What if Windows run on Mac natively?

[knighthawk]

Wasn't COCOA, when it was first announced by Apple, suppose to allow you to write an application that would work on both the Mac OSX and Windows [yellow box]?

There is a company called Lindows, that is writing a UNIX version for the PC that would emulate Microsoft OS, and would allow you to run Office and other major software packages without running Windows... I think that this is a good idea, but I don't see them succeeding. However, Apple would be in a great position to write OSX for Intel.

Personally, I think that Apple SHOULD start porting OSX to the Intel chips, just because they could do it, and would be the best at it. Of course, it would be a slightly stripped down version, to encourage you to buy mac hardware.

This would allow Apple to have more "Switches" than ever possible. Of course, in order to Apple to succeed this way, the would need to be strict in their licensing (almost like Microsoft), but I could forgive Apple enforcing licensing just to see Microsoft take a blow.

 

[drash]

Originally posted by knighthawk

There is a company called Lindows, that is writing a UNIX version for the PC that would emulate Microsoft OS, and would allow you to run Office and other major software packages without running Windows... I think that this is a good idea, but I don't see them succeeding. However, Apple would be in a great position to write OSX for Intel.

Walmart stopped selling the boxes they made using Lindows because of the technical problems with some programs were insurmountable. That and the fact that the Windows calls had to be run at the root level. And of course Walmart shipped the boxes with no root level password. And Apple probably already has a version of OS X for Intel. Selling it is another problem. They would have to support three mainstream OSes in both development and service calls. That and the fact that there are no mainstream apps for Intel OSX like Office, or Photoshop, or any games at all (not that I play any) would make this option float like a lead balloon. In short it ain't happenin' What you might get is what we have now, an Apple only OS on Apple only hardware, but with no software to keep the ball rolling, nope.

 

[knighthawk]

At the beginning of my post, I mentioned that Cocoa was originally designed to be on both Mac and PC (Windows NT was supported through Yellow Box). If Apple were to write OSX for Intel, then they obviously would finish the port of Cocoa to Intel. Then all applications that are written in Cocoa could be recompiled for Intel.

If Apple is planning, or even considering porting OSX to Intel, then several things would need to happen for it to work.

1. Microsoft will not support it with any of their applications including Office. Apple would have to have either OpenOffice support or a far more developed AppleWorks Suite (which is rumored to be in the works anyway). Apple would need to be self-sufficient from Microsoft.

2. Better Java support.

3. Push major developers more in the direction of Cocoa and/or Java, and a commitment from Apple's developer partners to support OSX for Intel. This would include Adobe with Photoshop. Remember, that many Photoshop filters would not need to be rewritten because they are "tools" that only use a general GUI window. This are already supported on Intel through the Windows version. Besides, with all of the high-end digital video companies that Apple has purchased recently, how difficult would it be for Apple to develop a Photoshop "clone".

4. ATI Radeon or GeForce Video card as a minimum... with Quartz Extreme. The rest of the hardware would not matter much as long as the computer was at least a 1GHz Celeron or higher. Apple would need to support a lot of hardware, but a lot of that work is already done by FreeBSD. It would be Quartz that would require the greatest amount of work.

5. A method business plan that would grow Apple's software market-share without a significant impact on their hardware sales. For example, the purchase of the Intel OS would be twice as much as the PPC version. In addition, there would need to be a method to prevent piracy... for example a USB hardware key... software keys are just a joke.


One of the reasons why I think that Microsoft has been so successful in it's history is because it is almost exclusively a software company, and in today's market the hardware is not making money. I think that Apple really made a mistake by selling off most of their software (remember Claris?). I remember working on my dad's MacPlus with MacPaint and MacDraw. Of course those programs don't compare to Photoshop and Illustrator, but they were they were the applications that started everything! Filemaker used to be a Mac project too, but that split off too. Apple revitalized ClarisWorks with Appleworks, but there were years that they were not even shipping it. Now with all of the iApps, things are looking better for the software end of Apple. But at the very least, they should start porting them to Windows (and charge for them of course) just so all of those windows people can see how cool Apple is. I wouldn't be suprised if Bill Gates secretly sneaks down to the Mac Business Unit and plays with the macs every once in a while, especially to see all the new features in Jaguar.

 

[sheepguy42]

Originally posted by knighthawk
I wouldn't be suprised if Bill Gates secretly sneaks down to the Mac Business Unit and plays with the macs every once in a while, especially to see all the new features in Jaguar.

What are you talking about, sneaks? It's an official business meeting, and they call it "R&D".