Will OSX eventually run Windows applications?

Published on March 31st, 2006

Posted by SN in General

Engadget – Mar 29th 2006:

Notable curmudgeon John Dvorak raised hackles last month when he suggested that an Intel-powered Apple would dump OS X and switch to Windows. Turns out he may have been right — sort of. Word is out now that Apple has joined BAPco, an industry group that does one thing and one thing only: create benchmarks for testing the performance of Windows-based PCs. The move comes on top of rumors that Apple will include VMWare-style virtualization capabilities in the next version of OS X, which could enable the Mac OS to run Windows apps without requiring a third-party emulator or a reboot. While those rumors have yet to be confirmed, it does seem possible that Apple is indeed working on a way for OS X users to run Windows apps…

28 users responded in " Will OSX eventually run Windows applications? "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Awake said, on March 31st, 2006 at 11:44 am

I just wrote about that possibility yesterday as part of another post.

I would consider switching to a Mac, but it is just far too expensive. Not that the hardware is to expensive, it’s the software and the effort involved. I own copies of Photoshop and Office that just by themselves would set me back over $1000 just to buy the Mac versions. I also use several smaller programs that are available only in PC versions, with no Mac equivalent. I’m not about to redo my whole accounting database just to shift to a Mac… that is the legacy sofware (aka “data”) that really counts.If I could run those programs on OSX I would seriously consider buying a Mac as my next computer.

# 2 Alex said, on March 31st, 2006 at 12:07 pm

I Apple doesn’t make some kind of virtualization of Windows possible (which would be one of the dumbest moves in the history of Apple, and that is saying a lot), someone else will do it. Its too much of a good market opportunity for this not to happen. Being able to run both Mac OS and Windows in the same machine would make Macs extremely popular. The price between Macs and PCs is no longer that different specially when you consider how well designed Macs are and how fast they run Windows. Why buy an ugly Dell that only runs Windows when you can have a Mac that runs both? Apple would be insane not to do it.

Unless John D. is right and Apple is switching to Windows… riiight!! Whatever John is smoking he needs to share it with us.

# 3 Bruce said, on March 31st, 2006 at 12:50 pm

Is there a better way to make Microsoft irrelevant in ten years?

# 4 ShrimpCrackers said, on March 31st, 2006 at 12:52 pm

Alex: So far the Macintels are running Windows pretty slowly. The solution devised so far is far from complete.

In addition your statement seems to imply that Macintel hardware is different from PC’s, even superior. Dual Core Intels have been available on laptops (ex. Sager) months before Apple debuted with them.

Also, people have been running OSX86 on Dells since last year. So Dells can easily run OSX.

I smell an Apple Fanboy.

# 5 JSFORBES said, on March 31st, 2006 at 1:07 pm

#1,

Would you say the same thing in a few years when your software versions are out of date and need updating?

I would switch if I could load windows and do some light-medium gaming.

# 6 jasontheodd said, on March 31st, 2006 at 1:18 pm

Wow! John has gotten an amazing amount of traction from one article. It’s a good thing it wasn’t political in nature or there would be a hit squat lookin for him.

# 7 Alex said, on March 31st, 2006 at 1:20 pm

Shrimp, Wrongo! The tests I read about the MacBook Pros were running Windows XP faster than similar PC laptops with Dual Core CPUs. Not just that but the MBP also ran the Windows version of Photoshop faster than the same PCs.

Read it and weep:

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/03/22/mac_fastest_core_duo_laptop/

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=14171

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1617

Yes, I am a Mac fanboy, so what! Kiss my hairy white ass!

# 8 Jack Lear said, on March 31st, 2006 at 1:36 pm

Yeah, the Intel Macs do run Xp pretty fast, but drivers are still few and far between making it basically pointless for your average user at the moment. The only real reason to bother is proof-of-concept.

Though I heard someone has Solitare running natively under XP on an iMac…result.

# 9 stew said, on March 31st, 2006 at 2:01 pm

Im bettin if this happins microsoft whould raise heck. AKA sue somebody. And could we keep the pejorative adjectives down. Kids could be enlightened here.

# 10 isteve said, on March 31st, 2006 at 2:18 pm

ShrimpCrackers , A Dual Core processor is not the same as a Core Duo. I don’t think there are many Core Duo PCs.

