lucero1148

This is a very interesting development: CodeWeavers has announced plans to release CrossOver Mac this summer. The $60 software will allow Intel Mac users to run Windows applications — including some games — without having to buy or install Windows itself. Boot Camp and Parallels Desktop both provide this capability for Intel Mac owners already — Boot Camp, software from Apple currently available in beta form, makes users reboot their Macs and run Windows. Parallels Desktop is a “virtualization” utility that enables the Windows operating system and Windows applications to run in Mac OS X, within another window (or, alternately, in full screen mode). CrossOver Mac will take this one step further — it eschews what CodeWeavers Chief Operating Officer Jon Parshall calls the “box within a box approach.” “What you see running is an application sitting in your Dock or your Applications folder,” Parshall told Macworld. Both Boot Camp and Parallels Desktop work because the new Macs utilize the same microprocessor that’s found in Windows-compatible computer, and CrossOver Mac employs the same basic principle. This wasn’t possible before January, when Macs depended solely on PowerPC-based microprocessors made by IBM and Freescale. The presence of an Intel processor inside the Mac forges a close enough resemblance to get Windows and Windows applications to work. Although Boot Camp is free and Parallels Desktop is reasonably priced, both software applications require an expensive copy of Windows in order to work — and that’s the biggest benefit for CrossOver Mac. It works without having Windows installed all together, thanks to the underlying code that powers the software. WINE-powered CrossOver Mac is based on the same core technology that powers CodeWeavers’ Linux-based offering — an open-source project called WINE. WINE — a self-referencing acronym that stands for “WINE Is Not An Emulator” — is a compatibility layer that provides alternate implementations of the code referenced by Windows applications in order to work. CodeWeavers uses publicly available versions of WINE in order to develop the CrossOver product, and contributes its code changes back to the WINE project, according to Parshall. Applications running on CrossOver Mac will offer performance comparable to apps running natively on Windows, according to Parshall, with all the same capabilities and functionality as they would if you were running Windows. CodeWeavers’ specific focus is getting CrossOver to run commonly used business applications, he said. Right now the company’s Linux product runs Microsoft Office applications, Access, Project, Vision, Lotus Notes, Quicken, FrameMaker and other products. Gaming possibilities Gamers have a strong interest in Boot Camp, as it allows them to play games that won’t run natively on Mac OS X — Parallels Desktop has disappointed gamers because it doesn’t include native graphics driver support so it isn’t suitable for running 3D games. CrossOver Mac won’t suffer that problem, though Parshall cautions that CodeWeavers’ specific area of focus isn’t on games. The company said it hopes “to offer support for a limited number of games,” but hasn’t yet determined the final mix of supported applications. Parshall told Macworld that the popular shooter Half-Life 2 is on the list, and while he said that it isn’t technically on the supported list of application, the new 2K Games-published FPS Prey also works well. Viruses, malware not as much of an issue Another benefit of CrossOver Mac’s approach to running Windows software is that it’s much less susceptible to infection by Windows-based viruses or malware than a true Windows-based solution, according to Parshall. “A virus needs to affect the guts of Windows,” he explained. “Theoretically, if you were really, really good you might be able to get your virus to run under WINE, but we’ve yet to hear about anyone who has, even in the laboratory.” Parshall said he expects that this protection will extend to CrossOver Mac as well. CodeWeavers plans to release CrossOver Mac in July or August, 2006. It will cost $59.95 for a single-user license. The company said it has a backlog of beta testers, but advisers users who are interested to e-mail them anyway.

Skellen The reason the press includes the details is due to the fact that the military is feeding the media and using those bits of info to sow confusion amongst the enemy. What better way to sow confusion and mistrust amongst the survivor's than to get them all paranoid against each other and commit fratricide.

It has to be windows since the Macbookpro can't open OS9 whether in classic or as a separate boot.

Wouldn't it have been better to have had him captured instead? Intelligence would have been able to glean a lot more with him alive than him becoming a martyr. I doubt very much that Zarqawi heard the jets, suffered or knew he was dying. the bomb hits and he doesn't even have a micro second's chance to even contemplate **** happens. Haha!

Oh well scratch that idea. I'll look for some flies and pull wings off as I mutter Doroshes name. Hehehe!

