The arriver of Boot Camp continues to send shock waves across the Mac biotic community , as Mac users assay to make sense of the Apple - made utility that will permit Intel - based Macs boot directly into Windows . What will this mean for Mac developers ? Does this mark the end of emulation programs such as Microsoft ’s Virtual microcomputer ? And will Windows user be inspired by Boot Camp to change to the Mac ?
Cyrus Farivar : Rob , last week both you and Peter raised some concern that Mac developer might take a smasher due to Boot Camp . Because now the developer can say : “ Just boot into Windows . ” Can you elaborate on this ?
Rob Griffiths : Well , from my chair , the outlet is one of finance . If Adobe spendsxmillion dollars a class evolve Photoshop , for case , they might find it theoretically punk to just license Windows XP and just pack it with all “ Mac versions ” of Photoshop CS2 for Windows . Now , that’snotgoing to happen . At least not in good order away .
CF : Why ?
RG : There are , what , maybe 500,000 Intel Macs out there ? And 10 million PowerPC Macs .
Jason Snell : I do n’t think that ’s ever going to happen .
RG : Conversations like that will be pass off . But I would also agree with Jason .
JS : essentially , Mac users are Mac drug user because they want to use the Mac OS . And developers clear that if Mac users want to ply Windows apps , they would n’t be Mac users .
Peter Cohen : That ’s something that has been reprize by the Mac plot developer I ’ve been utter with as well , Jason .
JS : Do I consider that developers who are only tenuously confiscate to the Mac market , but do n’t really get it , might try the “ just expend our app in Windows ” approach ? Sure . But most of those company spend out of the Mac grocery store long ago . With games , I can see how some gamers and some games might be affected by this .
CF : allow ’s switch to games for a second . Take a plot that exists on both political platform — say , World of Warcraft . Is running it on a Mac essentially unlike from endure it on a PC ?
microcomputer : Anecdotally , I ’ve heard from several multitude since Boot Camp was introduced that have tell , “ A Mac was n’t even on my microwave radar , but now I ’m by all odds getting one . ”
JS : I ’m excited about playing PC game on my Mac . But only certain ones , the sort that consume your entire user interface anyway , so you do n’t know what OS you ’re on , and you certainly are n’t running any other apps at the same time . ( World of Warcraft fits those standard . ) But I want to affirm what Peter just pronounce : For a lot of PC - oriented masses , the Mac just became a relevant option because it ’s got that Windows safety mesh behind it .
CF : Right — but now that Blizzard Entertainment has the PC version of World of Warcraft already , would they stop create the Mac version ?
PC : At the core level of the user experience , no — playing a game on Windows is just like playing a game on the PC , with a few minor exception .
RG : I hold with that argument as well .
PC : When it comes to development , however , shit a biz for the PC is radically different than making a game for the Mac .
CF : Explain .
PC : Windows has a rooms of covering programing port called DirectX , for lesson , that help PC game developers do everything from connection codification to 3 - D graphics management . There ’s no real equivalent to that on the Macintosh — Apple take on a more piecemeal advance , letting candid standards like OpenGL handle some of that . The other issue is that PC game developer are conversant with Windows . Making them develop make them outside of their comfort level .
CF : So Peter , is it easy to grow the same biz for Windows ?
personal computer : I would n’t say it ’s needfully well-off to make a plot for Windows than it is for Mac . What I would say is that creating a plot that ’s promiscuous to develop for multiple weapons platform requires a level of discipline that few companies are unforced to put forth . And that ’s one reason that we see very few concurrent multi - platform release .
CF : Is there any reason that Blizzard should continue to develop the Mac adaptation ?
PC : Sure , absolutely — because a large number of their Mac users are running on computer hardware that ca n’t and wo n’t support Boot Camp .
JS : Let ’s not forget that it ’s $ 150-$200 to buy a copy of Windows .
PC : But having said that , with World of Warcraft , Blizzard knows how many of its client are using Windows and Macs . And if Blizzard sees the number of Mac users unload suddenly , of course they ’ll have to reassess the market for their Mac exploitation .
CF : OK , but over the next year or three , will there be a shadowing off of development for big title Mac games ?
PC : Cyrus , I believe that wewillsee a diminished mart for native “ hardcore ” Mac games . By and tumid , “ hardcore ” gamers are the single who have been complaining the most about Mac game ’ clip to mart , feature disparity , and cost compare to their PC counterparts .
JS : Agreed — and if I had a dual - boot Mac two years ago I sure enough would have corrupt City of Heroes !
microcomputer : They ’re also early adoptive parent .
JS : Because lots of game never , ever make it to the Mac .
