if you put it in context with the fact that Avi Tevanian just left Apple (Avi being the man responsible for the Mach microkernel), there's a ring of serious potential to the whole thing.

With Steve, it's impossible to say that something won't happen because it doesn't make sense (to us)... after all, who would have taken the bet three years ago that Macs would be running Intel CPUs in 2006?

I don't even want to run Windows apps on Windows.

Mach may be slow for certain tasks, but certainly not for "integer calculations". That's absolutely ridiculous.

And WINE IS an implementation of the Windows APIs, so saying that Microsoft can break WINE at will but cannot break the Apple-implemented Windows APIs is total bullshit.

If Apple employs this, all of their developers will stop writing software for OSX. Why bother.

Remember OS/2, it natively executed windows programs so well that nobody wrote software for it.

This move is not a rumor will kill OSX and maybe even Macs. We pay a premium for a superior design and operating system. Why pay more money just to run windows (since vendors will stop writing software for OSX).

In a properly ordered society, we wouldn't let people who don't know an operating system kernel from an electric coffee grinder make public statements like this. But unfortunately we don't have a properly ordered society, and that's why we allow 'analysts' to prosper.

We have always had people like this in our society. Just in olden times they used to wear hats with bells on and carry sticks.

Its called DarWINE. Get used to it. WOOO HOOO!

There's nothing wrong in letting Windows apps run on osX, it won't be 100% compatible. Mallware won't get the rights and opportunity to install DLL's etc, it will just be much easier to program for Mac while keeping the security at its max. I don't think that exe's will run in osX, its just a extra help for the developers to bring software to the Mac.

it sounds....

There is a small project called ReactOS. It's pretty much an Open Source Implementation of Windows. They are applying the same prinicles that Linux was built on for the Windows Community. They are a very ambitious little group and are in the process of Auditing their code as we speak to Secure their future. They hope to evolve their OS pass it's roots much like Linux did from Unix. It also is a great showcase for just how powerful and flexible the Wine API is. Check them out.

ReactOS is a very young group so don't expect miracles but it is already usable. If they succeed then they will have proved the Point in this discussion - it is possible to build another OS that is not a MS clone that runs Windows Apps/drivers/etc....

I think they will be releasing .3 shortly. (told you it was a young project). Lots of advantages that could come from this. The fine tuning of XP and eventually impoving on it. Possibility of a XP 64 port in the future. It's free and Open Source. All source code will be freely available. (Europe should be happy with that) Finally, if they succeed, we will have a true competitor to Windows. Check out the website just type ReactOS in google and you should be able to get there. Some of their cool ambitious goals yet- The possibility of porting to other chipsets (PowerPC was mentioned). One of my favorite of their Lofty goals is to get their OS to accept other filesystems Natively Like Reiserfs, XFS, EXT3. Can you Imagine that Windows on Reiser. Thought I share this little tidbit with you. Just one of those things that make you go Hmmmm.........

OS/2 ran windows apps natively, and as a result OS/2 application development stopped.

and If Apples business strategy is to go after Dell (long term target, MS) and capture a huge marketshare.. then it makes total sense. From a hardware standpoint, Apple wins vs Dell.

And not many people use Windows for the 'lovely' OS. They use it cause that's what the Apps run on.

IT managers are fed up with MS prices and faulty software and Apple will gain in corporate markets.

Gamers never consider a Mac cause they dont want to play Warcraft. I hear that XP runs faster on Intel iMacs then Dells. Imagine the Intel Tower. Will probably blow it away.

Home users fed up with Virus c*** or reinstalling windows every 9 months. (I can install MS Money - insert other Windowws favories here - on a Mac)

Also.. the really big thing. No one needs to repurchase any software. That is a HUGE bonus for Apple. (Not sure what Vista will do, but I'm assuming that XP apps will be around for a while)

Apple will be able to gain marketshare, which will give OS X tons more exposure.

IF it's true, this is an attck. Apple is cutting MS's legs from underneath him. They 'Steal' all developers software.

