Windows XP on Mac,Its official now.

[dcraig]

Quote from ElectricSavant:

Mac gave up...Bill Gates wins

Maybe. Predicting these things is close to impossible.

While dual boot may well be popular with home users, I can't see it being a such a big deal in the IT world. In a work environment, rebooting your Mac just to get email from an Exchange server is not likely to be a big winner.

However following on from the links posted above about virtualization and the ability to run OS X and Windows at the same time, some interesting possibilities present themselves.

An organization or department might be able to run a wholly *nix based infrastructure. Linux/Unix on the servers and big iron and Mac on the desktop. "Must have" Windows desktop software would be supported by virtualization on the Mac.

Why would anybody want to do this ? One reason may be superior security and far less exposure to the risk of malware of various types which is both costly to guard against and potentially very costly in terms of down time. Another might be the 'standardization' of Apple hardware. IT support not having to deal with the myriad combinations of video cards and drivers and whatever, that happens in the PC world.

There are a lot of benefits to virtualization and I think it's destined for widespread adoption. Just one example. If the guest OS (eg Windows) gets clobbered by malware, the guest OS image is just a file that can be recovered from backup very easily. The time consuming procedure of Windows reinstallation is entirely removed.

Some of these things may well add up to a lower cost of ownership that we hear about so frequently.

 

[ktmexc20]

Quote from dcraig:

There are a lot of benefits to virtualization...

Hi dcraig,

Since I haven't had time to play with this yet (ie: Xen, etc.) I'm curious if there is any latency (or other hindrance) considerations.

kt

 

[dcraig]

Quote from ktmexc20:

Hi dcraig,

Since I haven't played with this yet (ie: xen, etc.) I'm curious as to if there is any latency (or other hindrance) considerations.

kt

I havn't tried Xen, but several years ago I used Vmware on on a 600Mhz PIII laptop with 192 Mbyte of memory and Windows 98 as guest and Red Hat 7 as host. Mostly for MS Office and connectivity to Exchange server for email. I even had an X.500 server and Ingress database running under NT as a guest at one stage for some software testing. Performance was perfectly acceptable for these tasks - basically little different from native windows.

Xen claims some impressive performance figures, and I have no reason to doubt them. For most things I guess you would be looking at better than 95% of native performance. Graphics performance is probably the main issue but probably more than adequate for most uses. Latency is negligable.

 

[ktmexc20]

Quote from dcraig:

Thanks.

 

[canyonman00]

Quote from nitro:

My nine year old daughter installed a knoppix cluster the other day. That is about how much you know about computers.

Look man, stick to installing Hards Disks and adding paper to the printer for your "clients", because it is more and more obvious that while you have some knowledge of computers, and because you deal with people that have no clue every day and they call you a geek, you really believe it!

nitro

That's really cool! I'm happy that she is working with computers. Sadly for you though, that has no impact on whether or not I know computers. Maybe she'll keep that gleam in your eye dreaming about Apple's prospects in main stream computing services as it relates to reality and existing product bases. I'll factually tell you that the dream has very little bearing on whether or not the main corporate environs will get the MAC OS installed any time soon. There is possibly some hope for it yet though. Time will tell!

The issue, for me, falls as to am I going to endorse adding another OS into the corporate domains that I work on. As an outside consultant charged with keeping my clients efficiently operating, I know where I'm looking. The current answer - Not!!! I'll continue to poopoo the matter and make sure that the current UNIX/Novell/Windows domains remain as they are. Some how I feel that my direct corporate involvement will have more impact (currently) than your wishes and your daughter's talents.

I do not work in the domain of learning the computer OS's. It is my job to keep the geeks in line and working within the corporate constraints of budgets and reality. I hear their wishes daily and I do understand their desires. My foray is in hardware and project management.

It is my job to translate geek talk into corporate speak and vice versa. I spend days on end bring the fantasies of both sides into line with what is doable. Most of the time the two never meet naturally. They (both sides) like you, want to do everything new that can be done just because it's the next thing in the line.

