Will Apple Adopt Windows?


Recommended Posts

What happens when I have more than 300 or so programs, like I do on my Windows laptop?

Oh wait, I forgot. It's impossible for a Mac to have that many programs. After all, there aren't that many apps written for it, is there?

I was going to stay out of this thread, but the glaring ignorance in this post made me want to reply.

Firstly, do you truly believe that all your application shortcuts show up in the Dock automatically? Because that's not how it happens. They are voluntarily put there by the user, much like you voluntarily put (or don't put) shortcuts on your Windows desktop. The only difference is the amazing amount of functionality the Dock icons give you, as opposed to the simple function of just launching the program as do the Windows desktop shortcuts.

Secondly, there may be less software available for Mac, but I must say that the average level of quality is better... I have found better quality programs for Mac than I ever have on Windows. Out of all the freeware/shareware apps available for Windows, 90% of them are lackluster and don't perform the function you want at the level of quality you're expecting. For Mac, there were only about 10% of the apps that I found that were developed poorly. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather have quality over quantity.

People who want a pretty laptop have a few choices out there like Alienware, Sony Vaio or those new Titanium Thinkpads. Some people may be drawn to macs by the industrial design of their cases but the majority of mac switcher take the plunged because of the OS.

i orginally took the switch to a ibook over a windows laptop was becuase of its cheap price and battery life for what it is, after getting it i feel in love with macosx i use it now as my primary desktop. If they were to switch to windows i wouldnt bother saving up for a imac or mac mini, i only want them for mac osx

Yeah, Apple does one heck of a job on OS X. IMHO it is the best Operating System to be found. Granted you're paying a premium for it, you'll realize it was worth it with the time you save not reformatting, defragging, etc.

I hardly ever use Windows anymore. The only time I use Windows is for games. The remainder of the time is spent on my mac mini. :)

Two words: HELL NO! :D Mac OS X is the best system out there and demand for the Macs is actually outstripping supply! As a matter of fact, so many people I know of want to switch to a Mac because of the crappy Windows user interface. Chances are, it's more likely that Apple would be forced to allow Mac OS X installations on non-Apple systems if they are not able to keep up with the hardware demand.

the evn show, I think you are getting caught up in the details of what .NET and Cocoa are. They are both API's for connecting to the underlying OS in an Object oriented way. You could also say that Carbon and Win32 are somewhat analogous as they are both C based with kind of messy syntaxes.

I don't want to get into a nerd contest with you especially since I'm recovering from bronchitis. You don't need to prove how smart you are. I've written plenty of code to interface with Win32 at work and I'm sure you have too.

From a very high level, both .NET and Cocoa + the Core frameworks help developers concentrate on writing applications instead of interfacing with low level OS APIs or implementing basic network and file I/O.

Regardless of which one you happen to prefer or what features one has over the other, the fact remains that Apple and third-party developers use Cocoa and the Core frameworks to a large extent these days. Switching to Windows would throw all that functionality out the window or it would have to be ported to Windows. I think it would destroy Apple as we know it.

Essentially, this Dvorak fantasy is not going to happen. Apple might be working on providing some sort of compatibility libraries to speed up porting of windows Apps to OS X.

Actually, more likely, porting OS X apps to *Windows*, not the other way around. However, they *won't* be necessarily for Macs.

