MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Game over

Steve Jobs is going to eat Bill Gates alive. Wait until the Leopard Servers hit the street capable of running Exchange....the Xserves are already monsters...Once they hit and can run OS X, Vista, or Linux...why would anyone in their right mind buy a machine that can only run one?

"Vista will never run on Intel Macs!"

Can someone tell me why this is? Did somebody say Microsoft could prevent that? How? Am I dense?

I hope the Mac OSX that ships on the MacTels gets cracked ASAP. Apple as an even bigger monopolist doesn't sit will with me.

If Apple were to bring aboard a couple of first-tier retailers, I'd be more at ease with their huge successes. But I envision a company that wants complete control over your use of their products, a company that wants to dig their hooks in to you so in the future you can purchase nothing but their products (the manner they employ DRM).

Do you fellow Mac users feel comfortable with Apple being an even bigger, controlling monopolist?

The ultimate irony ... Windows is safer on a Mac ... M$ can still sell more copies of Windows so they will be resistant to prevent it.

The PC makers are the ones who are going to suffer ... they will already face competition in the low end from the next generation of game consoles that have basic capabilities ...

2006 is going to be very interesting indeed.

Sorry PR, how does that beat big Bill? He'll still sell Exchange and Vista. It's the PC hardware manufactures that take the first hit. And later big Bill when people start choosing OSX as their number one and never upgrade Windows again.

I don't bother Apple becoming a monopolist if what they deliver is right for me, it would be my only choice anyway

I think leopard will have some amazing capablities to run windows programs; a rosetta stone for Windows applications. I think it is a possiblity that the Apple kids said they wouldn't promote Windows on their machines because they wouldn't have to. It would have the built in capablity to run Windows applications without opening Windows. I say this in a hopeful manner, and I won't be dissapointed when I see other wise. I still don't think I'll buy any Windows applications.

To: Mac & PC Guy

I don't worry about Apple becoming monopolistic because they focus on making quality & inovative products. Perhaps a stronghold on the computer industry would cause them to become complacent, but I don't think they will slip untill Steve Jobs retires. To me he seems to enjoy making fantasic new products that are easy to use, and I don't think he cares about money as much as people think. He might have a personal grudge towards Microsoft that drives him to eat up their market share but I think that is driven by a bitterness that the computer world isn't were it could be. If everything worked as well as Macs do together there would be a lot more money for inovative technologies to compete with Apple. Less tech support, less virus support, and a higher standard of quality. I'll stop sharing my visions of grander now.

What Steve is thinking is not going to be as obvious than that. Keep dreaming.

> a rosetta stone

Hey Hawkins, put the cat back in the bag and seal it for chrissakes!

VISTA - The end of M$ era.

If your motives are sincere, MDN, delete this page because it includes speculation that could harm us all.

but it's sure going to give Steve Ballmer ulcers all the same

Go on, keep overserving, over delivering, over specifying, over building.

The more there is overserving, the more Apple is setting itself up for disruption, like Windows is.

Apple needs to STOP piling crap onto their OS and hardware. They are too far into the 'one size fits all' thinking, and this is the next example.

Only dumb ass geeks who sit home and beat off in front of their computers because they dont know how to get a date relish all this crap.

Apparently, just like you -- thanks for the interview.

Any issue of getting the Mac hardware full of viruses and spyware if it's running Windows as well as X? The mac side of things don't worry me, since it's been proven how secure it is. But could it mess up the Mac hardware performance if both are running?

F*ck you macheads, I'll eat Steve Jobs for breakfast (Throws chair across room).

Windows Viger, I mean Vista, will stop all this f*n b*llsh*t (Spits into the trash)

You never know, maybe I'll buy Apple with my spare change...then convert them into well behaved Microsoft developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, (gasp for breath) developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, (breath & sweat more) developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers (passes out).

You dumbs asses going against Apple. Live with it, it's the future

Apple is the future

Hmmn.... a tour of the top manufacturers for pcs (excluding some niche ones) v Apple shows the majority of their machines will suck at running Vista. I would be less worried about companies that deliver some performance w/ top of the line parts (lenovo/ibM) or innovate to the ludicrous (while maintaining a strong 3 year warranty and good corporate support ex: HP). DELL and a lot of others have something to worry about. Apple, specifying their graphics cards for years doesn't deliver 'shared graphics memory' (read: lowest level of glass, poor vista experience, and the cheapest graphics chipset they could afford), but rather puts reasonable cards in. This is about the only place I see people paying money for vista v bundled (if you already have a good machine w/ a decent card). Will Apple get over-elegant w/ their minimalist ideas and put an entire intel set inside their machine..probably not considering 'objective quartz'. Is the Apple price competitive? Oh yeah...it definitely is... so that second button will probably come back to powerbooks next year (about time).

