# How to run Windows apps on Intel macs



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

Available now for early adopters:


> WINE Arrives for Intel Macs
> Tuesday, 07 February 2006
> Though the precious dream of dual-booting our Intel Macs has not descended, a convenient alternative has arrived. Although fully functional on developers releases of OS X for Intel, the WINE compatibility layer, which allows Windows programs to run on *nix systems including OS X, was not available for the public release of 10.4.4. However, thanks to the hard work of the folks at Darwine and their contributors, it appears this barrier has been broken! Find out how to compile WINE and view screenshots in our <a href="http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=8699">forum</a>.


For me, this is a more attractive proposition than running windows on an Intel mac (in a window, dual boot, whatever) because it offers the windows apps without the unwanted costs and risks of running windows.


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

nxnw said:


> Available now for early adopters:For me, this is a more attractive proposition than running windows on an Intel mac (in a window, dual boot, whatever) because it offers the windows apps without the unwanted costs and risks of running windows.



Please change the title to something like "WINE on iNTEL Macs'. Emulation is just that. Many of those that want to run windows, want to do so for games, WINE just doesnt cut it there.


----------



## darkscot (Nov 13, 2003)

Heard about this. would it cut it for the apps that need windows system files, .dll's, api e-commerce plug-ins, etc?


----------



## bmovie (Jan 18, 2003)

this would be perfect for running Quicktax during this time of year. I have a PC just for this and ONLY this if you can believe it.

Pissed me off that Intuit stopped making quicktax for the Mac.

I know there are other programs but I have ALL my tax over 10 years on quicktax.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

bmovie said:


> I know there are other programs but I have ALL my tax over 10 years on quicktax.


...Yeah. In classic, too.

A particularly obnoxious thing about quicktax is that you need to 2002 (for instance) application to read the 2002 tax file.


----------



## jdurston (Jan 28, 2005)

WINE is not emulation, it redirects system calls to allow .exe's to run, but it does not emulate a processor like VPC does on a PowerPC Mac.


----------



## RC51Pilot (Mar 26, 2004)

bmovie said:


> this would be perfect for running Quicktax during this time of year. I have a PC just for this and ONLY this if you can believe it.
> 
> Pissed me off that Intuit stopped making quicktax for the Mac.
> 
> I know there are other programs but I have ALL my tax over 10 years on quicktax.


Have you tried QuickTaxWeb? I've used it the past 3 years now and it's great. I think you can even import data from your past tax returns.


----------



## elmer (Dec 19, 2002)

jdurston said:


> WINE is not emulation


False.


> , it redirects system calls to allow .exe's to run, but it does not emulate a processor like VPC does on a PowerPC Mac.


True.
Operating system emulation is still emulation. The performance hit is much less, but the compatibility/stability/support/real-time-dynamics/API-incompleteness issues still exist.


----------



## randomdef (Sep 12, 2005)

elmer said:


> False.



true, thats what WINE stands for ass. WINE IS NOT EMULATION. W.I.N.E.


----------



## RISCHead (Jul 20, 2004)

randomdef said:


> true, thats what WINE stands for ass. WINE IS NOT EMULATION. W.I.N.E.


come now - read what the previous poster said - OS emulation is still emulation  you don't have to take all acronyms literally


----------



## jdurston (Jan 28, 2005)

RISCHead said:


> come now - read what the previous poster said - OS emulation is still emulation  you don't have to take all acronyms literally


I would argue it's more OS replacement than emulation.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

How to get Darwine running under 10.4.5 on Intel:

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=10331

Still for early adopters, but somebody was running photoshop (windows) in darwine on an Intel mac, and claimed that it was faster than photoshop (mac) running in rosetta.


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

downloading now.. going to give it a shot. 

Wine has always interested me. I'm going to give a shot at running WinAmp first.. Then, I'll see what I can get going in other departments.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

AutoCAD on a Mac??? *partay* :clap: if it performs well i may finally get to use a mac at work, scoooore.



bmovie said:


> Pissed me off that Intuit stopped making quicktax for the Mac.


I use QuickTaxWeb


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

dp


----------



## paulohnine (Aug 6, 2004)

Does anyone know how well Darwine would run Windows games on OS X?

Watching  Will Wright's Spore demo from the E3 conference and assuming that the game will only be released on PC, Im curious if Darwine would be acceptable for running games - I would hate to buy a PC but this game looks almost too good!


