Skip to main content

Parallels plans for OSX on a PC!

I am really beginning to doubt my prediction on VMware grabbing the marketshare on the OSX. Parallels is gaining ground. If it really does host a virtualized OSX on a PC.

However, CNN is reporting that an upcoming version of Parallels could make running OSX on a PC a reality…by accident. Apparently, this feature wasn’t really planned, it was a “consequence of the nature of the technology” especially now that Intel has built virtualization into its chips.

While Steve Jobs will undoubtedly resist the idea of OSX running on non-Mac hardware, CNN points out that there is already huge pressure being placed on the company to break away from its proprietary way of thinking. The bottom line is that Apple is going to have to cooperate at some point - this sort of functionality on a PC is an inevitability. It is only a matter of time before the lines between Mac owners and PC owners will begin to blur.


No matter what Steve thinks here's the reality for the Apple folks.
  • Users are increasingly getting attracted to apple products thanks to the innovation the company is driving
  • Users would love to have iPhone, itunes and all the cool stuff but have to wait and decide on buying Mac Hardware (I'm one of them)
  • Users are desperate of running the cool Leopard on their MAC which would sell like mad so your hardware sales may decline but the OS X and other sales will shoot sky high.
  • A lot of MS, Linux clients will be happy to have a Mac UI
  • We all want change and give us the Mac.

Greene says one reason VMware's Mac product is delayed is that it was so time-consuming to get Apple's cooperation and blessing. "We were trying to do it the way they wanted to, but in hindsight we should have just gone ahead," she says. "I wonder what Steve Jobs is going to do, because there is so much pressure to run Mac OS on non-Macs. There's no technical reason not to do it. He's so proprietary about everything, yet it could be a very strategic move for him to make." Beloussov, for his part, agrees.



Well as you see, Diane and Beloussov agree too!
Original CNN article and the blogger's take as well.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Security: VMware Workstation 6 vulnerability

vulnerable software: VMware Workstation 6.0 for Windows, possible some other VMware products as well type of vulnerability: DoS, potential privilege escalation I found a vulnerability in VMware Workstation 6.0 which allows an unprivileged user in the host OS to crash the system and potentially run arbitrary code with kernel privileges. The issue is in the vmstor-60 driver, which is supposed to mount VMware images within the host OS. When sending the IOCTL code FsSetVoleInformation with subcode FsSetFileInformation with a large buffer and underreporting its size to at max 1024 bytes, it will underrun and potentially execute arbitrary code. Security focus
Post a Comment
Read more

OS Virtualization comparison: Parallels' Virtuozzo vs the rest

Virtuozzo's main differentiators versus hypervisors center on overhead, virtualization flexibility, administration and cost. Virtuozzo requires significantly less overhead than hypervisor solutions, generally in the range of 1% to 5% compared with 7% to 25% for most hypervisors, leaving more of the system available to run user workloads. Customers can also virtualize a wider range of applications using Virtuozzo, including transactional databases, which often suffer from performance problems when used with hypervisors. On the administration side, customers need to manage, maintain and secure just a single OS instance, while the hypervisor model requires customers to manage many OS instances. Of course, the hypervisor vendors have worked hard to automate much of this process, but it still requires more effort to manage and maintain multiple operating systems than a single instance. Finally, OS virtualization with Virtuozzo has a lower list price than the leading hypervisor for comme...
Post a Comment
Read more