Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Walker · Jul 3, 2006, 07:34 AM

This sounds like it could be big:

http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/06...over/index.php

Big Mac · Jul 3, 2006, 07:46 AM

It's just WINE with some supposed improvements. It doesn't sound like that big of a deal.

mac128k-1984 · Jul 3, 2006, 07:47 AM

There's also darwine, but that hasn't really seemed to be moving, at least the last time I check in. With the virtualization technology built into the intel cpu, parallels is postioned to really be a popular choice.

G-Force · Jul 3, 2006, 08:00 AM

Is it just me or is anyone else worried that all this mac-windows integration that is (or soon will be) available is going to spell the death for mac software development

Instead of investing resources into mac development, they now can just say "compatible with macs using the crossover software" and they will only have to develop for one platform.

besson3c · Jul 3, 2006, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by G-Force

Is it just me or is anyone else worried that all this mac-windows integration that is (or soon will be) available is going to spell the death for mac software development

Instead of investing resources into mac development, they now can just say "compatible with macs using the crossover software" and they will only have to develop for one platform.

No, because they can claim the same thing now. Those who put resources into a Mac port do so because they can stand to make money, meaning there is an audience for the product. It is in a company's best interest to satisfy their target audience, or else why produce the product at all?

Codeweavers working on Crossover Office for OS X is great news, they have already contributed to the Darwine project. Darwine is not at a standstill, they just aren't producing public releases yet.

I still bet that Apple will come out with a Xen-based solution for Leopard, which will leave Parallels in the dust.

tooki · Jul 3, 2006, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by G-Force

Is it just me or is anyone else worried that all this mac-windows integration that is (or soon will be) available is going to spell the death for mac software development

Instead of investing resources into mac development, they now can just say "compatible with macs using the crossover software" and they will only have to develop for one platform.

No, you're not the only person with that worry, but it's unfounded: Mac users don't get Macs in order to run Windows apps. There's ample history of complete and utter failure of essentially any program that was ported from Windows to Mac without making it "Mac-like". If it doesn't look and act like a Mac program, it will fail.

This will certainly be handy for running the occasional odd program, but it in no way endangers Mac applications. We hold our apps to too high a standard for Windows apps to make the cut! (And good developers know this.)

tooki

besson3c · Jul 3, 2006, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by tooki

No, you're not the only person with that worry, but it's unfounded: Mac users don't get Macs in order to run Windows apps. There's ample history of complete and utter failure of essentially any program that was ported from Windows to Mac without making it "Mac-like". If it doesn't look and act like a Mac program, it will fail.

I don't agree. If there is no competition and yet a need for this product, it will succeed despite its GUI shortcomings.

It comes down to a cost/benefit ratio for the producers of this product, and that cost also includes support of the product in some sort of virtualized layer.

NeXTLoop · Jul 3, 2006, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

I don't agree. If there is no competition and yet a need for this product, it will succeed despite its GUI shortcomings.

It comes down to a cost/benefit ratio for the producers of this product, and that cost also includes support of the product in some sort of virtualized layer.

And the minute any of us Mac software developers see how popular such a program is....... we'll make a true Mac competitor!

besson3c · Jul 3, 2006, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by NeXTLoop

And the minute any of us Mac software developers see how popular such a program is....... we'll make a true Mac competitor!

Are you a Mac developer? I'd really like something like IfoEdit for Windows, just in case you are looking for a new project

mac128k-1984 · Jul 3, 2006, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by G-Force

Is it just me or is anyone else worried that all this mac-windows integration that is (or soon will be) available is going to spell the death for mac software development

I'm worried. What is the motivation for the adobes of the world to produce an OSX version when they know it will run on a mac? Doing so cuts down on their development costs, support costs and manufactoring costs.

I guess you can ask, why wouldn't they do this?

alex_kac · Jul 3, 2006, 03:14 PM

Because the Crossover version won't act like a Mac app. It won't support the Mac technologies, Color Sync, and so on. It requires X Windows. No matter how you describe it, there is a LOT to making an app a Mac app. Just running on the OS does not do it.

I for one am looking forward to Crossover for a couple apps I use in Parallels currently (and I'll still use Parallels for other stuff) which I want more immediate access to.

tooki · Jul 3, 2006, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

I don't agree. If there is no competition and yet a need for this product, it will succeed despite its GUI shortcomings.

I disagree. Historically, if there's been a need, a Mac developer has come out of the woodwork to create a native Mac app.

tooki

besson3c · Jul 3, 2006, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by tooki

I disagree. Historically, if there's been a need, a Mac developer has come out of the woodwork to create a native Mac app.

tooki

That's why I qualified what I said by saying "if there is no competition" - i.e. if such a (Mac-like) product does not already exist.

tooki · Jul 3, 2006, 04:47 PM

No, it kinda negates it. If there's a need, there will already be a product on the market. I can't think of anything where there's a need which remains unfilled by Mac developers. I've never seen a Windows product succeed on the Mac, period. Blind ports of Win apps invariably fail miserably.

