“It’s hard to believe that [the release of Boot Camp means that] Apple will just roll over and play dead at a time when it’s doing so well – especially as it recently got a public commitment from Microsoft that it would update the Mac version of Microsoft Office for the new Intel Macs and would continue to develop the Office suite for several years to come,” Cliff Joseph writes for Personal Computer World. “It does seem more likely that Boot Camp is a kind of Trojan horse designed to lure PC users over to the Mac camp.”
“Many PC users admire the elegant design of Mac hardware and the eye-catching graphical user interface of OSX, but still hold back from buying a Mac because they are committed to Windows or to specific Windows programs that may not be available on the Mac,” Joseph writes. “The ‘Macs can’t run Windows’ argument is a particular problem for Apple in the corporate market.”
“The Mac version of Microsoft Office is completely compatible with the Windows version of Office, so there’s no real reason business users can’t do their Excel number-crunching on a Mac (apart from the fact that Office for the Mac doesn’t include a version of the Access database),” Joseph writes.
“However, most large organisations simply won’t consider buying Macs because they don’t run Windows,” Joseph writes. “Well, now they do, and removing that all-important obstacle might just allow Apple to get its foot in the door of the 90 per cent of the market that is currently Microsoft’s private stomping ground.”
“Don’t get us wrong – we’re not suggesting that Apple is planning to topple Microsoft or even start courting large corporate clients,” Joseph writes. “Its focus at the moment is very much on the consumer market, where the success of the Ipod is making Apple look very trendy right now.”
“But don’t forget that Apple currently holds less than five per cent of the personal computer market,” Joseph writes. “If it can tempt just one million home users worldwide to swap their old PC for a new Mac – and maybe buy an Ipod at the same time – Apple could double its market share and profits without even having to think about the corporate market.”
Full article, including speculation about virtualization in Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard and, “Apple is swimming in cash at the moment, so it could buy Parallels out of petty cash; and then – hey presto – buy a Mac and you get two computers for the price of one,” here.
Advertisements:
• Introducing the super-fast, blogging, podcasting, do-everything-out-of-the-box MacBook. Starting at just $1099.
• 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.
• 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 ‘Get a Mac’ web page pushes Parallels Desktop instead of Apple’s own Boot Camp – June 18, 2006
I’d have to agree with Noraa. Office:Mac is not *quite* fully compatible with the Windows counterpart – 99% maybe – and here we *do* need an Access-compatible alternative. A relative passed to me a Powerpoint slideshow called “A Place Called Earth”, which includes a moody soundtrack as the images fade one to another. It’s really quite nice. When I tried to run it on my newly acquired Mac:Office 2004 ($19.99 under our new “Home Use” program) my whole screen goes black. I have to F11 to see my desktop and then kill the Powerpoint. I can view the individual slides in a window, but switching to the slideshow again blacks the screen. No music in either event.
I do agree that being able to support multiple operating systems is a real plus for Intel Macs. But for those who must, or think they must, have Windows available, the add-on cost of the Windows OS must be considered. Who, after all, really wants to spend more money for virtualization software, plus another two to three hundred for a shrink-wrapped copy of Windows atop what they think is already a premium priced computer (the Mac)?
It also remains to be seen how Parallels or like products, or Boot Camp, handles non-OEM installations of Windows. Here we use a custom, Ghost-installed image based on the OS, myriad patches, and a bundle of common applications. I’m sure we’re not the only large business or government office that builds their desktops that way.
Fred Mertz said it best in a response to another post from MDN’s VMWare article earlier today:
“What people want is to be able to run Windows programs in Mac OS X without Windows.”
No they don’t. Not real Mac users at least. What Mac users want is for developers to make Mac OS X versions of their programs. Using all of the unique interface elements available in Mac OS X. Since developers won’t do that, we have to settle for using some apps with the crippled and crappy Windows UI on our Macs. It sucks, but it’s better than nothing, I guess.
“Apple could buy Parallels with petty cash”
Hold on there. Tom’s assets with the estate of Johnny’s is a ton of money.
It’s just amazing how many people can’t get names right. iPod, Mr. Joseph, not Ipod. Go ahead, go to Apple’s site and see. Go to Wikipedia. Look at the ads on TV. iPod, not Ipod or IPOD or IPoD or anything else you can come up with. (eye-pawed?)
Chill out! Yes, he’s wrong. Who cares? Funky capitalization of names can be cute, but it also can be a pain in the neck. I once worked for a company that insisted that its name be written in all capitals. Of course no one but employees wrote it like that – not our suppliers, not our customers.
Ditto calling it the “video iPod”. Yes, that’s not the official name. But it’s the iPod that does video. Say “video iPod” and everyone knows what you’re talking about.