I cant speak on what will happen with development.. They could be casualties of war. Just because Apple has a reputation for being 'user-friendly', they are still a large corporation. Large corporations cant always be 'user-friendly'

Add in a few slip ups by Microsoft's Vista..

yeah.. buy stock. lots and lots of stock. :)

It's one thing to reboot if you want to spend a couple of hours playing a Windows game but I use a bunch of vendor-specific equipment selection software on my Dells at work. I would love to switch to Macs but if it requires a reboot to do a selection for someone, I would be rebooting, honestly, 20 times a day. If I can't run the OSs in parallel, I'm stuck with Windows at the office.

"This move is not a rumor will kill OSX and maybe even Macs."

It's not even a rumor. It's random, groundless speculation.

Cringley always have bold speculations. But given his background, his gut always up to something that's not too far from the truth. The only thing will render his speculations to fall short are the final decision making of these companies who may change their mind.

The bold steps Apple's been taking give me a feeling that Cringley is not too far from the truth. If Apple will do what Cringley said (it's a business decision), Windows will no longer the dominant OS anymore. And this is exactly Steve Jobs want to do. The launch of Bootcamp already set the personal computer business on fire, and Steve Jobs plan on this migration to Intel and launch of Bootcamp is not a overnight decision. Just as before, Jobs is always the most dangerous man in the industry, bootcamp is only the start of his real plan. He's been waiting for this moment from the day he come back to Apple.

Now I can tell why Microsoft have so much trouble launching their Vista. Apple was waiting for the Vista so they can launch the next version of OS X. Now Vista delayed, now seems like a very trouble OS, MS is uninspired, and the pressure to launch a better OS is high. The PR had been pushing security, but it's hard to fix if the foundation of the OS is not changed. And what if apple really going to have Windows apps run on a Mac without the need of Windows?

This is going to be fun!

There is nothing wrong with Third Party Software from Windows. Heck even Microsoft Office is not to shabby either. What the problem is The OS and the security issues with it. All the pretty graphics on XP right now can be change to imitate the Mac Look.

I know because I use it to match my XP with my Mac at home. Why don't I just get another Mac. I have a Mac. It was also a sneaky way to get my family used to using a mac like Interface. I even thought about selling my setup as a training ground for business. Using windows technology I make their PC appear almost mac like. The employes get used to where every thing is at on a Mac (to a point of course) then switch over to a real mac and the employees wouldn't notice the difference (to a point of course).

Point I'm am making is that it really isn't that hard to make an OS look and feel like a Mac. The windows applications aren't affected by the OS unless they built their software to use OS specific tasks. Alot of Windows Applications stopped building apps that rely heavily on XP. Alot of Window Applications can run on just the Win32 API with little help from XP. Games would run on their own with out XP if it wasn't for the fact that DirectX is pretty good Piece of Software. But if Game companies support OpenGL, which alot do, then it is possible to run the game outside of Windows. There are even a few companies out their experimenting with that possibility as we speak.

Anyways, Some applications do take advantage of things that are OS specific, like applescript and Cocoa, but all that stuff can be rewritten to run on Windows especially Cocoa. So, all apple has to do is take the Windows API and just wrap a secure OS around it with all the Little cool technologies that make our Macs better and Boom we all win. The only thing I don't agree on with Steve is not liscensing the Mac OS X. He could charge a premium for it (even to companies like Dell) to cover any loss of sales on hardware Apple received. He could also come up with version of OS X, one that does not have all the features but will run all software but no optimizing features. Additional features will be for Mac Owners and businesses who purchase a Mac. the rest would be for those who just want a secure little OS that runs most software out of the box. It would be easier for Software developers to just add in the features in their software than to rewrite the entire program. These Applications would just autodetect if the user was running on actual mac or not and adjust accordingly.

For instance lets imagine apple builds themselves a Application that functions like Directx. Apple would convince Game developers that Opengl is the standard but if they wanted to take advantage of real power and speed they would also include code to access Apple's Directx like functionality. Opengl is no slouch but by including this optimize piece of code, it gives people incen

I'm used to sites that tell you when you reached your max characters allowed.

