Mac and flight planning software

ScottM

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
42,529
Location
Variable, but somewhere on earth
Display Name

Display name:
iBazinga!
I just bought a new MAC Power book and I am wondering what you guys with Macs are using for flight planning software? I love Golden Eagle but will need to boot into windoze if I still want to run that.
 
I just bought a new MAC Power book and I am wondering what you guys with Macs are using for flight planning software? I love Golden Eagle but will need to boot into windoze if I still want to run that.
I run Golden Eagle Plus under Windows in a Parallels Desktop virtual machine. If you've got a Mac and still need to run the occasional Windows program, you need a copy of Parallels.
 
I run Golden Eagle Plus under Windows in a Parallels Desktop virtual machine. If you've got a Mac and still need to run the occasional Windows program, you need a copy of Parallels.
I heard there is a better alternative than Parallels these days.

But I am planning on running Windoze if I have to. I was just wondering if there was anything that could be run in native MacOS.
 
I heard there is a better alternative than Parallels these days.
The other choice is VMware Fusion. I've got 'em both. I run Parallels.

But I am planning on running Windoze if I have to. I was just wondering if there was anything that could be run in native MacOS.
I really wish there was; that'd be one less reason to run Windows.
 
AOPA now has available their Internet Flight Planner that's free to AOPA members and is a version developed by Jepp. The nice thing about it is that not only can you now do flight planning with Jepp on a Mac but it can be any computer since it's internet based. It saves your information for yourself and any planes you fly.
 
I just bought a new MAC Power book and I am wondering what you guys with Macs are using for flight planning software? I love Golden Eagle but will need to boot into windoze if I still want to run that.

Power Book? I hope not. You mean Macbook or Macbook Pro?
 
The other choice is VMware Fusion. I've got 'em both. I run Parallels.

Really? I was considering springing for VMWare rather than upgrading Parallels. I don't really need either. I haven't needed to run Windows on the MacBook for quite a while.

Scott, one thing for VM Ware is you can get free ready-to-run VM appliances for all kinds of tasks. http://www.vmware.com/appliances/
 
I heard there is a better alternative than Parallels these days.

But I am planning on running Windoze if I have to. I was just wondering if there was anything that could be run in native MacOS.
Virtual Box is free. Boycott Parallells and any other Mac software that charges for something that should be free.

edit: Virtual Box is also as fully featured as both, IME.
 
Virtual Box is free. Boycott Parallells and any other Mac software that charges for something that should be free.

edit: Virtual Box is also as fully featured as both, IME.
Not mine. I tried it, and deleted it with extreme prejudice. It's missing lots and lots of features, like, for example, USB support, any way to pass the mouse cleanly in and out of the virtual machine window, any sort of usable emulated networking, and any good way to share the CD-ROM drive with the host system.

Don't even bother.
 
Not mine. I tried it, and deleted it with extreme prejudice. It's missing lots and lots of features, like, for example, USB support, any way to pass the mouse cleanly in and out of the virtual machine window, any sort of usable emulated networking, and any good way to share the CD-ROM drive with the host system.

Don't even bother.

WHAT? I can do all of that with Virtual Box, without issue. It supports USB, you can enable Networking in the preferences, and you can share the CD-ROM by clicking a single button (I want to say it says "SHARE CD-ROM" but I could be wrong).

You own stock in Parallels or something?
 
BTW, for proof:
 

Attachments

  • Picture 1.png
    Picture 1.png
    569.8 KB · Views: 15
  • Picture 2.png
    Picture 2.png
    419.5 KB · Views: 12
  • Picture 3.png
    Picture 3.png
    468.9 KB · Views: 9
WHAT? I can do all of that with Virtual Box, without issue. It supports USB, you can enable Networking in the preferences, and you can share the CD-ROM by clicking a single button (I want to say it says "SHARE CD-ROM" but I could be wrong).

You own stock in Parallels or something?
Nope. I'm just a very satisfied, long-time user (I was in the initial beta). Parallels just works for me in ways that Virtual Box and VMware Fusion never have.
 
WHAT? I can do all of that with Virtual Box, without issue. It supports USB, you can enable Networking in the preferences, and you can share the CD-ROM by clicking a single button (I want to say it says "SHARE CD-ROM" but I could be wrong).

You own stock in Parallels or something?

Ladies and Gentlemen the previous is from the guy who said that Apple sucks and Macs suck because they sucked 12 years ago....(like I did, only it was 20 years ago)

We keep getting them.

(Although I will KILL the SOB that (didn't) set up printing to shared printers on a Windows workgroup.)
 
Virtual Box is free. Boycott Parallells and any other Mac software that charges for something that should be free.

Nick,

I'm curious - When "should" something be free? :dunno:

I ask because I'm probably gonna go into software development, and there is no way in hell I will be giving any of it away. I respect the open-source community's work, but saying something "should" be free implies that anything you have to pay for is worthless.

IME, open source software generally suffers from "design by committee" and has a poor user interface. It's designed by geeks, for geeks (and I are one). But when I want to be productive, I really appreciate a clean, well-designed user interface.

And Scott: I'm going iPhone first, but it's mostly the same as programming for the Mac. When I'm tired of the iPhone, the first thing I write for the Mac is gonna be a great flight planner.
 
