Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
#14593 04/06/06 08:41 AM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 5
Very Senior Member
Online Content
Very Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 5
I don't see this as anything but trouble. There is now a very big new disincentive for developers considering releasing a product for OS X. Why bother when the Mac users can boot Windows, anyway?

#14594 04/06/06 09:08 AM
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 141
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 141
uh, last time I checked XP doesn't have a force quit that works as well as the Mac force quit.

#14595 04/06/06 09:08 AM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 497
MacMAME Author
Offline
MacMAME Author
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally posted by Vas Crabb:
I don't see this as anything but trouble. There is now a very big new disincentive for developers considering releasing a product for OS X. Why bother when the Mac users can boot Windows, anyway?
Well, it's trouble for a certain subset, sure. But I don't think it's trouble in general. OSX definitely has "buzz" going for it right now among the geek crowd. There are a lot of "Mac curious" developers out there who are starting to look at Mac development because of this. If you've got one or two major apps at your company, I think it'll provide you with a strong temptation to do a Mac version as an experiment and see how it goes. As the Mac marketshare cilmbs (and it seems that this is fairly certain now), the clamor for Mac-native software will only grow.

#14596 04/06/06 09:30 AM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 177
J
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
J
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 177
Vas, I don't see it as a development problem. I agree with Brad. VPC already "does" put Windows on Mac for weird things (as does the super cheap price of Windows machines. For $400-500 today, you can just have a Windows box to set next to your $1,500 mac which you would have paid $180 for VPC on...) Windows simply is too expensive to buy in a separate license off the shelf for most people.

So, while us geeks will be installing dual boots ASAP, the general public won't be. I work with them. They're scared to jump to Mac because they'll leave Windows behind. But all anyone I know who's non-geeky actually does on their computer is 1. Internet 2. mp3's 3. Photos and 4. Games. (Oh, and maybe 5 quicken.) Mac has all of that already in the basic bundle. People will start using MacOSX who buy it for a Windows compatible comfort machine, and won't even both to install windows. They'll transfer over their mp3's and photos and be done. (Trust me, I've seen how the people I work with "upgrade" their windows machines...)

The gamers will switch to Windows to play commercial games, and that will be about it. Brad's niche aside, most gamers seem to be going the console route anyway, and that market's fragmented all to hell itself. As games become more and more studio productions, I think Brad's blog predictions being true.

Anyway, when the "installed base" numbers for MacOSX hit 10% or 15% (Yeah, I'm still an AAPL dreamer somewhere in the back of my brain, crappy video board iBook and all!), developers won't cough and sputter anymore...

Jon

#14597 04/06/06 01:13 PM
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 804
S
smf Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
S
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 804
Quote:
Originally posted by jonceramame:
But all anyone I know who's non-geeky actually does on their computer is 1. Internet 2. mp3's 3. Photos and 4. Games. (Oh, and maybe 5 quicken.) Mac has all of that already in the basic bundle. People will start using MacOSX who buy it for a Windows compatible comfort machine, and won't even both to install windows. They'll transfer over their mp3's and photos and be done. (Trust me, I've seen how the people I work with "upgrade" their windows machines...)
But are those the users that would buy brad's games anyway? I had OS/2 v2 & DOS/Win3.1. I switched the Win 3.1 to Win 95 beta, I don't think OS/2 survived the reformat to install Win 95 final.

It's going to be applications that keep the users in MacOS X. They are going to have to be cost effective and have the features the users need & you can't rely on them waiting for too long. Once people get used to booting into one OS it's hard to get them to switch. I killed OS/2 because I pretty had no reason to wait for it to boot up anymore.

It doesn't necessarily hurt apple in the short term, they get alot of money for someone to run windows. This could easily hurt the developer community. I guess they decided to support it in the end because end users were hacking it anyway.

smf

#14598 04/06/06 01:44 PM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 497
MacMAME Author
Offline
MacMAME Author
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally posted by smf:
Quote:
Originally posted by jonceramame:
[b]But all anyone I know who's non-geeky actually does on their computer is 1. Internet 2. mp3's 3. Photos and 4. Games. (Oh, and maybe 5 quicken.) Mac has all of that already in the basic bundle. People will start using MacOSX who buy it for a Windows compatible comfort machine, and won't even both to install windows. They'll transfer over their mp3's and photos and be done. (Trust me, I've seen how the people I work with "upgrade" their windows machines...)
But are those the users that would buy brad's games anyway?[/b]
If you're a 12 year old kid whose friends live and breathe CounterStrike and your parents have an Intel Mac, how long do you suppose it would be before that Mac is dual-booting to shut the kid up? Never underestimate the power of a spoiled brat. wink

#14599 04/06/06 01:50 PM
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 74
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 74
*rofl* Sorry, I just had to post this.

Has anyone read the Tech. Info. Library Article?

"Important: Apple does not provide technical phone support for ... Windows XP."

Yes, I know ... that's not exactly how it reads, but I just couldn't resist using the ellipsis!

In all seriousness, I do have a question. Is this really installable without erasing or formatting the drive? Or, does the drive need to be erased or formatted to create the Windows XP partition? I've always thought that to create a partition, it has to be done after formatting the disk.

In advance, thank you.

#14600 04/06/06 01:53 PM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 5
Very Senior Member
Online Content
Very Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 5
You can shrink the HFS+ partition without re-formatting.

#14601 04/06/06 06:13 PM
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 463
Likes: 1
M
Senior Member
Online Content
Senior Member
M
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 463
Likes: 1
Okay... Silly question... Is there an easy way to transfer documents between enviroments?


The following statement is true...
The preceding statement is false.
#14602 04/06/06 06:27 PM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 5
Very Senior Member
Online Content
Very Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 5
Make the XP partition smaller than 32GB and format it as FAT32. Then OS X will be able to read and write to it. If you use NTFS, OS X can read but not write to it.

Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
1 members (MAMEBase), 65 guests, and 3 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
Forum Statistics
Forums9
Topics8,879
Posts116,775
Members4,958
Most Online890
Jan 17th, 2020
Forum Host
These forums are hosted by www.retrogamesformac.com
Forum hosted by www.retrogamesformac.com