“Quite simply, a monolithic kernel like the one used in Linux or most of the other Open Source Unix clones is inherently two to three times faster for integer calculations than the Mach microkernel presently used in OS X 10.4. That’s why the world hasn’t embraced xServes, for example, because for simple web or database service they are slower and serve fewer users. Apple has evidently reached the point where they need to trade claimed performance, — typically based on floating-point operations that aren’t a part of much web or database service — for real performance,” Robert X. Cringely writes for PBS.com. “I think it safe to say that whatever Apple’s overall strategy, we’re likely to see a new kernel in OS X 10.5, though the look and feel and underlying functionality shouldn’t change at all. Those who think the kernel change will have to wait for 10.6 forget that Apple has had parallel versions of OS X in development for years, so who’s to say they haven’t had a monolithic-kernel version running in the lab since 10.3?”
“Apple will most likely offer more than one way to satisfy Big Business’s desire to run Windows or at least Windows applications. I think Apple is sincere, for example, in their interest in allowing Apple hardware to boot straight into Vista,” Cringely writes. “Another option for Apple would be full OS virtualization like I championed last week. I’m sure it will be available, though maybe not from Apple, since there are plenty of third party applications ready to fight for that business. These applications, probably even more than running straight Vista on Apple hardware, could use the extra oomph of a faster kernel.”
“Now for the interesting part: I believe that Apple will offer Windows Vista as an option for those big customers who demand it, but I also believe that Apple will offer in OS X 10.5 the ability to run native Windows XP applications with no copy of XP installed on the machine at all. This will be accomplished not by using compatibility middleware like Wine, but rather by Apple implementing the Windows API directly in OS X 10.5,” Cringely writes. “The wonder is, of course, that Apple could even dare to do such a thing? Oh they can dare. Not only that, this is one dare Apple can probably get away with.”
“I’m told Apple has long had this running in the Cupertino lab — Intel Macs running OS X while mixing Apple and XP applications. This is not a guess or a rumor, this something that has been demonstrated and observed by people who have since reported to me,” Cringely writes. “Think of the implications. A souped-up OS X kernel with native Windows API support and the prospect of mixing and matching Windows and Mac applications would be, for many users, the best of both worlds. There would be no copy of Windows XP to buy, no large overhead of emulation or compatibility middleware, no chance for Microsoft to accidentally screw things up, substantially better security, and no need to even take a chance on Windows Vista.”
Much more in the full article, including how Apple can legally do such a thing, here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Sketchtrain” for the heads up.]
MacDailyNews Take: No copy of Windows XP to buy and no need to even take a chance on Windows Vista means no money for Microsoft. As we have always said, even as many short-sightedly threw in the towel, the war is not over. And, yes, we shall prevail. For the naysayers we trot out our favorite example once again: In 1929, Ford held just over 61% of the U.S. market for automobiles. GM’s market share stood at just 12%. Ford was thought to be invincible, with GM regarded as a niche auto maker. But, in 1936, just seven years later, Ford held 22% of the market for new automobiles while General Motors held a 43% share. No company is invincible. Not even Microsoft.
Advertisements:
• Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
• Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• Apple’s brand new iPod Hi-Fi speaker system. Home stereo. Reinvented. Available now for $349 with free shipping.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
Related article:
Apple ready to take back market share; may debut Windows virtualization in Mac OS X Leopard – April 21, 2006
Dude, you got a Dell? What are you, stupid? Only Apple Macs run both Mac OS X and Windows! – April 05, 2006
Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ ultimate goal: ‘to take back the computer business from Microsoft’ – June 16, 2005
Definately on the cards…
Sorry can’t spell/turning American…
People fear this because of OS/2, but I hope it is real. I installed darwine on my intel notebook, and it shows promise, but has a ways to go.
I would be more excited to see Yellow Box (Cocoa for Windows) as it would allow me to switch to my preferred mac development system to develop our Windows applications (sadly I work at a Windows centric company).
This is all intertwined, give the world that is tied to the boat anchor that is windows a way to move to the mac without having to start over.
He has been reading AppleMatters this week.
This is the future!!! Mac OS X “BYOA” (bring your own application, even windows ones!)
Good stuff, except that Cringely sounds like he is ready to take the credit for any virtualization that appears in Leopard…. since “championed it” and all.
What about the vast majority of Mac users who are using G3/G4/G5? What reason will there be to purchase Leopard? I personally don’t see this kind of a move until the majority of Mac users have switched to Intel. Then again…
Attn: MDN – dream on.
