Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

besson3c · Jun 20, 2006, 10:01 PM

Xen support...

information about Xen

Xen offers the best performing machine virtualization out of anything else available, and boasts the ability to run 100 operating systems on the same computer.

Essentially, in software like Virtual PC or VMWare, a base set of hardware is emulated, and software that is installed within VPC/VMWare thinks it is being installed on this hardware. In Xen, the guest OS will share the same hardware as the host OS. Your games will use your native video card. The overall performance hit is supposed to be only between 2-8%.

Xen is completely open source, and several Linux operating systems already support Xen. It holds great potential for ISPs to provide dedicated server access on a single machine. Xen requires changes to the OS for paravirtualization, however Intel has been working on machines that will support full virtualization:

Intel has contributed modifications to Xen to support their VT-X Vanderpool architecture extensions. This technology will enable unmodified guest operating systems to run within Xen virtual machines, if the host system supports the Vanderpool or the Pacifica extensions (Intel's, and AMD's, respectively, extensions to natively support virtualization). Practically, this will mean that there will be a performance boost, and that it will be possible to virtualise Windows without having to modify it in any way, which licensing restrictions prevent.

This, I think, will be exactly what Apple capitalizes on in Leopard. My prediction is that Apple will provide an easy Boot Camp-type GUI install for Windows, requiring nothing more than a Windows CD to get started.

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jun 20, 2006, 10:24 PM

Sounds good but I hope it is something more innovative and that more people will use.

besson3c · Jun 20, 2006, 10:37 PM

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

Sounds good but I hope it is something more innovative and that more people will use.

More innovative? Something that more people will use? How do you mean?

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jun 20, 2006, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

More innovative? Something that more people will use? How do you mean?

Believe it or not every mac user I know doesn't want to or need to run Windows. That is why they got a Mac. Sure it is great for geeks like us but is the average user going to need it?

In terms of innovative virtualization is nothing new. It has been done a zillion times a zillion different ways.

For one I am hoping for apple to make a much better GUI and have that be the main selling point.

besson3c · Jun 20, 2006, 10:41 PM

SWG, I included a fair amount of technical detail, but essentially all we're talking about here is the next generation of Virtual PC.

If Virtual PC only lost 2% performance from the same OS running natively on the same hardware (and it were priced reasonably), it would easily be the most important product on the Mac, no contest. As it stands, it sucks ass.

besson3c · Jun 20, 2006, 10:47 PM

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

Believe it or not every mac user I know doesn't want to or need to run Windows. That is why they got a Mac. Sure it is great for geeks like us but is the average user going to need it?

In terms of innovative virtualization is nothing new. It has been done a zillion times a zillion different ways.

For one I am hoping for apple to make a much better GUI and have that be the main selling point.

How has it been done a zillion ways? Virtualization has always been about emulating a base hardware set. Virtual PC has had to translate x86 instruction to PPC instruction and vice versa while virtualization has the luxury of skipping this step, but there has still been that tradeoff. With Xen, the tradeoffs are far less (aside from needing supporting hardware and software). Moreover, virtualization has always been a little geeky and intimidating to many users.

Think about all those people who need to own both a Mac and a PC. Think about what it would mean to destroy this barrier and need. This may not be a big deal to you, but it's a big deal to thousands of other Mac users I'm sure - certainly just as much as Spotlight or Dashboard.

MindFad · Jun 20, 2006, 10:57 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

More innovative? Something that more people will use? How do you mean?

The FINDER, goddamn it!

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jun 20, 2006, 10:59 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

SWG, I included a fair amount of technical detail, but essentially all we're talking about here is the next generation of Virtual PC.

If Virtual PC only lost 2% performance from the same OS running natively on the same hardware (and it were priced reasonably), it would easily be the most important product on the Mac, no contest. As it stands, it sucks ass.

