Short and sweet: Apple seems to have removed all references to Microsoft’s Virtual PC from its “Switch” webpages in recent days. Previously listed on some Apple pages were references to using Virtual PC to run Windows applications not available for the Macintosh.
The removal of Virtual PC mentions from Apple’s “Switch” webpages seem to coincide with the recent news that Microsoft confirms Virtual PC incompatible with Apple’s G5.
Apple’s “Switch” section is here.
(UPDATE 12:05pm ET: Apple does indeed have one reference left, on the Switch site. It is on this page. Thanks, Swedentom.)
Anyone heard rumors that Apple has been working on it’s own PC emulation product?
“Anyone heard rumors that Apple has been working on it’s own PC emulation product?”
If Apple isn’t doing such a thing, it should. Apple should just create a software package that allows the Mac to run Intel/AMD software (with as standard a BIOS, etc. implementation as possible). Then people could buy whatever OS they wanted (various Windows OSes, an Intel/AMD based version of Linux, an Intel/AMD based version of UNIX, or whatever). This way they don’t get into competition problems with Microsoft.
Apple really needs to have a VPC/RealPC type program. And it needs to be there somewhat quickly. DO we really think that Microsuck is going to help with VPC solving this quickly: I don’t think so. I think Apple is finally poised to grab some serious market share. a VPC type program will help get switchers who need one program or two. I use one real program on windows. I also use dos for V for Victory game (my favorite game).
Please apple hurry and get a quailty emu program and grap that market share.
“Apple should just create a software package that allows the Mac to run Intel/AMD software”
Surely you jest. What a ridiculous effort that would be. Talk about shoe-horning. Please do a little research on the differences in x86 (Intel/AMD) and RISC (PowerPC) processors before posting such tripe.
“Apple seems to have removed all references to Microsoft’s Virtual PC from its “Switch” webpages in recent days.”
Not quite.
http://www.apple.com/switch/questions/applications/index.html
From what I’ve heard an Apple branded PC emulation product would be difficult due to required cooperation on Microsoft’s end. I don’t know all the issues but apparently this is one of ’em…
Im not saying that Microsoft ISN’T dumping VIrtual PC, but remember even before they had to be complicit in the deal by selling Connectix Windows licenses.
If Apple were to include/make their own emulation software, the cons of such a debacle would FAR outweigh the pros. Sure we could run Windoze programs, but developers (many, but not all) will stop developing for Mac OS X, as you can just emulate Windows on your Mac. Any idea of turning a Mac into a PC is a bad idea. At first it seems it could make sense, but if you look deeper, it will kill Apple. Why do so many people fail to look at the longer term results? The playing field isn’t going to be the same if Apple introduces such an application, its going to skew horribly.
i always thought apple should buy connectix. now that MS has taken it over, i bet they are kicking themselves for being such boneheads.
Micro$oftopoly did not buy the VPC part of Connectix because of the Mac VPC, they did because of VPC for Windows. They are getting ready to drop support for the FAT 16/32 file system in a future release (Longhorn) of ‘doze and VPC will allow them to retain legacy support without building it into future releases of ‘doze. Why? Legacy support is one big contributor to the instability issues with ‘doze, as complexity breeds potential conflicts. Incorporating VPC technology into their server software will solve a lot of headaches for them in the future. The Mac VPC is just gravy along for the ride.
Any idea of turning a Mac into a PC is a bad idea.
I just need VPC to validate my cross platform web site. I don’t want to use a cheap PC and works with two keybord two screen and three button..
Nice day
Technically, Apple DID have a Windows emulation, and probably still do. NeXTStep (which OSX is built on) had a built in Windows emulation. I beleive it was called Yellow Box. In the original Beta release of OSX, there was still a splash screen for it tucked deed in the system (with both the NeXT and Windows logos on it, if I remember correctly).
Apple’s been making apps that are compatible with Windows features for a while, plus adding features to current apps (I.E. the Panther version of TextEdit can read .DOC files). While I doubt they’d make their own version of Virtual PC, how cool would it be if Apple could engineer a way to just run Windows apps on OS X? Without the hassle of having to actually use Windows! I’m thinking it would run like Classic does.
