AppleNova Forums

Doxxic · 2005-12-20, 04:56

There's a lot of speculation going on about running Windows on the upcoming MacTels, for instance about the way it's implemented: will there be fast user (OS) switching? How well will VPC work, or otherwise software like DarWINE? Or about what we want from it, like easy networking, easy cutting and pasting etc.

Now even though I know it's been talked about sideways in several of these other threads, I'd like to dedicate this thread to the GAMING aspect:

- How well will the first iBooks and Mac minis work with games, when run within VPC (whichI expect to be the easiest way)? Could someone speculate in a way a consumer would understand about the efficiency by which the graphics cards are going to be used?

- If this works pretty well, as I kind of expect, why would a title like The Sims be being ported to Mac OS X for Intel? I mean, people rarely buy only one game for their computer so Mac gamers should be better off buying VPC once and have access to the vast amount of available (and less pricey) Windows games.

My, this topic turns me on...

BenRoethig · 2005-12-20, 06:32

Let me try to answer your questions here:

1. Darwine currently works with the Intel version of MacOSX. However, don't expect apple to include it in the box.

2. Nobody knows if fast OS switching will be included, but since Apple has no plans to support other operating systems on their hardware I very much doubt it.

3. Since nobody has seen the Mactel version of VPC or can even confirm one exists, we can't answer that question. I'd venture to guess, it would work in a similar fashion to OS9 in classic mode running on OSX.

4. VPC costs $220 if you want an operating system and eats up a bunch of RAM and requires you navigate through that god awful excuse for an operating system called windows.

I am willing to pay a small premium for my Mac games, but with the intel switch I'm hoping development companies hire Mac programmers and go with hybrid disks.

Brad · 2005-12-20, 08:59

This one's easy! I like easy ones.

Quote:

will there be fast user (OS) switching?

Nobody knows. It's unlikely to be officially supported by Apple but may be possible with third-party software like VMWare, as has been discussed in other threads.

Quote:

How well will VPC work, or otherwise software like DarWINE?

Nobody knows. Darwine is unlikely to be officially supported by Apple, as has been discussed in other threads.

Quote:

- How well will the first iBooks and Mac minis work with games, when run within VPC (whichI expect to be the easiest way)?

Nobody knows. VPC doesn't currently offer hardware GPU acceleration, even in the x86 Windows version, and this is unlikely to change just because of Apple's switch. In fact, VPC may not be available at all (at least, for a while) because it would require a significant rewrite.

Quote:

If this works pretty well, as I kind of expect, why would a title like The Sims be being ported to Mac OS X for Intel?

It will have little effect at all. The "only" new things Mac OS X and Windows will have in common that were different before are endianness and ISA. The APIs and use of high-level languages will still be vastly different. Mac OS X 3D will still be primarily OpenGL and Windows 3D will still primarily be DirectX.

edit: I misread you question. The correct response would be that the virtualization you desire is unlikely to be supported out of the box and may not be easy for novice users to set up. However, you are right in implying that the availability of virtualization diminishes the incentive to make native software ports, as has been discussed in other threads.

DevNull42 · 2005-12-20, 23:12

The easiest way to do it probably going to be just adding a second hard drive and actually installing Windows to run games on. That way when you boot up you choose between your "real" OS and you "games-only" OS. This isn't an ideal solution but it will definitely be the most compatible, probably be the fastest, and might be the only way to go for the first several months.

However, if Darwine becomes widespread, or VPC starts getting fast I could easily see MacOS native game development/porting taper off, unfortunately.

nskk · 2005-12-21, 16:22

i donno about there being games but i do think that there is a good amount of fun game out now for mac i.e. call of duty

Luca · 2005-12-21, 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by nskk

i donno about there being games but i do think that there is a good amount of fun game out now for mac i.e. call of duty

Call of Duty and...?

