Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #61742 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-07-04 09:49 -0700 |
| Last post | 2014-07-27 17:55 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 236 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 09:49 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 13:02 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 11:47 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 11:49 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-04 20:40 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 19:43 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 09:23 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 15:28 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 19:42 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 18:10 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 15:50 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 22:37 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 19:18 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 23:23 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 23:07 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:26 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 00:21 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 01:37 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 00:56 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 02:59 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:21 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 03:44 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:08 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 00:27 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 17:15 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-05 17:30 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:09 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:17 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-07-05 01:40 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-05 00:26 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 06:57 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-07-05 22:18 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 23:07 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 00:57 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-06 21:56 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-07 07:35 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:15 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 03:23 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-05 14:45 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 00:11 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-06 12:41 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 02:11 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:06 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 00:13 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:14 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2014-07-07 17:36 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 01:27 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 23:07 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 13:49 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 13:06 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 22:38 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:24 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:17 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 01:44 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:57 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 20:00 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:20 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 20:22 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:28 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 21:54 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 21:59 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 22:11 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 22:19 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 01:05 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac billy@MIX.COM - 2014-07-06 03:10 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 23:07 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 21:28 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 04:39 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 21:41 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 01:09 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 17:38 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 01:00 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 03:26 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 22:02 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 22:03 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 05:23 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 06:36 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 09:28 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-06 10:44 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 23:30 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac billy@MIX.COM - 2014-07-06 03:52 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 09:10 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-05 07:19 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2014-07-07 14:52 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-07 16:36 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2014-07-07 17:25 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-07 16:22 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-04 20:38 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 15:50 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 01:22 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 23:07 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 17:05 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 17:17 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 11:49 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 18:55 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 09:16 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-07-04 22:36 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-07-05 11:34 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 16:42 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-07-05 12:04 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 17:45 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 00:59 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 03:08 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-07-05 17:57 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 15:26 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 03:11 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 00:51 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 00:49 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 00:46 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 09:14 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 04:14 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:07 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 10:08 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 11:55 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 11:57 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 12:12 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 19:39 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 12:58 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 13:22 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 22:26 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 22:25 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:06 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 19:45 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:05 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:24 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 20:31 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:35 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 21:58 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 22:01 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 21:57 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 22:01 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 15:50 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:32 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 22:01 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 22:02 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 15:23 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 08:28 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-05 09:27 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 12:50 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 13:09 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 13:23 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 14:01 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 15:07 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 15:24 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 22:47 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:02 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 19:43 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:08 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 20:12 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 21:33 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 21:39 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 22:08 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 22:18 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 03:34 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 22:02 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 22:04 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-05 15:24 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 15:57 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:03 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 19:44 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 01:49 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:05 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 19:45 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-04 14:32 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 15:01 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-07 16:46 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-07-04 19:14 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-05 10:38 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-07-04 23:43 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 01:59 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:23 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-05 03:48 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:18 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 08:56 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 08:01 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-07-05 14:20 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 22:55 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-04 14:13 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 14:58 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-04 18:05 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac billy@MIX.COM - 2014-07-06 00:20 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 22:41 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:26 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-04 19:54 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:19 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-04 21:03 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 03:44 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-07-04 21:11 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 05:29 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2014-07-06 01:39 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-06 14:26 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-05 10:39 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-04 22:10 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 15:26 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-04 22:52 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:11 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 19:47 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 20:15 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 20:19 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 21:36 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 21:40 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 22:09 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 22:18 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 15:59 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-04 19:13 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 19:48 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-05 03:51 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-07-05 01:30 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-04 22:32 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 06:54 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-07-05 22:15 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-07-05 19:19 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 06:43 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac cb <cb@aol.com> - 2014-07-05 12:39 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-07-05 06:53 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac cb <cb@aol.com> - 2014-07-05 14:53 +0200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 07:04 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-07-05 22:14 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 20:14 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 07:00 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-07-05 06:59 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-05 07:06 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-07-06 08:35 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-07-06 06:54 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-07-06 12:55 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Mitch Bujard <nonono@schoolfonts.com> - 2014-07-16 17:40 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-07-17 09:39 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Juan I. Cahis <jiclbchSINBASURA@attglobal.net> - 2014-07-17 09:22 -0500
Re: Windows application on a Mac Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-17 15:23 +0000
Re: Windows application on a Mac Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-18 09:08 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-07-17 22:41 +0100
Re: Windows application on a Mac Juan I. Cahis <jiclbchSINBASURA@attglobal.net> - 2014-07-21 11:07 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-22 09:47 +1200
Re: Windows application on a Mac Juan I. Cahis <jiclbchSINBASURA@attglobal.net> - 2014-07-26 11:35 -0400
Re: Windows application on a Mac Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-07-26 10:17 -0700
Re: Windows application on a Mac Laszlo Lebrun <lazlo_lebrun@googlemail.com> - 2014-07-27 17:55 +0200
Page 5 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 12 Next page →
| From | billy@MIX.COM |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-06 03:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lpah5m$j0t$1@reader2.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #61995 |
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> writes:
> As we discussed quite recently in these news groups, CNET does exactly
> that - they repackage installers to add toolbars and ad-ware to
> them. I recommend avoiding CNET at all costs.