Vista locked from running on an intel based Mac? Only if intel gives microsoft a chip series and NEVER deviates from when providing hardware to Apple (not happening), or of course if it somehow reads a partition map in it's nice non-native format and decides to choke the HFS+ journaled part...funny how they didn't do this w/ xp sp 2 for linux partitions (regardless of their fear campaign)..not going to happen.

Vista screwing up your Mac w/ security....It's only going to happen when your machine is running both or is booted from Vista. The hardware helps, It looks like Apple will make both a sandbox, firewall, and a breakwater (to block corruption when booted from Vista). It's really a big problem.

I don't see Apple piling crap onto their OS. The OS has been tightened in the last release. If you think about the GUI, sure you have a few more things AVAILABLE to you, but they aren't the OS, they also don't kill off performance and can be taken out. Spotlight and Dashboard are not curses.

Pro machines are where Apple needs to get w/ the program. Either get on the ATI X1XXX series w/ built in GPGPU for H.264 etc (2000% transcoding speed increase) or slap custom chips on there because duh..finally Apple gets on the video bandwagon and their own hardware is slow as hell.

Beating off in front of your computer is fine as long as someone else is doing it for you.

I believe this the "Huge impact.." Stev J mentioned.

read the patent FULLY

It makes you have a grin as big as a house!

This is no more evolution, it's a revolution and a salvo of fire that would make Fort Knox collapse.

The OS war is on again! And Microsoft suddenly is the weaker.

When will these dorks figure it out: Macs ARE competitively priced! NOW!

We've all seen article after article with side by side cost analyses. If you configure a Mac and a Dell, feature for feature, both machines cost around the same (give or take a couple hundred dollars).

Sure, you can't buy a feature-crippled box for $299, but Apple beautifully counters that with the Mac mini, which is a nice little feature-packed system for not much more than a vanilla DOSbox.

When people look at Vista and the hardware requirements, then think about how fab their iPod is, maybe Apple will win over a few more Windows drones. Although, there are still a lot of people contentedly running Windows 95 and 98 who could care less as long as their email works.

What Apple needs to do is actually ADVERTISE their wares... at least a LITTLE bit. Please?

MDM Magic Word: upon

Once upon a time, Apple ruled the universe... LOL

Mac & PC Guy--

I'm not worried about Apple getting too big like you're describing. The strict control is a good thing for the most part, but it's also a survival tool for a relatively small company that swim's against the tide. Once a company gets really big, the opportunities change, as do the returns they get by being so strict.

Notice how M$ now can be "beleagured" and still pull in multiple billions of dollars, even though they haven't released a new version on Windows in years?

For Apple to stay Apple, they need to run a tight ship, but once the established base gets to a critical point, it seems to me that the rules can change somewhat. Or, the other PC makers get their butts in gear and really try to catch up. In which case, we all win.

The average consumer does not dual boot operating systems. Business IT is about standardizing, and minimizing expense. Businesses will not pay 2x to license two OS's per PC. They will not accept the inherent complexity and expense of maintaining (patching/upgrading) two OS's per PC. They also will not accept the additional expense of end user training required to use two different operating systems.

Dual booting is a niche config for geeks, period.

Apple computers based on Intel processors will be able to run Vista (or 95 or 98 or ME or 2000 or NT). It's just another PC.

You DRM Doom preaching punks make me want to puke. What kind of hot water do you think MicroShaft would be in with the DOJ if they start picking and choosing which hardware vendor is blessed. You'll need a retail copy of Windoze OS Crapola to install on your Intel based MAC (sorry, your pirated stolen copies won't be good enough anymore as Windoze DRM marches on to lock out bootleggers and thieves, but not retail OS license buyers, who by the way are paying over five times the price Dell or Gateway or HP pays for an OS copy to put on a new PC).

Well, all and good. However a lot of people, businesses, and schools will still buy the cheap, low quality Windows boxes.
As for myself and many others when I buy a new Mac, I'd never use Windows even if it came with the new Mac.
With the Windows machines I noticed that people tell me how cheaply they bought their computer, not how nice it is.
For schools and business, the excuse is as well is that windows is "the standard" and "everyone uses Windows."
When these new super-Macs come out, Apple really, really needs to spend some money on an aggressive ad campaign to change the public's perception, thus driving sales.

Dual booting is the means by which every home WILL become a Macintosh environment with VIsta being used twice a year, then once, then never...amen.

And then we see the revolt in the working environment...business IT managers will have to look sharp to survive it.

