Posturing is important in the tech world, where "coopertition" -- cooperating with your competition -- is just as important and widely practiced as competition itself. That may explain why Apple suddenly is vocal about a Mac that runs Windows and Microsoft is silent about the same subject.

As we had predicted, in recent weeks the new Intel-based Macintosh computers have been shown to run Windows -- not just in one way, but in three different ways. Smart techies, competing for cash prizes, proved that almost anybody with a Windows XP license could load it on a new Mac. Then two commercial solutions arose. Parallels Software International created a program that can run both operating systems simultaneously; and Apple released "Boot Camp," its official software to let Windows run on a new Mac.

The Apple solution requires users to reboot their systems to change from Windows to Mac OS and vice versa; and the company says it's for two types of users -- those who want a Mac but need an occasional Windows application, and for those who are afraid to leave Windows behind when they switch over to a Mac computer.

If Parallels works the kinks out of its solution, it will probably be a solution of choice for those who truly want to switch between Windows and Mac OS whenever they desire. But the Apple solution is an "official" solution so lots of users will buy it.

Apple will be very happy. Hewlett Packard, Dell, Gateway and other PC manufacturers will be unhappy as they lose market share to Apple's dual operating system PCs. And most of us will think Microsoft will be happy because it will be selling more Windows licenses.

But will Microsoft really be happy with a short-term gain that becomes a larger loss in the long term? I can't see why they would be. Sure, they'll sell more Windows licenses as well as Office licenses for both operating systems. But they'll be beginning a slippery slide into a competitive environment.

At most, they'll pick up 5 percent share for Windows because that's all Apple has now. But even that is unlikely. On the other hand, they have a lot to lose if Apple's dual solution becomes popular.

Imagine a Windows user who, having heard for years about the Mac, decides to make his next Windows computer a Mac. At first he only plays with Mac OS while he uses Windows for his normal work. But as he plays, he gets used to the Mac OS until sooner-or-later he becomes comfortable with it -- comfortable enough to start using it for his normal work. Apple's market share grows. Software developers start to see a better market for software running on Mac OS -- and Microsoft loses its advantage of having the most important business applications in its huge catalog.

It could spell the end of monopoly power for the Redmond, Wash.-based giant -- and give Apple more clout. If I were Microsoft, I'd keep quiet too. It's against Microsoft's best interest to create an official Windows for Mac or support it.

Yet it may have to. The European Union is coming down hard on the company for anticompetitive practices. Here in the United States, the feds and many state governments are lying in wait.

As users, we will have a dual solution and that will open things up a bit; but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for an official Microsoft product. At least not until it can protect its Windows cash cow or is forced to make it available by some government action.