Don't Let Them DIE (Yiokse) Mac OS

When Wayne Dyer passed on recently, I was reminded of one of his well-known quotes: “Don’t die with the music still in you.” It’s a profound message. You don’t know when you are going to die—or like Wayne, just not wake up again. Those who have been given a terminal diagnosis can surprise the medical world by living years longer than expected. And at the other end of the spectrum, any of us can be hit by that proverbial bus at any moment. So what should you be doing between this moment and that inevitable one? Expressing your passion, your “music.”

What is it that makes you feel most alive, most vital? It could be mothering—your children, your parents, your pets, your community. It could be any of the arts—music, dance, theater, writing, painting. It could be your intellectual pursuits that fire up your imagination, like turning your fascination with 17th century Scotland into a series of historical novels. Whatever it is, it is yours!

Mac Reqs MinimumSupported Will It Run? Mac OS X: 10.11: Download the MacGameStore App to compare your Mac's information in real-time. Get the Mac App: 64bit Support: Unknown: CPU Type: Intel Mac Only: CPU Cores: Any: CPU Speed: 1 GHz: System RAM: 2 GB: Drive Space: Unknown: Video RAM: Any: Video Card: Any. Get more done with the new Google Chrome. A more simple, secure, and faster web browser than ever, with Google’s smarts built-in.

Have you turned away from the things you were animated about in your youth? Did your love of dance, for example, fade when you had to go out and earn a living? If you spent every free minute in college in the art studio, what happened to your inner artist when you entered the “real” world?

If you are one of the lucky ones, your youthful enthusiasms morphed into the driving purpose of your life. Your love of reading became a career in publishing. Your basic instinct to mediate the fights of your siblings and school friends turned you into a counselor. The zeal with which you helped mom make dinner grew into becoming a chef or organic gardener.

But if you’re like many, your life’s journey has not been a straight line. Many of us had to survive various forms of abuse before we could even think about our passions. If you look back at your life, from the vantage point of who you are now, can you follow the dots—seeing what created your life as it is today?

I know that, for me, music was a passion. It touched my soul in a way that I didn’t understand until I discovered the inner music of meditation and the spiritual path of energy healing. I grew up in an abusive household. I ran from the abuse, straight into various addictions. A nasty medical diagnosis turned me away from addictions and into what became not only my passion, but also my life purpose: energy medicine.

Do you know your life purpose? Why you are here on Earth in this particular time and place? With these particular people in your life? Look at your present situation, carefully. Is there someone you know who has the expertise in an area you would just love to develop? Is there some way to incorporate your love of design into the work you do?

Here are a few ways to discover your passion and live your life purpose:

  • Slow down and unplug for at least a half hour a day. Go for a walk. Do yoga. Sit and stare out the window. You’ll be able to hear your inner voice more clearly.
  • Be your unique self. There is something you have to offer that no one else does. Don’t be embarrassed by being different; let your uniqueness shine!
  • Look for recurring themes in your life. What are you repeatedly drawn to? What parts of your life touch you with joy and light instead of discomfort and pain?
  • What do you consider fun? What makes you happy?
  • If you didn’t have to worry about money, what would you be doing? Is there a way to bring whatever that is into your life?
  • Don’t let fear stand in your way. What’s the worst that could happen? Why do you care what others may think of you?
  • Believe in yourself. You can do it.
  • Meditate. Meditate. The more you connect with your Higher Self, the easier it will be to navigate through life with passion and purpose.

Or as Wayne Dyer put it, “Don’t die with the music still in you.”

I've noticed something odd about my writing habits here at FatBits. The bigger the story, the less apt I am to blog about it. Big stories elicit big reactions. The bloggers come out in droves. By the time I've actually learned enough about the story to write about it, I feel like everything's already been said. The exception, of course, is when everyone gets it wrong (in my ever-so-humble opinion). Then I still feel like I have something to add to the discussion.

Most big stories about Apple fall somewhere in the middle, with an even mix of astute and asinine commentary. The recent announcement of Boot Camp exceeded my expectations, however. Within hours of the announcement, the entire Mac web had dealt with its initial Windows-induced anxiety attacks and settled on a common analysis of the situation. The remarkable part was not the quick arrival of a consensus, but the fact that it was actually right.

John Grubersummed up the situation beautifully, and I agree with what he wrote in almost every detail. His post is more articulate and lucid than most other Boot Camp commentary on the web, but the content is essentially the same as you'll find elsewhere. We all got this one right.