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

There are a few possibilities for Intel Macs.
Windows Vista: likely will work in Intel Macs, as it uses the same boot process (no more BIOS).
VMWare:
XP With VMWare on Intel Macs
QEMU:
Q:kju Universal Binary for Macs (Works with PPC or x86 Apple hardware; and might work with your VPC drive image)
QEMU for other architectures

As to whether WINE is an emulator or not, I'll leave it to others. But I would like to remind everyone that WINE does not require a copy of Windows; it's a substitute for Windows that runs Windows applications. So, emulator or not, it's cheaper than the emulators we're used to, since no Microsoft Tax is required, a rather important distinction if your wallet gets to vote.

It's not clear whether Microsoft intends to release VPC for Intel Macs; there are many who believe they will not, based on statements by Microsoft's Mac BU. They have publicly committed to supporting PPC Macs with VPC, but are rather cryptic when asked about plans for Intel Macs.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

dona83 said:


> AutoCAD on a Mac??? *partay* :clap: if it performs well i may finally get to use a mac at work, scoooore.


If you're going to run AutoCAD under WINE, I think you're expecting too much of WINE... but I may be wrong. Give it a try and let us know.


----------



## lilstewart91 (Mar 3, 2006)

Quite interesting... has anyone tried this?
I'd like to see some results from fellow ehmacers


----------



## miguelsanchez (Feb 1, 2005)

Kosh said:


> If you're going to run AutoCAD under WINE, I think you're expecting too much of WINE... but I may be wrong. Give it a try and let us know.


I was going to ask the same question about Solid Works. A quick perusal of their website gives this info:

*RAM* 
- Minimum: 512MB RAM - Parts (< 200 features) and assemblies (< 1000 components)
- Recommended: 1GB or more - Parts (> 200 features) and assemblies (> 1000 components)
- Virtual memory recommended to 2X the amount of RAM 

*Video*
- Recommended: A certified OpenGL workstation graphics card and driver
- For a listing of tested and certified graphics cards and driver combinations visit the Graphics Cards and Systems web site

*CPU*
- Intel® Pentium™ , Intel® Xeon™ , AMD® Athlon™, or AMD® Opteron™ based computers

The video cards recommended are higher-end ATI, nVidia, and 3Dlabs. 

I was thinking of getting an Intel iMac at home to run Solid Works, but I don't think that's going to happen for a while. 

_(Later...)_just did a quick google search, and I found this:

http://www.architosh.com/news/2005-06/2005c-0607_edrawings.html

At least it's a start.

Has anyone here actually used any CAD software successfully on a Mac?


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

I primarily used AutoCAD for 2D but it is resource intensive nonetheless, add 3D into the equation and it gets slow. I've been begging my IT guy for another gig of RAM on my work PC since I started dealing with 3D about a couple of months ago. 25% of my work is done in 3D now...


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

Well.. I took GordGuide's advice today... and download the Universal Binary (Unstable) of Q.

I have Windows 2K Pro running a heck of a lot faster than it ever did in VPC. It's only going to get better from here. 

Check it out if you're interested.. the link is in GordGuides post.


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

Vexel said:


> Well.. I took GordGuide's advice today... and download the Universal Binary (Unstable) of Q.
> 
> I have Windows 2K Pro running a heck of a lot faster than it ever did in VPC. It's only going to get better from here.
> 
> Check it out if you're interested.. the link is in GordGuides post.


Can you post the link to the specific version that you downloaded.


----------



## green_ears (Feb 26, 2005)

nxnw said:


> For me, this is a more attractive proposition than running windows on an Intel mac (in a window, dual boot, whatever) because it offers the windows apps without the unwanted costs and risks of running windows.


Awsome! Definately better than running the crap OS that is MS Windows. I use to do that on Linux and apps were like 10X faster than in MS Windows. ;oP PS games will also be easier to use (although a little slower executing because of the translation from DirectX to OpenGL)... No more waiting 2 years for a full port... Ports might also be faster too mind you... I hope they release Cedega for Mac now that we're all dealing with X86 processors... Shouldn't be too complicated to port from Linux to Darwin (FreeBSD).

Just be careful guys, just because you aren't running MS Windows, doesn't mean you can't get viruses or suffer from PC program bugs when executing in WINE... WINE runs the programs as is with full access to your Mac hardware.


----------



## green_ears (Feb 26, 2005)

ender78 said:


> Emulation is just that. Many of those that want to run windows, want to do so for games, WINE just doesnt cut it there.


Ok, time to educate the noobs:

A) WINE stands for: "WINE Is Not an Emulator". It doesn't emulate. It intercepts Windows DLL calls and routes them to the exact same DLL files (or the open-source equivalent depending on what you choose to do) in a different directory on your hard drive and executes them from there, AS IS!

B) Gaming is great through WINE and a Canadian company in Ottawa (Transgaming) actually makes a really popular branch off WINE called CEDEGA that intercepts all the DirectX calls and translates them to OpenGL for Linux (and probably Intel OSX in the near future). I've used it on my Linux box for years for most recent game titles and it is fast as hell.

