Running VT Cahsbook on a MAC

Hi,

It can be  run under Windows.

If you can run virtual machine with Windows under MAC OS - answer: YES.

Regards,

Oleg.

I am planning to install the entire VT suite (and Excel) on a Mac just as soon as my copy of Windows 7 arrives. I'll be using Parallels Desktop 5 to create the virtual environment for Windows and then I understand that the rest is a push over.

Please remind me in a couple of weeks and I'll update you on progress.

http://www.twitter.com/proactivepaul

http://www.thepaperlessaccountant.com

Hi,
as oleg kindly pointed out virtualisation is the simplest way, but If your clients Mac is a PowerPC architecture, paralells desktop may not work. I've tried Q and also Ms Virtual PC with varying success on a G5 2ghz ppc with 2gb ram. VirtuAl pc is working best although still very slow. However I beleive WINE could also be used to run it directly in Mac but I've not had the need to try. If it's for enterprise you might be able to install vt on a win server and access it over remote desktop/terminal services from the Mac.

Ross

Hi,

I have a Macbook that is used as a family laptop. I would love to change my work PC for an iMac, so I have been looking into options on how to still run my software.

In the Apple Store, they strongly recommend using VMWare Fusion, which allows you to run Windows in a Mac enviroment. Obviously, this uses up some of the Mac's resources, but it's not too memory hungry. Apparently, any Windows compatible software (i.e. VT Transaction +) will run perfectly, although I have yet to test this first hand.

Alternatively, Mac OS 10 comes with Bootcamp built in. This allows you to install Windows on a separate partition on the hard drive. You simply hold down the Alt key when switching on, and you get a choice of booting into Windows or Mac OS.

I have done this on my Macbook, and VT works as normal - basically because you are running a Windows machine as you would with any other PC. The downside is that you need to reboot if you want to use any Mac programs, and of course you still have the security issues of using Windows etc.

I am seriously close to making the switch to Mac, and I'd be really interested in hearing from other AW members who have done this.

Regards,

Paul

Again bootcamp is for Intel Macs (most recent), you can install windows natively as intel macs have the same x86 arcitecture as PCs, however if like me you have a very capable PowerPC processor you have to emulate x86 environment and run windows inside. This is very resource hungry and has never worked well. If you have intel mac you can virtualised the environment without having to emulate x86 processing so this frees up alot. Of performance an can run very well. I manage vmware virtual servers with very little issue and I would be inclined to recommend virtualisation of boot camp. With virtual machines you can share files between them and the mac in real time, and also save and load machines in their current state so that you don't need to 'boot'. I'm a windows engineer by trade but use a mac at home, they both have good and bad points and this 'macs don't get viruses' mantra is sadly a myth, it's only that the majority of amateurs use windows and so are targeted more often by scams, and with the advent of windows 7 it is getting harder for scammers. The nature of Unix of which macs are built upon is that when things go wrong, and believe me they still do, they're often very complex to fix and where as windows fixers are ten a penny these days, mac/unix engineers are expensive. I've had untold problems with printers, wifi network and smb shares, let alone software compatibility, take vt for example. My advice is for business unless you are in digital media etc stick with PC, for home use macs are great for browsing web and looking at photos etc.

Hi BowChikaWowWow (is that your real name?!),

Thanks for the advice. It actually concurs with what I have been told by a few developers - Windows is a better platform for business.

I realise that they are not immune to viruses etc, but my (limited) experience is that they just seem to work! Bootup and shut down take seconds, it never seems to lock up, and (at the risk of sounding really shallow) Macs are soooo pretty!!!

Any other advice from AW members will be gratefully received.

Regards,

Paul

Of Course Its my Real Name ;) I was named after the music to which i was conceived.

Yes macs are in fact very pretty and i too have one for such, the imacs especially have 1 cable and thats it, so it looks good in my home office and keeps the missus happy which is a must in my house.  My high res screen is so damn clear too.  BUT... thats not to say if i had taken the £1500 it cost me i couldnt have sourced a similar spec'd and as beautiful PC, but in UK anything over 500 for a pc and people think its a rip off, the macs just ooze class, and there is a bit of snobbery about it.

You see much of modern business today is built around Windows and other MS products, so Apple is an outsider.  Microsoft released .NET framework which allows amateur/semi-pro developers to get a bit of software up and running very easily without much knowledge of what's happening behind the scenes, this has created a wealth of apps that run on windows and a wealth of developers not keen on changing as getting .NET to run on anything but windows is pretty much impossible.  However this sometimes amateur/hobbyist influence often creates the misconception that Windows is 'At Fault' when usually its poor coding practices and poor software (theres alot of it around).  For example a Windows Vista/ Windows 7 PC will boot very quickly out of the box, its not until you load often poor software onto it that it becomes bloated, and unfortunately Macs suffer the same.   Also not every PC specification is the same, what might work well on one pc, may work terribly on another, I like how if something says 'Works On Mac' you know it does exactly that.

Lastly, I dont know alot of businesses who are 'Not Happy' with their windows infrastructure as it works very well when installed and maintained correctly i mean its pretty awesome when you think about it.  But show them how much a Mac and Xserver infrastructure is going to cost and ill be suprised if you were still in their office 2 mins later.

Anyhoo Mac vs PC debates will rule for years to come, and the best way to know, is to see for yourself.  Go for a Mac for home and you'll likely not regret it.

 I find that any work-around, eg virtualisation, emulators etc, are an additional layer of software that can go wrong.   I think the simpler you can make things the fewer problems you will have. If a programme was made for Windows, use it on a PC. If it was made for a Mac, use it on Mac.

