Vista Virtualized through OSX to make it more secure and more

[alfredo]

stable. So says Robert X Cringley

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20060413.html


The version of Boot Camp that will ship with OS X 10.5 will likely be very different from the version people are playing with today. The actual shipping version, I predict, will have full OS virtualization so that both operating systems can run side-by-side and a user can cut and paste data from one to the other. Apple may have already developed this capability, or maybe they'll license or buy it from outside. Parallel Workstation 2.1 sure looks nice from Parallels, Inc. Maybe Apple should buy the whole company.

If Apple's intent is to do virtualization, then why bother with this dual boot version of Boot Camp? My best guess is to throw off Microsoft until it is too late. Not that I think Microsoft will even care as long as they get their money, but Apple can be sneaky this way.

So Apple will at least offer the option for users to run a virtualized version of Windows Vista atop OS X, which brings with it two HUGE advantages. First, the bad guys and script kiddies will have to get through OS X security before they even have a chance at cracking Vista security. Second, by running a virtual version of Windows Vista loaded from a read-only partition, Microsoft's recommended method of dealing with malware (periodically wipe the OS and application from your disk and load them anew) can be done in seconds instead of hours and can be done daily instead of monthly or quarterly or yearly.

By running Windows Vista this way, Apple can offer the most secure version of Vista available with the lowest Total Cost of Ownership, which could lead to a leadership change in business computing. Down with Dell and HP and up with Apple.


---

I was thinking that boot camp was a proof of concept, a test to see if it (windows) worked in the real world. It is a beta and it has caused some problems, so I wouldn't install it unless you know what you are doing and have your OSX fully backed up. It appears that Cringley sees OSX serving the same purpose as DOS as far as being used to fix problems with the Windows OS.

I have also learned that they now have Macs triple booting. http://wiki.onmac.net/index.php/Triple_Boot_via_BootCamp

[Atman]

1. MACS SUCK!

Oh, wait...I have five of them. Never mind.

;)

[ChairmanAgnostic]

12. nyah nyah.

I only have four at the moment.

[wakeme2008]

2. Intel Mac Suck

PowerPC only for me....

[alfredo]

5. Rev A always suck. Wait for the B or C models.

It sure has been fun watching how Steve Jobs plays this game. Even if I wasn't a Mac user or even a computer user, it would be fun watching the strategy unfold.

[onehandle]

7. Yeah. It's always a B or C for me. nt

[alfredo]

27. I guess it is all about being an Alpha male not wanting other

A's around.


Actually, the A might be rock solid, but the B or C will have more goodies that were not included in that first model.

[onehandle]

28. Yup.

Like I said in another post, I have the last 17" G4 PowerBook.

Rock solid plus a hi-res screen.

[alfredo]

37. someday when OSX PPC is not supported (many years on),

you will be able to run Linux or UNIX on that machine.

I have an old iMac running Linux right now. It is on extended loan to a friend. As yet he has had to call for assistance.

[Atman]

6. Yeah, for now, I guess

Personally, I'm not jonesin' to get an Intel Mac anytime soon. Apple started advertising them as 3X faster than their PPC, now they seem to have backed of to claiming only 2X faster...but that's really on their own software. I've heard nothing good from anybody who has the new Intel Macs, and since none of the graphics software I have is optimized for the Intel yet, I'd be foolish to even consider one. I bought my 20" G5 iMac about a month before Apple introed the Intel one, and at first was bummed. Now I'm very glad I didn't get stuck with one of them!

[wakeme2008]

34. Right and I have $2,000 worth of PowerPC Software

that I do not want to buy again just to upgrade to a Intel machine.

[alfredo]

39. Photoshop will stay on this machine. I can hardly afford the cost

of CS at this time. I will be lucky to afford a new Intel Mac.

[onehandle]

3. My PowerBook Sucks!

Kidding. I love my Mac. The last 17' G4 PowerBook, only 4 months old.

I can wait a while for an Intel. Need Photoshop to become native first.

[LiberalPartisan]

4. Business runs on Windows

You and I will be dust before that ever changes. The billions of dollars already invested in Windows based operating systems precludes any sort of mass migration in the foreseeable future. Furthermore, Vista is based on the Windows Server 2003 kernal which has the following advantages over previous Windows operating systems: it's rock solid and very secure. Vista simply will add to that. Don't forget the price advantatage every PC manufacturer has over Apple's artifically high pricing scheme.