Don

Perhaps predictably, as my sense of collective satisfaction and pride reached its peak, I stumbled upon a post that must have been created by the Bizarro Gruber. Chris Seibold's analysis of the Boot Camp announcement is exactly wrong in every way that John Gruber's is exactly right.

I'm not going to pick apart Seibold's article. (Gruber already did that preemptively.) It's like the comically exaggerated exception that proves the rule. On the whole, I still say the Mac web got this one right, even after you throw out the highest and lowest scores. But I do have a little bit to say about Boot Camp.

My first reaction to the announcement was relief, not surprise. Ever since Apple joined the Windows benchmarking consortium, BAPCo, I've considered it a foregone conclusion that Apple hardware would eventually run Windows. I mean, duh. Why would any PC hardware maker join a Windows benchmarking consortium unless it wants to benchmark its hardware running Windows? Sure, you can come up with some (remotely) plausible alternate explanations, but Occam's razor applies. Just look at this quote from last month, found on some crazy web site. 'The likely end product of Apple's decision to join BAPCo are Mac OS X versions of the consortium benchmarking apps.' Likely?C'mon, people.

Don't Let Them Die (yiokse) Mac Os X

Yeah, I know, look at me, so brave with my 20/20 hindsight. But believe what you want. Resistance to the idea that 'BAPCo Windows on Macs' was built on a massive foundation of denial. Clear heads saw this as the mostly likely outcome by a long-shot.

So, that explains my lack of surprise. My relief came from a much more personal source. Finally, I'll be able to play Half Life 2! And Crysis, and Homeworld, and whatever else strikes my fancy. Yes, for me (and many other Mac users, I suspect), Windows will be a dandied-up game console OS. I've been resisting buying a gaming PC for a long time. Now I won't have to.

This brings me to the most worrying part of Apple's official sanctioning of Windows on Mac hardware. It's the dreaded rebuke, 'Let them use Windows!' Don't get me wrong, I do agree with the common wisdom here. Any vendor that decides to stop development of its Mac applications and directs its customers to boot into Windows and use the Windows version of the software instead is in for a very rude awakening. Mac users will not do this, and they will hate you for even suggesting it. Mac users want Mac software. Hell, even some actual Mac applications are met with an upturned nose. (Take Google Earth—please!) We're a finicky bunch.

Advertisement

This naturally leads to the fear that Mac users will simply snub themselves out of the software market entirely by rejecting the supposedly inevitable 'just boot Windows' crumbs offered to them. Here's my favorite rebuttal of that scenario, from a comment on Seibold's article page, by Dogger Blue. (Emphasis added.)

Consumers don't compete for developers. It's the other way around. Any developer who wants any significant presence among Mac users needs to release an OS X version. That is never going to change, and any developer who thinks that will change, might as well just write off all their Mac business because some other developer will come along and take advantage of the fact that they have just left the door wide open for competitors.

There is money to be made in the Mac software market. (Just ask Microsoft; Mac Office is incredibly profitable.) As long as the number of people with Apple hardware stays about the same, that's not going to change. And if it increases, as seems likely given the removal of one more barrier to entry ('Can it run my Windows?'), the pool of Mac software money will only get bigger. Software makers are competing for that pool. They have to satisfy us.

Game on?

This realization leads to a dark truth, however. What happens when the directive to 'just use the Windows version' is not met with a derisive sneer, but with an eager smile? 'Yes, please!' Not possible? You just saw it happen a few paragraphs ago when I expressed my willingness to boot Windows to play Crysis, et al. Ah games, always a special case. The grim calculus of Mac gaming is as follows.

Computer games are developed primarily for Windows. With Windows holding down 90% of the PC market, this won't change any time soon. Games are heavily optimized, and those optimizations are at least partially Windows-specific. If a Mac port of a game exists at all, it's almost always slower. Sometimes it has more features or looks better than the initial Windows release, but only when it's released much later. 'Later and slower' are not music to a gamer's ears.

Don't Let Them Die (yoke) Mac Os 11

Add to this Microsoft's ongoing campaign to migrate each and every PC game developer to DirectX, an API that does not exist on Mac OS X. This makes porting games to the Mac even harder, and adds another layer of abstraction to further impair performance.

Finally, games usually don't show any part of the OS at all, so they're effectively immune to Mac OS snobbery. All games are equally 'Mac-like' (or 'un-Mac-like,' depending on how you look at it) once they're up and running full-screen. At that point, the OS is no more important to a PC gamer than to a console gamer.

Now, given all of this, imagine offering a Mac gamer complete parity with the Windows game market in terms of software performance, availability, and pricing. All that's required is a reboot (and maybe not even that...more later). Who's interested?

