Rui CarmoPrompted by this piece of news and some discussion in our neck of the woods (which is getting more and more corporate Mac users who are interested in running portions of their, erm... "legacy" apps on their shiny new MacBooks as soon as they arrive), I spent some time looking at emerging virtualization options for Mac OS X on Intel.
Sorry, I have absolutely no interest in desecrating a Mac by booting Windows (even Vista) natively on it.
Melo got the ball rolling by mentioning this, but Bochs doesn't cut it for me - I'd rather go with "proper" virtualization, and preferably something that can take my QEMU and VMware images.
There's nothing official from VMware yet (although there are a few bits of wishful thinking here and there) and QEMU hasn't even been ported yet, but the topic has been repeatedly mentioned as well.
The biggest issue, of course, is the virtualization bit itself (kqemu or qvm86 would have to be converted to a .kext if at all possible).
If VMware doesn't step up to the plate and yanks a Player port out of a hat, a Universal binary of Q using such a .kext would be a dandy solution - it would for sure be able to run at near-native speeds on a Core Duo (preferably half of it, so that Outlook won't hog the machine).
And, best of all, it would also let me run other OSes if necessary (something that Virtual PC can do, but grudgingly).
Like I said, I give it around two months on the outside - something is sure to pop up soon...