Slashdot Mirror
OpenOSX Provides Virtual PC Alternative
lucas.clemente writes "OpenOSX has just announced a cheap alternative to Microsoft's Virtual PC for Mac OS X, OpenOSX WinTel. What's more, the OpenOSX version will be compatible with Apple's new G5 architecture, whereas Virtual PC users will have to wait until the next major upgrade for G5 compatibility." It's a frontend to bochs, which we've discussed before as a possible Virtual PC replacement, and the biggest obstacle seemed to be getting it up and running. Perhaps this product will fill that hole. Prices start at $25 for download, but it is covered under the GPL.
Bochs is so much slower than Virtual PC that I don't consider it an alternative at all.
Getting Windows 95 to run acceptably on my last comouter was impossible in Bochs, and oh so easy in VPC.
Just wait for a VPC update. I'm sure you won't have to wait for 7.0.
Also, I refuse to use software from OpenOSX. All they do is recompile popular software, then put it on CD for you for silly amounts of money.
I.E. - Want GIMP?
Step 1) Download and install fink - http://fink.sourceforge.net
Step 2) % sudo apt-get install gimp
OR
Pay OpenOS X a whole bunch of money.
1 As said before, bochs is extremely slow. Their own page does not even recommend that you install Win2k or XP.
2 This project is not new. It has been around for I don't know how long, at least a few months. The only new thing is support for the G5.
3 It is suspected that this organization is ripping off compiled binaries from Fink without giving credit. Read about it in the Fink FAQ.
It would be much more useful for someone to create an OS X port of qemu [http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/] and wine [winehq.com] and post it somewhere. Both of these programs have very good things said about them, as far as performance and stability, but I don't know how well they work on OS X.
Can I make my Mac run the LoveSan virus?
Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
I Hate \.
Robert Atlee was one of the founders of this company, and provided a substantial part of the initial equipment and funding. He is listed on the contact page rather unprofessionally as "terminated." I spoke with him on the phone about three months after he footed the bill for the double-wide booth that Jeshua Lacock ran at MacWorld. He was rather upset at the time that Jeshua had basically skipped town with a bunch of his computer equipment and had locked him out of the web server etc. I'm sure that every story has two sides, but at this point in time, not only Mr. Atlee, and Christoph Pfisterer, but also myself have received poor treatment at the hands of Jeshua Lacock, the sole proprietor of OpenOSX.
Slashdot doesn't probably have the budget that professional news sources do, so we can't expect all of the stories to be double or triple cross-checked. My guess is that if you start asking around (tax records? employees? better business bureau?), you'll find that few others have genuinely benefitted at the hands of this opportunist. The MacGIMP project helped to fund GIMPCon 2003. Has OpenOSX EVER given back to the community that built the software it sells?
One of the first rules of polite public behaviour is to give credit where it is due. Jeshua has attacked my reputation and left a rude web page up with my name on it (after numerous requests to have it taken down) and upset a very good open source developer (Chris Pfisterer) and has managed to con his business partner out of the equipment it took to get everything he had started. Make up your own mind, but I refuse to do business with someone who has managed to offend this many reasonable people without having made any visible efforts whatsoever to set things right.
I'd rather run Bochs for free (or at worse, very cheaply) that pay significantly more to Microsoft for crippled future releases of VPC to ensure that performance sucks (even after the architectural differences are taken into account).
Look, I loathe and distrust Microsoft as much as the next guy, but--what incentive do they have to cripple Virtual PC?
Microsoft profits from the sale of Windows for Virtual PC in the same way it profits from the sale of Wndows for actual x86 hardware.
Microsoft may very well sell other software products that run under Virtual PC at the same rates they sell those products for actual x86 hardware.
Apple is only the enemy of Microsoft because Apple hardware a) doesn't run Windows and b) exemplifies an alternative to Windows hegemony. But,
It seems to me that if some application is capable of running Windows and Windows applications aptly on the Macintosh platform, this turn of events is only in Microsoft's interest.
I mean, they have no real hope of "crushing" the Macintosh platform -- there are too many addicts, Apple is far too liquid, and people just plain hate Microsoft. Virtual PC provides them a way to continue to profit from Apple.
PS: Did I miss something about using Links in /.?
WITHOUT CREDITING FINK
I don't think that is fair at all.
It even caused the primary devloper of fink to resign because he was fed up of people stealing his stuff, without credit.
Look here and here to judge for yourself.