Granted – that would be a huge tax on resources, would take tons of time to develop, plus would Microsoft even permit such a thing?
Why are people so worried about Microsoft shutting off VPC.
VPC emulates intel HARDWARE, not Microsoft SOFTWARE; Microsoft still gets a full payment on a full license of windows when you use the emulator; and all Microsoft cares about is that you are running their software on everything digital (as you can see from their product line (from Car embeded systems, to large enterprise and Scientific clusters)
they don’t see it as a bad thing that VPC unables Macs to run windows quite the contrary they see it as getting the whole PIE. I mean if the remaning 5% of cpu Users also runs windows in Emulation, why wouldn’t they be so so so happy?
Really the only company that should be mad here is Intel because they are the ones being bipassed by this software.
Wether microsoft uses it to do virtualization on large servers, or uses it to emulate intel hardware on non intel machines, they loose always.
because everycopy of VPC that is running is an intel compatible processor not being used.
so I don’t think people should fret about Microsoft shooting themselves in the foot. (in fact I can see them making it that only windows can run on vpc asap, before anything else happens.)
Really what needs to happen is that people stop using Microsoft products period, even if it makes their lives a little difficult; and find replacements in O-S and other alternative directions.
Everycopy of a Microsoft OS that is bought wether on a cell phone or PDA, or in emulation software; is a percentage point more for Microsoft’s aim of dominating the Market.
leave it alone.
don’t touch it with a ten foot pole.
avoid at all cost.
RE: Jonahan
way to just run Windows apps on OS X? Without the hassle of having to actually use Windows!
What about IE ? Sorry Jonahan this is not possible.
I see no reason why Porsche must make the brackets to retrofit your favorite Ford accessories onto it.
I would hate to see Apple waste a huge amount of time, money, manpower and resources into making their system run crapware. Current Apple aps read and write 99% of the data produced by Windows. If it is so important that you run “CyberBlaster Bot from Hell 2004” then just keep your li’l Dell box or get an X-box. But, if you’re priorities are serious computing, go get an Apple… then get a life!!
On the “Hot News” page under OS X, it is still listed. Probably not for much longer. On the issue of Apple is dead if they make an emulator… well, they weren’t when Connectix did it. Morover, the market is dynamic and it may be that as MS comes under further REAL scrutiny by end-users the Mac and other Unix systems will be seen as very real alternatives and the products may be made for them first. It depends on the ease of development of course but porting from Unix to Windows may become the norm for some apps. Apple has some advantages and disadvantages in making available a Windows emulator but history has shown it didn’t seem to hurt them… and it might not in the future. Much depends on that market dynamic.
Apple still refers to Virtual PC in
http://www.apple.com/myths
Apple should help the open source x86 emulation project called bochs http://bochs.sourceforge.net/ and then ship macs with it. If you needed to run Windows, you could buy a copy and run it on your mac.
Well folks, there’s one thing to consider in this, sure M$ could drop VPC for Mac, or use it like they did Office to ensure that Apple stays “faithful” to them (remember the IE debacle, and the stories of Apple being told to kill off QuickTime?)
But for those of us who go digging through the OS underpinnings and have worked with some of the other *BSDs, there’s software with names like WINE which emulates Windows APIs, and BOCHS which emulates PC hardware in the OS. I’m not sure if these would be able to compile under OS X yet, but I’d bet it would be worthwhile to pursue. Wine especially would be interesting because that would similar to the “red box” (Windows compatibility) that was rumoured back in Rhapsody days.
I’m personally not to afraid of MS buying out VPC, or FWB bailing on RealPC, because the software is accessible, and with some effort, these Applications, while fondly remembered, will not be sorely missed.
All I can say is, who cares? I bet the percentage of mac owners that own (much less use) a windows emulator package on a regular basis in miniscule. PCs are so inexpensive that anyone needing to run a Windows specific application would generally be better off by just buying a cheap PC. I’m waiting for some REAL news in the Mac world, like the release of 10.3, or some new laptop hardware.
