area91 Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 <removed> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Patriot Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 What a rip off of Windows CodeName Longhorn. Except of course that OS X will likely have this capability this year, not 2 to 3 years from now (or possibly later, considering that Microsoft has said that this feature may not be ready by the time Longhorn is released). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacedog Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 Yes, BeOS was the first. It's no marvel that Apple has on its payroll the engineer in charge of that project at Be, he's probably doing something similar for OS X (HFS+ is getting a little old now...) ...by the way, I don't see how it can be a rip off if a)BeOS had it first and b)MS has only announced the new filesystem, it's not ready yet. You can't copy something who's not been developed yet... and since you can't develop a filesystem in one night, Apple engineers have been probably working on it for some years now... it's not the first time a similar change in the Mac filesystem is rumored. Another one of the Wonderfully Uninformative Posts (patent pending) by Area91... :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
session Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 just a weird thought: do you think apple will make it impossible to run 10.4 on pearpc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishie Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 damn windows trolls :\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureEdit Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 just a weird thought: do you think apple will make it impossible to run 10.4 on pearpc? I am sure they will try, but it will be fixed within a few weeks. I have my own theory that Apple is secretly developing PearPC though.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
session Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 why tho they don't get any benefit from developing it well the only thing i can think of is that after pc users try out mac os x on pearpc, some of them might wanna switch but the possibility isn't high enough for apple to actually spends time developing it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureEdit Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 why thothey don't get any benefit from developing it well the only thing i can think of is that after pc users try out mac os x on pearpc, some of them might wanna switch but the possibility isn't high enough for apple to actually spends time developing it Yeah, I believe that the just want more people to try out OS X. Many people have never used it before, and this is a good way to get them to try it. There have been a lot of people who acted really surprised how nice some things in OS X were that they had only just heard of before. If apple wasn't behind this, I am sure threads like the PearPC one on neowin would have been removed at the request of apple legal for explaining and discussing in detail howto install OS X on a PC. And it is obvious that very few people have legal copies they are installing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azcodemonkey Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 What a rip off of Windows CodeName Longhorn. Yeah, and they got the idea from BeOS. So what's your point? If you loathe Mac so much, why even come into this forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macman87 Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 theres no point for apple to develop os x for the pc. to make money, if would have to be installed as a default os on pcs from dell/hp and those brands. thats where most of the money for windows comes from. if they are doing this and aiming for the consumer, who want mac os x, they would fail because people would just not buy it and prob download it and burn it and whatever they do these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuka_t Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 why thothey don't get any benefit from developing it well the only thing i can think of is that after pc users try out mac os x on pearpc, some of them might wanna switch but the possibility isn't high enough for apple to actually spends time developing it its better than those stupid switch ads. waste of money IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JadeWolf324 Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 its a horrible idea because Apple makes alot of their money on their hardware. you can only run OSX on their hardware so they own the apple market 100% profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuka_t Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 i see your point. however, pearpc is nowhere near usable as a daytoday OS. unless you mean porting OSX to x86, in which case i am on hte fence. i agree that its bad for apple, however it would be really cool for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureEdit Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 (edited) theres no point for apple to develop os x for the pc. to make money, if would have to be installed as a default os on pcs from dell/hp and those brands. thats where most of the money for windows comes from.if they are doing this and aiming for the consumer, who want mac os x, they would fail because people would just not buy it and prob download it and burn it and whatever they do these days. The consumer doesn't even need to know about OS X. PearPC is targeting developers/experienced windows/linux users. These are the people apple wants to make the switch. If people stopped developing for windows, and upper level IT people recommended companies use Macs, the switch would happen and microsoft would fail, well windows would at least. PearPC is perfect for this. People who think they hate macs for some unknown reason get a chance to try OS X for the first time. They would not have bought anything from apple anyway, so apple doesn't lose anything (unlike the RIAA believes..). Apple will probably never make PearPC a whole lot faster then it is now, they only want it to be a very limited trial of OS X. This will ensure that people serious about using it buy a mac. Edited May 27, 2004 by PureEdit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuka_t Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 the RIAA thinks thats on oxymoron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureEdit Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 thats on oxymoron. lol, your right. Post Edited... