"If you want to run Windows applications on your Intel powered Mac, you will be happy to learn that there are three different ways. The first method is by using Crossover for Mac, the second is using Parallels, and the third method is using Boot Camp. Each has their own advantages and disadvantages. This article will explain the differences between these programs and from there you should be able to figure out which method works best for you."
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-11-10
They forgot Q[emu] too. Free, open source virtualiser / emulator. It emulates other processors so can run things like PPC AROS. There's a beta kernal extension to virtualise x86 directly and run things closer to native.
http://kju-app.org
Member since:2006-07-26
Member since:
2005-11-13
And run OSX on plain 'vanilla' PC hardware? Although this certainly wouldn't be legal (in the US), I would think that ethically speaking, this shouldn't be a problem if you can buy a shrink-wrapped copy of Leopard somewhere when it comes out. Although I wouldn't mind paying for OSX and taking it for a spin, I'm not too keen on paying the Apple hardware tax just for the privilege.
Edited 2007-02-19 23:19
Member since:2005-11-12
Member since:2005-11-13
Well, you pay the Microsoft tax for running PC's. Here in the UK we pay TV license and if I dont watch BBC I still have to pay it, is that not the same as Windows on a PC I dont want?
No, it is not quite the same, at least not in the US. While it really sucks that OEMs will not sell you a PC unless you take Windows with it, it's not all that hard to get a PC without Windows preinstalled if you really want one. I'm not seeing it's possible at all to purchase a copy of OSX to run on hardware other than that which is sold by Apple. So the only way you can LEGALLY run OSX (AFAIK) is to buy your hardware directly from Apple.
For some of us, it would be nice to be able to test web pages we write in Mac web browsers (esp Safari), but I ain't doing that if I have to buy another computer, especially when the one I have works flawlessly already.
Edited 2007-02-20 20:46
Member since:2005-07-09
For some of us, it would be nice to be able to test web pages we write in Mac web browsers (esp Safari), but I ain't doing that if I have to buy another computer, especially when the one I have works flawlessly already.
http://webkit.org/
This should help your testing.
Member since:2005-11-10
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2006-02-16
Member since:2006-06-06
Technically, the only way to get a "full" version of OS X is to buy a Mac. The boxes you can buy at the store are upgrades, which "require" a valid OS X license.
Apple does not sell full OS X licenses apart from hardware purchases, so there is no "legal" way to run OS X on non-apple hardware.
Apple is, however, fairly generous, and as long as you have a recent Mac, they consider you to be a licensee of Mac OS, unlike MS, who could rain down on you anytime for using that "XP Upgrade" as your base install.
Member since:
2005-11-12
Member since:2005-07-06
I fail to see why you would need Crossover since the apps they say can run actually run native in OS X
Switchers. If you already own Photoshop/Dreamweaver/Office...you can put your money towards the hardware and put off buying new versions until they get upgraded with some feature that you must have.
Member since:2007-02-19
Member since:2005-07-07
Unfortunately, those tons of applications aren't officially supported by CrossOver. If you've used the product, you'll know how sh*t the support for unsupported applications are.
For example, I'm interested in running Windows developer tools on the Mac. VS.NET is not supported. Neither are the free Borland Turbo Tools. Hell, none of the applications I want it to run are classed as "supported". All the apps I've run have hung on the installer, or have installed but failed to run.
There is little point in running CrossOver on the Mac. Look at the top 25 list. How many of those applications are already available on the Mac? How many of those that aren't already have alternatives that do the job just as well or better?
Member since:2006-01-03
Member since:2006-02-06
Member since:
2006-10-16
Member since:2006-12-28
It would be nice, wouldn't it?
Although frankly, and I'm sure you'll agree, it's very unlikely. Most of these technologies, with the exception of BootCamp, come from X86 software houses. I really don't see them working on a compatibility port for PPC as many in the desktop sector consider it dead.
It's a shame really. I like running a non X86 desktop.
Member since:
2006-05-29
Member since:
2007-01-19
They failed to mention The Mac edition of VMware which is presently in beta http://www.vmware.com/company/news/releases/mac.html. It looks good so fat with the 3d acceleration http://youtube.com/watch?v=xF_CoXsXtk4.
Edited 2007-02-20 00:33
Member since:
2005-11-17
Hello,
I just installed Parallels on a customer's PC with Windows XP Professional. The installation was straightforward and very simple.
Parallels and XP had all of the drivers needed, and it worked incredibly well. This is a very good way to run those older Windows apps that do a lot to the operating environment which Crossover won't support too well due to developers making assumptions. However, the video support isn't the greatest. VMWare's DirectX builds will fix that, however 
.
I also just installed Boot Camp on another customer's MacBook with Windows XP Pro for testing with a 2D-graphics intensive application with users that don't have much OS X experience.
Apple has to be complimented here. I have only ever seen one other vendor who could provide a single file or CD with all the driver support you need on one CD, and that was HP with the Proliant server series. I haven't seen this from another vendor for the desktop. Apple managed to make the Windows driver installation painless.
Between the two of those solutions, running Windows itself is painless on a Mac. Apple's managed to make installing and running Windows better than any other desktop vendor's solution.
Crossover/WINE is still good for those certain applications that its tuned for. It's not a 100% solution for Windows apps, and that's what the other two are for.
Parallels and Boot Camp are the best I've seen in practice for running Windows apps on a Mac. They've both made it incredibly easy to set up and run Windows.
While Parallels is incredibly good at running Windows within OS X, Boot Camp has the easiest installation and fastest speed because it's not virtualized, and because Apple makes it simple with the driver CD.
With all of these solutions, YMMV .
Member since:
2007-01-18
Only three different ways...? Did they forget this one, too:
http://www.openosx.com/wintel/index.html
Member since:2005-11-10
They're just reselling open source. Q.app does exactly the same and is free. http://kju-app.org
Member since:
2005-07-28