RE: Bochs
Actually, Bochs has already been ported to OS X. It requires the Dev Tools to be installed and will only run Windows versions thru NT 4. It’s pretty slow, but most emulation is and will probably benefit as more people show an interest because of the VPC fiasco. Check it out:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/unix_open_source/bochs.html
A big problem for many users is not really running windows apps (Most Mac apps can read windows documents), but it is running windows GAMES. Alot of people out there play games and if anyone plays games even once a month, chances are they will get a PC because few games are built for Macs. We need x86 emulation WITH native support for the videocard in the Mac. Shure, it will use more processing due to emulation, but the videocard does most of the work and if you have a G5, then it will do fine with the extra CPU load.
Beautiful….A masterpiece of stratagy, or a happy accident that Micro$oft might have bought this company to eliminate competition or control it’s OS on an Apple platform and now it won’t run on anything..I love it.
One more thought…Some of the people that switched to Mac are still using Micro$oft crap on their Macs. I just don’t get it…”Explain it to me like I was a 6 year old.”
Should Apple create Virtual Mac software for PC hardware? Most Windows users admit to liking Mac software but feel more secure buying a PC. Instead of having to create iTunes for Windows and perhaps others in the future Apple would only need one piece of software to increase its market share and perhaps convert many others to Mac hardware. Any thoughts?
If you really need a PC get a little Athlon box for $500 CDN (thats like $300 USD).
But the truth is you really don’t need one. The only thing a PC has that Mac does not are games, and VPC won’t help you there.
ATT’N, George Krueger. Yellow Box never had anything to do with Windows emulation. Please stop spreading ignorant misinformation. The Yellow Box technologies assisted in creating Windows applications. YB did not bring Windows APIs to the Mac/Next; it did the exact opposite.
Some of you still don’t get it do you? Connectix was 3rd party, if Apple made an emulator and bundled it with computers, what incentive is there for developers to create a native version of their app when the computer comes equipped to run an inferior OS? I use VPC when I have to, and for validating webpages, its just fine, but don’t turn your Mac into a full blown PC as many people here want. If you want dual operating systems (Mac OS and Windoze), Apple is not going to let it happen. Its more in their interest to kill their hardware division and release Marklar. Allowing the option to emulate Windoze through 3rd party sources or Microsoft themselves is a good thing. It leaves the options open. But integrating it is asking for Apple to die. From every standpoint its a bad thing, although the consumer standpoint, you have to look into the future and not be blinded by the original positive points that will last a few weeks.
Some people posting to this forum neglect to consider the predominance of Windows in the enterprise market. This is a market that Apple is courting, and so it becomes very relevant to establish a bridge to this frontier.
As a Mac advocate and senior analyst within such an organization, VPC — or some other Intel emulation software — becomes unfortunately essential if I wish to replace the PC on my desk with a Mac.
Should Apple develop such a package, it should be similar to VPC — a hardware emulation package, and not a Windows emulator. Nothing would be lost, and they could have another revenue source from its sales.
Unthoughtful posts like several of the ones in this forum are the reason many only refer to mac users as fanatics and zealots.
I think most people that are currently using VPC do so because they have a program that they need to use that doesn’t have a Mac equal. I don’t think any Mac user uses Windows unless they have no other choice. In my case I own a Network Wiring tester that needs a program to interface with the computer. I also use PC anywhere to access remote PC’s. Others use it to test web pages. It’s a pain to have to waste desk space for a PC.
If you need to run M$ crap go buy a e-machine, it costs about the same as VPC and is a hell of a lot faster and works better than VPC. VPC was a hunk of crap before Microsuck bought them and would only have gotten worse given Mr. Bill and his Gestapo’s track record. Good riddance, I’ll be glad when all of the whiners quite complaining. It’s sure not the end of the world.
I will miss VPC, not because I would use it for windows.
I had a drive for OPENSTEP, LINUX, as well as Windows. I still like and occasionally use OPENSTEP. I still like the editor and dev tools on OpenStep better than OS X. Also, there are some apps on OpenStep which do a better job than any app on other OS’s which have not been ported to OS X.
VPC was great. It allowed me to run software on different OS’s side by side.