With the possibility if fighting red on red forces with the units available in CMSF would it be possible to do Iraq'a invasion of Kuwait which brought on the 1st Gulf War? that being the case does anyone know what the Kuwaiti's had as a army back then? Did they even have one or just a border patroll? From what I remember it took Iraq only a few hours to capture the country.

Cool! didn't know a pastry shop could do that on a b'day cake. BTW Travis have you gotten the last turn I sent you? Happy birthday too!

All in all this would make a better naval/air war simulator than a CMSF module.

Very good point there. Didn't think about the implications of the US striking the mainland. Question. Are the Chinese manufacturing their own SU27's under license? If not that's their only front line fighter with their J7's as backup. They have the logistical edge over the US but it's still a toss up if the US stands by Taiwan and only in a defensive role to prevent a landing. Should China sink a carrier or any US capital ship though I would think US public opinion would weigh in heavily for destruction of the missile sites and air bases on the mainland. That being the case the US would say to hell with the expense and will strike back at China with all intentions of winning a war of limited objectives. China could escalate by going nuclear but they have more to lose on that route. America may not be the manufacturing juggernaut it was during WW2 but can certainly hold its own against China today. China has as many restrictions as the US in a war over Taiwan and for them to go for it would require a lot of resources and planning for a long term conflict which China may not be able to handle.

Well first off in an actual war I would bet the US would start any defensive campaign against the PROC with several salvo's of cruise missles at their air bases, radar sites and communications. That would immediately take a bit of pressure off the US. Possibly even forcing the Chinese to push back their air bases or to divert resources to protect their own bases. Undoubtably the US would also be on the lookout for missile attacks but with its superior technology would probably be less vulnerable than the PROC. China would also be under a economic /diplomatic time clock. How long could they keep on refueling their own planes over a long period of time. Like the US they also must import most of their fuel. Despite the fact that most of the world kowtows to the PROC's "One China" stance I doubt very much if the UN would stand silent. The EU would also weigh in for peace. the pressure would be on China to step back. Would the US have the backbone to make good on defending Taiwan? That's an entirely different question as it is ambiguous on what it will do. For the sake of a scenario that it does come in aggressivley for Taiwan it's hi tech capabilities wouyld clearly give it an edge in the long run.

There are a lot of if'sin a battle for Taiwan and if China were to attack it would have to engage in maskarova on an epic scale to launch a surprise attack. For the Chinese to be as successful as the US was in both Gulf Wars how much prep time would they need and since they have to add the response of the US to their final equation would they even risk it. If Taiwan declares independence China has stated they would go to war to bring Taiwan back ito the fold. They would then need to buildup their forces and logistics in the immediate areas. Taiwan would go on the alert making PROC commando ops difficult to succeeed. The US in the meantime would be steaming towards the conflict but standoff maybe 500 or more miles away and rely on aerial tankers to maintain their aerial defensive perimeter. That being the case China wouldn't be able to launch a surprise attack in such a scenario. As to whether the Spratleys would make a better area of strategic conflict...as far as the US is concerned if china was to invade the area they probably wouldn't get involved even though they signed a treaty with the Philippines to help protect their sovereign waters. My guess is that if China were to invade they would standy idly by and encourage the American oil companies to assist China in exploring the area for oil and gas. The Chinese already have armed installations in the Spratleys with gunships actively patrolling 2 or 3 atolls and reefs (with bases built on them). Malaysia, Philippines and Vietnam also have their armed bases but none of them would be able to take on the Chinese navy or airforce.

HI Just back from the beach and see the forum is still alive and kicking. Re. the Chinese air force let's not forget that Taiwan also has an air force as well and a fairly robust AA missle defense. I doubt very much if the Chinese could get a complete knockout of the Taiwanese defenses to be able to launch and land successfully on any of the islands. Considering the UAV's being developed for the USAF today and for the future it's quite probable an air fleet of UAV fighter's would make its first debue in a conflict over Taiwan. Of course that's all hypothetical.

Yes but it would be difficult for China to cross the straits as well. Would China use its ICBM's against the US knowing it would face massive nuclear retaliation an destruction? I think not. China may be fighting on its own turf but it won't use a military option unless Taiwan openly declares itself independent. The US also doesn't need to get involved with a land war with its carrier fleet it only needs to deny a Chinese invasion.

using SF might be doable but wouldn't the extraction be difficult to the point where they would risk it?