[Atman]

8. Did you read the initial post?

Windows is just an OS. If Windows can run on a Mac, with the security of OSX protecting it, why would the MIS department care about the hardward? (Other than the cost, of course...you'll always be able to cludge together a $300 PC from cheap parts at the computer store, but businesses generally go with HPs and Dells anyway, which just aren't any cheaper than Macs when configured the same).

ON EDIT: I forgot to add...Just WHEN is VISTA due for release? 2012? LOL! Why do people continue to fall for this shit from MS? They're as predictable as the sunrise...Apple announces their next new thing, and MS comes out with a press release saying they'll be releasing a new version of Windows -- which is always about two years away, and only just catches up with what Apple has had out for a year. They do this just to keep MIS managers from considering switching. Why bother, if their tried and true POS Windows will have all that cool OSX stuff anyway...even if MS can't actually stick to an honest release date?

[alfredo]

9. From what Cringley is saying OSX could serve the same purpose as

DOS did for early versions of Windows. It will provide a way to clean up any Malware, and to reinstall Vista quickly if needed. OSX will also provide some very good multimedia tools businesses could use over what is provided by Windows. Running OSX and Windows at the same time gives the user more access to a wider range of tools.

[LiberalPartisan]

38. Except now you're paying for 2 OS per machine

The cost would be unjustifible to the consumer since every instance of Windows and every instance of Mac requires a separate license. For the enterprise it's the same plus an enterprise has to standardize on applications and operating systems accross the organization. What could possibly compel an organization to shell out for two operating systems per machine?

I'm sorry but the entire argument is conjecture and theory. Sure, it can be done but why would a business bother?

[alfredo]

45. On the Mac, the OS is there to add value to the hardware.

It is the loss leader. It is what "gets you in the door."

On edit: Never forget, Apple is a hardware company.

[Atman]

46. It's ironic that "a hardware co" make an OS so much better than Microsoft

Who is 100% a software company.

[alfredo]

50. The corporate culture is completely different. One demands their

product to be "insanely great", the other is content with "good enough." As far as the bottom line is concerned, it works for both. Apple can't sell "Mercedes" hardware with a Yugo OS. The OS has to be enticement for their hardware. MS just has to have a product that works well enough to keep the class action lawsuits to a minimum.

Remember, Apple is like the big drug companies. What is on the shelf is not as important as what is in the pipeline. They live and die through innovation. MS's products don't need to create a buzz, Apple has to or it dies. They are in a more precarious situation than MS because of their model. MS has to keep from failing, Apple has to succeed.

[LiberalPartisan]

51. One point you overlook

Apple is entirely consumer oriented whereas MS is consumer oriented and embedded in the enterprise. MS creates more than just Windows OS. They have the best enterprise DB on the market (SQL Server 2005, sorry Oracle fans, and MySQL isn't even in the game), the best enterprise integration application platform in BizTalk server and numerous other highly inovative solutions and relevant products which solve real life business problems. I appreciate your passion for Apple, but only to the point that it clouds your perspective. As for your opinion of the MS corporate culture, you obviously don't have any idea there.

[alfredo]

53. I'm just saying that innovation is not as important to MS as

far as survival in the market. The expectations for each company are different. MS software has to just work, Apple software has to be elegant. That is what is expected. All businesses have to operate within what their customers expect. Look at Ford and Toyota. Both make excellent products, but you expect something different from these companies.

[Atman]

54. MS doesn't innovate. It acquires.

MS has never invented anything in its sorry existence. Everything it sells it simply purchased outright. Or stole.

[alfredo]

55. If you look at their patents, they have innovated. It's just not

essential to be the innovators as it is with Apple. Apple has bought a lot of its technology.

[BlooInBloo]

10. Mac people are sooo bass-ackwards...

... They keep trumpeting the windows-on-mac stuff AS IF IT'S A VICTORY FOR MAC.

IT ISN'T

:rofl:

You guys don't even know what losing is.

