Could Mac OSX run Windows apps natively?
Posted by Antaris on 03 December 2007 - 10:25 · 28 comments & 11914 views
About the Author
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: +Antaris
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Unknown
Forum name: +Antaris
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
#2 Posted by redmosquito on 03 Dec 2007 - 12:06
- that would make mac even better, i mean lets face it:
you get the (better) good OS and all the apps you MIGHT miss (i dont miss any but i know some)...
but thats controversial and i see a mac vs. windows-discussion coming up and so im outta here... =)
-
#3 Posted by AlexMagik on 03 Dec 2007 - 13:15
- if this is true, this can be my first mac. i've 5 in my office, but until i can run all the software i need (vs.net included), i won't be able to switch...
-
(2 replies)
#4 Posted by Primetime2006 on 03 Dec 2007 - 14:08
- LOL. I could just see it too. Mac can't keep up with the competition, so they'll start building their OS's so that Windows programs can run on it. "Can't beat them, so join them" seems to come to mind. Then MS will sue them and that'll be the end of that chapter.
Go for it Apple, pleeeeeease! I want to see you get destroyed. -
#4.1 Posted by hotdog963al on 03 Dec 2007 - 17:18
- LOL@ ^. Shame Microsoft don't sell brains eh.
-
(2 replies)
#5 Posted by Croquant on 03 Dec 2007 - 16:16
- Oh brother.
Do you really think the boys in Redmond would ever let Apple Inc. do anything that would let people run Windows apps on a OS not owned by Microsoft?
If you answered yes to that question, I have some prime Florida swamp land I'd like to interest you in. -
#5.1 Posted by SkyyPunk on 03 Dec 2007 - 17:50
- I dont believe there is anything against doing this...nothing says apps HAVE to run on windows and windows alone...
-
#5.2 Posted by Binary on 03 Dec 2007 - 19:26
- Quote - (Croquant said @ #5)Oh brother.
Do you really think the boys in Redmond would ever let Apple Inc. do anything that would let people run Windows apps on a OS not owned by Microsoft?
If you answered yes to that question, I have some prime Florida swamp land I'd like to interest you in.
Ever heard of WINE? Last I checked, it's still a project and hasn't been shutdown. There is no reason Apple couldn't do this, and actually have it done in Cocoa so that windows apps appear as if they are true mac apps using native widgets/GUI elements.
-
#6 Posted by aNILEator on 03 Dec 2007 - 17:47
- To run it I would assume you'd need Windows installed in a boot-camp alike fashion, and apple encourage you to buy a windows license, so as long as you're windows is legally licensed why would Microsoft care?
Same thing would go if Apple managed to code their own way of making apps compatible, same as that open source remake of windows I saw floating about the tubes a year ago or so
-
(2 replies)
#7 Posted by Chrono951 on 03 Dec 2007 - 18:20
- Does anyone else notice that Macs and PCs seem to be getting closer and closer to each other? Maybe someday we'll just have one OS and one type of hardware that everything runs on.
-
#7.1 Posted by sLm4ever on 04 Dec 2007 - 23:46
- yes !! ... one OS to rule them all
!? ...
macs are being windows and windows are being macs ...
-
(3 replies)
#8 Posted by C_Guy on 03 Dec 2007 - 19:00
- So, even more than before, the driving force behind Macs is the fact that you can run Windows and Office... and now, Windows applications? Sounds almost as good as running a Windows-based computer!
-
#8.1 Posted by Binary on 03 Dec 2007 - 19:28
- Quote - (C_Guy said @ #
So, even more than before, the driving force behind Macs is the fact that you can run Windows and Office... and now, Windows applications? Sounds almost as good as running a Windows-based computer!
Except that a windows based computer cannot run OS X legally!