Since the first Call of Duty came out, Windows has seen these worthwhile first-person shooters (I'm using a very simplistic method of taking any FPS rated 8 or higher by IGN released since CoD, since there are tons of craptacular games):
- XIII (also available for Mac)
- Unreal Tournament 2004 (also available for Mac)
- Battlefield Vietnam
- Far Cry
- Doom 3 (also available for Mac)
- Tribes: Vengeance
- Half-Life 2
- Joint Ops: Escalation
- Chronicles of Riddick
- Punisher
- Star Wars Republic Commando
- Brothers In Arms: Road To Hill 30
- SWAT 4
- Project: Snowblind
- Doom 3: Resurrection of Evil
- Rainbow Six 3: Iron Wrath
- Battlefield 2
- Day Of Defeat: Source
- Brothers In Arms: Earned In Blood
- Serious Sam II
- F.E.A.R.
- Quake 4
- Call Of Duty 2
- Gun
- Battlefield 2: Special Forces

*whew*

Now I'm not saying that those games are all worth playing or that we need that many games on the Mac platform, but when you compare it to the full lineup of games available for the Mac it dwarfs it. And remember - these are only the games that were rated "8.0 (Impressive)" or higher since Call Of Duty's release in fall 2003. Also, these are only the first person shooters, a genre that is very common and has a lot of Mac support. Get into real time strategy games and there are TONS of releases that never make it to the Mac platform, and many of those that do end up being crippled through their use of DirectPlay (a non-cross platform multiplayer client that prevents Macs and PCs from playing together).

Mac users basically have Age Of Mythology, Warcraft III, and Command And Conquer, but I think only War3 has cross-platform multiplayer. There's also Starcraft, of course, but that's a very old game. Still fun, but definitely not new. But Macs are missing out on a lot... no Civ 4, no Total War, no Warhammer 40K, and no Battle For Middle-Earth.

The point I've tried to make in nearly all of my Mac gaming related posts is that while Macs are entirely capable of gaming, they're so far behind that they'll never be able to catch up and actually compete in the gaming market. Mac games will remain as they are - diversions for casual gamers who don't want the hassle and expense of buying and setting up a console or a dedicated gaming PC. But if you are serious about gaming and you want to put money into it, the Mac is not an option (at least, it's not a good option).

sirnick4 · 2005-12-21, 17:16

But we do have the Sims 2!

But yes.. it's impossible to catch up with the PC market.

JayReding · 2005-12-21, 17:30

Which is true, but it's important to note that Apple doesn't care about the gaming market. It's not their market. Consoles own the gaming market, and even PC gaming is an also-ran compared to console sales. It doesn't make economic sense for Apple to go after that market, nor does it make sense for third-party developers to develop games for the Mac platform except in limited cases where there's a strong chance of recouping development costs.

That's not a slam against Apple, just the fact of the matter. Macs don't compete in that space, and that probably won't change.

jshockey9 · 2005-12-21, 18:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevNull42

The easiest way to do it probably going to be just adding a second hard drive and actually installing Windows to run games on. That way when you boot up you choose between your "real" OS and you "games-only" OS. This isn't an ideal solution but it will definitely be the most compatible, probably be the fastest, and might be the only way to go for the first several months.

However, if Darwine becomes widespread, or VPC starts getting fast I could easily see MacOS native game development/porting taper off, unfortunately.

I agree a second drive would be the way to go. But would it be possible to do the same thing with a single partitioned HD? This would be helpful for notebook users/gamers.

Just think of the fun on long plane trips. OS X for work and the Window's game library for fun...

chicagodan · 2005-12-21, 18:46

I don't mean to sound like an a-hole around here, this being my first post and all, but you guys really know nothing about Yonah, don't you?

Darwine, VPC, VMWare? You've got to be kidding me. Yonah includes onboard Virtualization Technology (VT) that basically does what VMWare does in hardware, much more efficiently, with full dual core, hyperthreading capabilities. Apple won’t need to bundle Darwine, VMWare or anything for that matter, there will be a downloadable program available next month (probably from VMWare, or perhaps Intel itself -- they haven't commented) that will make it possible to run Windows, Linux or any other Intel-capable OS simultaneously with OS X. (Bring back OS/2 if it floats your boat.)