That is fine, i just don't see such a high demand. Out of the 30+ mac users I know I'd say about 3-4 of them want or need any sort of visualization or emulation.

besson3c · Jun 20, 2006, 11:00 PM

Originally Posted by MindFad

The FINDER, goddamn it!

Maybe Apple will develop a super high powered Finder that supports Xen and will do backflips and draw pixels?

MindFad · Jun 20, 2006, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Maybe Apple will develop a super high powered Finder that supports Xen and will do backflips and draw pixels?

Yeah, sure, maybe.

While the idea of virtualization is great, and I hope Apple does it, I'm more interested in improvements to Apple's operating system, especially when it comes to its own applications (like the Finder). Much more than the ability to run hundreds—nay thousands!—of other operating systems.

besson3c · Jun 20, 2006, 11:06 PM

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

That is fine, i just don't see such a high demand. Out of the 30+ mac users I know I'd say about 3-4 of them want or need any sort of visualization or emulation.

Yes, but don't forget that Apple seems intent on trying to captivate switchers. Promising full Windows capability is quite the marketing ploy. I suppose they can technically market this right now, but I bet we won't see a huge push this direction until Leopard is out.

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jun 20, 2006, 11:07 PM

Ya I rather have apple concentrate on improving their own OS rather than helping me use other companies to make up for something.

I bought a Mac to use OSX not to run 50 other OS's.

besson3c · Jun 20, 2006, 11:08 PM

Originally Posted by MindFad

Yeah, sure, maybe.

While the idea of virtualization is great, and I hope Apple does it, I'm more interested in improvements to Apple's operating system, especially when it comes to its own applications (like the Finder). Much more than the ability to run hundreds—nay thousands!—of other operating systems.

I can see your viewpoint, but do you not see this feature as having great sex appeal as a marketing hook? It could help Apple tap into several new markets.

besson3c · Jun 20, 2006, 11:11 PM

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

Ya I rather have apple concentrate on improving their own OS rather than helping me use other companies to make up for something.

I bought a Mac to use OSX not to run 50 other OS's.

Well, Apple unfortunately cannot single-handedly fill these gaps themselves. Do you expect them to create apps where the Mac is lacking? What about the gaming market? What about users who are too cheap to buy new Mac licenses for Windows software they already own, and do not want to purchase a Mac as to not negate their software investment?

besson3c · Jun 20, 2006, 11:15 PM

SWG, don't forget that in many cases, as much as Apple might *like* to write software to fill gaps, in many cases they are running up against proprietary software/hardware barriers and *cannot* write software to fulfill this need.

This includes drivers for hardware, specialized custom-designed software, dealing with closed formats, etc.

MindFad · Jun 20, 2006, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

I can see your viewpoint, but do you not see this feature as having great sex appeal as a marketing hook? It could help Apple tap into several new markets.

Sure, and I think that's great for Apple, but this feature, for me, is a minor convenience. I could live without it, in other words. But if you're talking about Apple penetrating markets, sure, that's fine. This feature wouldn't improve my Mac OS experience, though.

Salty · Jun 20, 2006, 11:20 PM

Better not be. Quite frankly I don't really care about that and I don't think a lot of other people with PPC macs are going to care.

euchomai · Jun 20, 2006, 11:41 PM

I'd never use that feature and it doesn't make sense to push that as the "heavily marketed feature". People buy Apple computers to run OS X (or whatever OS we'll be up to). I'd be more interested in my computer not crashing when I try to print through Airport Express.

Salty · Jun 21, 2006, 12:07 AM

Besson sometimes I wonder if you know what people actually like to do with their computers.

The big feature I'd like to see would be sync but I don't think that'l be a huge thing either. That said we didn't really have much of a clue about dashboard or exposé before they came.

©öñFü$íóÑ · Jun 21, 2006, 12:51 AM

how about built-in distributive computing ability that exploits the x86 platform..... especially now that Macs are going to be x86 from now on. If you have 2 or more x86 macs or an x86 Mac and and x86 PC, you can utilize the power of both to complete a large task..... whatever it may be.