Apple is a hardware company that also writes a goodly amount of software. It is also smart enough to look beyond the base of its own hardware to make money. A case in point is QuickTime Pro. While QuickTime authoring software is mostly associated with Apple's Macs, you haven't needed a Mac to author content in QuickTime for the last two major releases (6 *or* 7). Apple, however, is faced with a rather nasty dilemma: the top-drawer photography and HD editing software outside of Avid is written by Apple itself. However, the vast majority of software that *competes* with Apple Logic Express/Logic Pro, FinalCut HD and Motion are not even available for Apple hardware (they are available for that *other OS*). That means that Apple must do one of two things: either be content with their niche market, or port their software to that other OS. Let's be honest: what percentage of iPod sales are going to non-Mac owners? Forty percent? Fifty percent? Even (egads!) *sixty percent*? Personally, I would say that even the sixty-percent figure (iPod sales to non-Mac owners) is actually underestimating the case, considering the number of downloads of iTunes for Windows (even though you can use iTunes with portable devices other than iPods). The fact that people with portable devices that *aren't* iPods (and also don't own a Mac) are using iTunes on Windows obviously means that Apple is doing SOMETHING right when it comes to writing software on Windows. Could it be that Apple (which is, as I said earlier, smart enough to look beyond their own hardware base to make money) is actually looking to port some of the applications (and possibly even development tools) to *Windows*? (One thing that is seriously lacking is a low-cost, or better still, no-cost, entry-level development environment to write managed code in Windows. Xcode, which Apple *gives away* with every copy of OS X, can be used to write managed code. Name *one* thing in Xcode that would prohibit its use to write managed-code-based Windows applications other than the usual cross-OS issues that Apple has dealt with before with QuickTime and iTunes. Xcode could be the way to woo still more developers away from Microsoft.)

Apple moving whole-hog to Windows? Not a chance. Apple porting some of their own *software* to Windows? Why not?

That guy is a ****in retard. He's like the Nostradamus of IT. He sits there and spouts a billion predictions and if one turns out right 10 years later he brags about it. It's like throwing a bunch of **** at the wall and waiting for some of it to stick.

PGHammer, that's not going to happen. Those Pro Apps rely very heavily on OS X specific Core technologies like Core Audio, Quartz extreme, Core Image and Core Video not to mention the rest of Cocoa.

Porting that technology would be like porting .NET and all of the pillars of Longhorn/Vista to OS X. It's not going to happen.

You cannot just recompile and have it run on windows. Cocoa is as alien to windows as Win32 is to OS X.

What many Windows users fail to realize is that there is almost always an alternative program for every program that runs Windows and many of them are much higher in quality and often freeware or shareware (very cheap). This Apple switching to windows bull**** is a load of crap and Dvorak needs to take his crazy pills! More probable would be Microsoft giving up the OS industry and letting Apple take over. Also... someone earlier mentioned that Microsoft has better marketing and I must disagree... Just look at the success of the iPod! Microsoft doesnt have to do anything to sell new copies of windows except to say that there is a new version. The few ads from microsoft I have ever seen were extremely lame at best.

Also... someone earlier mentioned that Microsoft has better marketing and I must disagree... Just look at the success of the iPod! Microsoft doesnt have to do anything to sell new copies of windows except to say that there is a new version. The few ads from microsoft I have ever seen were extremely lame at best.

That's anno 2006. Microsoft did do a better job getting Dos/Windowsto to the masses in the early '90s, something Apple failed to do with Mac OS.

yeah, because he was soooo off the mark when he predicted that Apple would switch to Intel processors...

Actually, he predicted that Apple would switch to the Itanium chip in 2002. Yeah, that happened.

Dvorak spews a lot of crap, it should be taken with a grain of salt.

Apple adopt windows?!? Lol, I think not. They may embrace a situation where it is used in conjunction with OS X on the same Mac or even possibly the Red Box technology but hardly ditch one of the most advanced consumer OS's for something still stuck in the 20th century...

Apple adopt windows?!? Lol, I think not. They may embrace a situation where it is used in conjunction with OS X on the same Mac or even possibly the Red Box technology but hardly ditch one of the most advanced consumer OS's for something still stuck in the 20th century...

Ummm... kinda got it it the wrong way around there... :o

Oh lord, not turning this into another OS X vs Windows thread man, but its true. Evn Show explains it terrifically, wish I could find that post he made a while back. Oh well.

Btw, for those of you who do not know what Red Box is, its the fabled OS X technology that would allow for windows programs to run natively within OS X. Most say that it would spell the end of OS X developed programs but I tend to differ. With extremely advanced technologies such as quartz, core image, cocoa, etc built into the system, I don't think this would have any impact on the developers that use those to make smoother and more efficient programs.

