Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Leopard Rumors...

Options
  • 23-05-2006 3:02pm
    #1
    biomusicology
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18 ✭


    Is it true that Leopard will included virtualization technology to run windows alongside OS X? Do you think Apple would do this?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    flogen
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,243 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    I don't see why not, it's possible isn't it (don't some versions of Linux do it?)

    It makes sense too, rather than having to reboot you could just switch in a single click, it would make it even easier to use than Virtual PC


  • Options
    #3
    Asiaprod
    Registered Users Posts: 6,737 ✭✭✭Asiaprod


    biomusicology wrote:
    Is it true that Leopard will included virtualization technology to run windows alongside OS X? Do you think Apple would do this?

    Heard the same rumor here in Japan. Would make a lot of sense to include it.


  • Options
    #4
    biomusicology
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18 ✭biomusicology


    I feel as though to do that, Apple would be opening up a whole can of worms. Right now, if someone if using Parallels Desktop and infects OS X w/ a virus, thru windows, Apple can say, "You used a third-party software, it screwed up your comp, tought luck." But it the same thing happens thru virtualization on leopard, Apple will be at fault, people will blame them, and they'll lose their "virus-free" credibility.


  • Options
    #5
    flogen
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,243 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    biomusicology wrote:
    I feel as though to do that, Apple would be opening up a whole can of worms. Right now, if someone if using Parallels Desktop and infects OS X w/ a virus, thru windows, Apple can say, "You used a third-party software, it screwed up your comp, tought luck." But it the same thing happens thru virtualization on leopard, Apple will be at fault, people will blame them, and they'll lose their "virus-free" credibility.

    How will it be any different, OSX Leopard won't come with WinXP as standard, it will just allow anyone with WinXP to install it in a partition and hopefully allow straight swaps.. if a virus does get into the computer it will just infect the WinXP partition and would have no effect on the rest, the same as it would now... even if it did, the owner is the one running the risk and Apple aren't liable if people don't take security measures when using WinXP.

    If anything it will show people how easily WinXP gets infected and how robust OSX is by comparison


  • Options
    #6
    biomusicology
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18 ✭biomusicology


    I'm not talking about a partition, the way bootcamp works. There are rumors about being able to run OS X side by side w/ XP, such as the way Parallels Desktop allows you to do right now. There could be viruses shared thru drag and drop files sharing, etc, and so on...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    flogen
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,243 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    but from what I understand of the whole thing, even if xp and osx were on the same drive without partitions a virus could only damage XP files and could not damage OSX files, which is what the whole thing would be based on; so you might destroy whatever you've done in windows, but OSX itself, and your Mac would be fine.


  • Options
    #8
    biomusicology
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18 ✭biomusicology


    flogan - that only stays true if you are not sharing any files between the two OSes, and I highly doubt people will be keeping the two totally seperate.


  • Options
    #9
    Duck Soup
    Registered Users Posts: 3,996 ✭✭✭Duck Soup


    :confused: I would have thought that since the PC viruses are based on PC code, that even if they did transfer through onto a Mac via transferral of files, it would have no effect on the OSX operating system since it's written in a different computer language. Am I mistaken in thinking that a PC virus will not 'work' on a Mac?


  • Options
    #10
    flogen
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,243 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    Duck Soup wrote:
    :confused: I would have thought that since the PC viruses are based on PC code, that even if they did transfer through onto a Mac via transferral of files, it would have no effect on the OSX operating system since it's written in a different computer language. Am I mistaken in thinking that a PC virus will not 'work' on a Mac?

    That's my understanding of the whole thing; I mean even if you shared files between the two (say you had .doc files which you edited in Windows and OSX) the whole thing would still be based upon OSX code and so would stop infection


  • Options
    #11
    silverlining
    Closed Accounts Posts: 425 ✭✭silverlining


    what biomusicology is saying is correct. A virus written for windows will not work on OSX but there is nothing to stop an unpatched windows system from transmitting an OSX virus onto an OSX operating system via some sort of file share. You'll probably see virii that will take advantage of windows to get onto someone's windows partition and from there dump an OSX virus onto the OSX partition using SMB or the drag n drop method that bio mentioned.

    Just to confuse things: as for .doc files, the most common types of virus on Macs are actually macro viruses written for MS Word on windows but sometimes will work on Mac Word too (although these viruses usually just affect word documents and cannot access important system areas). Even if the macro virus doesnt work, the macro virus will still be in the document waiting to be copied onto a windows machine again.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    SixShot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 104 ✭✭SixShot


    With more people moving to mac it's only a matter of time
    before there is a Virus to affect a Mac the only reasion there is no Virus for mac is basicly because theres not a lot of people useing them.
    Don't try say it won't happen its a Mac.
    guys who make virus don't give a feck they could if they wanted to make a virus to affect the mac they just don't bother because there is a lot more windows use's out there .
    However it was not so long ago was there not a Virus about afecting mac's.
    I'm not putting Apple down they are a great system but anything is posable don't think because its a Mac its safe.
    Ture there is more virus problem for windows then mac.
    I don't think a Windows virus would damage the mac any way with that new Leopard Thing.
    there is security issue's out there not even a Mac could save you.
    PS any smart ass people out there yeah I know my Spelling is Crap


  • Options
    #13
    biomusicology
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18 ✭biomusicology


    ha, at least you recognize the spelling.... :)

    But anyways, it's true what you've said about viruses affecting macs. Why would people waste time developing a virus for a computer that 5% of the popular has as opposed to a computer that 95% of the population has? Wouldn't make sense. But as Macs become more mainstream, which they are, more hackers will try to crack into the system, and cause a lot of headaches for more people.


Advertisement