It's like if people bought cars, and lopped a wheel off to make a tricycle. And then the car people say "see? I told you cars were better! You can even make a tricycle out of it"

lol - ok, not the best possible example, but you get the idea.....

[stepnw1f]

13. Mac People?

Ok Mr./Mrs. PC.... they pay you too?

[BlooInBloo]

14. Nope. :)

It does amaze me tho, that Mac people confuse defeat for victory.

[stepnw1f]

18. Mac People?

What's a Mac person? What defeat? What the hell are you talking about?

[Atman]

21. Yeah, they're the one's with the smiling faces!

You know, the icon.

This seems to be a "victory" for people who use computers. Now you have an even wider array of choices. You can continue to buy a cheap homemede PC that runs Windows BS, or you can buy any number of Mac solutions that will run ANYTHING. From relatively inexpensive Minis, to top of the line dual-processor tower Macs. Few will argue (except real die-hard PC fans) that Apple hardware is the standard in industrial design. But as always, no one is forcing you to use anything. If you like a cheap homemade box running Windows, go for it. I wouldn't trade my 20" G5 iMac for any PC on earth.

[stepnw1f]

23. I Have Used Macs for a While Now

And I LOVE Em. They do every PC's do and more. I use a PC at work and can't stand the machine nor the operating system. It's clunky and has too many bugs.

I just don't get why PC users are so damn set at bashing Macs. Even their arguments are bull...

Use your PC's or whatever, just leave us Mac users alone for Christ sake. Even at work I get this shit about the types of people who use Macs, and how snobby we are, and how we are stupid for this and that. Jesus... fuck off already.

Macs are better. That's why I own one.

[Swamp Rat]

25. So are "Mac People"

We are better. :D Nah nah nah nah naaah naaaahh!

[onehandle]

16. The Mac base which has grown with the iPod can only grow more now.

All I care about is keeping the Superior Mac Hardware and Superior Mac OS out there for me.

And not supporting Red companies like Dell.

[cureautismnow]

19. Mac hardware users can now run MORE software than Windoze users

Yes, it is a victory. :)

[chicofaraby]

32. It's great that you have an opinion.

But I'm not so sure why your opinion of my computer is relevant.

If you don't like Macs, don't use them.

[LiberalPartisan]

41. Is OS-X really bullet proof?

The data is clear, and Apple has a lot more vulnerabilities of every kind ranging from moderately critical to extremely critical. While Windows had some months with more security disclosures, they are more spread out while Apple tends to release mega-advisories with dozens of vulnerabilities at a time.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=165

[chicofaraby]

43. All I have is 18 years of Mac use, no "real data" but....

I've never even seen a virus.

[Poiuyt]

47. ZDNet is extremely anti-Mac

It's like asking Fox News's opinion of Hillary Clinton

[alfredo]

58. You don't run as root on the Mac.

That one unpatched exploit was fixed quickly. That is not reflected in the chart. I believe it was a Safari or Quicktime exploit and was easy to fix. Developers had fixes the same day, then an official patch came a short time later. I'd rather they are found before some Eastern European script kiddie makes a few hundred machines his bitch.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

11. Cringely was one of the original employees of Apple, he left before

they all got rich though.

Consider that he may not be totally unbiased in his technology world writings...

Also, consider THIS:

The actual shipping version, I predict, will have full OS virtualization so that both operating systems can run side-by-side and a user can cut and paste data from one to the other. Apple may have already developed this capability,

What you have posted in your thread title as established FACT is speculation by Cringely.

Having said all that, read Cringely's book "Accidental Empires" about the birth of the modern PC and Web world, excellent and very well written and entertaining at the same time.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0887308554/qid=1145121889/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/002-9316151-6706427?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

[onehandle]

15. A third party has already developed this.

In Beta. About to ship.

http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/

Not to mention Virtual PC which I have had on my Macs for Years.

[alfredo]

36. The Intel chip has virtualization capabilities. I linked to

an article about triple booting, OSX, Windows, Linux. Parallels already does what Cringley mentions.


BTW, early Power Macs could run both Mac OS and Windows through software virtualization. They also had a version with two chips, one PPC, and one Intel.

At one time it was seen that MS was the target, but while everyone was watching that fight, it was Dell and HP that was the target.

