MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

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.

It could mean that or tying the OS to your chip serial or it could mean ... hell just about anything including running those other OSs inside a protected shell or even: What if Vista comes out and Leopard+ can translate XP/Linux apps on the fly to run without having to boot their OSs? Anyone here read patents like an average joe reads the sports page? I've got a [MW:] feeling that dual boot is a red herring.

Mac Raven,

Thanks, but unfortunately for you I'm pretty firmly grounded in Reality.

RE: "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."

Many? The condition you describe above is not at all representative of how PC's are used in the majority of corporate america. We don't use PC's "now and then"; the whole infrastructure and application base is standardized on them. I'm happy that in YOUR case having an occassional need for a PC, you will be well served by dual booting a Mac. Your situation, however, is not AT ALL reflective of how PC's are used in the vast majority of businesses today.

No charge for the extra Reality.

what incentive will developers have to write OS X versions of their software when their Windows versions will run on Mac's?

Good point.

Obsolesence? We can't have our cake and eat it too. Isn't this for Windows users more than for Mac users? Lookit that! It looks just just like it dud in Winders. Cewhl! Other developers might just take a page off Aperture and go all the way if Macs start to fly. Dunno.

Ohhh Reality Check

Take off your blinders and realize the world does not revolve according to your very narrow little view.

Perhaps you've been bathing in the light from the "Reality Distortion Engine" just a little too much or spending a bit too much time loading service packs.

Or perhaps the dual boot done kicked you in the head twice.

When the PowerPC is finally dead and gone from the shelves of the Apple store, there will be A LOT of corporate and Government WindBlows PC customers who will finally be able to scarf up Apple hardware because it will run the lame MS OS mandated by pinhead managers from above. Then in the blink of an eye and with nary a dual-boot required OS-X will provide all the Mac goodness.

Yea Heidi. You go girl!

I agree -- if a mac can run windows, won't some developers simply keep things simple and write code for only one platform?

By allowing the Mactels to run windows, maybe AAPL is convinced that everyone will only run X because it's so much better. But is this the same hubris that caused all the troubles for Apple?

Look, it could be a massive success, or very questionable for Apple to allow native windows on their boxen. I hope it's very well thought out.

Well, if it boots in OX S [Freudian Slip] and runs wind-OS [no sic] apps then you're not running wind-OS.

Troll echoed "what incentive will developers have to write OS X versions of their software when their Windows versions will run on Mac's?"

Those developers who specialize in Windows apps will have no incentive but Intel powered Mac users will finally be able to run the Windows apps we need to (if even just occasionally).

All the Mac developers will continue building on the Mac platform for all the reasons they do currently - stability, reliability, creativity, and capability.

Consumers will have a choice - real quality Mac apps or Windows apps that are unavailable on native Mac OS. Choice is good.

Developement and sales of Mac software will go up.

More people will be exposed to Mac software if dual boot machines are out there.

I work on both platforms every day, and Mac OS interface rules mean that nearly every Mac application is much better than a similar Windows program and that difference will finally become apparent to the degree that Mac hardware sales will also go up because people will finally see how the OS, the software, and the hardware work so well together, compared to the Windows alternative.

Would not happen otherwise.

To those elitists who want to keep Mac small and away from the "great unwashed masses", you have a personality problem.

Fix it.

Here is a software engineer’s take on the patent: Using the technology described, Apple will be entirely successful in preventing MacOS X from running on standard PeeCees. (Until i read this patent, i didn’t think that would be possible.) This technology can also be used as a DRM for software, music, videos, etc. It will be very, very difficult to crack this system, and if it is cracked, a simple update will restore the DRM integrity.

Apple can offer the protection this technology affords to third parties to protect their software, thus eliminating software piracy and offering a huge incentive to write native MacOS X software. (The other incentives already are superior development environment, a better OS, and more efficient code development platform.)

This can also be used to ensure the integrity of the software already on the machine and prevent tampering (e.g. hacking, patching, viruses, etc.) In other words, it can function like a tripwire.

The other technology described in the patent sounds like the user will be able to run Linux and Windoze binaries natively under MacOS X without the need of having those OSes. In other words, the technology is similar to WINE, taking standard calls to the target OS and transliterating them for the resident host OS (i.e. MacOS X). No dual booting; no Windoze license necessary. M$ becomes M¢.