C) OSX on Intel + CEDEGA = PC games on Mac running just under full native Windows speed (because of non-existing DirectX)

If you don't want to wait for the OSX version of Cedega and still want to play PC games near-native on Mac Intel, just dual-boot into Linux and install Cedega for Linux and enjoy!

Useful links:

http://www.transgaming.com/
http://www.winehq.com/


----------



## cdnbacon (Feb 26, 2001)

miguelsanchez said:


> Has anyone here actually used any CAD software successfully on a Mac?


For many years I have been using CAD software on the Mac, started out using Ashlar Vellum 2.7 (which is now Graphite), now just making the transition to Vectorworks. Some close associates of mine bit the bullet and went full tilt into ArchiCAD for Mac OSX, very remarkable how powerful a CAD program it is. I still have to put up with AutoCAD 2005 on my windows machine, holding out on running windows on my Mac on anything but a glacial pace so I don't have to use my windows computer as much. I'm tempted to pick up a copy of ConceptDraw V to replace the work I do in Visio.


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

Version 0.8.0 (0.8.0d788) is the one I'm using. It's Universal Binary beta.. but seems stable to me.

I can't wait till they release some more builds which take less emulation for the CPU. Also, you may want to invest in some RAM for this little project. The built in 512 just isn't cutting it when dedicating 256 to Windows.

edit: Nevermind the RAM thing, I just noticed your MacBook Pro has 2GB


----------



## mycatsnameis (Mar 3, 2000)

gordguide said:


> It's not clear whether Microsoft intends to release VPC for Intel Macs; there are many who believe they will not, based on statements by Microsoft's Mac BU. They have publicly committed to supporting PPC Macs with VPC, but are rather cryptic when asked about plans for Intel Macs.


Perhaps M$ wants to produce a version of Vista that will boot native on Intel Macs? Why not, it's just more copies of Windows sold and would probably be a heck of a lot cheaper to produce/support than VPC (not to mention providing a much more "positive" user experience - I mean that in the most relative sense ).


----------



## Mrsam (Jan 14, 2006)

mycatsnameis said:


> Perhaps M$ wants to produce a version of Vista that will boot native on Intel Macs? Why not, it's just more copies of Windows sold and would probably be a heck of a lot cheaper to produce/support than VPC (not to mention providing a much more "positive" user experience - I mean that in the most relative sense ).


Who else would feel dirty if they installed windows on their systems?


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

Most Mac users actually wouln't feel dirty. They both do a job.. they're tools.. that's it. 

I personally can't wait to be able to have the choice of installing Windows on my Mac. I'll rarely use it.. but when the need is there.. I'll be able to. That's good enough for me.


----------



## Fox (Oct 4, 2002)

Vexel said:


> Well.. I took GordGuide's advice today... and download the Universal Binary (Unstable) of Q.
> 
> I have Windows 2K Pro running a heck of a lot faster than it ever did in VPC.


Vexel, are you running this on an Intel or a PPC Mac? Would it run on either? I don't have an Intel Mac yet, but I wouldn't mind trying this on my Cube or G5 to see how it compares to VPC. Is it troublesome to set up?


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

Not at all troublesome. I'm running it on my Intel iMac, but it's Universal.. which means that it should be a fine replacement for VPC even on the PPC architecture. Give it a shot.


----------



## green_ears (Feb 26, 2005)

Mrsam said:


> Who else would feel dirty if they installed windows on their systems?


I just don't see the point... To me, it would be like evolution, but backwards. tptptptp


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

Vexel said:


> Not at all troublesome. I'm running it on my Intel iMac, but it's Universal.. which means that it should be a fine replacement for VPC even on the PPC architecture. Give it a shot.


I was wrong here.. there are a few quirks with the program. Apparently, when installing XP there is a major bug that will not let it be installed. I didn't realize this at first.

They're working on the fix now. They're also working on the Virtualization part of the program as well, so it will be much faster in upcoming releases. Anyone who wants to run Win2K can do so however.


----------



## Fox (Oct 4, 2002)

So far, no good, Vexel. I tried importing a VPC 7 disk image onto my PowerBook into the version of Q that you downloaded and it starts the import but fails with the command "This kind of VPC diskimage is not supported by Q". It was a Win 2000 disk image running on VPC 7, so I don't know what the problem is. Did you run a diskimage from VPC or create a new one on Q?

By the way, I also tried the earlier "stable" version (0.8a537), it seemed to import the disk image (at least one was created), but the program froze and when I restarted it, it didn't recognize the disk image it created.