Salty · Jun 21, 2006, 01:54 AM

I've been saying Apple should get more into grid computing for a while. That said there aren't that many tasks for the average consumer that would really benefit from this over consumer grade networks. Though I do think this might come eventually.

My guess is that like the last two couple of major ones. It'll be something that is system wide, similar level to spotlight, the dock, explosé etc. My guesses would include updated Safari, Finder and Mail, updated spotlight etc, the dock hopefully will get a much needed update. And I really have no idea how they intend to make a new feature for all of OS X... Our windowing is handled super intuitively now, as is our search. My guess would be something to do with quicker ways to find what you want but I have no idea what that'll be.

Big Mac · Jun 21, 2006, 03:07 AM

Whatever besson's on, it sounds like a strange but pleasant trip.

chris v · Jun 21, 2006, 06:13 AM

I hate Windows. I run Mac OS because I like it lots. If the biggest feature of 10.5 is that it will run Windows, I for one, will not be that excited.

chris v · Jun 21, 2006, 06:16 AM

Originally Posted by ©öñFü$íóÑ

how about built-in distributive computing ability that exploits the x86 platform..... especially now that Macs are going to be x86 from now on. If you have 2 or more x86 macs or an x86 Mac and and x86 PC, you can utilize the power of both to complete a large task..... whatever it may be.

Build Xgrid into the OS, with expanded features that allow it to distribute work for any app? Not sure if that's a practical possibility, but it's an interesting thought.

besson3c · Jun 21, 2006, 06:32 AM

Originally Posted by Salty

Besson sometimes I wonder if you know what people actually like to do with their computers.

The big feature I'd like to see would be sync but I don't think that'l be a huge thing either. That said we didn't really have much of a clue about dashboard or exposé before they came.

Sometimes I wonder if you are so disconnected with mainstream computing culture that you think that the whole world is comprised of Mac geeks that are chomping at the bit for the next version of Stickies.

Effortlessly running Windows apps with little tradeoff would be huge. There is a huge market of people too heavily invested into the Windows world, particularly in business.

besson3c · Jun 21, 2006, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Whatever besson's on, it sounds like a strange but pleasant trip.

Perhaps I was mistaken about the sex appeal of being able to run other operating systems in the OS, but surely you can't see how this would be a huge feature to the rest of the non-Mac world?

The biting sarcasm I can do without. Thanks!

Obi Wan's Ghost · Jun 21, 2006, 06:54 AM

Some resolution independence GUI features

Some Z axis 3D GUI features

GPU accelerated shadows instead of the alpha maps we have now.

Expose with real time reflections. Makes Expose look a little like Front Row

New Finder.

Improved Spotlight.

Improved RSS built in to the OS for getting multimedia stuff from iTMS

greenamp · Jun 21, 2006, 07:58 AM

I think it's pretty much a given that some very polished version of BootCamp will be in Leopard. As for the Windows API thing being integrated into OS X some mention, it's a pipe dream. Not gonna happen.

Person Man · Jun 21, 2006, 08:17 AM

This was overlooked.

From the Wikipedia article besson linked to:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Operating systems must be explicitly modified ("ported") to run on Xen (although compatibility is maintained for user applications).

And also:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

A Windows XP port was carried out during the initial development of Xen, but Microsoft's licensing prevents its public release.

And I don't think Microsoft would allow this.

Whatever virtualization Apple includes, it will not require a specially modified version of ANYTHING.

besson3c · Jun 21, 2006, 08:20 AM

Originally Posted by Person Man

This was overlooked.

From the Wikipedia article besson linked to:

And also:

And I don't think Microsoft would allow this.

Whatever virtualization Apple includes, it will not require a specially modified version of ANYTHING.