It isn't just OSX the businesses will be able to run, but they can also run a wide range of UNIX programs natively in OSX.

That will cut costs because many of those powerful tools and applications are free. Scribus for DTP, Inkscape for SVG, MuCommander* (Norton Commander) for the IT guy in the basement, and a wide array of other UNIX applications will be available to the small businessman.

It is about presenting the business and home user more choices.

*Yes it does run on Windows http://www.mucommander.com/

[htuttle]

17. I got an IntelMac laptop for work, and have been dual booting it...

...with the Boot Camp beta the last couple weeks.

The only problem I've noticed at all is that Windows XP only seems to want to wake from sleep once, ie., the first time you put it to sleep and wake it again after you boot. The second time you put it to sleep -- it don't want to wake up.

To be honest, though, I'm not even sure you can put Windows to sleep like OSX. I'm not a Windows guy -- mostly OSX and Linux for me (and Solaris long ago). I saw a 'hibernate' function, but that seemed to be a cross between sleeping and being shut down (with RAM stored on disk). Don't know if it's me, or Windows, or some firmware funkiness that still needs to be straightened out.

Also, the trackpad was kind of jerky from time to time before I applied the recent firmware update for IntelMacs. Now it's fine.

Other than that, it's the fastest computer I've ever used. I got a dual-core 2Ghz with a gig of ram. I keep thinking my software builds are failing because they finish so quickly.

I do ALL my internet access through OSX, however. :)

[Feron]

49. Regarding the sleep problem in Windows..

look in the power settings and deselect turning off the harddrives. That caused the same problem for me.

[stepnw1f]

20. Hey Everyone...

we are Mac people. It is important we know this... a "PC" person says we are Mac people so we should distinguish our selves as Apples.

What's with the PC users always trying to jump on people that use Macs. What's the deal with that seriously. What are they afraid of?

[BlooInBloo]

22. Yah - mac people NEVER do that to PC people....

Buncha holier-than-thou putzes they be.

[stepnw1f]

24. Go lay with your PC

she's calling you now. And get over yourself, you act like computer preferrences are a religion. Weird... get lost with the insults too and try getting a job with Microsoft, they are always looking for more goose steppers.

[BlooInBloo]

26. Rofl! Mac people not so bright either.....

In this case, they can't tell the difference between being anti-mac and pro-MS.

They aren't the same, tho apparently mac folks are too dim to tell the difference.

That along with the fact that they can't understand that MORE windows means mac is losing. A user base that knows ONLY how to use windows does NOT help mac's cause. But they are so dim and so narrow of thought that they take this for victory and confirmation. Fools.

[stepnw1f]

30. You Just Keep Up the Good Work

and remember. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

[Atman]

31. A significant number of people will not use OSX yet because of $$$

They have fortunes invested in 27 versions of the same programs. But if given the option and they actually purchase a new Mac, you can bet your last dollar that it will boot into OSX. That is Apple's gambit. Many, many users, I'd bet, will start up their new Macs thinking they'll use it only for Windows, but after using OSX even long enough to get to Windows, they'll start going "hmmmmm."

I was in hysterics over the winter when a friend took all of our digital cameras and promised us a slide show of the day's snowboarding/skiing pics. He sat with his WinTel laptop and started fudging -- and fiddling and cussing and clicking and, yet, was still thrilled with himself when, 45 minutes later, he was able to start up a slide show for us. Have you ever used a digital camera with a Mac? Plug it it. No drivers, no nothing, just plug it in. Within 5 seconds, you'll have the iPhoto window which requires you to do only one thing before proceeding -- decide whether or not you want to erase your camera's memory after importing the pics. CLICK. You have the option of naming the roll of film and adding keywords if you want. Other than than, bing, it's done. Then click "Slide show." I couldn't help but chuckling, and, being the only Mac user in the group, drew comments about why I was just sitting there with an incredulous look on my face.

Point being, again, is that Apple's bet will be you'll buy a Mac to use your Windows, but you'll be using OSX after spending ten minutes with your new machine. Windows PC's make the simplest tasks take ten times longer than with OSX. And I'm not talking out of my ass...I have Windows XP on my Mac, both Virtual PC and native over the network from a PC my son uses to test code he writes. I just don't understand the appeal of Windows in any way shape or form. It is about as convoluted and poorly designed as anything I've ever used. It never ceases to amaze me that MS has any market share at all, until I remember that it gained most of it through dubious business practices.