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

I created a new image with Q. Installed Win2K Pro no problems. Much faster than it ever was on VPC.. although, there is room for lots of improvement. It's still in beta form and working on it constantly. 

I'll be staying on top of this program and posting back here to let everyone know of its status.


----------



## Glipt (Aug 7, 2003)

I just installed Win 2K with Q on my G4 733 quicksilver 10.4.5 1G ram. SSLLLLOOOOWWWWW! It took 3 hours to install. It does boot, but is so slow it is unusable. I used the stable version 0.8.0. Is it true the disk image will only expand to 1 or 2 G? This could be a broblem as a full install of Win 2K with SP 4 is almost 2 G.

Q would not install Win 98.

Win 2K with VPC is OK. Not stellar but useable.


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

Glipt said:


> I just installed Win 2K with Q on my G4 733 quicksilver 10.4.5 1G ram. SSLLLLOOOOWWWWW! It took 3 hours to install. It does boot, but is so slow it is unusable. I used the stable version 0.8.0. Is it true the disk image will only expand to 1 or 2 G? This could be a broblem as a full install of Win 2K with SP 4 is almost 2 G.
> 
> Q would not install Win 98.
> 
> Win 2K with VPC is OK. Not stellar but useable.


I have to say. I haven't used it on a PPC machine. I only have the Core Duo at the moment to really test it on. I believe you can create an install disk up to 4GB compressed, as well, you can add new disk images to your installation for use as HD's. So, the space thing isn't really an issue. 

FWIW... I installed Win2K w/ SP 4 on Q and it worked wonderfully. Much faster than it ever was on a PPC machine with VPC 7. Once the virtualizion comes into play.. I think we're going to see darn close to native speed from Q, which is going to be a godsend for people who really need Windows apps to run.


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

Vexel said:


> FWIW... I installed Win2K w/ SP 4 on Q and it worked wonderfully. Much faster than it ever was on a PPC machine with VPC 7. Once the virtualizion comes into play.. I think we're going to see darn close to native speed from Q, which is going to be a godsend for people who really need Windows apps to run.


Vexel,

My installer has been running for well over two hours and it has yet to get past detecting keyboard and mouse. If this is "fast" I dont even want to know how bad VPC was. Can you post some detailed instructions on if and any flags that you ran with with installer. I just ran the defaults and so far, this install is taking forever.


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

ender78 said:


> Vexel,
> 
> My installer has been running for well over two hours and it has yet to get past detecting keyboard and mouse. If this is "fast" I dont even want to know how bad VPC was. Can you post some detailed instructions on if and any flags that you ran with with installer. I just ran the defaults and so far, this install is taking forever.


I really don't understand why it would take so long. Are you user you have the Universal Binary?

My setup:

Platform: x86 PC
RAM: 256MB
Videocard: Standard VGA card with Bochs VBE
Soundcard: Soundblaster 16
Harddisk: Harddisk_1.qcow
CD-ROM: Built in CD-ROM
Boot from: CD ROM

I left the Advanced tab alone.

It took a total of about 40 minutes to install Win2K. XP will not install.. but it's being worked on. Other than that.. I couldn't tell you what the problem might be.. good luck.


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

Install is being quite quick the second time. We'll see how it works.


----------



## Fox (Oct 4, 2002)

I tried installing Q on my Cube, using a VPC 7 disk image, which was supposed to work but didn't. For those of you interested in getting this to work,  here is a cross-post from the CubeOwners site that explains how it can be done.


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

I guess the third time was the charm. My second install claimed it was out of space, 3.83 GB's was used by the WINNT directory. What is also unusual is that I was not prompted for a lot of stuff during the install. I did run the third install with the WinNT Install Hack flag set, maybee that was the charm. My second install, I used an 8GB disk, sadly that was not required as Windows only uses 1.7 GB of space at this time.

On the bright side, downloads are lightning fast on the Q client, see attached image. Downloaded SP4 for Windows 2000 at 700+ KiloBytes per second.


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

Some quick notes:

- SP3 [Windows 2000 Service Pack 3] must be installed before SP4. Do not reboot after SP3
- windows update does not work [IE 6 install makes little difference]
- Q is not ready for prime time, even the problems that I have experienced thus far will turn off most casual users, I expected to have more problems off the bat with just getting windows running not while it was already installed.


----------



## Fox (Oct 4, 2002)

What kind of problems, Ender? What did you install it on, a PPC or an Intel Mac?


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

Just keep in mind that this is free. The developers are working really hard on getting the program up and running really well. Search for the forums for some help with issues that arrise, the community seems to be a really nice one. 

I personally have decided to wait for the virtualization compenent they are working on. But, if you have to run a Windows app or two it should be easy enough to get it up and running.


----------