Don’t take my word for it, read more here: http://www.nordichardware.com/news,2670.html

As for Brian Croll’s comments about Windows on Apple hardware, you’ve taken the quotes WAY out of context. Apple won’t be bundling or supporting Windows ... smart move, who’d want any part of that? You know how many tech support people Dell or Gateway has to waste on first tier Windows support? It's a nightmare. But Apple will have no problem with developers offering dual OS solutions and Croll said (immediately after his "no support" comment) they don’t plan anything on the hardware side that will preclude it (it’s not dual boot, by the way, the OS’s will run simultaneously, much like fast user switching.)

Finally, as for the persistent, annoying “why would you need to run both” comments, please just shut up. I have a PowerBook for 99 percent of what I do on a computer, but I also like to play Full Tilt poker, I run an Action PC Football league and play in a Diamond Mind Baseball league. These three pieces of software have required me to keep a 1998 IBM Aptiva connected to my Mac via a KVM switch (and yes, a 7 year old computer IS better than Virtual PC) and I’m so, so sick of that ugly black box. When Mac on Intel and parallel OS’s come out, I’m going to sledge hammer the IBM.

BFG · 2005-12-21, 18:50

Right now as far as i can see it, the macintel box's are going to kill mac gaming- not just impact or dent it, we're talking termination - people want these games, and many of them will never make it to OSX PPC - probably many will never make it to OSX intel.... right now we have to like it or lump it, but as soon as you can install windows or linux on your new Mac, you can have OSX for normal life and then kick start windows to play your games... now if your favorite game is suddenly available to you, and all you have to do is boot windows who's still going to refuse?

Sales of mac ports will drop which will mean Aspyr and co can't afford to port so much stuff, and so loose more sales, and so more people will boot windows, and mac gaming will die

Call me a pessamist, i just know that when i eventually get an intel box, im pretty damned likely to install windows on a HD just to be able to play the likes of BF2 CoD2 HL2 and other great games out there

rminkler · 2005-12-21, 19:10

I've posted this in a couple of threads, but it seems relevant here as well. It is very likely that the upcoming "MacTels" will use EFI firmware. EFI is an intel creation designed to replace the old PC BIOS (which is something like 20 years old). Windows XP can NOT boot from EFI, so windows as we know it today, will NOT (until/unless somebody comes up with some kind of crafty software workaround) boot on these MacTels. Windows XP 64bit edition does boot from EFI, but as I understand it, does not run on the Yonah chip.

So my understanding is that we may have to wait for the release of Vista to run windows (simultaneously with VT technology or otherwise) on any intel Macs released in January.

Does anyone disagree with this? Do I not understand virtualization correctly?

chicagodan · 2005-12-21, 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by rminkler

I've posted this in a couple of threads, but it seems relevant here as well. It is very likely that the upcoming "MacTels" will use EFI firmware. EFI is an intel creation designed to replace the old PC BIOS (which is something like 20 years old). Windows XP can NOT boot from EFI, so windows as we know it today, will NOT (until/unless somebody comes up with some kind of crafty software workaround) boot on these MacTels. Windows XP 64bit edition does boot from EFI, but as I understand it, does not run on the Yonah chip.

So my understanding is that we may have to wait for the release of Vista to run windows (simultaneously with VT technology or otherwise) on any intel Macs released in January.

Does anyone disagree with this? Do I not understand virtualization correctly?

Right, it's not going to boot ... it won't be a dual boot machine. Yonah has Virtualization Technology on board, so you'll run the OS's simultaneously, you won't actually boot into Windows. Anyone trying to do the old fashioned dual boot installation is going to fail ... I wouldn't be surprised if Intel sells the VT enabling software themselves ... might as well profit from the solution when you cause the problem.

chicagodan · 2005-12-21, 20:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFG

the macintel box's are going to kill mac gaming

From what I've been reading, Mac gaming is going to die, but Windows gaming may be close behind. The future is in the creation of separate gaming partitions within the OS -- basically an OS-independent gaming window that could potentially be standardized across Windows, Linux and OS X machines.

