What I find using Google …

Adobe is a business. It releases products, and kills products, when it either can justify the cost or not justify the cost of development. Adobe would love it if Macs users stopped using Macs and switched to Windows. Half the work, same pay off.

My point is even more likely with video game developers who make a game and often are done with it. Game developers may very well just say hey if you want to run the game just start up in Windows.

Well Make or Break I guess depends on the industry, Since Discreet now owns maya, the other major 3D applicaiton for macs, which is traditionally a Windows only company, and major competitor of apps like shake, motion, and FCP, it may become the only major player, and they are no where near a Universal Binary because mayas is very awekward to code, being originally written for PC and linux based systems, and relying heavily on OS functions for interface.

now that mac’s have access to identical graphics cards as the regular windows machine, they’ll have little reason not to compare in realtime 3d capabilities, but what fgood will that be if the 3D apps don’t work.

Adobe needs to rework photoshop Its also another reason we still have no linux photoshop to date despite the huge demand for it.

I am not sure those applications are good examples. Many OSX programs like Office, and various Adobe programs, were designed for OS 9. These developers probably designed the programs well. They just did not anticipate Apple would move to OSX, and then Intel. Adobe and Microsoft programs are much more complicated then the ones you mention. Those probably were originally written in Coco, which Office and Adobe programs were not. For instance, Mathematica was alledgedly recompiled to work on Intel Macs in a matter of hours. However, it was orignally written in Coco.

The point is if Adobe and Microsoft are spending months and months developing for OSX, which is the case, why bother if Macs will boot into Windows. Cinema is not a make it or break it application for Apple. Photoshop and the Office suite are.

Howabout this for an answer:
Its simple to do.

Now that is a misleading statement I grant you, its only simple if you designed your app well in the first place, some simple examples are MODO, and Cinema 4D/BodyPaint 3D. 2 3D applicaitons which both were able to get successful ports working in a couple days. Of course their code is very OS inspecific, as a god applciation should be. Thyey both use their own interface systems rather then relying on the OS, and their code is designed to be easy to edit, which is why they also can release more updates in a much shorter period of time with 12 or less programmers then adobe or microsoft could for apps like office and photoshop.

Maxon was also able to get a succesful port of Cinema 4D running on XP 64 as a 64 bit app in a mere two weeks for release, fortunately they had a hardcore test team to do that.

They now are at the point where they are supporting linux as well, and are ouputting PowerMac OSX, Mactel OSX, Windows xp32, Windows Xp 64, And various linux distro’s in 32 and with little effort in porting form their original windows 32 and powermac 32 of just over a year ago. Its all in how you design your program.

I understand that gamers want to play video games on their Macs which largely only run on Windows. However, if my forecast is correct, Blizzard may decide it is not cost productive to develop for the Mac if people can just boot up in Windows. As an avid Mac user, that would upset me because I love playing Diablo on my Mac, and love being able to have my other Mac programs operating while doing so.

I bought a Mac knowing I would not get the latest video games. I am cool with that because all the applications I really need to use do run on the Mac. That might not continue to be the case if people can boot Windows on their Mac and doing so is reliable.

I also have another theory. Microsoft does not want people to be able to natively boot Windows on a Mac. If they could, many Windows users may very well buy a Mac, and find out they really do not need Windows. This is a guess, but I suspect Apple and Microsoft made a deal in which Microsoft would develop Office for the Mac, if Apple gave up something in return, for example not natively allowing Windows support on the new Macs.

Otherwise, the deal made no sense. Microsoft was already making a good profit on Office for the Mac, its best year ever. Moreover, Microsoft has been developing Office for the Mac for many years now without a contract. In fact, I believe it was last year, Microsoft made the point that the two were working together and did not need a contract to continue the relationship. What other developer who is making a profit, needs a contract to continue developing something? Also, the timing of the announcement was peculiar.

If I was a developer, however, say Adobe, who makes software for a profit, and currently has to support two operating systems, one of which I currently have to overhaul for a new processor, why would I develop for the Mac if I could just tell people to run Windows on their Macs in order to run my applications?

Sure, Mac users would grumble, but users who need those applications would have no choice but to oblige. The idea is not to have to rely on Windows at all. If everybody can boot into Windows on a Mac, Apple developers may very well discover it is not worth their while to develop for the Mac OS anymore.

Not smart at all. I hope those trying to boot Windows natively fail.

I was under the impression that the current versions on XP aren’t compatible with the hardware ties that Apple is using (EFI rather than BIOS) and that while Windows Vista 64-bit supports EFI, Apple doesn’t have a 64-bit Intel Mac yet.

That being said, anything is possible these days. I just won’t hold my breath.

(Why is my comment not showing up?)

i really hope someone cracks this one, because if they do, i’ll have run out of excuses not to buy one ;)