Another good reason. Back in the good old days of Version Tracker,
software developers could list their programs there at no cost, but
Cnet wouldn't do it without being paid.
Then Cnet ate Version Tracker, and in particular ate the very useful
version tracking function.
Some bonus reading -
How Halsey Minor Blew Tech Fortune on Way to Bankruptcy
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-30/cnet-founder-minor-files-for-bankruptcy-after-selling-art.html
Mr Minor also topped the State of California's list of biggest tax
cheats (owing US$7E6+) for some years, although I see he's no longer
on it now.
Billy Y..
--
sub #'9+1 ,r0 ; convert ascii byte
add #9.+1 ,r0 ; to an integer
bcc 20$ ; not a number
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-05 09:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <k0lk8b-hce2.ln1@news.chingola.ch> |
| In reply to | #61750 |
On 2014-07-04, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > In article <040720141302564348%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam ><nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > >> crossover probably won't work but if it does, it's the cheapest option. >> a lot of apps don't work with it, but maybe you'll luck out. if you >> already have it then it might be worth trying. > > If/When I get the software, that's what I'll probably try first. > >> otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels >> versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost >> of vmware/parallels if you choose that path. > > yes, but that's not enough information for me to decide. Parallels offers a 10 or 15 (?) day evaluation period (during which it constantly nags you to buy). VMware offers a much more sensible 30 day evaluation (without the constant nagging). Unfortunately VMware jacked their prices up got V6 which leaves me stubbornly staying at V5. (note to VMware: I might even buy V6 if you gave me more information than "Improved for Mavericks" and "contains 50 new functions". Would it hurt you so much to tell us what these functions actually are?. > And, I just realized, I'd have to get an external DVD/CD drive to > install the software. FWIW my copy of VMware Fusion 5 came with a DVD *and* a USB stick. -- Big Data is any data that is expensive to manage and hard to extract value from. -- Michael Franklin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-05 07:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2014070507194721015-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| In reply to | #61946 |
On 2014-07-05 07:10:44 +0000, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> said: > On 2014-07-04, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> In article <040720141302564348%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam >> <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: >> >>> crossover probably won't work but if it does, it's the cheapest option. >>> a lot of apps don't work with it, but maybe you'll luck out. if you >>> already have it then it might be worth trying. >> >> If/When I get the software, that's what I'll probably try first. >> >>> otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels >>> versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost >>> of vmware/parallels if you choose that path. >> >> yes, but that's not enough information for me to decide. > > Parallels offers a 10 or 15 (?) day evaluation period (during which it > constantly nags you to buy). VMware offers a much more sensible 30 day > evaluation (without the constant nagging). Unfortunately VMware jacked > their prices up got V6 which leaves me stubbornly staying at V5. > > (note to VMware: I might even buy V6 if you gave me more information than > "Improved for Mavericks" and "contains 50 new functions". Would it hurt > you so much to tell us what these functions actually are?. For what it is worth, Fusion V4.1.3 runs just fine on Mavericks, even with the upgrade nag. >> And, I just realized, I'd have to get an external DVD/CD drive to >> install the software. > > FWIW my copy of VMware Fusion 5 came with a DVD *and* a USB stick. My copy of VMWare Fusion V4.1.3 was a down load, and bought as part of a bundle. -- Regards, Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-07 14:52 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <1lof4rx.36zbnzcw7532N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> |
| In reply to | #61750 |
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > In article <040720141302564348%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam > <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > > crossover probably won't work but if it does, it's the cheapest option. > > a lot of apps don't work with it, but maybe you'll luck out. if you > > already have it then it might be worth trying. > > If/When I get the software, that's what I'll probably try first. > > > otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels > > versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost > > of vmware/parallels if you choose that path. > > yes, but that's not enough information for me to decide. > > And, I just realized, I'd have to get an external DVD/CD drive to > install the software. I've also had a poor experience with CrossOver rarely working well, or at all for many Windows apps. I've found virtualisation via VMware's Fusion to be a far better robust solution that nearly always works for lightweight games and serious apps. For graphics intensive games and the like with poor performance in a virtual machine, I boot into WinXP using Boot Camp. My only real trouble with Boot Camp was the crappy Apple supplied ATI Drivers for my Radeon 2600 Pro HD under WinXP. They had intermittently corrupted the graphics, requiring a restart, and had no configuration utility for setting up additional monitors that for some effing reason are set to underscan by default! So stupid! Luckily I was able to find drivers and utility software from ATI directly that worked, using educated guesswork and many hours of trial and error manually installing drivers (the driver installers would not work as they complained my video card was unsupported). However my problem was a rare one. IME most Boot Camp users have no real issues to speak of. But I'd still prefer virtualisation when native speed isn't necessary, as is more often the case on newer Macs than mine, if only because it's a PITA rebooting into Windows. Fusion is very seamless when setup right, and quick to startup. -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-07 16:36 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <070720141636478817%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #62040 |
