Is Virtualization dead for Leopard?

I think that Apple's public support for Parallels clearly indicates that Apple does not intend to provide virtualization with Leopard. Moreover, I suspect that Parallels established this with Apple for themselves before commencing their development work. To do otherwise would be too risky. However, Fat-Ass Phil's line about the "R&D would be prohibitive" is quite absurd.

Virtualization is yet another area where Apple can crush Microsoft, it clearly is the future operating systems in general. I would hope that Apple recognizes this fact and not only has a plan (perhaps with Parallels) to make OS X the best platform for virtualization, but also vice versa. I specifically mean that Apple should be developing virtual OS X for Windows.

10.5 comes out in August. It will support it from what I hear. Two versions right now. One that does like Parallels but from Apple. Another, one does one natively. Right now there are problems with drivers. Folks will say, "BS" but time will tell.

10.5 comes out in August. It will support it from what I hear. Two versions right now. One that does like Parallels but from Apple. Another, one does one natively. Right now there are problems with drivers. Folks will say, "BS" but time will tell.

really, 10.5 is being RELEASED in August? If so, sweetness.

I for one would welcome Apple adding virtualization as part of their OS.

On the other hand, if it means taking (read: implimenting/liscensing) Parallels, I would HIGHLY doubt Apple would incude it with their systems. I see Apple as a company that would only bundle software if it was of their own design. Think about how big Apples software portion is? anyone in the professional "creative" world can, and does, use Apple software. I think Adobe (MAYBE Corel) has as big of a hold in that market as Apple does.

Back to my point, if Apple doesnt create the software, I would very much so doubt that they would bundle it with their systems.

Well they offer it up as a possible alternative to their boot camp implimentation, maybe. That depends how good it is.

I think it is sure to be an exciting August!

SIDENOTE: has anyone heard if they are planning on updating the entire mobile line with Merom based Core 2 Duos? I for one hope they do for the Macbook (non-pro) lappys, as I have my eye on them.

I would not mind having to reboot every time to change operating systems, but i find that Windows or any other OS can't run off an external drive is something very crucial. (I personally own a laptop so desktop users may have a different opinion) Not everyone needs windows with them every second of the way so i think leaving an external drive with windows behind at the office or house would be really great.

10.5 comes out in August. It will support it from what I hear. Two versions right now. One that does like Parallels but from Apple. Another, one does one natively. Right now there are problems with drivers. Folks will say, "BS" but time will tell.

The developer's preview for 10.5 is coming out in August. The full retail version won't be available late 2006 or early 2007.

So project "yellow box" (or whatever it's called) was nothing more than a rumor? Is this guy really a credible source who has the authority to say such things definitively? If it is true, although it's a little sad to hear that there won't be any native running of Windows programs, at least Mac OS X 10.5 won't be susceptible to viruses.

I doubt Apple will leave Boot Camp as-is. I think they will take some step to making running windows programs easier, even if it's not through virtualization. They could work with parallels to develop a system whereby people can boot into their native Windows partitions via a program similiar to Parallels for quick and easy access, rather than reboot each time they need to use a windows application. Advanced features could allow for even more interaction between OS X and the virtual Windows machine, such as dragging and dropping files from one desktop to another.

I think that there are two possibilities.

1. Apple really isn't making a virtualization program, but is rather making a program more like CrossOver Office

2. Apple will leave virtualization to Parallels. Why should Apple remake a virtualization product if they can just have their customer's get Parallels'.

The developer's preview for 10.5 is coming out in August. The full retail version won't be available late 2006 or early 2007.

Oh, that makes sense as the guy who told me is a developer.

i'd just have 2 computers

So project "yellow box" (or whatever it's called) was nothing more than a rumor?