[Tactical Progressive]

35. Dubious, that's kind

Felonious is more accurate.

[Elwood P Dowd]

44. Blew away a visiting relative who owns a Dell

He had his digital camera with some pics on it. Took him forever to get the thing working properly on his mother's Winblows PC. When he came to my place, I just plugged it in to the Mac, iPhoto opened up, and we were importing pictures in a few seconds. No driver downloading, no software installation, no fiddling or adjustments, just plug his camera in and go.

He played with some other programs on the Mac and left amazed. He is buying a Mini to use with the Dell monitor and keyboard. The Dell processor is going to eBayland.

[Mika]

56. iPhoto sucks!

You can do a quick slide show easier than using iPhoto.

Just download all new photos into a unique folder, then select all photos and double click on one. Preview launches.. then select Slideshow (in the View menu) or Shift/Open Apple + F. Done.

[Atman]

57. Yes, you're right, there are other ways to do slide shows.

But that doesn't mean iPhoto sucks. It simply means there are also other ways of setting up a slide show. I'm not sure what is "sucky" about using iPhoto for a slide show, though. And Preview isn't going to dl or catalogue your pictures.

Personally, for slide shows I actually prefer Graphic Converter to either Preview (which does NOTHING but preview) or iPhoto for slide shows, but only because I was using it long before iPhoto was even a glimmer in Stevie's eye. However, if you think in terms of total noob-ness, iPhoto offers new Mac users everything they need, including basic retouching features, cataloging, printing contact sheets and cards, pretty much everything, in one package. You can even order prints (do people really do that?) and make hardcover books directly from the program.

Again, seems to be more a matter of preference and need than "suckiness." Saying Preview is better than iPhoto is like saying cream is better than rocky road ice cream. Cream is an integral part of the rocky road, but the rocky road has all the extra goodies that make it a dessert.

[alfredo]

42. The Anti MS rhetoric has been great cover for Apples real intent,

That being taking away market share from Dell and HP. Apple hardware will have all the great plug and play capabilities, access to UNIX tools, and the ability to run OSX and Windows side by side.
And on top of that you will have access to Perl, Python, Xcode, gcc, Applescript and other free, powerful development tools that come standard with OSX. With a bit of downloading you can run the development tools from KDE, and Gnome in the X11 environment that comes with OSX.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/xcode/


BTW, you will love file vault. http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/filevault/

At home and away, keep your valuable documents safe with powerful AES-128 encryption.
FileVault automatically encrypts and decrypts the contents of your home directory on the fly.

Your wife will never find those naught B&D images on your drive.

[The Revolution]

29. VMware anyone?

Maybe I'm missing something, but how is this different from what VMware already does?

[LiberalPartisan]

40. Virtualization is now built in to the hardware n/t

[Clarkie1]

33. I am so glad I went with Apple a year ago when I got my first laptop.

The wireless ibook has worked out great...I like it much better than windows!

[Greyhound]

48. ...and several versions of UNIX blow them both away, so what?

and I've yet to find any OS that compares to the old altair OS. isn't there a computer geek forum here?

[alfredo]

52. Yes there is. One for is for open source software.

There's also one for web development and for Macs.

there is one for general computer questions too. I forgot to add that before posting.

[alfredo]

59. Solaris on the iMac This is getting out of hand.

http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/setje?entry=solaris_on_the_imac

We now have Solaris Nevada build 36 installed and running on a bootcamp equipped iMac.

The most significant hurdles were conquered when Juergen Keil enabled both multiboot and GRUB to work in a i8042 free system. That work is covered by 6412224 and 6412226.

The next hurdle is that the Solaris fdisk doesn't interact all that well with the bootcamp prepared disk. This is 6413235. The reason this becomes a hurdle is that install re-writes the fdisk table even when we can simply use the existing one. That is 6413240.

This is all using the bootcamp bits which make the Macs look like just another (BIOS bugs and all) x86 system. Bringing Solaris up in native (EFI) mode is still the real challenge.