(yes OS4.2 can be installed on VPC6. It was not easy, but it works. OS4.2 works better on VPC5)
We do NOT need x86 emulation software to play games. If you thought performance of ported games were subpar, emulated games would be significantly worse. At least with ported games, you’re support the Mac platform. And there are plenty of games that get ported to our platform. Sure, we miss a few here and there, but the PC gaming scene is a pretty good filter for the crap that’s out there. We typically get the good games ported.
Apple is promoting Microsoft-branded Virtual PC here:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/applications/virtualpc/
So the original poster seems to be a bit too conspiratorially-minded for my taste. Grow up.
Honestly – ‘insensitive posts?’
The truth is you will be better served with a cheap PC and a KVM switch than VPC. Its a dog – thats why. Up here, people sell 1GHz pcs with licensed OS for $200 CDN. VPC is more than this.
My G4 is slower than my P4. So why would I try to run the P4’s software on the G4?
Its not insensitivity dude, its LOGIC.
What we need is more developers like Blizzard, iD and maybe Bungie (the jury is still out). They enforce good code control and develop across platforms because it imposes a certain discipline on them. The incremental costs of cross platform development when done this way is much lower. Currently, we end up with a single game re-written several times (only the assets remian the same).
CG and rendermonkey might help that a bit, but there is still no standard audio coding language and Physics engines/middleware like Havok are PC only right now.
The best thing about this VPC fiasco is that it will (hopefully) spur interest and development of Bochs for OS X.
lewdvig is correct. We tried using VPC for a PC-only application. We ended up returning our copies for the 30 day money-back guarantee. Now, each of us has a Mac, a dirt cheap Celeron PC, and an Iogear USB KVM switch (we use Macally keyboards and Logitech mice). VPC is indeed a dog by comparison. With falling PC prices and smaller form factors, Connectix must have seen the writing on the wall. I don’t see much of a future for emulation software unless someone develops a break-through that eliminates the speed problems and sells it for $50/copy.
What Apple should do is provide the capability for developers to easily recompile their windows apps so that they run on the mac. basically copy/layer the windows API’s (that make sense) on top of the mac api’s.
The linux WINE project has functionality to re-compile windows apps (so they run under the X windows server) as well as run windows apps directly (on x86 linux platforms only ) . If Apple backed an effort that sought to port the direct x API’s to the mac so that it was a straight re-compile for windows developers, that would be a first step.
Apple (or an open source effort) should create a layer that roughly parallels the Carbon spec, but that targets the most popular API’s that windows developers use.
They should also resurrect the OpenStep libraries for Windows so that cocoa programs could be ported (or shipped as fat binaries) to run under windows (a la the NeXT era)
Who cares!
We are so sick of Microsoft and there ways. I am sure Apple can come up with an emulation product quickly and avoid yet another attack of reliance on the big bad Microsoft!
The new G5 is a better product and Apple is doing such great things these days that Bill Gates and crew must be watching very closely.
Windows folks are so jealous of iTunes thety must be howling, “why not us” why not now”?
Have a great labor day holiday and thank God for the Mac-tech at it’s best!!!!!
This topic has come up in other places and I agree… There needs to be a windows emulator for the Mac, by Apple or someone else doesn’t matter. I’ve read of a Yellow Box for Mac OS X, but have no idea what it does.
Note I say WINDOWS emulator, not X86 emulator.
What I mean is that instead of attempting to emulate the CPU, sound card, etc… you write converter APIs that re-direct all Windows system calls to equivilant Mac system calls. You also have a component that pre-compiles major functions in the applications to native PPC code.
There was a very successful (speed wise) version of this emulator done for the Alpha processor systems. The emulator was called !X86 I think. It didn’t emulate the CPU or sub systems, and it didn’t use a virtual machine.
Since so many posters posted horribly misinformed BS:
WINE = Wine Is Not an Emulator. It only ports WIN32 instructions to *nix calls, and only works on x86. To run WINE on OS X, you’d need x86 emulation.
Bochs supplies something similar to VPC without the nice duh-friendly interface.
Apple is not interested in having OS X turn into a way to run Windows software. They have developed x86 hardware to enable Macs to run DOS and Windows in the past. They don’t do this anymore. It failed then. Duh.