Well, I for one, was hoping that Apple wouldn't get caught up in allowing Windows to run on a Mactel. I mean, who wants Windows on anything Apple? I for one don't! I can see it already, you're using Windows on the Mactel box and you get a virus and now you have a virus inside your box with all of that piece of crap MS code and registry, blah, blah. I was a Windows user for 15 years before I recently brought my first Mac and I don't want to know that Apple will allow its users to be able to install Windows. It'll be a sad day in Apple land if that happens.

C'mon do we really need Windows once the Intel changeover happens? Once the Macs get the Intel chips then, theoretically, it should be easier for software manufacturers to make software that was never available for the Mac, now available for the Mactel. Then you can get the software that you needed but was never developed for the Mac without even needing to use Windows.

We figure people will boot Windows and play some games. Then boot back to OS X to do real work.

What's so hard to understand about that?

>Kerry wrote: What kind of hot water do you think MicroShaft would be in with the DOJ if they start picking and choosing which hardware vendor is blessed.

Is that a question?

If we go with your logic, since Apple blesses only itself as a hardware vendor, Apple will be in hot water with the DOJ.

You're probably right.

Nothing is ever as good as the rampant imaginations and rumors that fly around think it will be.


Why trade one monopoly for another?

Jeremiah Hawkins & R:

First off, thanks for the intelligent responses. Threads usually degrade to MS-sucks, Apple-rules-all postings.

I think we all agree that Apple makes awesome products.

As I said before, Apple's implementation of DRM concerns me. It's not that it limits me now so much as it forces my hand in future decisions. Every purchase from iTMS will lessen future resolve to buy anything competing with Apple, since they will not license Fairplay.

There's talk of Apple licensing iPod connectivity. There's talk of Apple "upgrading" software so that it doesn't work with certain products (xBox 360, plus any vendor who finds a way to make iPod work with their hardware).

That may make sense for Apple and its purposes, but it doesn't work for me. If Apple can do this now, to me it shows they have the propensity for much worse.

Vista will never run on Intel Macs!"
--

Because Vista requirements won't be met until about 2009..

7Ghz and 3gig of RAM?

Maybe M$ will create an Vista:Mac version tailored to Apple's hardware configurations.
That could alleviate some of the one-size-fits-all problems that Windows has in dealing with the need to support every peripheral on the planet.

Checkmate in 3 moves!

Rock on SJ.

Why are Macs made in China and not the USA or Mexico? At least Dell makes PCs in Texas and NC. Apple is un-American.

"I hope the Mac OSX that ships on the MacTels gets cracked ASAP. Apple as an even bigger monopolist doesn't sit will with me." -Mac & PC Guy

Did I miss something? Is "Sputnick" now trolling as "Mac & PC Guy"

"Do you fellow Mac users feel comfortable with Apple being an even bigger, controlling monopolist?"

That you are even suggesting Apple as a monopolist is laughable.
Funny thing is, this is exactly what all you PC apologists have in the PC world, and yet you all seem perfectly comfotable with this situation. Not to mention the fact that the stuff doesnt even work that well.

If Apple ends up being a monopolist, at least stuff will work. And I for one wouldn't care because Im a stockholder.

And for cripes sake STOP CALLING IT MACTEL. It sounds so CHEAP!

It's Not MacBM or MacOrola now is it?

And while we're at it, stop calling it a vPod.

There are "Creative Services" divisions inside the top 100 corporations in America which are not allowed to buy PCs that don't run Windows (corporate mandate). Their entire network buildout is based on running and maintaining Windows.

Macs capable of running Windows will allow the users (the few which actually have a say in the hardware buying decision) to choose Mac as their workstation, connect to the corporate Windows network natively (as a nice little MicroShaft citizen) and switch to Apple power-apps like FCP and Aperture to get some real creative work done.

Also, look for Adobe to drop Apple support in the post MacIntel era (just like they did with Premier) when Apple comes out with their own software that smokes Photoshop, Illustrator, GoLive, and whatever lame-oh MacroMedia stuff Adobe palms off. MicroShaft will also stop supporting Office on the Mac because Apple is going to stomp this overpriced piece of bloatware into history. No worries for Apple users though because you'll be able to run these PC-only apps on your new MacIntel (if you want to).

For years Apple has promised higher performance and been unable to truely deliver workstation class benchmarks. SJ is on a mission to be on top and is not going to stop until he gets there or dies trying.

Apple is on a roadmap that will finally give them parity with all the other PC manufacturers. Real slots, real video cards and real processor horsepower which will be second to none.

The proprietary route Apple has chosen in the past has always yielded up nice little BMW-like machines, good looking, good handling, respectable performance and a little pricey. Reasonably generic Chevy-like PCs have been able to out accelerate Apples best everytime (especially in massive database applications).

