Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Rumor: Windows Apps Running Native on Your Mac

<< < (2/3) > >>

f0dder:
So are these Leopard loaders a sign that Apple is working on a way to run Windows apps within OS X? Possibly, though if they ran natively, without proper sandboxing, OS X could end up vulnerable to Windows viruses and malware, something Apple obviously wants to avoid.
--- End quote ---
Introduced in Leopard however is exactly such a sandboxing technology used for certain processes. That said the news is not even a rumor really.
-justice (December 04, 2007, 07:10 AM)
--- End quote ---

"could end up vulnerable to Windows viruses and malware" - nah. That line shows the author doesn't really have a clue about how malware works :)

Ralf Maximus:
How easy would a straight port of WINE be?

Eóin:
Well WINE seems to work on FreeBSD and NetBSD so I can't imagine a port would be infeasible. A quick check turned up the Darwine sf.net project but not sure how active it is.

nontroppo:
According to some far-out theorising, there are claims that Apple already has a fully licenced XP API (something to do with their 5 year cross-licencing deal initiated in 1997), rumours furthering that people have seen this mythical beast already running in Cupertino:

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20060420_000893.html


More smoke'n'mirrors here (better comments at least than Wired): http://origin.arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/11/30/uncovered-evidence-that-mac-os-x-could-run-windows-apps-soon

r.e. Darwine - it works well apparently. Also there is a commercial spinoff which guarantee's compatibility with a subset of Win apps, which is pretty popular: http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxmac/

f0dder:
I only had a quick glimpse at the pbs.org article, but it seemed pretty bull... a statement like "Speed. Quite simply, a monolithic kernel like the one used in Linux or most of the other Open Source Unix clones is inherently two to three times faster for integer calculations than the Mach microkernel presently used in OS X 10.4." is so utterly crappy, as kernel design has nothing to do with raw computing speed, but only things like how kernel calls are handled.

As for "rumours furthering that people have seen this mythical beast already running in Cupertino", perhaps somebody confused parallels with the real deal :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page