CF : dependable .
RG : Far hollo . Half Life .
microcomputer : So there will in all probability be a drop - off in the number of Mac users who will buy , say , games like Quake 4 . But I believe there will continue to be a marketplace for cursory games , mass - mart game like The Sims 2 , and other titles that invoke to Mac users who are either unlikely or unwilling to gift in an Intel - base Mac with Windows set up on it .
Cyrus Farivar : Now let ’s switch gears a little number . Rob and Jason , we were talk about authority software package and there seemed to be some variance as to whether or not something like Microsoft Office on a Mac is the same as on Windows . Is this same fall - off something that we should worry about alfresco of the realm of game ? In other Christian Bible , will Microsoft stop make Office for the Mac ?
Rob Griffiths : Not for at least five years !
Jason Snell : No , no , never , never , never . When you ’re running Word , you ’re not ladder just Word . You are using one software among many on your system . I do n’t just track down Word . I run Word and BBEdit and Eudora and switch among them . I want Word to deport like the rest of those apps . I am not a Word exploiter or Excel user — I am a Mac substance abuser .
RG : Right . But you run differently than many in an federal agency environs . In my anterior job , users spent all day in Word , Excel , and due east - mail .
JS : Even if I only used Word all 24-hour interval , I ’d prefer to use the Mac . Because a “ Word - only ” drug user is still connecting to file waiter . Or using the Finder , and adjusting organization preferences . And there ’s no such thing as a Word - only exploiter anyway .
RG : I agree , though — Office wo n’t disappear .
Peter Cohen : That ’s where virtualization technology like Parallels Workstation , which was announce last week , becomes so likable . Unlike Boot Camp , it does n’t pretend your workflow .
JS : It ’s appealing for Windows - only apps . I just do n’t ever see it being a answer for a company like Microsoft to abandon the Mac . If Mac users want to use window , they would .
RG : My big concern in all of this can be summarized like this : I need oculus sinister X 10.5 to boast virtualized Windows . Because then the main OS is OS X , not Windows .
PC : I want 10.5 to boast loyal exploiter - switching between Mac OS X and XP .
RG : That ’d be interesting .
CF : How viable is something like Parallels ?
JS : I cogitate Parallels is extremely workable , unless Leopard includes make - in virtualization . John Gruber of Daring Fireballnailed it : potentially , Windows is the new Classic . It ’s an icky compatibility mode for nasty stuff that just wo n’t turn tail on the Mac .
CF : Huh . Now that ’s an interesting thought .
RG : Peter , What happens with peripherals in virtualization ?
PC : That ’s a good question . I honestly do n’t love . I have n’t play around with Parallels Workstation enough to know .
JS : I incur it running here this dawn . But I have n’t plugged many peripherals into it .
CF : What ’d you find ?
JS : Basically , it ’s practical PC — exceptreallyfast .
microcomputer : I know this much — it ’s definitely a beta . catch it place up and work was more difficult than Boot Camp
JS : Yes , absolutely .
PC : And all the functionality is n’t there , either — I do n’t have sound recording working , I ca n’t get networking cultivate .
JS : And what you really want is to have Boot Camp and a virtual machine share thesameWindows induction . Networking , I got working . But no audio frequency .
JS : Right now , Windows via Boot Camp is interacting with the Mac hardware . Parallels Windows is interact with the Parallels “ virtual simple machine ” PC .
personal computer : And it ’s definitely not as fast — they advertise “ near aboriginal ” speed , but I do n’t get that sensation .
JS : As someone currently using Virtual PC on a PowerBook , I was blow away by the speed . But that ’s not saying much .
RG : One thing I will say : I think a Mini move XP via Boot Camp is the idealistic solution for anyone thinking of “ quiz ” the Mac . For $ 1,000 , you get a Core Duo , load it with RAM , and you ’ve get two amazingly unspoiled machines in one .
personal computer : One thing I can say unequivocally — Parallels ’ effort immediately put to layer Q , Qemu , Bochs , Wintel , etc . And Parallels also flushes Virtual PC down the throne , at least in its present frame . Clearly , virtualization is the way to go — not emulation .
JS : I could never get Q or WinTel to work right , although their developers are still plugging off . But I think they ’re all run low to be eaten by Apple or Microsoft . Either Apple or Microsoft will get up with a virtualization system that will be the criterion .
RG : Virtual PC next version , I paint a picture , will be fully virtual , like Parallels .
PC : Like it is on the microcomputer side .
JS : So anyway , the ideal would be that you could choose : boot completely native via Boot Camp , or run it in a virtual machine … from the same segmentation , same written matter of Windows , etc . We ’re not there yet . Leopard , maybe ?