While M$ is busy trying to catch a glimpse of Apple’s taillights in their effort to create a lame version of Tiger, or just an OS with a lower susceptibility to malware, Apple is raising the bar to a whole new level. M$ is trying to build a bi-plane while Apple is building a starship. Beam me up!

'Swhat I thought. Running other os apps natively [as well as Classic] would be awesome. As for copy protection; I always thought that the kids who couldn't afford to buy pro-level apps until they were older were getting free training via piracy, thus providing companies with a skilled pool of potential employees, and making some of those apps into "standards."

Whatever. This kind of speculation alone should be worth another $5-$10 on the stock price today. Let's see if any analysts are smart enough to pick it up.

Dual booting is great for existing techy Mac users.

Your kidding yourself if you think it'll be good for the platform though.

Just imagine calling into tech support as a new user trying to connect to say email or the Internet. The customer service rep asks "which operating system do you have" ... the customer replies both Windows and Mac ... the rep then asks "Can we boot into Windows and we'll get you connected".

Given the choice most people choose Windows. Open your eyes to the world around us. This isn't an intelligent choice ... just an easy one. Sad but true.

If Apple includes Windows on any Macintosh they might as well say goodbye to the Mac OS. Like water people take the path of least resistance and as good as the Mac OS is there is still more resistance to Mac than Windows.

CDL, what have you been smoking?

Apple will NEVER EVER NEVER sell Windows on an Apple computer! NEVER! Is that clear?

Apple willl NEVER SUPPORT WINDOWS on Macs but they will allow it to be installed (if you want to).

Apple will not SELL WINDOWS. Sheesh....

Apple will not do anything that helps MS make money off of Windows.

But Apple will not prevent MS (pea sea) software from running on Intel powered Macintosh hardware.

RE:"Given the choice most people choose Windows. Open your eyes to the world
around us. This isn't an intelligent choice ... just an easy one. Sad but
true."

Are you nuts? IF given a true choice, one not mandated by an ignorant IT policy, and one that is based upon more than 5 minutes of use, most people will choose MAC.

Bring on true choice, we will win. Reality always wins even if it takes a long time.

When given the choice to buy a PC where to run infected-by-the-second Windows and dual booting Linux with lots of hassle to share files between the two or buy a PC where you could run OS X, having binary compatibility with Linux (after all, FreeBSD has it already and it is rock-solid) and - what's more - binary compatibility but SAFE with Windows applications without having to juggle with registers corruption, Windows patching patches and viruses it will be an easy one indeed.

Sad - for Gates & Balmer - but you would not need to pay Microshaft in order to do that.

MDN "nearly" as in nearly game over

Run Windoze apps on the Macintosh...without Windoze OS - http://darwine.opendarwin.org//

True Heidi, Apple won't install Windows on each Mac but now a customer is one step closer to replacing the Mac OS with the one most of their friends use. If you believe anything else you're looking at just your own world and not the 95% of those around us.

Kenh given a "true choice" what the heck is that suppose to mean. Since when does an IT department decide what the average home user uses. People get what they use at work or school. Even Apple knows that.

I'm a true Mac user, I've switched most everyone I know (with a couple of exceptions). The truth is that when you switch you need to switch. Kind of "cold turkey". Then they realise how much better it is. Usually after two weeks they have a relapse. without Windows they can't go back.

Giving the ability to reload Windows is a crutch. Will it make people want to buy a Mac ... maybe ... but you "won't quit smoking if you still keep a pack in the house".

Just my 2¢

cdl writes: “If you believe anything else you're looking at just your own world and not the 95% of those around us.”

Windoze does not have even close to 95% of the market. Macs alone represent 16% installed base, and Linux, BSD’s, et al have some tangible percentage as well.

Don’t be confused by the approx. 5% of computer sales figures for Mac’s. Mac’s last roughly three times longer than PeeCees, so Mac users buy as third as often. And 5 times 3 is close to the Software Publishers’ Association figure of 16%. And that number is about a year old already, so i’m sure the number is probably closer to 20% by now.