Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 12th Mar 2006 18:40 UTC, submitted by Varg Vikernes
Apple Dan Kusnetzky, Apple program vice president, spoke to PC Pro News at IDC and said that Apple has no plans to support booting into Vista on the new Intel Macs. However, a Microsoft spokesman said that Microsoft would have no problem granting a Windows licence to Apple, in exactly the same way it currently provides licences to Dell and HP: "Microsoft would support Apple the same way it supports every other PC manufacturer." But Dan Kusnetzky said it would be difficult to know who would support that machine if Windows was running on a Mac. However, "no doubt someone will work out how to run Windows on the Mac, even if Apple doesn't technically support that."
Thread beginning with comment 103698
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
MikeGA
Member since:
2005-07-22

There's a hell of a lot of "magic" in Quartz, which I believe is fairly closely tied to the kernal.

And more importantly, do you think replacing the entire kernal would be that easy? Plus all the BSD tools that many people rely on would just stop working. And Apple would have to persuade Microsoft to provide a PPC versionb of the kernel, becuase Apple certainly aren't going to suddenly stop PPC versions of the software, just because they now have some computers that run on Intel chips.

Reply Parent Score: 3

ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

No it's not, that's the point of having a micro-kernel. If it's closely tied to the kernel than Apple has got a largely monolithic kernel ;) .

I think there's a lot of magic in quartz that's dependant on driver functionality which runs as "servlets" (or whatever they call them) for the kernel.

Reply Parent Score: 1

dr_gonzo Member since:
2005-07-06

Actually, Mac OS X's kernel is in fact more mono than micro.

http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=149636&cid=12544699

Reply Parent Score: 3

stephanem Member since:
2006-01-11

> There's a hell of a lot of "magic" in Quartz, which I believe is fairly closely tied to the kernal.

It's a freaking Microkernel!. There's NO magic inside the kernel.


> lus all the BSD tools that many people rely on would just stop working

As for all BSD tools, Windows has it - it's called Services for UNIX. Windows networking stack is based on BSD.

Reply Parent Score: 2

rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

1) OS X isn't a microkernel, but BSD layer is in the kernel. You're right that Quartz is in userspace, though.

2) The Windows networking stack is not BSD based. They used to use a BSD-based stack from a company called Spider, so there are some BSD-licensed utilities in there, but the stack is Microsoft's own.

3) UNIX apps on Windows is possible, but Windows is generally different enough that things don't work smoothly.

4) Ripping out BSD and substituting the NT kernel would be next to impossible. The OS X GUI is tied to the system-level userspace (stuff like the LWWP and Quartz Compositor), which are closely tied to kernel-level APIs like the IOKit. Large parts of the userspace use Mach IPC and other features, making it difficult to port the OS X GUI to FreeBSD, much less Windows NT.

Reply Parent Score: 2