Half-Life 2 on a Mac? Created 18 years ago2006-04-06 13:14:51 UTC by satchmo

Could this possibly be true in a few years? It's likely...

---

Apple Does Windows in Growth Quest
New software adapts the company's Intel-based computers to the leading operating system.
By Terril Yue Jones
Times Staff Writer

April 6, 2006

For Apple devotees, hell has once again frozen over.

Apple Computer Inc. said Wednesday that it was offering software that will allow dreaded rival Microsoft Corp.'s Windows operating system to run on Mac computers made by Apple that use processors from Intel Corp.

Apple hopes it can entice hordes of Windows users to switch loyalties and raise it beyond its status as a niche player in the U.S. personal computer business, where its market share barely surpasses 4%.

The initiative, which enables an Intel-based Mac to become a full-fledged Windows PC, was welcomed by investors. They sent shares in the Cupertino, Calif., company soaring $6.04, or nearly 10%, in regular trading to $67.21. After hours, the shares edged up an additional 19 cents.

Apple used the slogan "Hell Froze Over" in October 2003, when it introduced versions of its iTunes Music Store and media player software that were compatible with computers running Windows.

Apple has long positioned itself as the populist alternative to Microsoft and Windows-based PCs, which account for more than 80% of the market. The firm put Intel microprocessors into some Macs in January. By the end of this year, all new Apple computers are likely to be powered by Intel chips, which run most Windows PCs.

Apple fans praise the look and feel of its computers and the stability of its OS X operating system. But many applications from independent software firms, such as certain photo management programs and game software, are available only in Windows versions.

Running Windows "potentially could be a significant game changer" for Apple in its competition with Dell Inc., Hewlett-Packard Co. and other makers of Windows-based PCs, said Shaw Wu, who follows Apple for American Technology Research.

But Van Baker, a consumer technology analyst with market researcher Gartner Inc., doubts that the capability will have a dramatic effect. It might, however, encourage Windows users who are on the fence to make the move, he said.

"What it does for Apple is it will remove another barrier to people attracted to the Mac ? to the iLife software suite and to its industrial design ? but who just can't give up one Windows app," Baker said. "It gets them over the hump."

Apple users had mixed reactions to the Windows news.

"Fascinating stuff, it means I'll now never have to buy a PC," said a forum participant at http://www.appleinsider.com .

"Word to the wise: Windows running on a Mac is like Windows running on a PC. That means it'll be subject to the same attacks that plague the Windows world," said another posting, referring to periodic security breaches that bedevil Windows.

Users who install Apple's software, called Boot Camp, won't be able to jump between Windows and OS X at the flip of a switch.

"It's not the most elegant solution because you have to choose which operating system to boot up and can't switch the OS without rebooting the machine," Baker said. "If they had done two virtual machines where you just toggle between Windows and OS X, it would be more appealing."

The move could be slightly positive for Apple's business and a small setback for Microsoft, Goldman Sachs analyst Rick Sherlund said in a note to investors.

"This is another step in Apple's efforts to expand its total addressable market to include a more mainstream audience," Sherlund wrote.

The software to run Windows on Mac computers will be included in the next version of OS X. It can be downloaded now in a beta-testing mode from Apple's main website. Users must burn a disc with the software and install it using a "full-inflation" copy of the Windows operating system, said Brian Croll, director of product marketing for OS X. Such a program costs about $200.

Apple emphasizes that it won't be selling Windows directly or providing customer service for it. Microsoft was not involved in the initiative.

Croll would not say how much the next version of OS X would cost. Apple charged $129 for the last OS X system upgrade, from Panther to the current Tiger.

Macs suck. they are not gaming computers. if you try to game on a Mac you will not succeed. If you DO succeed then you cheated.

yeah, its unlikely that MAC will ever have a leash on the gaming market, they just don't have the knowledge and experience. and im sorry, but like WCD, macs suck imo, wod never buy one!

How are you "cheating" by gaming on a Mac?

WID HAX! 4 RL! ROFL NOOB!

macs are great computers. and this means apple users can partition they're HDDs and run progs or games they coulnt previously.

Their.

macs are great computers.

SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP SLAP!!! YOU WEAK-MINDED FOOL! I HOPE TO GOD YOU WERE BEING SARCASTIC!
AAAAAAAARGH

Their.