Mac OSX Leopard will be running Windows Apps. That again would eliminate another obstacle… “run your favorite Windows only apps on a Mac and don’t worry about viruses anymore; and while you’re at it why not try iLife.”
Apple must tred water lightly right now. A huge part of Apple’s business depends on Microsoft’s cooperation right now. Microsoft has been intentially leaving Apple behind for years. The Mac version of Office is just a bit slower and doesn’t have quite all the features as the Windows version. The Mac version of Internet Explorer was held behind the Windows version for all those years. That’s why I’m convinced that Apple came out with Safari. Microsoft would ideally want to benefit from Apple’s business, while at the same time avoid giving people a reason to switch to the Mac.
Office is the most widely used business Application out there. Boot Camp is a way to convince people to switch to the Mac without offending Microsoft too much yet. They may even sell a few more copies of Windows through it. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the deep dark secrets at Apple is to finally throw the hammer, full force, at Microsoft. I don’t think they’re able to do that yet. But when they are ready, sh••’s gonna fly!
I wouldn’t be surprised if we see native emulation for Windows apps inside OS X.5. If Microsoft decides to discontinue Office, I’m sure Apple is all ready to release iWork as a complete alternative, and besides, you could still run the windows version. Also, expect the prices to come down a bit at the same time. I think apple is saving up, building speculation and interest . . . and planning to finally throw the hammer and give people no reason in the whole world to not buy Macs. What if they were suddenly better, cheaper, completely able to run anything even games, had their own industry leading word processor, didn’t get viruses or malware, and you get a free iPod with your new computer . . .
Most people have no allegience to Microsoft. They just want a computer that doesn’t cost a lot, can run all of their stuff, and will not be terribly slow. Just remember, the market once was in Apple’s favor and Windows 95 suddenly shifted it out. Things could suddenly shift back. Every so many years, people upgrade their computers. That’s just how it is.
Sadly, if Apple wants Parallels they’ll probably just copy it and build it into Leopard without giving Parallels a dime. It’s what apple did with dashboard widgets (http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/dashboard_vs_konfabulator), sherlock (http://forums.macnn.com/archive/index.php/t-115461.html), and other cool OS features over the years.
Hey bro, how about
ypawed? or eeeeiiiiiiippppaawwwwddddd….
or… how about you and the rest of the spelling/grammer police just shut the fuck up and go back to being a hall monitor in junior hi?
On the corporate side, it’s likely Winblows-only software that’s keeping corporations from switching (along with idiotic IT people). But on the home-front it’s more likely just personal inertia – most people just don’t care that much about Winblows vs. the Macintosh OS. They are conditioned to accept mediocrity and shitiness. However, once they try a Mac, they aren’t going back! 30 minutes is all it takes, baby!
You may now start with the sexual jokes and references…..
Nick,
Apple introduced “Desktop Accessories” (essentially Dashboard) with either OS 6 or System 7 – can’t remember which. Konfabulator copied off of Apple!
Nick,
Try reading your own link, moron:
http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/dashboard_vs_konfabulator
It explains clearly that Apple DID NOT “rip off” that pile of crap Konfabulator.
Reposter
I agree with you. However as I former software professional I can tell you that market share is a big thing for executives that approve funding for projects. Windows rules period. Specially in biz apps. Some biz apps are never going to be coded to run natively in OSX. Software companies don’t have an incentive to offer mac versions because most people have Win/Tel PCs and Apple computers can run Windows. The only thing that can change that is a larger market share for Apple. Apple is just not there…..yet but I’m hoping it will in the future. I think Parallels, boot camp are good solutions in the meantime.
Nick,
Yes, Apple is the king of stealing cool OS features.
Not. Microsoft has that crown. Just ask Bill.
Get a clue. Apple invented cool OS features. Before Apple did them, if they existed, they were just features. Apple made them cool.
As a matter of fact, Apple has the US Patent on cool. Just look it up.
Apple does NOT want to waste resources and pour money into the bottomless pit of Windows support.
I bet that Apple is working on some kind of Windows solution for Leopard that will blow everyone out of the water!
Boot Camp and Parallels will seem as quaint as RAMDoubler or Virtual PC.
Nick, the link you gave for Konfab vs Dashboard actually gives all the excellent reasons as to why Apple DIDN’T RIPOFF konfabulator…
I guess that’s called speed debating, you refute your own statement…
Second link has nothing but forum opinions, which are worth as much as the ones on this board. In OS 9 we had windowshade, Decor, Launch Bars, etc, which all found their way into the OS. and in each case, Apple went far beyond the original shareware interface and made it work better.