RG : Yeah , Leopard may have some surprisal in memory board , based on Boot Camp .
JS : I suspect that if Leopard has virtual motorcar progress in , Microsoft will never release a newfangled practical PC .
RG : I agree with that as well .
JS : You ’ve got to think that Apple and Microsoft are speak about all of this .
RG : One would hope .
personal computer : The version of Virtual personal computer that runs on Windows is already an Intel - based Virtual Machine , so it makes sentiency to carry that forward , presuming Microsoft would develop it . But yeah , Jason — if I were at Microsoft , I could n’t really see a reason why I ’d want to continue developing practical microcomputer .
JS : I did have one wacky thought . front , Mac users do n’t cognize what copy of Windows to buy . It ’s weird and confusing , and virtualization is really necessitate . So , assuming Apple is n’t virtualizing in Leopard : shoot down the Virtual PC name . Just call it “ Microsoft Windows for Mac . ” Especially if you could boot directly into it or run it in a practical machine .
PC : Or as Rob so pithily put in his iChat subject line of work today , “ Mac OS X 10.6 Vista . ”
JS : And it comes with a legal Windows license !
Cyrus Farivar : Jason , will the telephone number of Mac substance abuser gain , as Windows users see why the Mac OS is better ? Will Windows users security concerns be alleviated when they try out out Mac OS ? Also , what about the possibility of running Mac group O on x86 generic ironware ? Will that ever hail ?
Jason Snell : That ’s a wad of interrogation . I do think the number of Mac substance abuser will increase .
Rob Griffiths : I agree .
Peter Cohen : Yep .
JS : I believe that for many whipper , Windows compatibility is about fear , not about world . Sort of like masses who crab when a newfangled Mac does n’t have an upgradeable processor or expanding upon slots . They would never really upgrade , but they are afraid of the “ what if ” scenario .
RG : “ Hey ! This Mini you broadcast me does n’t have any slots ! ”
JS : So I surmise many masses will buy a Mac knowing that they can retrovert to Windows and never will . Others will establish Windows for a couple of things and eventually realise they ’re never using it .
RG : Here ’s another opinion : when the eminent - goal Macs come out this downslope . I think Apple will trade quite a few to Windows users who never intend to run OS X. Because the MacBook Pro is currently the fastest XP laptop around , I expect the high - death Macs to be powerhouse , with Apple ’s typically excellent design . For many personal computer users , that will be irresistible .
JS : Whoa there , Hoss . I ’ve yet to see any convincing data point about the “ fastest XP laptop around . ”
RG : You did n’t seethe bench test?It looked passably conclusive to me .
JS : We ’re running all ofPC World ’s testshere . Then I ’ll be win over .
personal computer : What I ’ve been amazed with so far is just how good the iMac is as a back personal computer . It ’s sure enough not the loyal arrangement out there — the Radeon x1600 hobbles at high resolutions — but I ’m able to play games that are being released today , with comme il faut resolutions and high storey of item .
RG : Peter , I ’ve been ball over at the Mini ’s good game performance , limited RAM and all . I ’m still at 512 mebibyte .
JS : As for Mac OS X on generic microcomputer computer hardware , that will never legitimately happen .
CF : Please work out .
JS : Apple wo n’t allow it , period . They will sue anyone into oblivion who tries . However , I would n’t be traumatise if Apple did a licensing quite a little with someone eventually . Sort of like the HP iPod , except maybe it would actually work .
CF : But then would n’t that bring back the clone war , and take away Apple ’s profit from the Mac hardware ? Or does Apple ’s iPod sectionalization take care of that departure ?
JS : I think Apple would only ever license it to ship’s company making systems that do n’t really compete with Apple . But it ’s still an unbelievable event , I have to say .
CF : How could you license the operating system to a company that would n’t compete with Apple ?
PC : For example , if someone were to come forth with a really killer tablet design — installed with Mac OS X. Now that could be cool . circumscribe enough in market place share and world-wide appealingness .
JS : Yeah , exactly : markets Apple does n’t require to be in . What if Apple decides it never , ever , ever require to make a super - pocket-sized - extremist - sub - notebook computer ? Let Sony sell one . It could come about . But I still do n’t think it will .
microcomputer : Now if you ’ll relieve me I ’ve fix a game of Half Life 2 paused on my iMac that I need to get back to .
[ Jason Snell weighed in with his persuasion on Boot Camp on the day Apple announced the software program . Peter Cohen has look at Boot Camp from the view of plot developers . And Rob Griffiths has install Windows XP on his Mac , both with the assistance of Boot Camp and the OnMac.net project cab . ]
