RealPC For Mac Delayed By MS Cease And Desist

mgh02114 writes "Microsoft recently purchased the Windows-on-a-Mac emulation program "Virtual PC" from Connectix. Since then, FWB announced that they were working to revive their competing 'Real PC' Windows emulation program for Macintosh OS X. Well, now it looks like Microsoft is trying to kill that program as well. FWB announced that: 'FWB is working diligently to update Real PC and Softwindows for OSX. In May, while working on this project, we received a setback in the form of a cease and desist letter from Microsoft. We are working to resolve the issues with Microsoft, and this has caused some delay, much to our frustration. We are committed to having a beta for you to test for us and help us optimize, this summer. We think we have only lost a few weeks of time to this issue.' FWB appreciates your continued patience and support."

Comments

This is not the whole story

[Anonymous Coward]

What the RealPC guy doesn't tell you is that he SOLD his business to Connectix a few years ago. This is how Connectix did the product for Mac. VitrualPC is nothing but the evolution of RealPC.
When Connectix PURCHASED the IP from RealPC, the contract was saying that RealPC would not be able to sell anymore this product, as it was not theirs anymore. Now that MS bought Connectix's IP, VirtualPC that is, that idiot RealPC guy THOUGHT that he would be able to re-sell his own app!! What a loonie! He signed for the contract that now MS is owning.

MS only does what they should do here, as they own that IP. RealPC seems to have its head on its a$$.

Re:This is not the whole story

[goombah99]

hmmm....maybe this guy is actually clever. He gets massive press coverage when ms sues and thenhe changes his name to UnrealPC or something and everyon now knows that UNrealPC is really realPC. good way to laubder brand loyalty to associate it with a new product.

the thing is I somehow doubt your claim. as I recall softPC and virtualPC were competitors being sold at the same time for a while. They supposedly worked on differtent principles with VirtualPC running windows near native emulating the CPU while softPC focused more on emulating windows with ppc native repalcements for the API. maybe i'm wrong.

Re:This is not the whole story

[bnenning]

VitrualPC is nothing but the evolution of RealPC.

I don't believe that's the case. IIRC Connectix developed VPC from scratch. For a while VPC and SoftWindows/RealPC were competitors, but VPC had better compatibility and performance, so Insignia discontinued the product and sold the rights to FWB. Someone correct me if I'm wrong...

Virtual PC is NOT virtual Windows

[pauljlucas]

Virtual PC software emulates commodity PC hardware. It does not emulate Windows. If you choose to use Windows under Virtual PC, you use a bona fide Microsoft Windows installer CD. Alternatively, you're free to install x86 Linux under Virtual PC as well.

Re:Of course MS doesn't want competition.

[frankie]

don't want customers thinking that MS is at fault when really it's the PC emulator that's to blame

In my experience providing tech support to students running Windows apps in VPC, I have encountered exactly ZERO errors that were the fault of the emulator. Every single problem (other than helping a Mac user configure Windows) was a faithful bug-for-bug emulation of known errors experienced by physical PCs.

Re:Hardware x86 cards?

[MachineShedFred]

Apple did make these, and I actually have one that is about four years old with a Pentium 166 on it. I call it the "PC on a Stick" because it has a chipset, processor, sound card, memory controller, DIMM slot, and other features of a x86 PC all on one big honkin' PCI card. They licensed the design to Orange Micro, who made the OrangePC and ran with it, until the product went *poof*

Here's the reason why they never went anywhere:

Why would you buy a $1800 Mac, and then buy a $500 PC Compatibility Card and share the same hard disk, etc. when you can spend $500 on an actual PC and get a different hard disk, more memory (a la more DIMM slots that one), faster processor speed (you could actually support the heat sink, as it was gravity-friendly to put it on the board, rather than hanging off a PCI card, not to mention it could be bigger for more dissapation etc.), it was upgradeable through it's own PCI bus, had it's own IDE for adding more drives, didn't use proprietary wierd drivers in your OS to interface with the Apple hardware, et. al.

If anyone ever tried to get Windows NT 4 onto one of these back in the day, they would know exactly what I am talking about. It would instantly bluescreen saying that the mass storage was inaccessible, because I'll be damned if Windows NT didn't have drivers for that bastardization of a PC inside a Mac. Go figure.

"kill that program as well"?!?

[jbx]

I'm sorry but it really irks me to see writers such as timothy say "Well, now it looks like Microsoft is trying to kill that program as well."

As well as what? Look, I worked as the dev lead for Virtual PC at Connectix, and came to Microsoft 5 years ago. I work at MacBU only a few offices away from the Virtual PC development team. Microsoft has repeatedly stated that they intend to continue development of Virtual PC for Macintosh, and no matter how many times people here repeat that Microsoft is trying to kill it, it just isn't so. Microsoft likes Virtual PC for Mac, and Microsoft *loves* Virtual PC for Windows. Yeah, I know, I know, slashdot people won't believe it until they see the first Microsoft-branded VPC upgrade shipping, and try it out, and say "wow", but for those of you with a little bit of faith, the future of emulation on the Mac is quite rosy.

jbx