I am delighted that Apple has chosen to standardize on the big engine manufacturer for their future offering. AMD is cool but Apple has played around with second-rate CPU offerings long enough. The PowerPC promise was never met. Motorola had to bail out and spin off their loser chip business and IBM has now bailed out of the PC business to become a services company (making chips for others is a service too). Apple needs Intel engines and Intel needs an alternative to MicroShaft. Depending on your view it's a marriage made in Heaven and Hell but it will be good for driving Apple hardware sales in the future.

For those of you that don't want MS on your Apple box, I agree completely and have been PC free (and MS-free) for almost two years (and I still have my original 128 purchased in 1984 although it's been boosted to a 512 fatmac - it still works too).

I yearn for our Apple hardware to be truly competitive (performance wise) with beige boxes assembled down at the corner PC store. Likewise I want my friends in corporate Creative Services to be able to buy Apple hardware and survive on their MS corporate networks. And I want Apples software initiatiive to blossom fully (without fear of retaliation from Adobe and MS).

The best is yet to come! Rock on Apple, rock on!

Sorry Hammer

When I'm on a rant, writing out Macintosh powered by Intel is too much typing. At least I did say "MacIntel"

What we need is a nice compact descriptor for Macs powered by Intel.

You're right, we did not call them Macarolas, but we did call them Powermacs.

Give me your suggestion for what the new hardware should be called.

Also I agree about the iPods. We need a descriptor for iPods enabled with video capability that is compact and easy to type during a rant

John

PS: thanks for voting for me in the last presidential election - I know you were just voting against Bush but I still appreciate the kind thoughts

I dont any version of windows on my Mac. to be able to run windows programs would be quite enough and then I may finally be able to switch my Realtor mother to a Mac from her Dells, I really hate those machines, every time I come home from College I have to spend a few days cleaning them up and running updates. I do like the idea of running a Linux distro in a virtual machine or to switch between systems like we do now between our desktops and Dashboard.
Hopefully with the new machines Apple will realize that with all the media they are offering to us we need Massive HDs to keep it all on.
I cant wait for the intel Powerbooks, better battery life, raw power, hopefully they will run much cooler than the G4s, that has to be my one issue with my Powerbook, it gets way to hot.

What it this obsession running Vista on a Mac anyway?

Believe me, Vista and a bunch of Windows apps under Mac OS X is going to take developer focus away – why the heck bother to write Mac apps if one can run a Windows version? It was a simmilar situation that contributed to killing OS/2 (yeah, I know... Microsoft had some pretty rough tactics up their sleeves too.)

It derails the whole idea of creating a virus and malware free, high performance, stable, terriffic user experience on Intel platform, exposing the lameness of Windows.

Here is a view of the Vista. You don't want that on your Mac.
http://www.andwest.com/blojsom/blog/tatle/agenda/2005/07/27/Windows_Vista_Perspective.html

"Reality Check" you need one yourself.
Many business or individuals who are forced to use a PC now and then (due to apps that either ONLY run well on a PC, or because we need to see how something looks to a client running only PC), would welcome this Winduhz option on a Mac for those reasons. We'd rather not spend money on a Dell just for this unfortunate MINOR purpose. The Winduhz option is there if you want it or need it. You don't HAVE to do it. Choice. That's what it's about. Not having to buy, make deskspace for, and set up 2 separate computers.

Sorry iDon't, I think your bra's an too tight..

I've been to China. Dell has a manufacturing plant in Xiamen. I've been there, It's huge. Don't kid yourself about Dell's presence in Texas and NC. That's just to make people like you feel good.

I don't mean to sound pessimistic but, what incentive will developers have to write OS X versions of their software when their Windows versions will run on Mac's?
"Just buy our windows software," developers will say, "It will run just fine on your mac's! Why do we need to spend energy and money on an OS X version?"

Apple writes the best software in the world but they can't write everything.

A much simpler explaination is that Apple included the Windows capability in the patent to prevent others from using or patenting the capibility.

My fear about this whole thing is that developers would stop developing for the Mac if we can just run Windows programs on our Macs at full speed. I have no desire to look at Windows-esque programs. They're awful.

Sorry daddysteve,

I guess I should read all the posts before writing dups : )

Has anyoine read this patent?

It really seems that it covers a way to obfuscate code and make it difficult to crack. This has probably a lot to do with the research that happle is doing in order to avoid Mac OS X running on white box PCs. The Linux and Windows references are really unimportant, they just make the scope of the patent broader.

This does not mean that Apple will not surprise us with something exciting regarding the possibility of running windows within the Mac environment in the future or having dual boot machines, but I doubt it will be something that we will see in the first generation of Intel based Macs. This would only make sense after the transition is complete and all Macs run on Intel. Otherwise, we would see pro users delaying their Mac purchases and it would not be good for Apple's business.