OS-X on Windows?

[mattford11]

do they have a mac. emulator like they have virtual PC on Mac OS?

kinda wanted to run mac OS and see what its all about but from my PC

thanks in Advance for help and the bumps!

mf

 

[civad]

I think VMWare might be something you are looking for. In fact, they have a beta program going on right now.

You might want to give it a try. Linky

HTH

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: civad
I think VMWare might be something you are looking for. In fact, they have a beta program going on right now.

You might want to give it a try. Linky

HTH

Civad I didn't quite think that Mac OS X was compatible with i386 architecture.....

 

[minendo]

VMWare is great for multiple OSes, but it is a big RAM hog. We use it at work and to boot in win2k while running winXP requires 256mb RAM.

 

[civad]

originally posted by: wizardLRU
Civad I didn't quite think that Mac OS X was compatible with i386 architecture.....

VMWare is an emulator/virtual machine....

Also, in all probability, you might have to take back your statement in a few years from now...

And how can you forget that M$ Windows series is incompatible with ix86 architecture as well??

 

[Spyro]

VMWare is an emulator/virtual machine....

For x86 hardware.

Also, in all probability, you might have to take back your statement in a few years from now...

I hope so .

 

[Nothinman]

VMWare is an emulator/virtual machine....

But it's not a translator, which would be required to run PPC instructions on x86 CPUs.

 

[civad]

originally posted by:nothinman
But it's not a translator, which would be required to run PPC instructions on x86 CPUs.

I stand corrected. (or whatever else means "I was wrong")

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: civad

originally posted by:nothinman
But it's not a translator, which would be required to run PPC instructions on x86 CPUs.

I stand corrected. (or whatever else means "I was wrong")

That would be I surrender.

 

[civad]

originally posted by: wizardLRU

Originally posted by: civad

Quote
originally posted by:nothinman
But it's not a translator, which would be required to run PPC instructions on x86 CPUs.

I stand corrected. (or whatever else means "I was wrong")

That would be I surrender.

Getting my white flag ready...

 

[GonzoDaGr8]

OS-X on Windows

One can only dream....


But then again, that is why I am saving up my nickels and dimes for. To get another Mac again. No emulation needed there.

 

[Nothinman]

But then again, that is why I am saving up my nickels and dimes for. To get another Mac again. No emulation needed there.

I'd save my money if I were you. Macs are decent but they're still not worth the price, I'd rather just get a really nice dual Athlon box and put Linux on it. You get all the power of unix (like with OS X) but without the high cost and proprietary parts. The only thing you really end up missing is MS Office, but I could care less.

 

[GonzoDaGr8]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

But then again, that is why I am saving up my nickels and dimes for. To get another Mac again. No emulation needed there.

I'd save my money if I were you. Macs are decent but they're still not worth the price, I'd rather just get a really nice dual Athlon box and put Linux on it. You get all the power of unix (like with OS X) but without the high cost and proprietary parts. The only thing you really end up missing is MS Office, but I could care less.

I don't plan getting a new one by any means...Besides I already have 3 AMD/Intel machines running Windows/Linux. Getting another mac would just be another to add to the collection. I like all pc's regardless of the OS or architecture.

 

[vailr]

If you look at a Cebit video (about 13:15 of a 16:58 minute video) mentioned in this thread: Text, MacOS (unknown version) is shown running on an AMD Athlon 2200+ system.

 

[Nothinman]

If you look at a Cebit video (about 13:15 of a 16:58 minute video) mentioned in this thread: Text, MacOS (unknown version) is shown running on an AMD Athlon 2200+ system.

Mac OS has moved between platforms enough that I'm sure portability is important to their developers, having it run on x86 hardware "just in case" is probably a priority. And since everything but the GUI to OS X is open source and can already be installed on (very hardware specific) x86 hardware so why wouldn't you think the GUI would work too?

 

[EeyoreX]

Originally posted by: GonzoDaGr8

OS-X on Windows

One can only dream....

Agreed. And I tend to think, in the near term at least, we will keep dreaming. I seriously doubt Jobs and co. are in any hurry to "port" OS X to run on PCs. I think there is little incentive in their minds (Though I see a big one really, since PC people like me would love to give OS X a spin on their PCs...). If OS X were to be ported to run on "regular" PCs, Apple would have a hard time selling it's hardware at such, IMHO, high prices. I think the iMac is ugly and would never buy one, but I think the OS is beautiful and would love to give it a spin. The only way to do that is to get a Mac of some kind (I dont think any Mac looks all that good to pay the price premium).

Just my 2 cents.

\Dan

 

[Topher]

Look for Basilisk II. It's a mac emulator for x86 pcs. (It's been ported to windows and linux, and probably others). I haven't tried it, but from my understanding (take it with a grain of salt), is that it only works up to mac os 8.something, and will only emulate an 68k processor, not a ppc. Also, you will need a mac rom to run it, and the only legal way to get one of those is by buying a mac in the first place. Sorry I don't have more info than that.