Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Linux or Mac: Which is the better alternative to Windows?

<< < (4/6) > >>

jgpaiva:
@urlwolf: Not quite. From what i understand, parallels allows you to run a windows program natively on OSX, on the same desktop. That's a major difference from a virtual machine, which isn't nearly as practical.

Here's a similar example with windows and linux. Too bad i wasn't able to configure it decently :(

f0dder:
jgpaiva: parallels is still a virtual machine (but like vmware, it tries executing as much code as it can 'directly', although still in a virtualized environment). That it can run apps so that they look like they're running natively doesn't mean that they are :)

Darwin:
My understanding is that Parallels allows you to run both Windows (and any windows apps under it) from within an OSX session and, as nontroppo reports above, move data between OSX and Windows apps.

jgpaiva:
:) sorry f0dder, probably "natively" shouldn't be in my post.
What i meant was what darwin said in his post. thanks

nontroppo:
Well, in the sense that Intel's VT technology allows the VM to run natively (no processor emulation and the like) it is partly native. but the reality is that it is a seperate VM and there is some overhead running that way (some 5% of one processor (2.5% overall) for me on average). In real terms Windows feels 'native' fast, and mixing windows and OSX windows together makes it ergonomically native (windows apps appear in the Dock, Mac apps in the Start menu too).

r.e. Freedom: As we've seen with HD DRM, the OS is becoming secondary to the principal battle run by Entertainment Industry Lawyers. If Linux and OS X users will want to watch HD DVDs, they will have to close / secure the data just as Microsoft have been so zealous to do, or just pirate it... I have serious reservations about how zealous Apple will be to drop their pants as Microsoft have done with Vista's DRM.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page