EDIT: Hurray!!!! 2000 posts!!! Yea I know, I'm a loser but when you are bored and its almost midnight, little things like that make you feel good :D

I needed a break from trying to decipher source code due to lack of documentation; the following is not proof read or fact-checked. Beware rampant opinion and speculation.

I could find that post he made a while back. Oh well.

Search is broken for anything more than a couple years back.

Just as a sort of final follow up to Aristotle from that side-topic we were having:

I like Cocoa, OS X, and even XCode just fine. I don't think has been another platform that would let me get nearly as much done as Cocoa and Xcode have?in fairness I've only written for maybe half-a-dozen operating systems so my experience is limited. We got off a bit of a stretch about features of IDEs APIs, and all sorts of nerdery not because I think .Net is leaps ahead of Cocoa (it's not) or because XCode sucks (only compared to VisualStudio) but because I don't agree that Mac developers couldn't have been at least as successful writing Windows Applications.

I also don't think that consumers really give a damn about how good their applications are?the number of them still using crap pretty much seals that one. I think it would be dreadful to lose Carbon and I think applications would suffer?especially small ones like Textmate and Delicious Library?but I don't think that'd effect most companies any worse than trying to sell to < 1/10th of the market does.

As a side bit: Cocoa almost completely abstracts all of the implementation details from a program. Moving an application from Cocoa on OS X to Cocoa running atop Windows may not even require a recompile in some cases. The problem (as always) is getting Cocoa to run anywhere but OS X. We already know that parts of OS X's API are running on Windows just fine (Rendezvous^wBonjour, Quicktime, all of the BSD Subsystem). We also know that OpenStep (Cocoa's grandfather) ran on a number of platforms, including Windows. Maybe Apple's been maintaining a mostly-current stand alone "cocoa runtime" that can be installed on other platforms the way the .Net can, in theory. I doubt they'd be spending the resources on such a project because there's little benefit to be seen from it?which is completely unlike maintaining a platform independent operating system?but nothing apple does surprises me any more.

The whole idea that Apple would ditch their OS as old as the "going out of business" and "apple becomes sony++" and the "switching to <X-brand> processors" rumors, all of which have been circling longer than I've been follow Apple.

Also, for what it's worth: Dvorak talks about this article on This Week In Tech where he makes it pretty clear?to my ears?that this article was written pretty much to put ads in front of your eyes. I haven't read this article specifically (him and Thurrot are little more than well paid trolls as far as I'm concerned) but I can't image there's anything in there that he hasn't said in 2005, 2000, 1995, etc. At the very least this whole the whole argument is pretty weak from what I've seen hear and on Ars. Listening to him try and explain himself on TWiT pretty much sealed the deal for me: this is a non story.

Sure - it's ad. hominem but the guy is talking out his ass?but it's getting a million page views a day so good for him: he's apparently much better at his job than I am at mine.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Indeed. But note that this has Wifi7, HDMI 2.1, BlueTooth 5.4, and 5G Ethernet, so even in the additional features list this bundle blows the Steam Machine away. And, with the money saved, one could improve this dramatically.
    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
    • For me, the fundamental problems with these "smartglasses" is that they really don't work well for people with significant prescriptions and massively up the price if you use attached lenses if they have displays, and if they don't, then they're not actually "smart" anything, rather just connecting to your phone and relaying voice to an AI. In a few cases like this, they throw in small cameras to feed video to the AI. All around, these feel like both a solution looking for a problem, and the problems it tries to solve seem more easily solved by different approaches and designs. Oddly, if the rumours are true, Apple may actually have invented something for once and it kind of does this right: put cameras in ear buds and manage the interface to AI exactly as most of us do: tapping on an ear bud and saying "Hey Google" or "Hey Siri." That makes them compatible with almost everyone, can double up as a hearing assist device, an impaired vision assist device, a "smart" device... and answer your phone and play music. That just seems like a better solution all around.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!