Yellow box was an early version of Cocoa, blue box was an early version of classic both for the early developer version of OS X known as Rhapsody. Dharma, which was yellow box for Windows, allows Cocoa programs to run in Windows actually existed around the time of Rhapsody and can still be found in certain parts of the internet (although it doesnt run very much). I think there was more color boxes as well but I cant remember right now.

jrsdead

First I don't think Apple would include Virtualization into Leopard if they don't have all the security measure they will need to stop viruses/troyans/backdoors that's plaging Windows.

Second they don't need to reinvent the wheel(Virtualization) just make it easer to use, something like CrossOver Office, and installed software that runs when you need it and let you use any Windows applications you may need...

I asked him the question, ‘will Apple include a virtualization solution in [the next version of Mac OS X] Leopard.’ He said ‘absolutely not, the R&D would be prohibitive and we’re not going to do it. Our solution is dual boot.’

but what if you dual-booted both systems at the same time? No virtualization (faked video card, faked ethernet, etc) but Mac OS X found a way to release the hardware so it could be handed off to Windows?

... Eh, too much of Windows would need to be re-written to allow you to switch back.

It's a nice thought though.

really, 10.5 is being RELEASED in August? If so, sweetness.

 

I for one would welcome Apple adding virtualization as part of their OS.

 

I see Apple as a company that would only bundle software if it was of their own design. Think about how big Apples software portion is? anyone in the professional "creative" world can, and does, use Apple software. I think Adobe (MAYBE Corel) has as big of a hold in that market as Apple does.

You must be confused , apple has a long history in stealing/buying software not coded by them , actually if i'm not wrong the only software coded by apple is icrap

2 computers is fine, but dragging 2 laptops around was giving me arms like the Governator, only before.

I now have a 2 gig macbook running solidworks, autocad and vb6 under win2k thanks to parallels. Blows my mind.

I have $5 says Apple goes that route. Or they could just buy Parallels with this week's iPod profit. Either way, it will happen because it opens up mac to windoze apps, which some of us just plain have to run.

I'll put $5 on it that Apple incorporates opening ".exe" files natively rather than bundling some virtualization program. Taking into consideration Apple's reputation in software development, it would be odd for Apple to do anything short of simple and spectacular.

With Microsoft's lack of improvement on it's OS and Apple's well established reputation for not only for security and simplicity, but possibly with ultimate compatability, I'd doubt someone up in Building 1 isn't thinking that it could be a key piece in gaining market share and capitalizing.

I'm by no means suggesting that folks will flock to Apple, but as a professional, I'm currently seeing more and more people with the new MBP or counting on the Mac Pro as their next replacement.

If Apple does incorporate native support, along with "Woodcrest" aka 3.0GHz Xeon, they WILL violently shake today's workstation market and my guess would be the gaming too. But it's all speculation still. Time will tell.

Given that they even sell parallels right off their store now, among other things, I ggive vitualisation in Lepord a "No way in hell."

I think we'd have at least had some odd rumour if they would run exes natively or something (since they'd seriously have to use wine or something, I don't think yellowbox is an option, etc).

I think that virtualization with a vm is not what the average person wants to use. But the Red Box approach (windows apps on os x) IS what people want and if Apple doesn't do it codeweavers will.

Linux users generally are not tethered to Windows in the same way an average user interested in buying a mac may be. The intel switch will bring more developers to the wine project if Red Box isn't implemented because OS X intel doubles the 'marketshare' for wine. (If not more than doubles since OS X users desire wine more than Linux users IMO)

Hello everyone, my first post here.

Anyway- I think that Apple should be leading towards a system where (If you excuse my over simplification) you simply "log in" to windows, and having it do a sort of user switch over to Windows. For there on, it Apple could provide either an app (.exe file) for windows, and make it be able to go back to MacOsX.

I'm pretty sure that's what they're shooting for. Also, maybe the use of windows apps (Rosetta style) directly in MacOsX.

You must be confused , apple has a long history in stealing/buying software not coded by them , actually if i'm not wrong the only software coded by apple is icrap

You know, I once had some respect for you because of you work in patching OS X for AMD systems, but your comments in your install routines and this comment make me think of you as no better than a common troll.