Operating systems must be explicitly modified ("ported") to run on Xen (although compatibility is maintained for user applications). This enables Xen to achieve high-performance virtualization without special hardware support.

This is required for paravirtualization without hardware support. Now read the "virtualization" section and check out the supported hardware.

chris v · Jun 21, 2006, 09:56 AM

Wait. Isn't Parallels the shizznit?

Socially Awkward Solo · Jun 21, 2006, 09:57 AM

The mac users I know get more excited over a new release of iLife then the announcement of Bootcamp or Intel chips in Macs.

besson3c · Jun 21, 2006, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by chris v

Wait. Isn't Parallels the shizznit?

I've never used it, but my understanding is that it provides a basic hardware set for guest OSes to run under just like VMWare or x86 Virtual PC.

Gossamer · Jun 21, 2006, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by chris v

Wait. Isn't Parallels the shizznit?

My coworkers use it (I'm still using a G4, I'll get my Intel soon though) and they really love it, and call boot camp stupid and worthless. I think its main weaknesses lie in video support and flaky usb support.

I don't think virtualization is a huge thing for current Mac users, so that's a moot point. It is a big draw for switchers though. Both my roommates are huge Windows fans and have openly mocked me for using a Mac. Now that they can natively run Windows, both of them have said their next computer will be a Mac.

Originally Posted by besson3c

What about the gaming market? What about users who are too cheap to buy new Mac licenses for Windows software they already own, and do not want to purchase a Mac as to not negate their software investment?

Exactly.

Socially Awkward Solo · Jun 21, 2006, 10:32 AM

Games? Apple doesn't give a **** about games judging by peoples reaction to the GMA950.

Big Mac · Jun 21, 2006, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Perhaps I was mistaken about the sex appeal of being able to run other operating systems in the OS, but surely you can't see how this would be a huge feature to the rest of the non-Mac world?

The biting sarcasm I can do without. Thanks!

On the contrary, besson, seamless Windows runtime compatibility would be a disaster for the Mac platform. There would be absolutely no reason for anyone to ever code for OS X again if the majority of the installed base could run Windows apps instead. It's not a difficult concept to understand.

greenamp · Jun 21, 2006, 10:39 AM

I think recent Apple history proves that we never really have any idea at all about what they have up their sleeves.

For instance, It was confirmed by Blizzard about a month ago that they were working with Apple directly on some pretty extensive OpenGL improvements in OS X. So pertaining to the gaming market, I wouldn't put it past SJ to be aiming at actually making OS X a better gaming platform, instead of just admitting defeat and pawning that off to dual booting Windows.

I mean, if the Mac Pros end up being anything near what early reports are indicating CPU wise, it will be a blazing fast gaming machine even under the current OpenGL build in OS X.

( I say all this as more of a response to the gaming market and Macs )

Socially Awkward Solo · Jun 21, 2006, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

On the contrary, besson, seamless Windows runtime compatibility would be a disaster for the Mac platform. There would be absolutely no reason for anyone to ever code for OS X again if the majority of the installed base could run Windows apps instead. It's not a difficult concept to understand.

Exactly. If you can just run a PC game in emulation super easily why bother coding a Mac version.

greenamp · Jun 21, 2006, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by Socially Awkward Solo

Games? Apple doesn't give a **** about games judging by peoples reaction to the GMA950.

Gaming definitely isn't number one priority for Apple, but they do spend quite a bit of time working with Mac gaming vendors, such as Blizzard, whose Mac developer team works with them on a regular basis.

::maroma:: · Jun 21, 2006, 11:03 AM

If that's the most heavily marketed Leopard feature, its going to be a boring launch.

Besides, Leopard is going to need something a lot more exciting to base users in order to compete with the Vista hype. Leopard is going to be one of the most important launches Apple has done since 10.0, simply because they are going to be competing with Vista directly.

besson3c · Jun 21, 2006, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

On the contrary, besson, seamless Windows runtime compatibility would be a disaster for the Mac platform. There would be absolutely no reason for anyone to ever code for OS X again if the majority of the installed base could run Windows apps instead. It's not a difficult concept to understand.