The Apple/Mac we love now would not be the same if their market share was over 50% maybe even over 25%. Look at any company that dominates their market and you will see complacentcy and lack of drive. For example, would you rather have a GM car or a Mercedes. While GM has a huge market share Mercedes has maybe 3 or 4. If Apple gets too big it’s over. Yes it needs to grow but not in terms of complete market domination.
I sure hope MDN uses all the extra ad revenues to implement comment editing capabilities here. I would like to fix my typos I find after posting, like the one above. Doh!
wouldn’t that mean that viruses would be able to run then ?
i dont think OS/2 is any kind of comparison, os x is an established OS and already has support so isnt relying totally on windows apps. wouldnt apple have to get some kind of permission from microsoft to use windows api? – i dont really know about all that just curious if microsoft would somehow sue big-time over this.
There are five year agreements for these major programs. In five years, so much can happen! Holy Shiites!
MadMac:
There are probably better verbs to use than “jew” to describe your thoughts.
Try to be more sensitive to others and stop promoting false steroetypes please.
I sure hope MDN uses all the extra ad revenues to implement comment editing capabilities here. I would like to fix my typos I find after posting, like the one above. Doh!
Hey Spark-Eat It
Simply: In answer to your question – not really. In order to get a virus onto a machine, you have to have A) a mechanism to run the code, and B) security holes. Windows has both and Mac does not. I’m not saying that Mac has no security holes. What I’m saying is that you’d have to find a way to get the code on the Mac, make it run, and give it the security to cause problems. Recently, some folks have found that they can create malware for Mac, but you need to manually run that malware and you need to enter your password once it’s running so that it can execute. That’s not a real virus.
Hope that helps!
JvW
I want what Mr. Cringley is having. Must be some good stuff!
MadMac is right – that would be the end of Mac developers. No more reason for anyone to buy a Mac at all.
The only reason this could work is if OS X offers some type of big advantage to PC users that they would want to switch to Macs. Maybe if Apple bought Adobe and also did this… that would be interesting.
I’d like to see Apple simultaneously release both Windows API support and Cocoa for Windows, so that developers can use Cocoa to develop cross-platform apps. Then you wouldn’t see developers abandoning the Mac platform.
I think what we are going to see is Apple has been working with Microsoft on Vista in order to be able to sell it on Mac’s.
I know, I know, it sounds horrid, but Apple under Steve Jobs is interested in new products which they can dominate the market with.
Fighting a uphill battle against the Demon of Redmond is going to take longer than you, me and Steve Jobs has time left on this earth. Then all it takes is a change of leadership and Apple will be back to the dark ages.
Microsoft has got the OEM’s locked up, the buisnesses locked up, the banks and everyone.
Microsoft will always just copy whatever Mac OS X is a few years later and the world will be happy because they can slap it on any hardware they want.
Apple is interested in completely new devices to dominate and grow with. The iPod is a shining example.
Right now Apple is flush with cash, Steve Jobs is flush selling off Pixar. It’s quite possible Mac’s with Mac OS X will continue on life support from iPod and new product sales without having to run Vista, but it’s also possible Steve might just decide to let it go.
I cannot beleive the shear amount of expoits that Mac OS X has had, so many of them are not fixed it’s incredible. This goes to show that Apple is not paying attention to security, which means that they might not be caring about Mac OS X any longer.
The recent leaving of their head mach development engineer means one of two things, a new Mac OS X or a dropping of it for Vista.
I can’t beleive it’s for Vista, although it would make Apple hardware sales go through the roof in all their Apple Stores. It might be both, I hope it is.
Hmmmmm.
It is getting harder to tell which wild future teller is just yacking and which one might have some technical info to back them up.
After reading the full article, it may be that Apple has been planning this for some time. But then again, the past is always easy to forcast once you have seen it happen. —— Yes, I am sure the Titannic will sink. !!!!!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
At least it is shaping up to be an interesting poker game.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
N.
Unlike many of Cringely’s articles, this one has the look and feel of truth. I’m in!
Mike
PS Right on Barry. Well said.
Jimbo,
Don’t you think that all the malware (virus/spyware) use the Windows API’s to execute just like other apps? It will happen!
There’s no way that Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard has an Intel-only kernel. Apple is to this very day selling G5 PowerMacs (as well as G4 iBooks and PowerBooks). They’re not going to announce at WWDC that customers who just spent over $3000 on a new computer can’t upgrade to 10.5.
This is all very interesting. I do agree, however, that Mac’s marketshare will never top 20% so long as they only sell premium computers. The simple fact is that the majority of people want to save $100-$200 on their computer purchases despite the quality of the product. Exactly the same reason BMW doesn’t have a bigger marketshare. Someday it would be nice to see Apple truly compete in the economy computer market, but I just don’t see that happening.
WISH: Apple releases a Mac mini for $399