# 11 Eideard said, on March 31st, 2006 at 2:44 pm

a. Core Duo PC’s — of course — will be rolling down the pipeline from China. Regardless of brand name.

b. Having switched from the wonderful world of Wintel a year ago, I’m hardpressed to ever think of a reason to go back to XP or “advances” therefrom. I turned on my XP PC, today, for the 1st time in 8 weeks — to run the security updates. Same reason as last time. Then, turned it back off.

c. Though I hadn’t really expensive apps to switch, most of what I had already came w/OS X and XP versions. Cost = Nada. The few new pieces I bought were less expensive than comparable XP stuff.

d. And, frankly, OS X just runs the way I always thought an OS should run — for the last couple of decades. Smooth and easy. I wish it hadn’t taken me so long to getting round to trying it.

e. I agree with a few folks — Apple may accomodate gamers and make it easier to run XP and variants. MSoft doesn’t have much room to sue — since they’ve worked w/Apple on emulation software in the past.

# 12 DanRyan1 said, on March 31st, 2006 at 3:30 pm

The only way Microsoft becomes irrelevant is if Apple starts selling OS X to PC users. Until that happens, Microsoft will continue to sell Windows to users who prefer the ease of customization and expansion that comes with PC’s.

The smart move for Apple is to give PC users a way to legally run OS X on their systems. It makes SO much sense. People would buy it simply out of curiousity.

If Steve Jobs ever want to stick it to Bill Gates this is his opportunity.

# 13 Alex said, on March 31st, 2006 at 3:37 pm

Why would Microsoft fight Windows running within Mac OS? You would either have to instal Windows within the virtual environment (read as buy a legal copy of Windows) or Apple would have to license the Windows APIs. Either way, its more money for Microsoft. It looks like a Win Win for them no matter what. The people who may not like it are Dell and the other PC manufacturers. That may be why Dell was asking about licensing Mac OS to run on Dells. They can read the writing on the wall as well as anyone.

# 14 Alex said, on March 31st, 2006 at 4:12 pm

I doubt Apple will ever license the Mac OS to run on other hardware. Apple makes a significant part of its income from hardware sales and the last time they licensed the Mac OS they lost hardware sales. Unless they figure out a way to expand the market share without cannibalizing their hardware sales, they are unlikely to ever let Mac OS run on other machines.

# 15 Mike Voice said, on March 31st, 2006 at 4:38 pm

#13 You would either have to install Windows within the virtual environment (read as buy a legal copy of Windows) or Apple would have to license the Windows APIs.

A third option may become available – but its usefulness may be limited to a small number of “productivity” programs.

When Apple announced the switch to Intel processors, Code Weavers announced they would be porting their “CrossOver Office” software to MacIntels.

http://www.codeweavers.com/

It won’t help the gameplayers, but it will let people who already have Office, Photoshop, etc for PC run them on a Mac – without installing Windows.

# 16 John Wofford said, on March 31st, 2006 at 6:15 pm

This whole Mac VS Wintel thing is irrevelant; I don’t care what the thing smells like when you open it up, or whose name is slapped across the innards, as long as it does the job it’s supposed to do. We are still pushing the digital envelope way past any original expectations, the miracle is that it all (computers, internet, applications, media, etc) works as well as it does. Kind of like jetliners, it’s not the miracle of flight, it’s that it happens thousands of times every day. A routine miracle, if that’s not too oxymoronic.

# 17 Hey Mac said, on March 31st, 2006 at 6:24 pm

The fallacy about Macs has always been that they are more expensive. That is only true if your time and sanity is worth absolutely nothing. Getting all those abundant and cheap peripherals to actually work, continually having to run updates, the cost and pain of virus protection, having to repeatedly reinstall a corrupt OS, parts of programs that mysteriously disappear, and who knows what else… I hear the screams of anguish every few days, as I sit relaxed in front of my Mac.

If someone offered me $1000 and any Windows PC for my Mac, I wouldn’t take it…. unless I could immediately sell it for enough to buy a newer Mac of course.

# 18 Mr. Fusion said, on March 31st, 2006 at 8:53 pm

Will OSX eventually run Windows applications

I believe they will. Simply because there are just so many applications out there. Earlier this evening when I read about Google’s raising $2 Billion an idea just came to me. Google will take over Apple’s computer division.

Jobs will keep the iPod division for himself and open it up to all formats and steal the whole market. They are making more money with the iPod then as profit on computers. This would also satisfy France, Denmark, and any other countries looking at anti trust measures.

Google will turn the OSX into a free OS or very inexpensive. If people can run OSX on an x86 processor then their machines should be able to use this instead of M$ Vista. Apple / Google would still be selling machines and software.

