Why would anyone buy a Mac because of (insert killer-app here) when they can just use it on their Windows machine? But then I realized how rare it was for someone to buy a Mac primarily because of Mac-only software. The only things I can think of that are remotely killer-app-like are the iLife suite and Escape Velocity. And they ported Escape Velocity to Windows a couple years ago. ;)
I think the idea behind the API is that if a software company is interested in making a cross-platform program, all they have to do is make the Macintosh version. Which means more native software for our side, without screwing Windows users in the rear the way Windows software has been screwing us for about a decade and a half.
[B]I think the idea behind the API is that if a software company is interested in making a cross-platform program, all they have to do is make the Macintosh version. Which means more native software for our side, without screwing Windows users in the rear the way Windows software has been screwing us for about a decade and a half. [/B][/QUOTE]
Coders please correct me if i'm wrong, but, I'm assuming the code difference between linux and macs are minimal because osx is based in a unix core. With this mac/windows api would we also see an increase in cross platform software throughout the open source community as well?
OSX is based on the NEXT OS core, which is a dirivative of Unix. Linux is an entirely different code base built from scratch.
However, most Linux software will run on MacOS (PPC and Intel, after a recompile) becuase MacOS is compatible. It's just like you can compile a linux app for Apple IIe, for an Intel 586, or a Palm and it will run. The CPU matters little, nor does the exact implementations, so long as their is a C compiler that properly converts the programmer's code to machine code of whatever system it's running on combined with the OS-centric calls of the particular distro of linux/unix.
--RC
[B]Coders please correct me if i'm wrong, but, I'm assuming the code difference between linux and macs are minimal because osx is based in a unix core. With this mac/windows api would we also see an increase in cross platform software throughout the open source community as well? [/B][/QUOTE]
The code difference is massive. It's just that, as RC said, you can compile for different processors and MacOS, being a POSIX--compliant operating system, provides the necessary low--level system functionality for the apps to work pretty much fine. This does not, however, equate to being able to just recompile any Linux GUI app for MacOS or vice-versa, because there are many, many libraries involved in such complex applications. These libraries, and any of their dependencies, must also be recompiled to function on the target platform. In the case of the Mac libraries, this isn't possible for anyone except Apple to do.
"Ok So I just played F.E.A.R a real hog of a game. As anyone with a gaming pc will tell you.
On my P4 3ghz, 1.5gb, ATI X800XT with settings all high, antistropic 8x, AA off, Vsync off, 1024x768 I get the folllowing results
low. 25fps average. 42fps high 73fps
On my imac core duo, 2gb, 256 X1600 same settings
low. 26fps average. 45fps high 75fps
That is with version 1.0 retail. I will update to latest version tommorow, but those results are impressive nether the less."
I've also seen comments on WOW forums and it plays very well too.
Regarding software, Apple do provide a very good suite of apps when you buy a mac. The iLife suite is perfect for most peoples needs. But if one needs to use MS Access they can simply jump across to XP. Saves having to buy or maintain a seperate pc (something I've been tempted to do, build a small shuttle pc to play HF2 and Rome Total War). And because of the apps that Apple provides, I very much doubt they will suffer the OS2 scenario. Mac game developing will be history though.
Update: seems like there is still some debate on this.
Following up the comments about this news has been interesting... The blog link that Croxis gave has a link to another interesting comment at [url=http://daringfireball.net/2006/04/windows_the_new_classic] Daring Fireball[/url].
I do wonder if Mac OS X 10.5 will include virtualization.
[B]Don't have the link, but at either digg or slashdot some users are reporting that booting into OSX is now causing problems and crashes. [/B][/QUOTE]
To quote Apple's page:
[quote]you can download a [i]public beta[/i] today[/quote]