Well, I've been somewhat converted to the merits of a Mac based computer, but they're definately not good for gaming.

One time I saw a friend of mine playing Quake 2 on his Mac laptop.... of course thats just Quake 2....

One time I saw a friend of mine playing Quake 2 on his Mac laptop.... of course thats just Quake 2....

Good enough for me... I hate new games! All remind me of Hl1 which wasn't too good.

Macs are good for editing documents or art packages but thats about it!

^Old as time

Macs are horrible to work with! People who get Macs just want to be different. PC's dont suck, so why get a MAC? Id rather not have a computer, then have a MAC!

Errr.... hate to ruin all your dreams but the latest Core-Duo iMacs running Windows, run HL2 perfectly. Macs are technically ahead one-generation in processor capabilities. Since, most companies like Dell are sticking to the old P4's.

What people don't get is that Mac's are PC's when running Windows.
Now people could say "OS X is useless for gaming" and that would be a different argument. Apple's a hardware company, hence the reason that they can't code their own kernel.

Great leave it to Fourthgen to ruin my life!
Did the website just go copmpletely whit efor anyone else?

No, your eyes r bork, as SpaG has already mentioned.

Mmm, the new Mac laptops sound like a tasty option now...

/me ponders

My friend is considering of buying a Mac too, but I can't figure out why.

You can build your own PC system for 1/3 the price, with pretty much the same specs.

Macs look nice, that's for sure, but I don't know about you. I keep my PC tucked away under my desk all the time. When was the last time you sat and stared at your machine for half an hour. I don't mean the screen, I mean the chassis itself.

Computers are for using. If you want to have something nice to look at, buy an expensive piece of painting or sculpture. It's more likely going to look even better than the Mac.

I stared at my computer for about 1 hour when I first built it!

My friend is considering of buying a Mac too, but I can't figure out why.

They never break.

I have owned both Mac and PC and if you were doing something intensive, like photo or movie editing, or doing extraordinary calculations, like high powered derivitives and algorithms, you would want a Mac. If you had 10 people working for you, say, digitally modeling, say "Toy Story", and each person had to wait 20 seconds to load their 2 seconds of realtime movie, just to see how it looked, then change something, and wait 20 seconds again, over and over, it would take a LONG while to make that 2 hr. movie. If a Mac could (and does) do it that same thing with a 5 second load time, your employees would have Macintosh. Period.

Now if you want your employees to surf the internet at lunch or email the latest jokes to the other plebes in the mail room, then a PC's your huckleberry every time!

Honestly, this topic is like the Ford/Chevy argument... who cares what it is as long as it does what you need? It's a tool. How many PC'ers are trying to make their machine like a Mac by installing Linux, eh?

Also, those who are pulling the "omg mac has no games lol!" argument are wrong. If you've looked at the Mac's catalog of PC-ports, these days, it's huge. Most PC games are being ported, too. I was suprised to see Generals and a vareity of other games when I walked into the mac store the other day.

the problem with macs is the upgrading issue - the same reason there aren't many laptop gamers around. you cant upgrade to a better video card etc. alot of gamers like to build their own computer from scratch - you cant do this with a mac.

You can... but why would you need to? Except for the video card, which you can upgrade, Macs come top-of-the-line right out of the box. With a PC, a "builder", like Dell, puts in the minimum requirements for the MOBO... then charges you severe markup to upgrade. With a Mac, if the MOBO holds a max of 2ghz of RAM, then it probably comes with 2ghz of RAM.

How many PC'ers are trying to make their machine like a Mac by installing Linux, eh?

Lots, and they're getting damn close for a lot less dosh. Wins hands down for me. I'll be running NIX on my lappy when I get it.

I've been C/C++ programming for over 30 years on Macs and Intel machines (MS based). For me, on average, development time on a Mac is about one quarter to one half of the time with MS compilers. Error recovery and debugging are definitely better on a Mac, although MS VS is improving.

I'm currently using MS Visual Studio (many USD) only because there's a very small audience for Mac stuff. BTW, Apple's IDE is free with the OS. So, if you're into programming, the difference in cost between a Mac machine and a MS-based machine is pretty much offset by the cost of software. (Yes, MS software is that expensive - stateside, anyway)

Harware upgrading a Mac is definitely a problem, though.

Relevant input indeed. Haven't seen you for a while, either.