A hell of a lot of people, that's who. Me, for one, and I'm about as die-hard a Mac gamer as you'll find. Transylvania, Lode Runner, Uninvited, Crystal Quest, Dark Castle, Lunar Rescue, Marathon, the worlds beyond the mackerel...I lived the life (such as it was). I live it still, with Quake 3, UT2004, Knights of the Old Republic, you name it. I'm ready and willing to buy Mac games. I'll accept 'a little bit later and a little bit slower.' But fewer and fewer Mac game ports meet even those timid criteria.

There are a few saving graces here. The first is that the pie may get bigger even as the portion of customers willing to pay for Mac game ports gets smaller. Things could even out in the end, or it might even be a net win. And mark my words, I will buy the Mac version of UT2007 if it's at least as good and as timely as the UT2004 Mac port. I hope there are enough Mac users like me to sustain such a product. Adding more total Mac users can only help the cause.

Advertisement

The second source of hope comes from the Intel transition. Mac game porters should have an easier time with CPU optimization now that they can directly benefit from the work done on Windows. (DirectX is still a thorn in the side of Mac gaming, but presumably developers have been honing their DirectX-to-OpenGL libraries on Mac OS X in recent years.)

Finally, there's the initial reaction from the Mac game porters themselves. It's a mixed bag, to be sure, but remember that this is likely the worst that they'll feel, interviewed mere hours after the Boot Camp announcement. Some of their gloom is probably justified, but they still seem willing to fight the good fight. That's all I ask.

Don't Let Them Die (yoke) Mac Os Catalina

Virtual PC redux

It was probably about thirty seconds between the time most Mac users heard about Boot Camp and their subsequent wish that they wouldn't have to reboot in order to run Windows on their Mac. Everyone wants virtualization, and it looks like Mac users will getit eventually, even if it doesn't come from Microsoft (né Connectix) or Apple. Getting it from Apple would be ideal, of course. It's bad enough to have to pay for Windows itself. It'd be nice to avoid paying even more for the virtualization software.

Speaking of which, the opening paragraph of Apple's Boot Camp web page contains this tease.

Apple will include technology in the next major release of Mac OS X, Leopard, that lets you install and run the Windows XP operating system on your Mac. Called Boot Camp (for now), you can download a public beta today.

Hopeful Mac users everywhere have interpreted this as near-confirmation that Leopard will have virtualization built-in. But as with the BAPCo story, I think they're mostly seeing what they want to see instead of what's really there. I want Leopard to include virtualization too, but the text above doesn't support that outcome.

It doesn't preclude it either, of course. It's completely neutral. The only way to view the Boot Camp announcement as a reinforcement of the virtualization in Leopard rumor is if you previously thought that Apple would 'never ever' allow Windows on Mac hardware. But that'd be a pretty silly belief, given Apple's historic support for products like Virtual PC, not to mention its own past forays into selling Macs that run Windows.

It's not even that I doubt that Apple is working on adding virtualization to Mac OS X. The question is, will it ship with Leopard? I see Boot Camp just as it's described by Apple: a beta test of dual booting. Early adopters will wring it out, the drivers will be further debugged and improved, and it'll all come together in the form of seamless, problem-free dual booting in Leopard.

I'm not sure Apple's even ready to consider including virtualization in Leopard. You have to walk before you can run, after all. I don't rule it out entirely, but right now I see this shaping up a lot like the resolution independent UI situation in Tiger: one release to lay the foundation, with real support to come in the next.

Finally, don't forget the Microsoft factor in all of this. I'm sure the ongoing negotiations between Apple and Microsoft regarding the future of Virtual PC are tightly intertwined with the possibility of virtualization built into future versions of Mac OS X.

The silver lining

Don't Let Them Die (yoke) Mac Os Operating System

Beyond all the obvious benefits and potential pitfalls of Boot Camp, its arrival has made life a lot easier in one important way. The accompanying firmware update reportedly allows Intel Macs to cold-boot from most Windows and Linux installations CDs. In other words, Intel Macs are finally starting to look a lot more like 'regular PCs' from the perspective of other operating systems. That's a far cry from the barren firmware wasteland that the Intel Macs shipped with, which required a $13,000 contest to overcome. (Okay, maybe it didn't strictly require all that money, but it was still pretty hard.)

Cringely has also essentially confirmed that Apple and Microsoft are working together to ensure that Intel Macs can boot and run Vista. This is all good news for non-hackers dreaming of One Computer to Run Them All. In the end, it helps the hackers too. Who really wants to futz with stuff like this? Give me that sweet, sweet official support.