Nick,

I'm curious - When "should" something be free? :dunno:

For almost any payware, there is a free version that is just as feature inclusive available.

My problem is that since I've switched to using a Mac, it seems that everything one would want to do costs money. That's the part that is failed to be stated when one purchases a Mac. You can go on and on about how when purchasing a Mac "its not really that much more" or even "it might be cheaper" but in reality, there is a severe lack of free software for the Mac, and that, to me is a problem.

So I support EVERY endeavor to bring free software to OSX. Having a wondeful, fully featured and easy to use piece of software lambasted for lacking features that it doesn't lack is disingenuous, and it hurts the open source community and the possibility of more free software coming around.

You already have to pay for the Windows license to use Parallels or VMWare, why should you also have to pay for an emulator? Especially when Parallels, Inc stole open source code to sell in their product, violating the license terms...until they caved and kinda released the source code a few weeks later.

I ask because I'm probably gonna go into software development, and there is no way in hell I will be giving any of it away. I respect the open-source community's work, but saying something "should" be free implies that anything you have to pay for is worthless.

Quite the contrary. There are plenty of things that should warrant being paid for....Operating Systems, Enterprise Levels of software, commercial use software, etc. But not an emulator....not an essential piece of software like an office suite, either.
IME, open source software generally suffers from "design by committee" and has a poor user interface. It's designed by geeks, for geeks (and I are one). But when I want to be productive, I really appreciate a clean, well-designed user interface.

Not fair, and not accurate. There are plenty of open source programs that are easy to use (OpenOffice.org for example), and don't fall into that groupthink idea. There are also plenty of commercial products that suck to use too, so I think you're unfairly stereotyping opensource software.
 
> There are plenty of things that should warrant being paid for....Operating Systems,
> Enterprise Levels of software, commercial use software, etc. But not an
> emulator....not an essential piece of software like an office suite, either.

I simply cannot agree any piece of software should be free
 
For almost any payware, there is a free version that is just as feature inclusive available.
...but nobody said it's be usable. Classic example: Photoshop vs. the GIMP. Yes, the GIMP is just as featureful. I could never use the doggone thing, hough; the layout is completely nonsensical to me. Yes, I pay big money for Photoshop, and no, I don't have stock in Adobe, either.

Quite the contrary. There are plenty of things that should warrant being paid for....Operating Systems, Enterprise Levels of software, commercial use software, etc. But not an emulator....not an essential piece of software like an office suite, either.
Sorry, but nobody gets to tell another whether, or how much, he should charge for his own work. If someone thinks he can make money from a piece of software, that's his right. I say that as the project manager of a pretty large open source project, too.
 
Ladies and Gentlemen the previous is from the guy who said that Apple sucks and Macs suck because they sucked 12 years ago....(like I did, only it was 20 years ago)

We keep getting them.

(Although I will KILL the SOB that (didn't) set up printing to shared printers on a Windows workgroup.)
You sucked 20 years ago? LOL. btw, I'm not a Mac convert. While I love my Mac, it was overpriced and there is still a lack of software for it. I never have to go back to Windows, but i didnt before either
 
For almost any payware, there is a free version that is just as feature inclusive available.

If there are two products with the same features AND the same level of user interface, and one is free, the only reason for going to the payware one is to have phone support available. At least, that's the only reason I can think of why people still buy the overpriced, bloated piece of crap that is Microsoft Office.

My problem is that since I've switched to using a Mac, it seems that everything one would want to do costs money. That's the part that is failed to be stated when one purchases a Mac. You can go on and on about how when purchasing a Mac "its not really that much more" or even "it might be cheaper" but in reality, there is a severe lack of free software for the Mac, and that, to me is a problem.

There is so much free stuff that comes with the Mac that you don't need to add a whole lot. 99% of what I do could be included in the group of things that Apple includes for free plus an office suite (whether you use the $399 M$, $79 iWork like I do, or a free solution). That includes web surfing, email, audio and video editing/archiving/DVD production, flying club financials (QuickBooks), personal organization, entertainment, photo editing and archiving, online chat, development, backup, and "productivity".

I also have a bunch of free stuff on my Mac, but it tends to be stuff that I don't use much.

If you want to find free (and commercial) software for the Mac, go to http://www.versiontracker.com/. There's a ton of it.

The only payware on my Mac:
BBEdit (a way-cool, well-written text editor - I'm still running v6.5, current is v9.1 and it still works like a charm)
CrossOver (windows emulator - no copy of Win needed, which is why I got it. Works like crap for most applications, but worked for the one I used to need it for.)
Dark Castle 3 (awesome game)
iWork '08 (Pages word processor, Numbers spreadsheet, Keynote presentation)
Audio Hijack Pro (there's also a free Audio Hijack)

Frankly, given that EVERYTHING I do on my machine is covered almost entirely by either freely included stuff or free stuff from elsewhere, I don't think the Mac is really lacking too much free software. I don't know that any of my free stuff is open source, but who cares?

Quite the contrary. There are plenty of things that should warrant being paid for....Operating Systems, Enterprise Levels of software, commercial use software, etc. But not an emulator....not an essential piece of software like an office suite, either.

Why should an "essential" piece of software be free? :dunno: I would think that an essential piece of software would be the type of thing you should be most willing to pay for.
 
Back
Top