I guess what I am saying is that if no Mac product exists, then it's because there's no need.

tooki

besson3c · Jul 3, 2006, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by tooki

No, it kinda negates it. If there's a need, there will already be a product on the market. I can't think of anything where there's a need which remains unfilled by Mac developers. I've never seen a Windows product succeed on the Mac, period. Blind ports of Win apps invariably fail miserably.

I guess what I am saying is that if no Mac product exists, then it's because there's no need.

tooki

I was thinking more along the lines of Unix app ports, and yes there are some areas that remain unfilled by Mac developers, although perhaps nothing in mainstreaming computing.

My point was simply that if you are the only game in town and your product is needed, getting to simply work on the Mac is often good enough in the eyes of many IT companies. Said companies aren't in the business to make great products, but to make money.

tooki · Jul 3, 2006, 05:29 PM

Sure. But those who don't understand that Mac users pretty much demand great products will find that their products fail in the market.

tooki

mac1896 · Jul 3, 2006, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by Walker

This sounds like it could be big:

http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/06...over/index.php

Re: Crossover:

It's for INTEL-Based Macs ONLY, whereas Darwine can be used on PPC Macs.

Big Mac · Jul 4, 2006, 01:57 AM

tooki is saying that Mac users reject poor ports, which is true. The difference between a poor port and Windows runtime compatibility is substantial, though. The difference is that whereas developers previously had to offer ports of their applications to target Mac users, they now can target them with the same binary for free. It will have a big effect on the choices certain developers make about the platform, and it may well spell death for OS X, unless the Mactels can grow Apple's marketshare significantly.

Gee4orce · Jul 4, 2006, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by G-Force

Is it just me or is anyone else worried that all this mac-windows integration that is (or soon will be) available is going to spell the death for mac software development

Instead of investing resources into mac development, they now can just say "compatible with macs using the crossover software" and they will only have to develop for one platform.

Yup, it's just you.

And what's wit da name huh pal ? Huh ? huh ?

G-Force · Jul 4, 2006, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by Gee4orce

Yup, it's just you.

And what's wit da name huh pal ? Huh ? huh ?

That's my handle that I use on all the webforums I frequent. It's based on my name.

Mithras · Jul 4, 2006, 02:11 PM

hey, at least his isn't pronounced "Jee Fourorce"

But yeah, I look forward to testing CrossOver. If I can get away with not even booting Parallels, so much the better. It'd be nice if WINE had all of the capabilities of CrossOver, but every now and then, the old profit motive proves worthwhile

thunderous_funker · 08:03 PM

Well, the clear advantage of Crossover would be not having to pay for a Windows licence just to run the occissaional Windows app on your Mac. I suppose if you're currently running pirated Windows that isn't a concern for you, but it would certainly make a big difference to those that would prefer to remain legal (particularly biz users). Lot easier to convince your IT guy to let you have a Mac if you can demonstrate running some necessary Windows app without even requiring the Windows OS license. Suh-weet.

For example: biz gives you an Office license (Windows only). You run it on your Mac you wouldn't even need Windows with Crossover installed. Same for Visio or MS Project.

Yeah, that's a really really big freakin deal.

besson3c · Jul 8, 2006, 12:35 AM

Originally Posted by thunderous_funker

Well, the clear advantage of Crossover would be not having to pay for a Windows licence just to run the occissaional Windows app on your Mac. I suppose if you're currently running pirated Windows that isn't a concern for you, but it would certainly make a big difference to those that would prefer to remain legal (particularly biz users). Lot easier to convince your IT guy to let you have a Mac if you can demonstrate running some necessary Windows app without even requiring the Windows OS license. Suh-weet.

For example: biz gives you an Office license (Windows only). You run it on your Mac you wouldn't even need Windows with Crossover installed. Same for Visio or MS Project.

Yeah, that's a really really big freakin deal.

I agree completely. However, Crossover Office itself is not free just FYI.

TerryJ · Jul 19, 2006, 10:59 AM

I have been testing the Alpha for CrossOver and I, for one, can say that it is looking to be incredible. I have installed a very complex learning program for one of my clients as a test - which is not officially supported yet by CrossOver - and it runs beautifully! It is loaded with interactive video files and research databases and libraries and it runs without a single hitch and is very, very fast on my MacBook 2.0/2.0/120. I know a lot of people like Parallels, but keep in mind... with CrossOver you DO NOT NEED a copy of Windows installed. For me... and many, many clients that I have spoken with... this is a very big advantage over Parallels.

Looking at the site, it looks like CodeWeavers will be releasing a retail version pretty soon so I expect them to get a fair slice of the pie once more people learn about and use CrossOver.

production_coordinator · Jul 19, 2006, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984

I'm worried. What is the motivation for the adobes of the world to produce an OSX version when they know it will run on a mac? Doing so cuts down on their development costs, support costs and manufactoring costs.

I guess you can ask, why wouldn't they do this?

Question: Why does Ford make more than one Truck?
Answer: Because they make money on both.

I think the backlash would be VERY bad for Adobe... Mac users buy mac software for a reason... it's not because they want to run Windows software.

Also, anything more complex than "it just works" isn't OK for most users. Try telling someone to install a dual boot... or to download some strange software to get it to work.