Apple IS interested in having the best Java implementation possible, and is working to provide X11 support. This is primarilly to bring *nix users to the OS X platform, not to bring X11 software to OS X.
Apple wants developers using Cocoa for OS X. Mac developers can use Carbon, Crossplatform developers can use Java. They don’t wan’t developers writing Windows apps and slopping them on top of OS X in some fashion. Which would suck.
VPC is to allow Mac users to buy a mac and still run a few legacy apps.
Also, note that YellowBox was the code name for what they now call Cocoa. At one point, OS X ran both on x86 hardware (I installed Rhapsody on a Dell) and as a layer atop Windows (I’ve also installed YellowBox on Windows, to run WebObjects developer tools). If Apple wanted to sell OS X to a larger market, they could — with some significant effort at this point — develop and market an OS X / Intel and/or Cocoa for Windows. It sounds like a good idea, but neither worked for NeXT, and Apple is CLEARLY NOT interested in doing this, even for vertical markets where they were selling WebOjects for $20,000 a copy. Certainly if they stopped doing that, they aren’t intersted in selling it at $99 a copy. Apple wants you to buy Macs. They are not interested in trying to displace Microsoft as the Provider of Software for Commodity PCs. Linux is trying to do that.
“Red Box” was the name suggested for the idea that Apple should include Windows emulation in OS X alongside Classic (the Blue Box). Classic is great for what is does, but it still sucks. It’s designed to allow Mac users to upgrade and still run their old Quark or whatever. Its best to upgrade everything and not use it.
Developing a Red Box (it never was Apple’s plan, just an idea thought up by conjecture loving rumor mongers) would be a huge development drain for what purpose? So IT departments could build VBasic crap and have Mac users run it rather than Java or web based stuff? Roll out Windows versions of apps as “corporate standards” since Macs with RB could run them? And why would anyone port games (or any apps) to the Mac if they could run pseudo-natively in a Red Box?
As long as there have been computers at home, there have been ideas that the best platform would be some glorious thing that could run anything: Apple II, DOS, CPM, Windows, whatever. But efforts to do this ALWAYS failed. The idea is stupid.
The best platform would be one where things work well, the user interface is consistant, and a full complement of professional/business/creative/technical NATIVE software was available and took advantage of the OS/hardware/user interface. This is what Apple is trying to do with OS X. Offering Windows compatibility would run counter to this goal.
What has not been mentioned here so far is how fast an x86 emulator would run on a dual G5 system. I am no expert in computer hardware but the G5 PowerMacs supposedly have the fastest front-side bus and a refined motherboard that is next-gen compared to all other desktop PCs. Had Virtual PC been able to run on the G5 PowerMacs it could have put a lot of Intel and AMD hardware to shame. Of course I am only making an educated guess here but it really would look bad for Microsoft & Co. if this was the case.
The sudden removal of references to Virtual PC on Apple’s part suggests to me that they were not happy by Microsoft’s recent statement that Virtual PC is unable to run on G5s and that an update will not be ready until sometime next year. Apple can now improve cross-compatibility between OS X and Windows, release its own x86 emulator or better yet, do both.
The Mac should be able to stand on its own without the need for PC emulation. Maybe then, Apple would market with inspiration instead of desparation.
I’ve never had the need to run Windows on my Mac.
I agree with the others about just buying a cheap PC if you need to run some form of business software that isn’t available on the Mac.
Contrary to what the FUD merchants would have you believe, there is but a handful of high profile apps that do not have a Mac version.
I have a small business that requires the use of QuickBooks working in conjunction with my bookeeper and my accountant. I have spent alot of money on Intuit products which includes the new “updated” QB5 for Mac.
It is a horrible piece of software that is no better than the last version Intuit did for the Mac. Payroll is done through Aatrix and does not allow coding projects, time or workmen to a specific task like it does in the PC version. This is a very big deal and renders the application useless.
I can’t stand Windows nor do I care for QuickBooks in any way. But, I am running a business that needs to send and receive information with other business’ that are rarely Mac based. Intuit has told me T.S. when I need tech support. Aatrix shrugs their shoulders when I need support.
By the way, MYOB is as bad as QB5 for the Mac.
…?