You missed the point. -
#8.2 Posted by QuarterSwede on 04 Dec 2007 - 04:58
- Quote - (Binary said @ #8.1)Quote - (C_Guy said @ #So, even more than before, the driving force behind Macs is the fact that you can run Windows and Office... and now, Windows applications? Sounds almost as good as running a Windows-based computer!
Except that a windows based computer cannot run OS X legally!
You missed the point.
Exactly, and last I check I still hated using Windows.
-
#9 Posted by Webgraph on 03 Dec 2007 - 20:57
- And what's next? Mac OS X on non-Apple computers? That would definitely force Microsoft to clean up their act!
-
(1 reply)
#10 Posted by thenewbf on 03 Dec 2007 - 22:04
- Steve Jobs got Bill Gates to invest $150 million in Apple and promise to keep Mac Office going for a few more years in exchange for a five-year patent cross-licensing agreement back in 1997. The idea in everyone's mind was that Microsoft would grab lots of Apple technology, which they probably did. However the exchange wasn't totally one-way and Apple got some legal right to the Windows API. Even though the deal has since expired, the rights it conferred at the time still lie with the respective companies. Whatever Microsoft grabbed from Apple they can still use, same for Apple using Microsoft technology. Apple is therefore technically allowed to have Windows apps running in OS X without Microsoft being able to do anything about it. And since that's exactly what's been happening in the labs in Cupertino, there's no doubt that someone 'forgot' to take the code out before Leopard shipped. Who knows, maybe this is one of those 'top secret' features Apple promised last year and they just didn't include it in 10.5.0 because they hadn't gotten it quite right yet. Since Apple seems to be determined to offer "free software upgrades" to its customers (AppleTV, iPhone, etc), maybe this can be another one of those free upgrades.
-
(1 reply)
#11 Posted by goatsniffer on 04 Dec 2007 - 03:12
- You can't plug in an OS's apps into another due to legal and technological reasons. You can't even plug older Win apps into a new Win OS.
-
(2 replies)
#12 Posted by billyea on 04 Dec 2007 - 04:58
- I've seen what Mac OSX apps like Safari look on Windows. VISUAL CLASH FTL! I don't want that happening to my mac.
-
#12.1 Posted by Narlzac85 on 04 Dec 2007 - 05:29
- Nobody to blame there other than Apple for not using native GUI elements. Any application that doesn't use custom GUI elements could probably be made to look like the native OS by whoever writes the necessary files to make the program cross platform compatible (a la Java although it doesn't look native at all, it can and does look different on each OS)
-
#12.2 Posted by billyea on 04 Dec 2007 - 06:24
- Quote - (Narlzac85 said @ #2)Nobody to blame there other than Apple for not using native GUI elements. Any application that doesn't use custom GUI elements could probably be made to look like the native OS by whoever writes the necessary files to make the program cross platform compatible (a la Java although it doesn't look native at all, it can and does look different on each OS)
Yes, but what most people are thinking when they hear of Mac OSX supporting executables is that it can run executables produced for Windows, which haven't gone through the same care.
The discussion begins with a mailing list message called Interesting Behavior of OS X, in which Steven Edwards describes the discovery that Leopard apparently contains an undocumented loader for Portable Executables, a type of file used in 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Windows. More poking around revealed that Leopard's own loader tries to find Windows DLL files when attempting to load a Windows binary.
Yes, that last bit is the juicy one. According to the fledgling investigation in this as-yet short message thread, folks are suspecting that Leopard contains at least the building blocks for Apple to one day add a compatibility layer to Mac OS X for running Windows apps right alongside Mac OS X apps. "Just add Windows" and Boot Camp itself could fall off the list of ingredients for bridging these two computing worlds.
Of course, this could also be nothing; perhaps leftover from some behind-the-scenes project, spare code from adopting EFI (though this reply notes that PE files are flat-out rejected in Tiger on Intel Macs), or who knows what else. Still, if your conspiracy theory wells have run dry during Macworld's pre-season, this should be more than enough to keep you busy for at least a week or so.