In article <1lof4rx.36zbnzcw7532N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, Jamie Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote: > Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > > In article <040720141302564348%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam > > <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > crossover probably won't work but if it does, it's the cheapest option. > > > a lot of apps don't work with it, but maybe you'll luck out. if you > > > already have it then it might be worth trying. > > > > If/When I get the software, that's what I'll probably try first. > > > > > otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels > > > versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost > > > of vmware/parallels if you choose that path. > > > > yes, but that's not enough information for me to decide. > > > > And, I just realized, I'd have to get an external DVD/CD drive to > > install the software. > > I've also had a poor experience with CrossOver rarely working well, or > at all for many Windows apps. <snip> It's Crossover becomes it makes the users come over all cross at the (so-called) developers, and WINE stands for Worthless Inefficient Nonworking Experience. ;-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-07 17:25 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <1lofc6i.wac8m71d9ufuoN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> |
| In reply to | #62041 |
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > In article <1lof4rx.36zbnzcw7532N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, Jamie > Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote: > > Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > > > In article <040720141302564348%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam > > > <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > > crossover probably won't work but if it does, it's the cheapest option. > > > > a lot of apps don't work with it, but maybe you'll luck out. if you > > > > already have it then it might be worth trying. > > > > > > If/When I get the software, that's what I'll probably try first. > > > > > > > otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels > > > > versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost > > > > of vmware/parallels if you choose that path. > > > > > > yes, but that's not enough information for me to decide. > > > > > > And, I just realized, I'd have to get an external DVD/CD drive to > > > install the software. > > > > I've also had a poor experience with CrossOver rarely working well, or > > at all for many Windows apps. > <snip> > > It's Crossover becomes it makes the users come over all cross at the > (so-called) developers, and WINE stands for Worthless Inefficient > Nonworking Experience. ;-) I refuse to buy WINE-wrappered Windows games from gog.com and the like, nowadays. I only buy older DOS games from them. DOSBox works. WINE is a piece of shit for the most part, IME. Also CrossOver only offers support if you buy their product. By then it's too late: you're stuck with a shit product that doesn't work, or the procedure is so arcane and involved to get a game working, one needs to access third party help; for nearly all the games it says it works with, on their site. -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-07 16:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlrli9n.2s4b.g.kreme@Amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #62042 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? Jamie Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> was all, like: --> Mon, 7 Jul 2014 17:25:41 +1200 <1lofc6i.wac8m71d9ufuoN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> > Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: >> In article <1lof4rx.36zbnzcw7532N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, Jamie >> Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote: >> > Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> > > In article <040720141302564348%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam >> > > <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > crossover probably won't work but if it does, it's the cheapest option. >> > > > a lot of apps don't work with it, but maybe you'll luck out. if you >> > > > already have it then it might be worth trying. >> > > >> > > If/When I get the software, that's what I'll probably try first. >> > > >> > > > otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels >> > > > versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost >> > > > of vmware/parallels if you choose that path. >> > > >> > > yes, but that's not enough information for me to decide. >> > > >> > > And, I just realized, I'd have to get an external DVD/CD drive to >> > > install the software. >> > >> > I've also had a poor experience with CrossOver rarely working well, or >> > at all for many Windows apps. >> <snip> >> >> It's Crossover becomes it makes the users come over all cross at the >> (so-called) developers, and WINE stands for Worthless Inefficient >> Nonworking Experience. ;-) > I refuse to buy WINE-wrappered Windows games from gog.com and the like, > nowadays. I only buy older DOS games from them. DOSBox works. WINE is a > piece of shit for the most part, IME. All the GOG.gom games I have work perfectly well under 10.9 and 10.10. I played a bit of Ultima IV, but I'd forgotten the recipes for the spells and it took me too long to suss out the runes, so I didn't play it that much. It was still fun to go exploring around Britannia again. -- Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum, cogito
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John <Man@the.keyboard> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-04 20:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <bc0er99dloo3ado77vjr6lpujj4bq4hav0@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #61743 |
On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 13:02:56 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
wrote:
>In article <040720140949213663%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
><michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>> I've pretty much been ignoring this topic, but now I have a strong
>> desire to run an application (BridgeMaster 2000, if you're curious)
>> that runs only on Windows.
>>
>> What would be my best option: Boot Camp, Parallels, VMware Fusion,
>> Crossover?
>>
>> I know that the biggest disadvantage for running Boot Camp is that I'd
>> have to reboot the computer every time I want to switch between OSes.
>> And both Parallels and Fusion cost extra money. I have Crossover
>> because it came in one of those bundles that are sometimes offered, so
>> price isn't a problem with it, but I'm all that convinced that it would
>> be the best way to go.
>
>crossover probably won't work but if it does, it's the cheapest option.
>a lot of apps don't work with it, but maybe you'll luck out. if you
>already have it then it might be worth trying.
I have never had any issue with getting something, from Win3 to Win7
stuff, running under CrossOver.
Had I done I would have gone to their fora which are quite good
sources of quite reliable help.
And they do, constantly, fix issues others have with - for example -
huge database programs, games and other stuff.
No, I don't work there or sell the program. I just find it easier to
use than WINE.
>
>otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels
>versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost
>of vmware/parallels if you choose that path.
And that is the one, true, most excellent advantage of CrossOver, you
don't need to buy a Win licence at astronomical expense and you don't
need to install Windows.
WINE is the same but I found that more difficult to use.
CrossOver is basically WINE for dummies.
If Michele is smart enough and experienced enough to use WINE that
might suit her more. I was neither.
J.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-04 15:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <040720141550508795%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #61758 |
In article <bc0er99dloo3ado77vjr6lpujj4bq4hav0@4ax.com>, John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote: > >> I've pretty much been ignoring this topic, but now I have a strong > >> desire to run an application (BridgeMaster 2000, if you're curious) > >> that runs only on Windows. > >> > >> What would be my best option: Boot Camp, Parallels, VMware Fusion, > >> Crossover? > >> > >> I know that the biggest disadvantage for running Boot Camp is that I'd > >> have to reboot the computer every time I want to switch between OSes. > >> And both Parallels and Fusion cost extra money. I have Crossover > >> because it came in one of those bundles that are sometimes offered, so > >> price isn't a problem with it, but I'm all that convinced that it would > >> be the best way to go. > > > >crossover probably won't work but if it does, it's the cheapest option. > >a lot of apps don't work with it, but maybe you'll luck out. if you > >already have it then it might be worth trying. > > I have never had any issue with getting something, from Win3 to Win7 > stuff, running under CrossOver. then you didn't try very many apps. photoshop, for instance, has a *lot* of problems. there's a shitload of other apps that have problems. > Had I done I would have gone to their fora which are quite good > sources of quite reliable help. > And they do, constantly, fix issues others have with - for example - > huge database programs, games and other stuff. which means it's a buggy hack. > No, I don't work there or sell the program. I just find it easier to > use than WINE. it's wine under the hood. > >otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels > >versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost > >of vmware/parallels if you choose that path. > > And that is the one, true, most excellent advantage of CrossOver, you > don't need to buy a Win licence at astronomical expense and you don't > need to install Windows. astronomical expense? windows is hardly expensive. > WINE is the same but I found that more difficult to use. > CrossOver is basically WINE for dummies. > If Michele is smart enough and experienced enough to use WINE that > might suit her more. I was neither. if crossover works, then she's in luck. however, there's a very good chance it won't.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John <Man@the.keyboard> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-05 01:22 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ctger95t3c8bona7k6qbi5i86fe6av4qm4@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #61765 |
On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 15:50:50 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
wrote:
>In article <bc0er99dloo3ado77vjr6lpujj4bq4hav0@4ax.com>, John
><Man@the.keyboard> wrote:
>
>> >> I've pretty much been ignoring this topic, but now I have a strong
>> >> desire to run an application (BridgeMaster 2000, if you're curious)
>> >> that runs only on Windows.
>> >>
>> >> What would be my best option: Boot Camp, Parallels, VMware Fusion,
>> >> Crossover?
>> >>
>> >> I know that the biggest disadvantage for running Boot Camp is that I'd
>> >> have to reboot the computer every time I want to switch between OSes.
>> >> And both Parallels and Fusion cost extra money. I have Crossover
>> >> because it came in one of those bundles that are sometimes offered, so
>> >> price isn't a problem with it, but I'm all that convinced that it would
>> >> be the best way to go.
>> >
>> >crossover probably won't work but if it does, it's the cheapest option.
>> >a lot of apps don't work with it, but maybe you'll luck out. if you
>> >already have it then it might be worth trying.
>>
>> I have never had any issue with getting something, from Win3 to Win7
>> stuff, running under CrossOver.
>
>then you didn't try very many apps.
>
>photoshop, for instance, has a *lot* of problems. there's a shitload of
>other apps that have problems.
>
>> Had I done I would have gone to their fora which are quite good
>> sources of quite reliable help.
>> And they do, constantly, fix issues others have with - for example -
>> huge database programs, games and other stuff.
>
>which means it's a buggy hack.
No, it's a good program but it does have limitations. Have you never
found a video file VLC won't play? Ever waited a while and found that
an updated version of VLC plays the file? Does that make VLC "a buggy
hack"?
The Codeweaver folk do what they can but Mac OSX and Windows are
basically incompatible OSes. Getting *any* Windows stuff to run under
OSX is good work. Getting all of it to would take something like
making OSX into Windows.
>
>> No, I don't work there or sell the program. I just find it easier to
>> use than WINE.
>
>it's wine under the hood.
Obviously. What I should have typed is: "I just find it easier to use
than a bare WINE implementation without CrossOver's GUI making it
simple for us."
Happier, now?
>
>> >otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels
>> >versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost
>> >of vmware/parallels if you choose that path.
>>
>> And that is the one, true, most excellent advantage of CrossOver, you
>> don't need to buy a Win licence at astronomical expense and you don't
>> need to install Windows.
>
>astronomical expense?
>
>windows is hardly expensive.
Depends on your budget, I suppose. Mr. Gates can probably afford a
licence for every Mac in his houses but there are people who find a
full licence to be a tad pricey.
Me, for one.
>
>> WINE is the same but I found that more difficult to use.
>> CrossOver is basically WINE for dummies.
>> If Michele is smart enough and experienced enough to use WINE that
>> might suit her more. I was neither.
>
>if crossover works, then she's in luck. however, there's a very good
>chance it won't.
Why are you so down on it? It's only software, not a threat to your
religion or manhood.
J.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-04 23:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <040720142307401360%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #61817 |
In article <ctger95t3c8bona7k6qbi5i86fe6av4qm4@4ax.com>, John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote: > >> Had I done I would have gone to their fora which are quite good > >> sources of quite reliable help. > >> And they do, constantly, fix issues others have with - for example - > >> huge database programs, games and other stuff. > > > >which means it's a buggy hack. > > No, it's a good program but it does have limitations. a lot of limitations and it's generally more hassle than it's worth. > Have you never > found a video file VLC won't play? many times. vlc is another buggy app and crashes often, which is why i rarely use it. what's your point? > Ever waited a while and found that > an updated version of VLC plays the file? Does that make VLC "a buggy > hack"? no. the last time i upgraded vlc, the upgrade was worse than the version it replaced, so i reverted it. > The Codeweaver folk do what they can but Mac OSX and Windows are > basically incompatible OSes. Getting *any* Windows stuff to run under > OSX is good work. Getting all of it to would take something like > making OSX into Windows. they're wrapping wine, which is a hack. > >> No, I don't work there or sell the program. I just find it easier to > >> use than WINE. > > > >it's wine under the hood. > > Obviously. What I should have typed is: "I just find it easier to use > than a bare WINE implementation without CrossOver's GUI making it > simple for us." > Happier, now? crossover may be easier to use than wine but it's still a buggy mess and most of the time it doesn't work all that well. the fact that there's a compatibility list is proof. > >> >otherwise, you are aware of the differences between vmware/parallels > >> >versus boot camp. you'll need windows for either opion, plus the cost > >> >of vmware/parallels if you choose that path. > >> > >> And that is the one, true, most excellent advantage of CrossOver, you > >> don't need to buy a Win licence at astronomical expense and you don't > >> need to install Windows. > > > >astronomical expense? > > > >windows is hardly expensive. > > Depends on your budget, I suppose. Mr. Gates can probably afford a > licence for every Mac in his houses but there are people who find a > full licence to be a tad pricey. > Me, for one. under $100 is a tad pricy? how the hell do you afford the computer? or do you find it on some site? > >> WINE is the same but I found that more difficult to use. > >> CrossOver is basically WINE for dummies. > >> If Michele is smart enough and experienced enough to use WINE that > >> might suit her more. I was neither. > > > >if crossover works, then she's in luck. however, there's a very good > >chance it won't. > > Why are you so down on it? It's only software, not a threat to your > religion or manhood. because it's buggy. as i said, if it works, that's great, but chances are it won't. many people simply do not want the hassles.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-04 17:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c1o56pFoii9U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61742 |
On 2014-07-04, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > I've pretty much been ignoring this topic, but now I have a strong > desire to run an application (BridgeMaster 2000, if you're curious) > that runs only on Windows. > > What would be my best option: Boot Camp, Parallels, VMware Fusion, > Crossover? > > I know that the biggest disadvantage for running Boot Camp is that I'd > have to reboot the computer every time I want to switch between OSes. > And both Parallels and Fusion cost extra money. I have Crossover > because it came in one of those bundles that are sometimes offered, so > price isn't a problem with it, but I'm all that convinced that it would > be the best way to go. I've never found CrossOver's robustness to be satisfactory for my needs. Every time I have tried it, it's been buggy as hell. Admittedly, the last time I tried it was a few years ago - perhaps things have changed (I doubt it though). Between VMware Fusion and Parallels Desktop, it's a toss-up. One tends to leap frog the other in terms of features and performance every now and then, but in general either one performs admirably, and both offer similar functionality - some might say it's a matter of taste. You didn't mention VirtualBox, which is free. And with any of the virtualization solutions (excluding CrossOver), you'll need to purchase or obtain a copy of Windows to run. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-04 17:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c1o5scFoii9U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61744 |
On 2014-07-04, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > On 2014-07-04, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> I've pretty much been ignoring this topic, but now I have a strong >> desire to run an application (BridgeMaster 2000, if you're curious) >> that runs only on Windows. >> >> What would be my best option: Boot Camp, Parallels, VMware Fusion, >> Crossover? >> >> I know that the biggest disadvantage for running Boot Camp is that I'd >> have to reboot the computer every time I want to switch between OSes. >> And both Parallels and Fusion cost extra money. I have Crossover >> because it came in one of those bundles that are sometimes offered, so >> price isn't a problem with it, but I'm all that convinced that it would >> be the best way to go. > > I've never found CrossOver's robustness to be satisfactory for my > needs. Every time I have tried it, it's been buggy as hell. Admittedly, > the last time I tried it was a few years ago - perhaps things have > changed (I doubt it though). > > Between VMware Fusion and Parallels Desktop, it's a toss-up. One tends > to leap frog the other in terms of features and performance every now > and then, but in general either one performs admirably, and both offer > similar functionality - some might say it's a matter of taste. You > didn't mention VirtualBox, which is free. And with any of the > virtualization solutions (excluding CrossOver), you'll need to purchase > or obtain a copy of Windows to run. One thing I forgot to mention: With either VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop (possibly VirtualBox too, though I haven't checked), it is possible to point the virtual machine to an existing Boot Camp volume. This means you can install Boot Camp, then install the VM, point it to the Boot Camp drive, and run Windows from there without having to reboot. The added benefit of doing things this way is if your Boot Camp volume is on a separate physical device than your Mac OS X startup volume, performance of disk writes in the Windows guest OS is much faster, since hard drive access is no longer shared between Mac OS X and Windows. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-04 11:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <040720141149366564%michelle@michelle.org> |
| In reply to | #61746 |
In article <c1o5scFoii9U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > With either VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop (possibly VirtualBox too, > though I haven't checked), it is possible to point the virtual machine > to an existing Boot Camp volume. This means you can install Boot Camp, > then install the VM, point it to the Boot Camp drive, and run Windows > from there without having to reboot. The added benefit of doing things > this way is if your Boot Camp volume is on a separate physical device > than your Mac OS X startup volume, performance of disk writes in the > Windows guest OS is much faster, since hard drive access is no longer > shared between Mac OS X and Windows. That's interesting. I would either have to partition my Time Machine drive (it's 3TB, so there's plenty of room on it) or buy another external drive.. BTW, I've not heard about Virtual Box.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-04 18:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c1obllFqq51U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #61751 |
On 2014-07-04, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > In article <c1o5scFoii9U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger ><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > >> With either VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop (possibly VirtualBox too, >> though I haven't checked), it is possible to point the virtual machine >> to an existing Boot Camp volume. This means you can install Boot Camp, >> then install the VM, point it to the Boot Camp drive, and run Windows >> from there without having to reboot. The added benefit of doing things >> this way is if your Boot Camp volume is on a separate physical device >> than your Mac OS X startup volume, performance of disk writes in the >> Windows guest OS is much faster, since hard drive access is no longer >> shared between Mac OS X and Windows. > > That's interesting. I would either have to partition my Time Machine > drive (it's 3TB, so there's plenty of room on it) or buy another > external drive.. The performance boost is worth the trouble, IMO. > BTW, I've not heard about Virtual Box. It's a free option, and won't have all the bells and whistles of the other two. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-05 09:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <jblk8b-hce2.ln1@news.chingola.ch> |
| In reply to | #61753 |
On 2014-07-04, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > On 2014-07-04, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> In article <c1o5scFoii9U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger >><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: >> >>> With either VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop (possibly VirtualBox too, >>> though I haven't checked), it is possible to point the virtual machine >>> to an existing Boot Camp volume. This means you can install Boot Camp, >>> then install the VM, point it to the Boot Camp drive, and run Windows >>> from there without having to reboot. The added benefit of doing things >>> this way is if your Boot Camp volume is on a separate physical device >>> than your Mac OS X startup volume, performance of disk writes in the >>> Windows guest OS is much faster, since hard drive access is no longer >>> shared between Mac OS X and Windows. >> >> That's interesting. I would either have to partition my Time Machine >> drive (it's 3TB, so there's plenty of room on it) or buy another >> external drive.. > > The performance boost is worth the trouble, IMO. > >> BTW, I've not heard about Virtual Box. > > It's a free option, and won't have all the bells and whistles of the > other two. VirtualBox does have regular updates and the Mac version has got a lot better since they first introduced it. OTOH the frequency of the updates can drive you nuts, especially if you are running it on more than one system. -- Big Data is any data that is expensive to manage and hard to extract value from. -- Michael Franklin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-04 22:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <040720142236226641%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #61751 |
In article <040720141149366564%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > In article <c1o5scFoii9U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger > <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > > > With either VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop (possibly VirtualBox too, > > though I haven't checked), it is possible to point the virtual machine > > to an existing Boot Camp volume. This means you can install Boot Camp, > > then install the VM, point it to the Boot Camp drive, and run Windows > > from there without having to reboot. The added benefit of doing things > > this way is if your Boot Camp volume is on a separate physical device > > than your Mac OS X startup volume, performance of disk writes in the > > Windows guest OS is much faster, since hard drive access is no longer > > shared between Mac OS X and Windows. > > That's interesting. I would either have to partition my Time Machine > drive (it's 3TB, so there's plenty of room on it) or buy another > external drive.. > > BTW, I've not heard about Virtual Box. As I said, I run Win7 under it no problems. I got it so I can run Publisher. -- "The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the first place." - Douglas Adams
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-05 11:34 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <1lob5c3.10knhp19ef4aaN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> |
| In reply to | #61751 |
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > In article <c1o5scFoii9U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger > <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > > > With either VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop (possibly VirtualBox too, > > though I haven't checked), it is possible to point the virtual machine > > to an existing Boot Camp volume. This means you can install Boot Camp, > > then install the VM, point it to the Boot Camp drive, and run Windows > > from there without having to reboot. The added benefit of doing things > > this way is if your Boot Camp volume is on a separate physical device > > than your Mac OS X startup volume, performance of disk writes in the > > Windows guest OS is much faster, since hard drive access is no longer > > shared between Mac OS X and Windows. > > That's interesting. I would either have to partition my Time Machine > drive (it's 3TB, so there's plenty of room on it) or buy another > external drive.. If you were thinking of partitioning your Time Machine drive to run Boot Camp, that isn't a good choice. Windows doesn't want to be installed on or booted from external drives (there are probably hacks to work around that). As a result, Boot Camp Assistant won't work on an external drive (because Windows doesn't support that configuration), therefore you would need to do the partitioning, Windows installation and Apple driver installation without assistance. A VM-based solution with a virtual hard drive is more flexible, since you can locate the virtual hard drive anywhere convenient within the Mac file system. > BTW, I've not heard about Virtual Box. When my need to run a virtual machine on an Intel Mac first arose (I had previously used Virtual PC on PowerPC Macs), I briefly tried an earlier version of Parallels Desktop (I got at least two of them via software bundles) but there were some technical details I didn't like (probably rectified in more recent versions), so I tried VMware Fusion, preferred it, and stuck with it through subsequent upgrades. I currently have VMware Fusion 6.0.4 running on OS X 10.9.4, with virtual machines for Windows XP Pro, Windows 7 Pro, several versions of OS X, and even one running MS-DOS for some very old software (which was harder to get working). I haven't tried VirtualBox as I already had VMware Fusion by the time I found out that VB existed. My understanding is that VirtualBox is not as polished or as well integrated with the host Mac platorm as either Parallels Desktop or VMware Fusion. The comparisons between Parallels and VMware vary, with Parallels generally having an edge in some areas (such as 3D graphics support), while VMware has an edge in other areas (such as USB device support). I have the impression that VMware tends to be more stable. From helping other people using Parallels, it seems they are more agressive than VMware about forcing paid upgrades to run properly on new OS X versions. I was able to keep using VMware Fusion 4 while I was on OS X 10.6, 10.7 and 10.8, then upgraded to version 6 to support OS X 10.9. According to discussion on the VMware forums, the latest 6.0.4 update allows VMware Fusion to run on developer previews of Yosemite, though it wouldn't surprise me if a later (paid) upgrade turns out to "better" at running on Yosemite. -- David Empson dempson@actrix.gen.nz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-04 16:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lp7e4k$mho$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #61812 |
On 2014-07-04 23:34:54 +0000, David Empson said: > Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > >> In article <c1o5scFoii9U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger >> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: >> >>> With either VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop (possibly VirtualBox too, >>> though I haven't checked), it is possible to point the virtual machine >>> to an existing Boot Camp volume. This means you can install Boot Camp, >>> then install the VM, point it to the Boot Camp drive, and run Windows >>> from there without having to reboot. The added benefit of doing things >>> this way is if your Boot Camp volume is on a separate physical device >>> than your Mac OS X startup volume, performance of disk writes in the >>> Windows guest OS is much faster, since hard drive access is no longer >>> shared between Mac OS X and Windows. >> >> That's interesting. I would either have to partition my Time Machine >> drive (it's 3TB, so there's plenty of room on it) or buy another >> external drive.. > > If you were thinking of partitioning your Time Machine drive to run Boot > Camp, that isn't a good choice. Windows doesn't want to be installed on > or booted from external drives (there are probably hacks to work around > that). As a result, Boot Camp Assistant won't work on an external drive > (because Windows doesn't support that configuration), therefore you > would need to do the partitioning, Windows installation and Apple driver > installation without assistance. More than that, Windows won't boot from a HFS+ Extended volume... ...which is normally a requirement for a Time Machine backup volume. > > A VM-based solution with a virtual hard drive is more flexible, since > you can locate the virtual hard drive anywhere convenient within the Mac > file system. > >> BTW, I've not heard about Virtual Box. > > When my need to run a virtual machine on an Intel Mac first arose (I had > previously used Virtual PC on PowerPC Macs), I briefly tried an earlier > version of Parallels Desktop (I got at least two of them via software > bundles) but there were some technical details I didn't like (probably > rectified in more recent versions), so I tried VMware Fusion, preferred > it, and stuck with it through subsequent upgrades. > > I currently have VMware Fusion 6.0.4 running on OS X 10.9.4, with > virtual machines for Windows XP Pro, Windows 7 Pro, several versions of > OS X, and even one running MS-DOS for some very old software (which was > harder to get working). > > I haven't tried VirtualBox as I already had VMware Fusion by the time I > found out that VB existed. > > My understanding is that VirtualBox is not as polished or as well > integrated with the host Mac platorm as either Parallels Desktop or > VMware Fusion. > > The comparisons between Parallels and VMware vary, with Parallels > generally having an edge in some areas (such as 3D graphics support), > while VMware has an edge in other areas (such as USB device support). I > have the impression that VMware tends to be more stable. > > From helping other people using Parallels, it seems they are more > agressive than VMware about forcing paid upgrades to run properly on new > OS X versions. > > I was able to keep using VMware Fusion 4 while I was on OS X 10.6, 10.7 > and 10.8, then upgraded to version 6 to support OS X 10.9. According to > discussion on the VMware forums, the latest 6.0.4 update allows VMware > Fusion to run on developer previews of Yosemite, though it wouldn't > surprise me if a later (paid) upgrade turns out to "better" at running > on Yosemite.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-05 12:04 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <1lob7re.1kht5v011cn5xaN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz> |
| In reply to | #61813 |
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > On 2014-07-04 23:34:54 +0000, David Empson said: > > > Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > > > >> In article <c1o5scFoii9U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger > >> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > >> > >>> With either VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop (possibly VirtualBox too, > >>> though I haven't checked), it is possible to point the virtual machine > >>> to an existing Boot Camp volume. This means you can install Boot Camp, > >>> then install the VM, point it to the Boot Camp drive, and run Windows > >>> from there without having to reboot. The added benefit of doing things > >>> this way is if your Boot Camp volume is on a separate physical device > >>> than your Mac OS X startup volume, performance of disk writes in the > >>> Windows guest OS is much faster, since hard drive access is no longer > >>> shared between Mac OS X and Windows. > >> > >> That's interesting. I would either have to partition my Time Machine > >> drive (it's 3TB, so there's plenty of room on it) or buy another > >> external drive.. > > > > If you were thinking of partitioning your Time Machine drive to run Boot > > Camp, that isn't a good choice. Windows doesn't want to be installed on > > or booted from external drives (there are probably hacks to work around > > that). As a result, Boot Camp Assistant won't work on an external drive > > (because Windows doesn't support that configuration), therefore you > > would need to do the partitioning, Windows installation and Apple driver > > installation without assistance. > > More than that, Windows won't boot from a HFS+ Extended volume... > > ...which is normally a requirement for a Time Machine backup volume. You are mixing up two concepts. Mac OS Extended (HFS+) is a file system, which is required on the volume (partition) used by Time Machine partition. That has nothing to do with the file system used on other partitions on the same drive. Typically the drive would be using the GUID Partition Table scheme, which allows a mixture of Mac-specific systems (e.g. Mac OS Extended) and Windows-specific file systems (e.g. FAT32, ExFAT and NTFS). GUID Partition Table is able to support a fake Master Boot Record to allow Windows to boot from the drive (as long as the Windows partition is one of the first four). The problem is that it still wouldn't work, because Windows doesn't want to boot from an external drive connected via USB or similar. (I don't know offhand if it would mind booting from eSATA via a PCI Express card, or a SATA drive connected via Thunderbolt, both of which might appear to be sufficiently "internal".) -- David Empson dempson@actrix.gen.nz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web