To others who think this would be the end of Mac developers... First, why would anyone who already has moved to Universal suddenly stop and start working in Windows? Second, if apps worked great as Windows apps and AREN't Mac apps now, why would you care? It would give you access to apps that will NEVER by Mac apps. Third, even if some apps that are Mac now, change to be just Windows apps, if virtualization works, why would you care? You would have your apps, the developer would have you as a customer and you would still have the Mac OS "feel" and "security." Fourth, OS/2 worked great and IBM could have kept it up if they wanted to - they just couldn't figure out a good business model. Apple has. Apple WILL continue to develop iApps and the OS since they still will make at least as much and probably MORE money than they are now.

If Apple can just get to double digit market share, the future will be GOLDEN.

My comments above do leave out the problems with system-wide services that might not work across platforms, like Spotlight and third party apps with services. That wouldn't be good.

I guess I'm just thinking that any XP app can be kept in an OSX window with an OSX bar on the top so that you might never know the dang thing was even in Windows....

'cause the flippin' Health Insurance Commission in Australia has only licenced 7 companies to produce software for "SECURITY REASONS." They didn't even look at Apple Mac, Double DUH!!!

But in relation to not being able to boot back into Mac. I have to agree with everyone else. I screwed my installation cause I didn't read enough. Fortunately I always maintain backups.

It has also been my experience with most PC Users... They don't know anything about behind the monitor of computers.

BETA is for the initiated! If ya gonna use it... EXPECT TROUBLE!

If you are going to truly grow market share you have to run windows apps. iPod sales sucked wind until opening up to winders.

Sure app writers will stop writing for Mac but in reality there are that many compared to windows. Oh well. We're there already.

Adobe will be at least a year to release. It is very obvious that they care a whole lot about Mac...

For people saying nobody will write Mac apps anymore if Windows' app can run on mac natively, I think we should see it this way: there will be not different from today. The developers who write Windows apps who do not want to write Mac apps, tyhey will continue to do so. The apps that's mac specifics will stay that way too. Nothing change. So what's the problem?

Final Cut, Shake, Logoc... all these apple apps will stay it's Mac only status for the reasons of getting people to buy Mac rather than a PC. But the possibilities is endless if the Windows apps will run on OS X without Windows. Apple will sell many more Macs because they're now a brand new platform, a platform that you can run all the apps in the world. You can have the best from Apple, and you can have all the Windows apps you like to run if you're those people who need those apps. There will also removed the threat from Microsoft who trying to control Apple's expansion by killing those Windows' compatibility applications. Remember they announced a renewal of agreement for the Mac Office? And at the same time they discontinue the Windows Media Player? That's the control Microsoft trying to impose on Apple. Virtual PC was a app for those who like to use Mac but need to run Windows apps too, to have the control Microsoft want to apple, they bought Connectix Virtual PC, and now we see how slow the development for this apps, and especially not trying to make it run faster.

Now the Intel Mac and Bootcamp already change how the game should play, Apple is changing the rule, adn everybody see it. It's really happening, something few years back we all think Apple will stay in it's slow marketshare growth with no hope of any new development.

So why stop here? When Apple make this (Windows apps run on OS X without the need of Windows) available to public, they'll be the most "Universal" platform in the world. After that, no worry about the developers, either way, Apple wins.

Regarding the concerns that adding a Windows API to Mac OS X would cause developers to stop writing for Mac OS X, I think this shows a certain lack of true belief that Mac OS X is truely a superior operating system that offers capabilties not available elsewhere. Perhaps it is time we took a critical look at this assumption? However, I think that such concerns are also failing to address the very high likelihood that Yellow Box has been maintained through the past years, in exactly the same fashion the OS X for Intel was. What are the consequences of adding both Windows API to Mac OS X and Yellow Box to XCode at the same time? This provides developers with the perfect development system: Mac, Windows, Java, UNIX, and so forth. If XCode can provide the Promised Land of true cross-platform development, wouldn't users choose to take their flavor on a platform that isn't riddled with viruses, malware, etc.? And if we really want to get far out in the field of speculation, least we forget that Jobs transitioned NeXT for a computer company to an operating systems company; it is not beyond the realm of possiblity that he might be planning the same thing again. Yes, the loss of Apple's beautiful hardware designs would be tragic, but no more so then the loss of Newton, OpenDoc, and many other great technologies that have been sacraficed in order to secure long term business survival. Imagine an Apple using the same business model as Microsoft, but with an operating system and development environment as described. Buy more stock indeed.