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JadeWolf324 Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 i agree that its bad for apple, however it would be really cool for me. well stop the presses.... people, just realize that OSX is NEVER comming out for PC. i could never see that ever being a good idea. why!? why would they waste all their money on that?! like i said, they make almost ALL of their money on their hardware, how else can u explain a 5-license version of osx for 200 USD? because either way they get as much money as they want because they control all aspects of Mac. if you want OSX for PC u have 2 options: A: contribute to PearPC or B: work for Apple and use vanderpool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MipScript Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 Will Apple be hosting the main speech from steve jobs on there website for people to view like before? (just checking) :lamp:? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macman87 Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 they prob will have a webcast for the keynote. it happens for many major apple events and since wwdc is always getting bigger they prob will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedimasterk Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 Yeah, I believe that the just want more people to try out OS X. Many people have never used it before, and this is a good way to get them to try it. There have been a lot of people who acted really surprised how nice some things in OS X were that they had only just heard of before.If apple wasn't behind this, I am sure threads like the PearPC one on neowin would have been removed at the request of apple legal for explaining and discussing in detail howto install OS X on a PC. And it is obvious that very few people have legal copies they are installing. Yeh people are just going to run out and buy a whole new computer system, because they tried Mac OSX. Let's be reasonable people. They like the operating system, but the majority are not going to buy all new hardware to run it. How many people (Mac Users) ran out and bought a whole new pc (x86 system) to run Windows XP after they used Virtual PC. Same idea with Perl PC and Virtual PC. It just took an opensource group to do it. Since opensource people care more about using a computer than making money from a computer. Hopefully it will work. If not Linux is stll better for UNIX. Linux will run on both PPC and x86 as well as alot more hardware platforms. Mac OSX and Windows XP can't do that!. Thanks to your proprietary software "intellectual property right's fanatics". Apple and Microsoft :D . The majority of UNIX users are opensource people, Apple hasn't figured that out yet. Industrial Light and Magic, a good example, uses Linux more than Mac OSX. And George Lucas is a good friend of Steve Job's. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MipScript Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 they prob will have a webcast for the keynote. it happens for many major apple events and since wwdc is always getting bigger they prob will. Thanks for the reply, I was hoping they would since I'm not going to be there :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnhood Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 If Tiger is 'free' then hoorah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the evn show Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 How many people (Mac Users) ran out and bought a whole new pc (x86 system) to run Windows XP after they used Virtual PC. If I can answer your question with a question: How many Mac OS users installed VirtualPC, installed Windows, and thought that they would be more productive using Windows XP to the point that they could justify not only the hardware cost, but also the cost of replacing software? Most Macintosh users don't install VirtualPC because they like Windows but cannot use it, they use the program because there are one or two application that are Windows only that they have to use (IE: I know a couple of designers that run Windows XP so they can make sure that IE6 bugs aren't destroying their pages). If not Linux is stll better for UNIX.Being capable of running on multiple platforms is no doubt an asset, but I don't think that's the only criteria one should use for determining "Better". Mac OS X is the single most popular *NIX operating system - more than FreeBSD, Fedora Core, and Gentoo Linux - so clearly the majority of *NIX users disagree with you (source:wikipedia, though there others if you look).I'd estimate that Mac OS's popularity as a *NIX environment has something to do with both the availability of major applications like Microsoft Office and Photoshop, as well as with it's two-decade reputation for ease-of-use. The majority of UNIX users are opensource people, Apple hasn't figured that out yet. The lions share of *NIX users are Apple customers (see above), so they must have figured out something. Looks like they've found the right mix of opensource (kernel, low level funcions, APIs) and close source (compositing engine, 'killer applications', etc). Industrial Light and Magic, a good example, uses Linux more than Mac OSX. Any fortune 500 company is going to have more Windows clients that Linux or Mac machines - does that mean that Windows is a better operating system. I honestly never thought I'd here a Linux advocate using market-share arguments to make a point as long as the Microsoft was the dominant Operating System vendor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redestium Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 Last I checked Linux had more of a market share than Apple did, but I could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight' Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 Last I checked Linux had more of a market share than Apple did, but I could be wrong. He was talking about distros: Redhat, Fedora Core Gento against MacOSX (which could be considered a distro?). Linux (as a summation of all the "Open Source" distros) has a larger market share than MacOSX, you are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts