Dell collaborating with software makers on virtual PCs

Apparently, Dell is working with VMware (makers of Fusion) and SWsoft (the team behind Parallels) to develop new computers with virtualization features for a new line of the company's PCs. According to reports, Dell's chief technology officer Kevin Kettler confirmed the collaboration at the Linuxworld conference in San Francisco. The plans right now are for the systems to tackle virtual versions of Windows and Linux which could run in tandem on a user's machine, though when asked about support for Apple's OS X on the virtual PCs, Kettler said "I can't speculate on that," but went on to say "virtualization is very powerful. It's an environment that would allow many different operating systems to coexist. You can interpret that however you would like." So -- at least as far as we can tell -- not an out-and-out "no."

[Via Pocket-lint]

[Major Malfunction @ Aug 16th 2007 2:01PM]

Wait.. wait a sec... slow it down nah... not enough evidence.. however; "When reached for comment, Khanom said that she had been "unable to stop listening to music in court," due to the release of "the new Hillary Duff record.""

What the hell do you call that? Obviously has disdain for the legal system, but loves dat Duff.

[Jordan @ Aug 16th 2007 2:05PM]

ummm... wrong article... they aren't emulating Hilary Duff here.

[Major Malfunction @ Aug 16th 2007 2:09PM]

damn you Engadget comment system... thats a first, but I know I was reading a different article. *smacks head*

[fistpittingnork @ Aug 16th 2007 2:42PM]

Hang in there buddy, Friday is only 1 day away.

[chezzo @ Aug 16th 2007 5:53PM]

"Major Malfunction" indeed...

[The General @ Aug 16th 2007 2:01PM]

They can't "support" Mac OS X as they would be supporting violation of the Mac OS X license agreement.

Am I right?

[Jeff Lewis @ Aug 16th 2007 2:25PM]

It's more than that. Every Mac has a TPM chip with a PKI key in write-only store that Apple uses to validate that the computer is a 'real' Mac. (Yes - write only store - that's not a joke - you can write a PKI key into it, but only the chip can access it, there's no way to read it back out from outside the chip).

The only way MacOS X can run on any other platform is either for Apple to provide a PKI key for systems that have TPMs, or to remove the TPM requirement from MacOS - which is what the hackers do, in essence. I don't see that happening any time soon.

And people talk about Microsoft's DRM...

[Chris @ Aug 16th 2007 3:51PM]

Steve Jobs should refer to his "Open Letter on DRM" to the music labels earlier this year on this topic.

"Hello, Kettle. This is pot."

[CajunLuke @ Aug 16th 2007 7:06PM]

Jeff:

No. Macs do not contain TPM chips. Some may have, but no Mac sold today has one.

[Jordan @ Aug 16th 2007 2:03PM]

Actually, OS X emulation is never going to happen. You have to configure VMware inside of the OS you are emulating. And Apple has told VMware that they may never make this configuration file. So instead of being sued, they just don't support OS X. I wish they did or at least some hacker made the freaking config file... (hint, hint to the 1337 coders of the world). Apple makes too much money on hardware to let others use their software.

[The General @ Aug 16th 2007 2:06PM]

I beg to differ. JaS accomplished that feat no more than 2 years ago.

OSx86, anybody?

[Jordan @ Aug 16th 2007 2:19PM]

Thats not emulation. Thats an illegal workaround of the Apple system verification process. Did I mention its ILLEGAL!? Apple is pissed about that whole business. OSx86 is not that stable anyways. (At least I could not get it to work for the life of me.)

[The General @ Aug 16th 2007 2:37PM]

So you're saying that VMware image of Mac OS X doesn't really exist? The one I have on my computer right here? That one?

[Jordan @ Aug 16th 2007 3:13PM]

VMware does not have ANY OS X image on their site (that I can see). You probably got it from a torrent site. If you can find the image on their site, I shall shut up. Please prove me wrong - I REALLY want OS X!

[dj-kenpo @ Aug 16th 2007 3:53PM]

Jordon, plz don't mention what you don't know.

JAS isn't 'unstable'.

I have osx 10.4.8 running on a pentium4 1.7ghz with 512mb ram/40gb drive, 8mb integrated video.

it runs just fine, and seeing as I got the cpu/motherboard/case/psu/40gb from the trash, the $5 I spent on ebay for the ram,..

apple can be as pissed as they want with JAS, I love the man.
there's no way in hell I'd spend $400 ona used g4 of comparable speed.

if apple allowed me to buy the osx and install it, I would, but they don't, so too bad, I'll run it anyways, no skin off there nose nor mine.

in fact, all the better for them, cuz then I test my sites for safari.

[Jordan @ Aug 16th 2007 4:11PM]

I agree with you dj-kenpo, except a Mac Mini is much more powerful than any standard clock P4. All I was saying is that I can't get it to work and many other people are having issues. I am currently considering buying a Mini just to test my sites as well. Linux is a good way to test sites, too (both are Unix). Free BSD is the closest to OS X as far as Linux goes.

PS - Avoid posting that you are pirating and using an illegal OS online. It can be used in court. =P

[The General @ Aug 16th 2007 4:59PM]

Jordan,

Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[Jordan @ Aug 16th 2007 5:15PM]

I KNOW IT EXISTS!!! I've heard this stuff before. But the fact of the matter is that it does not exist in a LEGAL form. Apple doesn't support it. VMware cannot support it. NO ONE can legally provide it until Apple says so. Apple is the real determining factor in all of this. If you don't mind getting a letter from Apple's attorneys, go ahead. Get OS X on your PC if you want to. I certainly will not stop you from doing so. Now please, quit replying and get on with your life. Thank you.

[The General @ Aug 16th 2007 5:32PM]

Then what did you mean by "or at least some hacker made the freaking config file... (hint, hint to the 1337 coders of the world)."

[The General @ Aug 16th 2007 5:33PM]

Er, I see what you meant by it. I read that "make" instead of "made."

Nevermind.

[omnicloud @ Aug 16th 2007 6:34PM]

Ehhh.. isn't there already a Safari 3 Beta for Windows? They run on the same engine. I don't think it's necessary to get a whole Mac for that.

[brownc4 @ Aug 16th 2007 2:03PM]

Wouldn't virtualization of OS X violate the License agrrement?

[7of7 @ Aug 16th 2007 2:12PM]

Screw the license agreement.

[Popinsky @ Aug 16th 2007 3:01PM]

Oh, and don't forget the security issues. Breaking out of the virtualization 'prison' is not impossible...
But undoubtedly Dell will tout this as an ultra-secure computing environment for all of us.
The idea of having several virtual OS's running with easily accessible 'clean' snapshots is nothing new, but it is interesting to see bigger players starting to get into this and trying to put a clean interface on top of it.

[Johnny Appleseed @ Aug 16th 2007 3:29PM]

Well...at least finally we have some hope that maybe we are getting closer to the day when we may see OSX on a PC! I really really hope to see it happen. There are so many cool apple programs that I want to run, but don't want to Buy a Mac just for that. Yes, I will buy a fully licensed version of OSX if it will work.

I can keep dreaming that this day will come soon.

For all the doubters, what have you to say now. Silence is deafening....

[dj-kenpo @ Aug 16th 2007 3:57PM]

read the above comments, just download JAS, you can already run osx on a pc just fine.

If you just mean legally though, then sure, I hope that day comes too . but I'd also love to see osx go open source, dual platform, but you can't get what you wish for. they need to make money and put food on the table too.

[Johnny Appleseed @ Aug 16th 2007 6:58PM]

yes, there is also a program called Pear PC or something like that and it will allow you to install OSX, but that program hasn't been updated for at least 2 years as far as I know. If this goes legal, there will be more support, allowing you to run apple programs smoothly, and thats what I'm hoping for.

[Aaargh @ Aug 16th 2007 4:34PM]

So basically Dell is going to install VW-options standard on his computers...? There is nothing that would stop people from already do this on their (dell)computers...

[Aaargh @ Aug 16th 2007 4:36PM]

VW-options = VM-options

[Chris @ Aug 16th 2007 5:00PM]

Won't Xen do this same thing but at a firmware level? No bloated base OS (by bloated I mean Windows).

[Chris @ Aug 16th 2007 5:05PM]

By using a firmware abstraction layer, the TPM on Mac systems can be emulated at a lower level (read..less hacking).

[Maul @ Aug 16th 2007 5:36PM]

So your going to go out of your way to build, hack or otherwise waste a lot of time instead of using a Mac which can already run all these OS's natively anyway?

Makes perfect sense to me.

[John @ Aug 16th 2007 5:42PM]

Not everyone wants to be tied to a white, shiny homosexual looking laptop

[PM @ Aug 16th 2007 6:44PM]

@ John

Yeah, instead they want to be tied to a biege transexual box.

[roger_huston @ Aug 16th 2007 6:04PM]

Personally, I have always viewed Apple as short sighted. They will enjoy their success, but only for a time, they they will fade to near obscurity again.

You would think that by allowing their OS to be virtualized that people might go out and buy their OS and run it and perhaps after a while, fall in love with it and go out and buy a Mac.

Of course, they can only see that if they allow people to use their OS on non-Mac's that they will loose their dominant position of less than 5% of the PC market as people will rip it off and use it on just any old box and Apple would be out of the hardware business. And we all know, that you can't be successful in this market simply by selling software - right Microsoft?

Apple is just like Sony, they want to OWN a market completely and force everyone out of business that competes against them. They don't play nice with others and eventually the market will react against them.

- Roger (over and out)

[PM @ Aug 16th 2007 6:44PM]

" they want to OWN a market completely and force everyone out of business that competes against them. They don't play nice with others and eventually the market will react against them."

You just perfectly described Microsoft...do you realize that?

[roger_huston @ Aug 16th 2007 7:35PM]

Actually, there is a difference.

Microsoft is responsible for one of the greatest marketplaces ever created. I live in the SF Bay area and work in the industry, to which most of us can attribute our livelihood to MS.

Remember, at a time where Apple was selling their Development kits for $5k each, MS practically gave them away at $500. They worked MUCH harder than apple to help the community grow.

Lets look at it a different way. Thousands and thousand of people got rich out of the market MS created, who got rich off of Apple?

Now, I am not saying that MS is not without its faults, they do want to dominate their industry, but they recognize that this is a community and for it to last the community must also profit.

- Roger

[PM @ Aug 16th 2007 7:53PM]

"Microsoft is responsible for one of the greatest marketplaces ever created."

It was not them who created it, please don't mistake one of the greatest industrial turnovers in history. None of Microsoft's primary sectors were created by them. Hotmail wasn't. Windows Live Once Care wasen't. FrontPage in Office wasn't...to name a few of the many. Heck, even Windows was not their original creation. Please don't give credit to Microsoft for something which they do not deserve.

Thousands of people got rich from the markets Microsoft ventured into...yes...there is no denying that, however millions of individuals lost their jobs because of the same reason. If current market share trends mean anything, it certainly can justify that. You are only taking into consideration the Bay area. By being so against open source standards...do you realize how many jobs Microsoft is putting at risk? Guess what, most of these jobs are not from the Bay area, which btw, is one of the more industrialized, and wealthy areas to begin with, so it does not speak a clear share of how the rest of the world is who are trying to embrace open source.

Apple does not need to dominate the market in order to prove that they are a serious competitor. Neither does Linux. If the Microsoft Anti-Trust trials meant anything...it goes to show how far Microsoft tries to monopolize and to be honest blackmail (remember IBM in the anti-trust trial?) in order to maintain that superiority.

[Ed @ Aug 16th 2007 8:15PM]

Microsoft is very good at working with partners. It is a necessity for them. Apple...not so much.

Mac OS X works very well under VMWare.

[PM @ Aug 17th 2007 3:12AM]

Microsoft good working with partners?

Do you even know how badly they screwed over their DRM infested PlaysForSure partners? That's probably the worst cutting of partners in the history of corporate partnership deals.

[:|Colin|: @ Sep 3rd 2007 12:41AM]

Apple might consider another Company using their OS
i mean think about it, what ever they do ppl are gonna use the OSx86. so why not let it go on anyones comp? Apple could make ALOT more money that way.and ppl DONT want to pay Big Bucks for a Computer for 1300$ when they could get the same for 900$ with Vista,( i would take vista off and Put OSx86 on ;) )
but it would basically Ruin all of Apples Computers, cause Apple wants them to be Unique, with an OS anyone can use, than what makes them that unique?


I wonder what they are gonna do...