Same is true of Konfab, which still has some desirable widgets, but Dashboard plays with the system better, so why would Apple feel obligated to pay them for code that was inferior to what Apple could build?
Ideas are “in the air” and are derived from influences that are available to everyone. No one has a franchise on a basic idea.
I’ve worked in the creative field a long time & I can recall many times where at least two groups came up with the same idea at about the same time. Its almost guaranteed actually, it usually comes down to execution. Just having a cool idea that no one else has ever had is a fairytale concept. Light bulbs, TV, Radio, all had several people developing the same things in different places at the same time.
Its not often like in school where people look over your shoulder & “copy” off your paper.
Some form of OS virtualization has been in the air around all operating systems for quite awhile. Again, just because of contemporanious development, Apple doesn’t owe the Parallel people a dime.
Wow, how does MDN do that? the secret word is “Radio”
I have a windows pc. I could care less is my next mac runs windows. I want programs coded for mac. If Apple lets Parrallels do their thing and stay away from windows virtualization, then they don’t have to support it. That way if some stupid idiot screws up their mac with a windows virus, then the makers of Parallels get all the annoying customer service calls.
LOL
That’s funny about the article I linked to. Regardless, Dashboard widgets copied Konfabulator in that both are markup language based widget kits that use Javascript to tie everything together; Konfabulator uses XML, Dashboard Widgets uses HTML. Desktop Accessories was a totally different architecture that Apple had abandoned since nobody gave a crap about it.
There was quite a Mac Konfabulator scene on the web, and it was handily replaced by the Mac Dashboard Widget scene.
Although Apple ripped off Konfabulator (IMHO), they did it legally, and they did it with really cool improvements (like Objective-C tie-ins and the whole Dashboard OpenGL effect).
If Apple wants Parallels in Leopard, they’ll just bundle it in with some cool improvements. “Embrace and Extinguish” – right MDN?
No doubt Apple would do a better job accomodating Windows than machines dedicated to running Windows, but I really want Apple to stay out of the Windows business, period.
If Steve J. wants to play with Windows then see the next article right here on MDN. (In short, let Steve go over to MS and fix Windows from there.)
The original plan for “Longhorn/Vista” was to eliminate all legacy code. Vista would be a complete rewrite with neqarly nothing in common with pre-Win2000 OSs.
That’s why MSFT bought Virtual PC. Anybody still requiring DOS or Win95 emulation would get it via VPC, and not directly from the OS.
This was a smart plan. Problem was that MSFT couldn’t deliver Vista, so Virtual PC had nothing to reference before emulating DOS, et al. This has forced MSFT to keep all that legacy OS code. 50 million lines of code? Give me a break, Linux requires 10,000,000, while MacOSX requires 15,000,000.
Gates is stepping down as Chief Software Architect before the shareholders rise up and fire his ass.
If 1m sales would double their market share and they currently have 5% market share surely that means there are only 20m computers in the world? Good Math…. s
Darth wrote:
“If this functionality isn’t built into MacOS, then someone ought to buy Parallels before M$ does. Then again, Apple just sat back and allowed M$ to buy VirtualPC from Connectix, and we know what’s happened since then.”
Apple knew then that it would be moving to Intel processors, and therefore Virtual PC was irrelevant. Virtual PC also wouldn’t run on G5 processors, which made it useless for Apple to buy.
Let’s remembers one thing, folks: Apple is not planning things 6 months or even 1 year in advance. Apple’s strategy is a multi-year strategy, of course with adjustments being made (i.e., the outstanding success of the iPod), but Apple has a long-term plan to bite back at Microsoft. I think Leopard will be the next major step in that fight, and likely will have some sort of virutalization software, maybe even just the ability to run Windows apps directly in OS X, which would be the ultimate Windows killer.
“maybe even just the ability to run Windows apps directly in OS X, which would be the ultimate Windows killer.”
People still don’t get it.
Native Windows support will allow companies to support Mac users and Windows users with just one version of a program.
There goes the incentive to EVER write native Mac OS X software again.
With that goes the need for Mac OS X, at least a Mac OS X that does anything but support Windows APIs.
What people seem to be predicting is a path where Mac OS X will eventually simply be a clone of Windows, or in fact more likely, for 100% API compatibility, Boot Camp would be the future.
I find it very interesting how everyone assumes that Leopard is going to run Windows apps without Windows.
Do you all have any idea how badly AAPL is going to tank if this doesn’t happen? Well, it’s gonna be bad. Think about how many Apple rumors have not come true…. Why are we all assuming so much?
Furthermore, Why would developers continue to devleop OSX versions of apps when the Windows version will run just fine? It just doesn’t make sense that this will happen anytime soon..
Yeah please buy it before Micros*it buys it and scuddles it!