Here's a quote from a recent story http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardw...eports/5798/2/ about VT and how it might change gaming:

Quote:

There's a lot of really cool things you can do in the consumer space, and just the pure coolness of those use-models is going to drive it into [the mainstream].

"Going down the road," Bohart muses, "we could give game developers their own dedicated partition to write games into -- imagine a PlayStation2 OS in a partition right next to Windows. Or Microsoft down the road -- I'm just speculating here -- doing a version of DirectX that's just a very focused OS, to streamline the gaming process. Or a TiVo or other personal video recorder in a partition where you don't have any conflicts with another application."

rasmits · 2005-12-22, 03:42

Darwine won't work for most games. I doubt it would be able to support Direct X.

Doxxic · 2005-12-22, 05:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by chicagodan

From what I've been reading, Mac gaming is going to die, but Windows gaming may be close behind. The future is in the creation of separate gaming partitions within the OS -- basically an OS-independent gaming window that could potentially be standardized across Windows, Linux and OS X machines.

Here's a quote from a recent story http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardw...eports/5798/2/ about VT and how it might change gaming:

I'd suppose that you can only virtualize OSes well enough for gaming on a Yonah if they run natively on a chip with Intel command set?

Brad · 2005-12-22, 05:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doxxic

I'd suppose that you can only virtualize OSes well enough for gaming on a Yonah if they run natively on a chip with Intel command set?

Is that sarcasm or an honest question?

Yes, all software has to be compiled for CPUs with the same ISA. Otherwise, you have to have a CPU emulator running in software ala. Virtual PC.

nskk · 2005-12-22, 06:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luca

Call of Duty and...?

Since the first Call of Duty came out, Windows has seen these worthwhile first-person shooters (I'm using a very simplistic method of taking any FPS rated 8 or higher by IGN released since CoD, since there are tons of craptacular games):
- XIII (also available for Mac)
- Unreal Tournament 2004 (also available for Mac)
- Battlefield Vietnam
- Far Cry
- Doom 3 (also available for Mac)
- Tribes: Vengeance
- Half-Life 2
- Joint Ops: Escalation
- Chronicles of Riddick
- Punisher
- Star Wars Republic Commando
- Brothers In Arms: Road To Hill 30
- SWAT 4
- Project: Snowblind
- Doom 3: Resurrection of Evil
- Rainbow Six 3: Iron Wrath
- Battlefield 2
- Day Of Defeat: Source
- Brothers In Arms: Earned In Blood
- Serious Sam II
- F.E.A.R.
- Quake 4
- Call Of Duty 2
- Gun
- Battlefield 2: Special Forces

*whew*

Now I'm not saying that those games are all worth playing or that we need that many games on the Mac platform, but when you compare it to the full lineup of games available for the Mac it dwarfs it. And remember - these are only the games that were rated "8.0 (Impressive)" or higher since Call Of Duty's release in fall 2003. Also, these are only the first person shooters, a genre that is very common and has a lot of Mac support. Get into real time strategy games and there are TONS of releases that never make it to the Mac platform, and many of those that do end up being crippled through their use of DirectPlay (a non-cross platform multiplayer client that prevents Macs and PCs from playing together).

Mac users basically have Age Of Mythology, Warcraft III, and Command And Conquer, but I think only War3 has cross-platform multiplayer. There's also Starcraft, of course, but that's a very old game. Still fun, but definitely not new. But Macs are missing out on a lot... no Civ 4, no Total War, no Warhammer 40K, and no Battle For Middle-Earth.