Yes it is, because your logic has some gaps...

1) Users would still have to pay for a Windows license, or somehow obtain a copy of a Windows CD to install

2) You would still have to have the entire Windows OS preloaded, sitting in memory

3) You'd have to manage and troubleshoot two different operating systems, including securing Windows

4) There would have to be no issues relating to integration between the two environments

5) There would be usability issues in adjusting between the two different GUIs

Perhaps you are arguing about the Windows API and/or WINE support?

Please, let's keep this conversation civil as long as possible. I'm trying.

Socially Awkward Solo · Jun 21, 2006, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by ::maroma::

If that's the most heavily marketed Leopard feature, its going to be a boring launch.

Besides, Leopard is going to need something a lot more exciting to base users in order to compete with the Vista hype. Leopard is going to be one of the most important launches Apple has done since 10.0, simply because they are going to be competing with Vista directly.

I agree. virutlization is cool and a nice feature but it isn't a huge seller for most people.

Apple needs something AMAZING and glitzy to make vista look like the ass it is. To me that means killing Aqua and giving OSX a new face. I don't just mean making things from white to black either but using fancy effects like sheets and expose to make computers easier to use.

Eug Wanker · Jun 21, 2006, 11:17 AM

Indeed. I think virtualization is nice and I think it's a definite possibility in 10.5. It's also a possibility I personally want.

However, I'd be very surprised if it would be anywhere close to the most marketed feature, even if 10.5 does get it. Most people just don't give a chit about virtualization.

Landos Mustache · Jun 21, 2006, 11:22 AM

My guess is whatever bootcamp evolves into it will be 3rd on the list of features.

chris v · Jun 21, 2006, 01:19 PM

Let's all pray to G*d that the most heavily marketed feature is the All New, Totally Revamped, Multi-Threaded, FinderDeluxeEditionStudioProExtreme™.

MindFad · Jun 21, 2006, 01:28 PM

^Yes

beb · Jun 21, 2006, 01:30 PM

List-shaded windows...

Landos Mustache · Jun 21, 2006, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by chris v

Let's all pray to G*d that the most heavily marketed feature is the All New, Totally Revamped, Multi-Threaded, FinderDeluxeEditionStudioProExtreme™.

I try to avoid using the finder but when I do I absolutely HATE it. Funning thing is I wasn't a Finder hater from day one, it has just been bothering me more since 10.4. More because bugs from 10.0 are still not fixed in it.

I also watch new users have a really hard time using it.

Rumor · Jun 21, 2006, 05:55 PM

The best feature that Apple could throw into 10.5 is remotely turning on my coffee pot in the morning.

kcmac · Jun 21, 2006, 09:27 PM

I just spent the last 2 days at a College Welcome Session at the University of Missouri with my son. He is going into the Journalism school there and they happen to require Macs as do many of the other majors. It was amazing to hear all of the people talking about having to buy a Mac because hey, you know, as soon as they get out of school all business uses the PC.

Then they find out that they can still do most if not all of the things they do now using OS X, the apps that come preloaded and they start to warm up. Then they hear that you can actually load Windows (if they even realize that there is more than one operating system on the planet) and they jump with no hesitation. And the pricing of the MacBook is very competitive, especially with the free iPod promotion.

I'm also with those that believe when the MacPro comes out with the dual and quad everything, that with Boot Camp or Parallels or whatever else makes the PC thing work, that gamers will give it all a good look.

This board is obviously full of people, like myself that have really no interest at all in operating Windows. But for the same reason that Apple had to develop iTunes and the iPod for the other side, this to is a very important new direction for Apple.

So I give besson some backing here although I think the 100 OS's is a little over the top. But I get the point and think it will be towards the top of the many features Leopard surely will bring.