Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: Robert <no@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 02:02:02 -0500
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:00:33 -0600, "Frank Swarbrick" <Frank.Swarbrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
<h6ldg3de1nbdn2t16pfumqcnj8l6p8f5lh@xxxxxxx>, Robert<no@xxxxxx> wrote:On 10/5/2007 at 6:34 PM, in message
Ironically, Boot Camp doesn't run on Intel based Macs. Apple says making
it work would
require a complete rewrite. You can't install Windows on a MacIntel
either. The Wine
people will probably virtualize the Mac.
Umm, what? Boot Camp is *only* for Intel Macs. It's certainly not for PPC
Macs.
Here's a quote from the Apple web site:
"In the next major release of Mac OS X Leopard, Apple will include a new
technology called Boot Camp that lets you install and run Windows on your
Mac. If you have an Intel-based Mac computer and would like to try Boot
Camp, you can download the public beta today."
Whoops, I got em backwards. Virtual PC is for PPC Macs; Boot Camp is for Intel Macs, as
you say.
.
- References:
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: tlmfru
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: Pete Dashwood
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: William M. Klein
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: Robert
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: William M. Klein
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: Robert
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: Howard Brazee
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: Robert
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- From: Frank Swarbrick
- Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- Prev by Date: Re: COBOL and uni-SPF - migration to HP-UX
- Next by Date: Re: [OT[ Louder cars (was: What matters most when getting a job done?
- Previous by thread: Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- Next by thread: Re: How proprietary is the "COBOL file system"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|