Hi

 I use a Mac and nothing else, but it is Intel based, so Parallels desktop works a treat (I haven't used VM Fusionware, or whatever it's called). The only problem with running Window's software is that you have to like Windows, which I personally don't, but the virtualisation of Parallels Desktop if nigh on perfect, once you've bought your Windows OS, that is.

However, once you start running Windows, then you need serious anti virus software, etc, something which you can literally forget about whilst just staying within the Mac framework. Also, once running Windows for a long time, your computer can start to slow up as it gets attacked from outside or your hard disk starts to get filled up with all that Windows bloatware, something you never notice under the native Mac OS.

This year, for the first time ever, I'll be trying some of the new iXBRL enabled accountancy software, so I'll keep you up-to-date on how well I manage this on a Mac. Up until now I've just used Excel, Word, etc, and HMRC's own online software .... the advantage of not having more than c.70 active clients (if that's an advantage!).

If I find that I don't like running Windows on my Mac so much as much as I might have to with iXBRL (24 inch iMac, about five years old, I think) then I'll probably invest in a second desktop machine, but a Windows one, which I use purely for iXBRL stuff. I know that old helpful paperclip/TV of Windows is pretty much old hat nowadays, but the overly ingratiating tone of Windows, with that bloody paperclip and bouncy TV, used to seriously get on my nerves.

Oh, and I have no problems with this iMac at all ... works flawlessly with whatever I've thrown at it ... just hope that isn't the kiss of death! But then I've always used Macs (well, started off using an Atari, but that's another story) and have found them to be absolutely fine ... the only times I've tried Windows machines I got put off by the operating system. This is obviously a personal thing, but if you are using a computer 7 hours a day, it's important to use a computer you enjoy.-- KH

I got sick of theory so i decided to put my money where my mouth is.
Ive installed VT in a virtual environment and attached a screenshot

Im running on a MacOSX 10.5 PowerPC 2Ghz 2GB RAM.  VirtualPC is my host, (Ive tried others but most dont work with PPC architecture, only support intel, newest Microsoft VirtualPC (Free) has ppc support).   Its running very well, i have internet access and sound too.

@Chatman: Suprisingly, most of the internet today is run on virtual servers and the reason for this is contrary to the belief that its another layer of software to go wrong.  Virtualisation offers the most incredible redundancy, should that host fail then the virtual machine can be moved to another host and fired up in a matter of seconds, in some situations < 10 seconds.

Now to apply this to the scenario of running VT on a mac,  if you were to virtualise a windows environment, that environment can be moved to any host (Mac, Unix, Linux, Windows etc) without any fuss, so imagine you have VT at home, you can also power up that very same environment at work, at a customer, etc etc. Now should someone partition their HDD on the Intel Mac (we're assuming here the mac is Intel, which we havent established yet), then each installed OS is completely reliant on that physical HDD, so not only do you need to backup the files of each OS, but the partition tables, which in modern scenarios can be in the Gigabyte-Terabyte range.  Should that HDD fail, and without an exact image as it was before, you would need to reinstall the OS's (3-4hours) reinstall the apps (1 hour) then replace your files (30mins).

Also, if you have an accountancy practice, you could copy your VT environment to each one of your employees to have on their macs (you would need a license for each, but as you would with partitioning) in minutes so everyone has the same. Simples!

So as you might imagine, I say virtualise always.  

As for the whole virus and mac vs pc thing, im dying to say things but im not as its outside the scope of this thread.

I must admit I did not understand your explanation of why adding another layer is not adding something that can go wrong.

I noticed the formatting of your message was a bit strange though. Did you write it on a Mac?

 @chatman:  The formatting is because this web page says it supports HTML and yet it doesnt, so the tags are not working.

The layers thing, what i was trying to say is that, virtualisation is actually more reliable, because the virtual machines you create can be stopped and started within seconds and because they are virtual they can be moved to any host machine.  Meaning should they fail, an identical machine can be fired up within seconds of such failure. 

As an example, the virtual machine you see running windows on my screenshot above, i could send you this machine file, and you could be running that exact same machine within minutes.  So if, for instance, your computer be struck by lightning, you wouldn't have to reinstall everything, you just fire up your virtual machine and voila!,  Imagine a virtual machine as a sort of bubble, and in that bubble is your operating system (windows xp) and all your applications and files etc.  You can copy this bubble and move it around freely, and wherever it is, it will always work the same, on your computer, my mac, my grannies computer etc.

Again as this is venturing beyond the scope of the thread, i will leave it there, and my opinion from experience is that virtualisation is the way forward in converging the two competing platforms in question (windows and mac) and if you need to run windows apps on a mac, then its simple tried and tested...virtualise. 

If anyone would like to talk in length about any of the topics mentioned here, then please PM me and i will happily discuss.  Our company provides software and integration solutions to many blue chip organisations and can provide consultancy services to companies wishing to integrate applications such as VT further into their own systems.

I don't personally use Macs but a good friend does and uses Virtual Box on his Mac and he has loaded on Windows 7 as a virtual machine. He assures me that all works fine and it operates exactly as a true Windows 7 machine would.

@oleg

Well! My new macbook pro (two months old) has spent 3 weeks back at Apple for repairs. My wife's new macbook pro (6 weeks old) also failed a few days ago, and spent 48 hours with Apple.

In 13 years of business, I've never had to send a PC back, so I guess I won't be using Macs for business based on this recent personal experience of these two completely brand new laptops!

-- @proactivepaul the paperless accountant dot com