Hi Haven't check this thread in awhile. Yes as a matter of fact I am using Safari for my internet. Didn't realize there was a problem because of that. At least it works well with the Scenario Depot.

Yo Travis, thought I'd chip in. My g/f's have always sort of rolled their eyes when they see me at it on the computer. For them it's actually great as that means the TV is available for watching their programs without me changing the channels whenever I pop downstairs for a drink or a snack.

Shmavis Yes please send me your PBEM set up of Breakthrough. Many thanks to Jason who sent me the pack last night and I'm all set to go.

Can someone email me the scenario pack on the 1st SS please. For some reason when I go to the Proving Grounds the section of the page with all the info is shifted all the way to the right edge of the screen and it's impossible for me to click on to anythng. No problem for me on the Scenario depot just TPG. patricklucero1148@yahoo.com Thanks!

Shmavis Uhh...sorrry about that, forgot about the spoiler. If you need an opponent you can send me a set up on this.

Jason Can't seem to get the Proving Grounds site to open correctly on my computer so I'm not able to post my comments on your 1st SS at Jakowlewa. From the get go I placed the Tiger to lead from the right flank in front of the MK III's and gave it a 30 sec. head start to lead the advance whereby it quickly nailed a T34 and took hits from AT guns from various sites. As reinforcements arrrived I advanced those gingerly to support the advance of the Tiger and by turn 8 took out a total of 6 guns and 2 tanks while losing a MK III and 3 lt armored cars and halftracks. Will give more details after I finsi the scenario. This is an excellent Kursk scenario. Very good brief to set up the situation without giving away the mystery. Looks to be very fair in the force mix for both sides. Great map and a daunting one at that for the Germans to conquer. It's impossible to guess where the AT guns are althogh you do have a good idea you're not going to waste your precious HE rounds shooting blindly. I would recommend this for HTH play and against the Red AI. Very good work Jason.

Jason I was just about to ask what the skirts were for on the Mk III and IV's and you gave the answer. I had always thought the skirts was to prevent bazooka rounds from penetrating, but that didn't make sense since the Russians didn't have anything like a panzerfaust until they had some lend lease bazooka's which aren't model in cmbb. At least I don't recall. Put a post at TPG on your Hunt Vasili. all best Patrick

This was on Mac Rumors and looks to be more promising than "Boot Camp". Over time though PPC user's will belong to the legacy market as Intel Mac's become the lead platform for the Mac. In 3 or 4 years from now we'll have a better idea as to whether it'll be economic for developer's to continue to port to OSX. ---------- Parallels released their Windows virtualization solution for the Intel Mac today. The product is called Parallels Workstation 2.1 Beta and a free fully functional copy is available for download now. Unlike Apple's Boot Camp solution which was released yesterday, Parallels solution allows you to run Windows XP (and other Intel-based operating systems) from within Mac OS X. Rebooting or Dual Booting is not required. This allows users to maintain their daily environment while also being able to use any desired Windows applications. It is only available for the Intel Macs and should provide near-native performance. Parallels Workstation 2.1 Beta for Mac OS X is NOT simply a "dual-boot" solution; rather, it empowers users the ability to use Windows, Linux and any other operating system at the same time as Mac OS X, enabling users to enjoy the comfort of their Mac OS X desktop while still being able to use critical applications from other OSes. Parallels appears to be taking advantage of the Intel Virtualization Technology which was included in the Intel Yonah processors that are now shipping in the Intel Macs. While in free Beta testing at the moment, the final software package for Linux and Windows is priced from the company at $49.99.

Yo Albert, I was wondering if that was you after I posted that. Yep still playing CMBB on my G3 as well. Looks like we're stuck to it unless we upgrade to a intel mac and buy windows versions. that however is getting expensive just to play cmbb. What with a new Mac, xp and Leopard thats a big chunk of change. If you'd like to play a PBEM game let me know. Hope all is well.

I would think so. However once the demo time clock runs out you will have to wait for Leopard's release to be able to boot back again into Windows.

Regarding boot camp. I may be wrong but this is a free beta version that expires after so many months. Once that's over you won't be able to boot back to XP. When OS 10.5 Leopard comes out it is supposed to be included in the update, but then you are paying $125 for the update anyways.