Some commercial/advertisement somewhere has caused another hard on for change. And once again we have to head out to the bleeding edge of technology to appease your thirst for ever more. Too much like right to wait for the testing and patches to be developed, you need it ~ YESTERDAY FOR TOMORROW! Even when you aren't beginning to tax the capabilities of what you have currently, YOU JUST GOTTA' HAVE IT!!!

I do not fashion myself a geek. The folks who know that I know how to talk to them are roundly reminded, by me, that I am not. But I do have the patience, understanding and vision to communicate with both sides quite effectively. And I am a damn good mediator.

At the upcoming IT conference that I'll be attending I, and many more like me, will again talk of integrated services without much discussion of the MAC's being integral. But, for you and your Elite Trader discussions, keep hope alive!

 

[canyonman00]

Congratulations, you get it!

And you're right, we can't predict it. It currently has no merits that would warrant making any changes in the current corporate setups. Other than a desire, it has no NEEDS that would require it to be blended into what's existing either. Windows and UNIX progressions, understandable. A whole new offering, I need a better answer for WHY?

I could address the security risks better than changing to MAC setups (cost wise) and that would negate the potential change as things are structured currently. It's all about system and environ architectures.

Quote from dcraig:

Maybe. Predicting these things is close to impossible.

While dual boot may well be popular with home users, I can't see it being a such a big deal in the IT world. In a work environment, rebooting your Mac just to get email from an Exchange server is not likely to be a big winner.

However following on from the links posted above about virtualization and the ability to run OS X and Windows at the same time, some interesting possibilities present themselves.

An organization or department might be able to run a wholly *nix based infrastructure. Linux/Unix on the servers and big iron and Mac on the desktop. "Must have" Windows desktop software would be supported by virtualization on the Mac.

Why would anybody want to do this ? One reason may be superior security and far less exposure to the risk of malware of various types which is both costly to guard against and potentially very costly in terms of down time. Another might be the 'standardization' of Apple hardware. IT support not having to deal with the myriad combinations of video cards and drivers and whatever, that happens in the PC world.

There are a lot of benefits to virtualization and I think it's destined for widespread adoption. Just one example. If the guest OS (eg Windows) gets clobbered by malware, the guest OS image is just a file that can be recovered from backup very easily. The time consuming procedure of Windows reinstallation is entirely removed.

Some of these things may well add up to a lower cost of ownership that we hear about so frequently.

 

[Bitstream]

macs are sexy, windows crap pc for da herd with zero taste

 

[dcraig]

Quote from canyonman00:



I could address the security risks better than changing to MAC setups (cost wise) and that would negate the potential change as things are structured currently. It's all about system and environ architectures.

A cynic might remark that MS has had an awfully long time and virtually unlimited resources to address the security issues in Windows and there are still a lot of problems. No doubt exacerbated by less than adequate system admin practices in many cases.

No matter how good the admin practices are, malware can always be imported into an internal network via laptops which are essential to many businesses operations.

I'm not saying that Macs are going to replace existing Windows desktops, but in security critical enviroments, I'm sure some people will be thinking about these things. If I was betting the farm on security, *nix would be the first port of call.

 

[jficquette]

Quote from vhehn:

if a mac runs an intc chip and now it runs windows why would anyone pay twice the money for a mac computer? seems like a mistake to me. it puts mac in the position of having to compete on price alone.

I agree. Why not just license the technology to Dell and let them build and sell them and just get out of the box business?

John

 

[1000]

Quote from dcraig:

A cynic might remark that MS has had an awfully long time and virtually unlimited resources to address the security issues in Windows and there are still a lot of problems. No doubt exacerbated by less than adequate system admin practices in many cases.

No matter how good the admin practices are, malware can always be imported into an internal network via laptops which are essential to many businesses operations.

I'm not saying that Macs are going to replace existing Windows desktops, but in security critical enviroments, I'm sure some people will be thinking about these things. If I was betting the farm on security, *nix would be the first port of call.

Probably because more empty heads turn their frustration towards Bill Gates, once they hear about Steve Jobs, then I presume Mac will be in a worse situation.

So far all the malware has been directed to MS, would *nix be able to hold up to the same descent?