Probably, many software vendors might end up writing slightly different versions of their software to run optimally on both platforms. Or, Windows could be run from within OSX when needed. I think Google would try to avoid having to pay M$ any license fees.

But as a disclaimer, I’m noted more for my looks then for my brains.

# 19 lisa said, on March 31st, 2006 at 9:07 pm

This must be ajoke he ??

http://devsingh.blogsome.com/

Leopard is the real Vista with .Live as an integral part?

# 20 Mr. Fusion said, on March 31st, 2006 at 9:10 pm

Would you say the same thing in a few years when your software versions are out of date and need updating?

Updating most software is a gimmick. If it works, then use it. I still use Adobe PhotoDeluxe 3.0 and Office 2000. I know some people that are quite happy using Windows 98.

I have a copy of Photoshop, but haven’t even opened it in a year. I find PhotoDeluxe has all the tools I need to do 97% of my photo editing. It is smaller, faster and easier to use. The only downfall is it is poor at “red eye” removal. I got it as a freebie with a digital camera in 1999.

I seldom use MS Office, preferring Open Office because it is open source. I keep it mostly because sometimes documents lose some formatting trying to save them a .DOC. I also like the Photo Editor that comes with MS Office as an image viewer. Why pay hundreds for Office XP when Office 2000 or even Office 97 can do everything I need? Or even better, Open Office.

# 21 FARTaLOT said, on March 31st, 2006 at 10:55 pm

Few points to make:

The Macs run windows XP and SOME APPS faster is simply because they aren’t bogged down with device drivers, bloated registry, and apps installed scattered across the hard drive.

Every time I install a fresh copy of Windows it always boots up fast, launches apps quickly, and shuts down with out a hiccup.. UNTIL I start installing drivers and everything.

By the way. Since these Macs are now PC/Intel hardware, why can’t one just download chipset drivers from Intel and use that on the Windows Mac?

Now back to the original topic…
Since OS X is UNIX/Linux/BSD based, can’t OS X “ALREADY” run windows apps using WINE?

# 22 Mike Voice said, on April 1st, 2006 at 11:07 am

Since OS X is UNIX/Linux/BSD based, can’t OS X “ALREADY” run windows apps using WINE?

I think so. “Darwine”… WINE for Darwin & MacOS X

http://sourceforge.net/projects/darwine/

# 23 James Hill said, on April 1st, 2006 at 2:08 pm

I’ve made the move to Mac myself, and for less than $3000 I’m running a top-of-the-line MacBook Pro with Office and all of the other software I need. While I should wait a few more months to write this in stone, after one month of use I am more productive at the office and at home with this computer.

I grant you that a platform shift isn’t cheap, but over time the costs of moving are the same as the costs of keeping up to date on your existing platform.

As for the ability to run Windows applications, it will be a good for getting people over to the platform, but it doesn’t hold much of a draw for me… unless I could run multiple OSes VMware style at the same time.

# 24 Josh Hickman said, on April 2nd, 2006 at 9:04 am

Dvorak, I gotta say, you are taking way too much heat for this. Whether it is true or not, it kinda makes sense, so whats the problem?

# 25 Branden Tarlow said, on April 5th, 2006 at 6:23 am

Dvorak, you’re a genius. Windows in the MACBOOK Pro will rock. I hope that you will play back clips of your detractors from previous TWIT episodes.

# 26 Alex said, on April 5th, 2006 at 12:00 pm

BootCamp still doesn’t mean Apple is switching to Windows. That will never happen as long as Steve is the CEO of Apple.

# 27 Salvatore Saieva said, on April 14th, 2006 at 6:25 am

Does the fact that Avie Tevanian (chief developer of the Mach kernel/OS and Apple’s Chief Software Architect) has left Apple support the theory that Apple may be switching to the Windows OS?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=19&entry_id=3821

Regards,

Sal.

# 28 LeKoos said, on May 13th, 2006 at 12:19 pm

My bet has always been that Apple will make their OS work on all PC machines. Sure they make a nice portion of revenue from ‘hardware’ but selling the Apple OSX to the broad PC market would mushroom the revenues for Apple. Selling a disk for $179- lot of profit in there. What’s stopping this? What is Gates position with Apple these days? I remember he slipped Apple $150m for stock back in ‘97. Not that many people “Switch” computers but they’d switch out discs for less than $200 to obtain a stable operating system.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!