I also use Quickbooks for my business, and have to share with my accountant. I purchased QB for Mac, only to discover that the files DO NOT swap between Mac and PC. The QB for Windows and QB for Macs are two separate and non-compatible programs. So much for QB for Mac. I returned it.
So, we are stuck with VPC 5, Windows 2000, which runs like a dog on a G4 450. Hard to believe that the CEO of Intuit sat on Apple’s Board.
I would never ever even have considered installing VPC and Windows on my Mac, had there not been two reasons: Gary Trudeau’s Doonesbury comic archive is available for Windows only. Duh.
And my children get learning software from their schools that’s Windows-only. Double-duh.
VPC is THE reason I am considering switching. I work in an industry that 99% of the software I use to interact with equipment is PC only. I work completely from a laptop and purchasing a 2nd laptop to perform a few functions in the PC world is out of the question. No VPC; no switch. It’s that simple for me.
P.S. Save your comments about all the other great things about a Mac. I know all that. But if I can’t do my job, as efficiently and effectively as I need to, I don’t make the switch.
I use VPC to run various browsers (yes IE) and versions to check my web pages. Easy and very convienient on the same worksation (and Pbook). Some times to check out an apllication that’s not or not yet available to Mac.
I will really mis VPC.
I like Mac. I don’t like Win. But it would be foolish to ignore 95% of the ‘others’.
Buying a cheap box doesn’t seems a very attractive option when one could have it all in one machine… Why lug two laptops around?
I hope VPC will upgrade ASAP!
It was great for Aplle when Connectix made the Virtual Game Station – PlayStation Emulator… Maybe Microfoft wanna re-releace that one for Mac OS X just to bug Sony
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
What hasn’t been mentioned is that Apple started, then shelved, an emulation product. One of the engineers working on it went to Connectix and did Virtual PC.
What also hasn’t been mentioned is that Apple had the opportunity to buy Virtual PC for Mac when Connectix sold VPC for Windows to M$. Apple didn’t want it.
The final thing to remember is that the G5 doesn’t support the little-endian mode that VPC 6.1 needed to run quickly.
In short, Apple doesn’t want to own VPC, and they don’t care if their processors don’t support VPC. It seems that Apple thinks VPC gives Windows developers an excuse *not* to make a Mac version of something, and they don’t want to make themselves just another Windoze box.
AVDad: If you are considering the purchase of an Apple laptop, and VPC was THE reason you decided to switch to the Mac, then this announcement about VPC has nothing to do with you.
All Apple laptops will be using G3 and G4 processors for the forseeable future. You will not see a G5 Apple laptop anytime soon. The issue with VPC is with the PowerPC G5 processor unable to run in ‘little endian mode’. PowerPC processors are RISC, which is ‘big endian mode’ – the older 68k processors and all intel/amd x86 processors are CISC or ‘little endian mode’ – Apparently the G5 doesn’t support the ability to emulate little endian.
-Zack
szpilki lesbijki x-x szpilki lezbijki x-x szpilki modelki x-x sutki xlaski x-x sutki zdjecia x-x suze julia x-x sperma gwiazdy x-x naturyzm gejowskie laleczki x-x lessbijki filmy ass x-x manga studentki nagie x-x manga studentki pijane x-x manga wc x-x filmy zadarmo x-x dupcenie na sofie foto x-x perewersyjne cipeczki pod prysznicem x-x pantaletas adolecentes x-x fots de rebelde x-x masturbacion exhibicionismo oral x-x filmy z nastolatkami za darmo x-x minetka na schodach porn x-x sex mam x-x
szpilki naturyzm x-x szpilki opowiadania x-x szpilki owlosione x-x suze randall x-x suze randall jpg x-x suze randall monika x-x odlotowe blondynki x-x oraltv dziwki mlode x-x ladne nagie modelki x-x manga wibratory x-x manga wyuzdane x-x mangi animowane erotyczne x-x lafiryndy na plazy pic x-x nastolatki w bikini movies x-x 18 latki w aucie foto x-x cachando fraganti x-x abuela peliculas corneo x-x caricaturas de gatitas x-x xxx milfki site x-x niunki w bikini xxx x-x minety pod prysznicem web x-x