The point I've tried to make in nearly all of my Mac gaming related posts is that while Macs are entirely capable of gaming, they're so far behind that they'll never be able to catch up and actually compete in the gaming market. Mac games will remain as they are - diversions for casual gamers who don't want the hassle and expense of buying and setting up a console or a dedicated gaming PC. But if you are serious about gaming and you want to put money into it, the Mac is not an option (at least, it's not a good option).

Nah man i understand where your coming from, but my point was that, because I am more of a console gamer and less of a pc/mac gamer, there are a few games that are fun a class act fps. But dont get me wrong pc still has a hudge edge in the gaming market.

nskk · 2005-12-22, 06:42

but you shouldnt say that "if you are serious about gaming you should get a pc". console's are a way to go to be serious about gaming. Im big into games and ive servived w/ my ibook g4 for the last 3 years especally w/ ps3 and xbox 360 producing pc type graphics, as shown in cod2

Bryson · 2005-12-22, 07:10

HUDE: A cross between Huge and Nude. Only bigger.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirnick4

But we do have the Sims 2!

And even my Quad will probably choke on the graphics requirements...

HezMah19 · 2005-12-22, 07:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryson

And even my Quad will probably choke on the graphics requirements...

My PowerMac chokes on TS2
(See Sig. for specs)

bostongeek · 2005-12-22, 09:01

How does the software emulation in the Xbox 360 fit in here? I mean, it works rather flawlessly, and it seems to do most of what Mac users have been looking for for a long time (namely, emulate x86 on a PPC and do it well enough for games like Splinter Cell, Halo, etc to run well).

Koodari · 2005-12-22, 11:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by bostongeek

How does the software emulation in the Xbox 360 fit in here? I mean, it works rather flawlessly, and it seems to do most of what Mac users have been looking for for a long time (namely, emulate x86 on a PPC and do it well enough for games like Splinter Cell, Halo, etc to run well).

You mean, well enough to run games from back when CPU's were four times as slow (even bigger difference for GPU). Emulating one, fixed hardware configuration without add-on devices or 3rd party programs. And they didn't even make the emulation comprehensive, they need to support each game separately.

Doxxic · 2005-12-22, 14:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

Is that sarcasm or an honest question?

Yes, all software has to be compiled for CPUs with the same ISA. Otherwise, you have to have a CPU emulator running in software ala. Virtual PC.

Sorry, i was being somewhat sarcastically sceptical about this speculation about running PS2 and XBox games inside partitions on Intel machines. I think it's nonsense but I was kind of unsure because the source that was quoted seemed to have a reputation and I found that a little odd.

By now, I suppose the source didn't have any reputation and isn't going to get one...

PB PM · 2005-12-22, 16:47

I don't think the gaming market for Macs will change much in the short term. All comments about PC games running on Mac is pure speculation, since we have no idea if you can even run Windows on the publicly released Intels. Even if you can, there is no way to know if the games will run on the hardware, there is more to a the new machines than the Intel CPU after all.

AtHomeBoy_2000 · 2005-12-22, 17:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by chicagodan

From what I've been reading, Mac gaming is going to die, but Windows gaming may be close behind. The future is in the creation of separate gaming partitions within the OS -- basically an OS-independent gaming window that could potentially be standardized across Windows, Linux and OS X machines.
Here's a quote from a recent story http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardw...eports/5798/2/ about VT and how it might change gaming:

THat would make soooooooooooooooo much more sense!!! Why worry about whether you computer has the right OS when you can install another OS and you will knwo for sure it works! It would work on Windows based computers, Macs, ANYTHING! I am all for this!

DeadMan · 2005-12-23, 08:02

i am new here, and i plan to buy new apple notebook, iBook seems to be better for me, so WarCraft 3 and Frozen Thone can be played on Mac current OS With G4? if so, what about Counter-Strike 1.5, 1.6, source?
shall we expect more popular games on Intel processor ibook or New PB?
from my own standpoint, it is kind of "imposible" that new iBook and PB that use Windows, if so, is there any major difference between original X86 based pc and apple products?

Brad · 2005-12-23, 13:26

Quote: