Linked by Adam S on Wed 5th Apr 2006 12:57 UTC, submitted by Thomas Ganter
Mac OS X "More and more people are buying and loving Macs. To make this choice simply irresistible, Apple will include technology in the next major release of Mac OS X, Leopard, that lets you install and run the Windows XP operating system on your Mac. Called Boot Camp (for now), you can download a public beta today." My Take: Is this possible? We've been talking about virtualization on Leopard for a few days now, but did anyone see this coming?
Order by: Score:
Priceless
by GrapeGraphics on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:09 UTC
GrapeGraphics
Member since:
2005-07-07

There is absolutely no reason to buy a Dull now... Apple has a very enticing hardware platform...

While we may complain about price, this is priceless...

IMHO JB

Reply Score: 3

RE: Priceless
by EmmEff on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:02 UTC in reply to "Priceless"
EmmEff Member since:
2005-09-16

The only reason to buy a Dull is to save money... Macs are great (I have one) but they're pricey. Despite this recent advancement, I can't see somebody buying a Mac for the sole reason of running Windows XP.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Priceless
by Quoth_the_Raven on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Priceless"
Quoth_the_Raven Member since:
2005-11-15

Pricey? Did you ever consider what comes standard on a Mac as opposed to a PC? The Mac is by far the more cost-effective purchase.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Priceless
by miscz on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Priceless"
miscz Member since:
2005-07-17

they are more cost-effective in USA, in Europe they aren't :

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Priceless
by TomB7 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:33 UTC in reply to "Priceless"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

" I can't see somebody buying a Mac for the sole reason of running Windows XP" There's no reason to run JUST XP. There's lots of Mac software people might want to run. For example: is there any good presentation software foe Windows? The one I am (intimately) familiar with is Powerpoint, and that is simply horrible.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Priceless
by Janus on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Priceless"
Janus Member since:
2005-07-20

"There's no reason to run JUST XP."

Eh? What about causing shock and outrage? ;-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Priceless
by StephenBeDoper on Thu 6th Apr 2006 03:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Priceless"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

is there any good presentation software foe Windows?

There is only one good presentation software package, and it is called Director.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Priceless
by someone on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:53 UTC in reply to "Priceless"
someone Member since:
2006-01-12

Not right now...

If you look at the installation notes, you will find that a number of hardware features are not supported on Windows, including Apple Wireless keyboard and mouse, the remote control, audio rerouting etc. Also, Apple mighty mouse will prevent XP from going to sleep or hibernation.

However, it stands to be reasoned that many XP users have gotten used to the lack of those "amenities" that OS X users have taken for granted. It's just that long time OS X users who didn't read the notes would be in for a shock at the lack of polish (most tend to ignore the fact that it's only a public beta)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Priceless
by Adam S on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Priceless"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

Um, wireless keys and mouse ARE supported, and even bluetooth keys and mouse are supported -- just not by the Windows installer, which is true for Windows on regular PCs too.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Priceless
by ronaldst on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:16 UTC in reply to "Priceless"
ronaldst Member since:
2005-06-29

@GrapeGraphics

There is absolutely no reason to buy a Dull now...

Apple doesn't make a gaming PC like Dell's XPS 600 line.

It's the only reason left...

And the shitty Finder and "so so" dev tools but I won't complain... ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Priceless
by Tom K on Wed 5th Apr 2006 18:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Priceless"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

The question is, who in their right mind would buy a Pentium 4-based rig for gaming?

Seriously. You have to be retarded.

Reply Score: 1

OT: RE[3]: Priceless
by ronaldst on Wed 5th Apr 2006 19:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Priceless"
ronaldst Member since:
2005-06-29

@Tom K

The question is, who in their right mind would buy a Pentium 4-based rig for gaming?

Most gamers.

Seriously. You have to be retarded.

Seriously, you're saying that most gamers are retarded?

Reply Score: 2

RE: OT: RE[4]: Priceless
by Tom K on Wed 5th Apr 2006 20:46 UTC in reply to "OT: RE[3]: Priceless"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

You obviously don't know too much about hardware and gaming. ;-)

An Socket 939 Athlon 64 at 2.0 GHz is faster than a Pentium 4 3.0 GHz (800 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2) in most game benchmarks. Given that you can overclock a 2.0 GHz Venice to 2.6 GHz easily, and that even then the Athlon 64 will be putting out less heat than a P4 3.0 GHz, the Athlon 64 is a no-brainer for gaming.

All the serious gamers know this.

Reply Score: 1

OT: RE[5]: Priceless
by ronaldst on Wed 5th Apr 2006 20:59 UTC in reply to "RE: OT: RE[4]: Priceless"
ronaldst Member since:
2005-06-29

@Tom K

You obviously don't know too much about hardware and gaming. ;-)

You obviously have a warped view right there... O_o

An Socket 939 Athlon 64 at 2.0 GHz is faster than a Pentium 4 3.0 GHz (800 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2) in most game benchmarks. Given that you can overclock a 2.0 GHz Venice to 2.6 GHz easily, and that even then the Athlon 64 will be putting out less heat than a P4 3.0 GHz, the Athlon 64 is a no-brainer for gaming.

All the serious gamers know this.


By serious gamers, I think you meant the DIY gamers. Those that buy the premium ram with neon lights and stuff like that.

Most serious gamers I know have pretty old hardware and upgrade per need. A few have Athlon XPs and the rest have P4 Northwoods.

Reply Score: 1

RE: OT: RE[6]: Priceless
by Tom K on Wed 5th Apr 2006 23:35 UTC in reply to "OT: RE[5]: Priceless"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

"DIY" gamers does not mean "ricer" gamers. DIY gamers know more about hardware than nearly any other demographic. Most serious gamers I know are upgrading to Athlon 64s, since you can pick up a CPU and motherboard for $250 CAD.

There's really no use arguing with me about this. Really.

Reply Score: 1

Nice
by davisable on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:11 UTC
davisable
Member since:
2005-07-10

Nice but this isn't virtualization.

This is just a dual boot.

Apple could have saved people money and time by announcing this in advance (so people wouldn't have had to put up that 10k(?) bounty and work tirelessly to get an EFI XP loader).

Reply Score: 5

RE: Nice
by GrapeGraphics on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:16 UTC in reply to "Nice"
GrapeGraphics Member since:
2005-07-07

While this may not be virtualization, it's indeed a huge step in the right direction. Once we have a workable XP, developers can now work on virtualization (which is indeed, around the corner).

Apple has a plan.

Jb

(Michael Dell is probably screaming right now)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Nice
by jaylaa on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:28 UTC in reply to "Nice"
jaylaa Member since:
2006-01-17

Apple could have saved people money and time by announcing this in advance (so people wouldn't have had to put up that 10k(?) bounty and work tirelessly to get an EFI XP loader).

Yes, they could have announced it earlier. Maybe they were still trying to decide whether they would offer it.

It takes more than a small amount of modesty on Apple's part to admit that people may want to run Windows on their hardware sometimes or even all of the time. Yeah, everyone knew that people would want to run Windows on them, but I didn't expect the makers of the most prideful OS out there to admit it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Nice
by TomB7 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Nice"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

Not all of us Mac users are interested in running XP. I get enough of that at work.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Nice
by CaptainPinko on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:12 UTC in reply to "Nice"
CaptainPinko Member since:
2005-07-21

My take? They had this a long time ago, probably ready when they released the MacBook. However, they didn't want Windows running on it since it makes it look like more of a commodity product. So, don't release it until someone else does. Once its out there -and your product already looks like a commodity- might as well do it and release a easy-to-use version and go after the dual-booting market. No evidence, an inkling really, but to me the puzzle pieces fit like that.

PS- the reason they didn't out right do anything in hardware to prevent Windows running maybe since it'd require too much work, or perhaps it'd look bad, and they grudgingly realised that they'd make more if they could dual-boot.

Reply Score: 2

That's Apple for you
by Captain N on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:31 UTC
Captain N
Member since:
2006-02-15

That's Apple for you, making things way too easy. Windows drivers for Mac hardware? Damn. Someone needs to make sure Steve's alright.

Reply Score: 3

RE: That's Apple for you
by joshv on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:18 UTC in reply to "That's Apple for you"
joshv Member since:
2006-03-18

Ummm... The Intel macs are composed entirely of commodity hardware - PC hardware - every chipset and peripheral in the thing has a stock Windows driver available from the manufacturer. Apple might have had to tweak a few things and recompile the stock drivers, but it was a trivial exercise.

Reply Score: 1

Coffee
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:33 UTC
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

Suddenly, John Dvorak's ramblings on Apple switching to Windows have a slight bit more sense in them...

Oh how glad I am I just brewed me a cup of double-roasted extra strong coffee.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Coffee
by rayiner on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:40 UTC in reply to "Coffee"
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

Nothing John Dvorak ever says makes any sense. The guy just likes to throw shit at a wall hoping some of it sticks. I remember reading an article by him in the mid 1990s, saying something to the tune of "a Pentium Pro is as fast a computer as anybody will ever need". He completely did not see the era of composited GUIs, high-level languages, vector-based UIs, etc, coming. That could've been excused in the 1970's, but given that these things had already appeared in the 1980's, not expecting them to have been rediscovered in the 1990s showed the limits of his vision.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Coffee
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Coffee"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Heh Rayiner, I was just playing around ;) .

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Coffee
by rayiner on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Coffee"
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

My sarcasm detector needs a tune-up ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Coffee
by joshv on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Coffee"
joshv Member since:
2006-03-18

No, Dvorak was 100% right. Nobody needs composited GUIs, vector-based UIs, etc... to get real work done.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Coffee
by Get a Life on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Coffee"
Get a Life Member since:
2006-01-01

I'm not getting any work done right now, and I don't have a hardware-accelerated alpha-composited desktop. Coincidence? I think not.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Coffee
by dukes on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:51 UTC in reply to "Coffee"
dukes Member since:
2005-07-06

rayiner, you obviously took that Pentium Pro comment out of context.

Reply Score: 1

Out of the blue...
by mini-me on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:35 UTC
mini-me
Member since:
2005-07-06

...I thought it was a belated April fools - even when I went to the apple page I thought it was a joke...but I am excited!

Yes, I would have prefered virtualization, and "fast user switch" but for another OS would have been even better - but it is a step in the right direction.

I think that narf and blanka earned their money - and proved that people do indeed want the best of both worlds - I do not blame apple for not releasing this earlier.

Now there is no reason to buy anything else ;-)
University computer labs can have one kind of machine (hardware wise) which cuts down on costs - and they can run whatever OS they want.

Reply Score: 2

Security
by AndyZ on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:36 UTC
AndyZ
Member since:
2005-07-05

Nice,

but what about security? Does BootCamp hide the Mac-partition and if, how will the User "get to his data" (aka Users/home)? If the partition is not hidden then the user/virus/... can easily destroy his OSX-Volume while booted in WinXP. Does anyone known how this is adressed?

Plus: What about "other" OSs? :-)

AndyZ

Reply Score: 4

RE: Security
by Aaron1 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:23 UTC in reply to "Security"
Aaron1 Member since:
2006-01-19

Unless Apple provides a driver with Boot Camp Windows will not be able to see the contents of the Mac partition.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Security
by AndyZ on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Security"
AndyZ Member since:
2005-07-05

Yes, but that would be quite useless if the user wants to use his data on both Windows and OSX (ie Word-Docs, videos, music)

If the Filesystem-Driver is implemented in EFI then the user could indeed destroy his OSX-Voulume while booted in XP. According to the FAQ BootCamp will create 2 partitions: One WinXP and one OSX...
So WinXP should see the OSX-partition (or at least the home-Dir) otherwise the user could not use his data (as I said above) as the OSX-User sees his Win-Partition (again FAQ).


AndyZ

Edited 2006-04-05 14:46

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Security
by someone on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Security"
someone Member since:
2006-01-12

I don't think that's a good idea...

A read-only HFS+ driver, though, would be a good idea. OS X can already read NTFS partitions, so an HFS+ driver for XP and Vista would create a Public folder-Drop box folder scenario, which is used by many users to share their files.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Security
by Big Al on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:00 UTC in reply to "Security"
Big Al Member since:
2005-06-29

This is the sole reason why I'd never dual boot on a Mac. If there's any link between the partitions you could potentially be screwed. I'm holding off until virtualization is available...

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Security
by TezKAh on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Security"
TezKAh Member since:
2005-07-06

wouldn't virtualization be an even worse security risk? I mean, you could run it in a sandbox like VMWARE, but if you start running things like wine then that would be an even greater security risk.


That said, I'm not too interested in installing Windows on my Mac... One of the main reasons I bought the thing was to run OS X, and not have to run either Windows or Linux or some other OS which doesnt recognize the hardware. ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Security
by Big Al on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Security"
Big Al Member since:
2005-06-29

WINE is not virtualization - they're two totally different things. VMWare is good because it's sandboxed, whereas WINE just leaves everything (file-wise) vunerable.

I have to use VMWare daily with work so I'm really comfortable with it. I wouldn't mind being able to do my Window stuff on a MacBook but I wouldn't trust doing that without having everything run virtualized. Plus I wanna try getting Zeta running on it as well. ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Security
by fye. on Wed 5th Apr 2006 20:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Security"
fye. Member since:
2005-08-23

Yeah, I'd love to try Zeta on my iMac. ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Security
by jsonder on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:47 UTC in reply to "Security"
jsonder Member since:
2005-12-31

I dual boot my ppc mac mini, but rarely boot OSX as I'm more comfortable and productive in Ubuntu (Dapper Drake).

If I need Quick Time, or to watch a dvd, I reboot.

P.S. There are a lot of programs not adapted for the PPC architecture.

John

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Security
by riha on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:26 UTC in reply to "Security"
riha Member since:
2006-01-24

windows does not read hfs+ filesystems, so it is like dualbooting linux, windows cannot see or read the linux partitions.

shouldn´t be any problems, if not apple provides drivers for windows to at least have readonly access to the drives.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Security
by miscz on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Security"
miscz Member since:
2005-07-17

it is like dualbooting linux, windows cannot see or read the linux partitions.

out of the box - no, but there's always http://www.fs-driver.org/ - ext2/3 driver for XP with read/write capability

Reply Score: 1

Other good news
by MikeGA on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:38 UTC
MikeGA
Member since:
2005-07-22

Have a glance down the right-hand side of the Boot Camp page. Some interesting stuff there. In particular:

"Developers can learn all about the sixth major release of Mac OS X this century at Apple’s Worldwide Developer Conference, to be held August 7-11 in San Francisco."

Confirmation - I can't wait ;)

Also found the comments about Security and EFI rather amusing!

Reply Score: 2

by Lazarus on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:40 UTC
Lazarus
Member since:
2005-08-10

EFI and BIOS

Macs use an ultra-modern industry standard technology called EFI to handle booting. Sadly, Windows XP, and even the upcoming Vista, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS. But with Boot Camp, the Mac can operate smoothly in both centuries.

Now that's priceless ;^)

Reply Score: 5

RE:
by TomB7 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:37 UTC in reply to " "
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

I also like:

"Windows running on a Mac is like Windows running on a PC. That means it’ll be subject to the same attacks that plague the Windows world. So be sure to keep it updated with the latest Microsoft Windows security fixes."

Reply Score: 5

RE:
by mono on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:54 UTC in reply to " "
mono Member since:
2005-10-19

Sadly, they don't know that Vista 64-bit edition will support EFI.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]:
by TezKAh on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:02 UTC in reply to "RE: "
TezKAh Member since:
2005-07-06

Sadly, they don't know that Vista 64-bit edition will support EFI.

If and when its released, and that wont really help on any of the current ICBMs - they all use 32bit chips.

Reply Score: 1

They're forced now
by MatzeB on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:44 UTC
MatzeB
Member since:
2005-07-06

Maybe their motivation was to get control back on this before too many people install bootmanagers and loaders created by 3rd parties on the internet. This way they can still do things like botting into OS/X by default and only booting the alternative WinXP when the Alt key is pressed down. I think defaults are very important to "influence" the behaviour of your users (as you can see with all these spyware apps changing the startpage of your browser...)

Reply Score: 3

RE: They're forced now
by tertiary_adjunct on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:45 UTC in reply to "They're forced now"
tertiary_adjunct Member since:
2006-01-15

You can set Windows XP to be the default OS with a setting in Boot Camp.

Take a look at page 13 of the manual:
http://images.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/pdf/Boot_Camp_Beta_Setup_Gu...

Reply Score: 1

RE: They're forced now
by Wemgadge on Thu 6th Apr 2006 04:10 UTC in reply to "They're forced now"
Wemgadge Member since:
2005-07-02

I agree. As a Help Desk Tech, I just cringe to think of the costs of support for all those Intel Macs with hosed EFI due to failed XP install attempts. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple's Call Centre tech's clamoured to have a dualboot solution that doesn't void the customer's warranty. Bootcamp, and the newest backward compatible EFI will bring Tech support costs down on these new Intel Macs (not counting "misroutes" ie: I realize you have installed Windows using our bootcamp software, but we don't support Windows, please contract Microsoft) ... although I suspect even those calls will be few because the sort of person who'll muck around with this stuff only contacts Tech Support for hardware failures

Reply Score: 1

Wow
by D-J-P on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:46 UTC
D-J-P
Member since:
2005-07-06

This is very great and certainly a step in the right direction. Also nice that they include the drivers.

Reply Score: 1

And what about Linux?
by ActiveMan on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:50 UTC
ActiveMan
Member since:
2006-01-15

I suppose that Linux could boot here also.

Reply Score: 1

v RE: And what about Linux?
by jocknerd on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:56 UTC in reply to "And what about Linux?"
RE[2]: And what about Linux?
by sappyvcv on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:03 UTC in reply to "RE: And what about Linux?"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Woah cowboy! calm down!

Maybe, just maybe, they were already working on this.

----

Anyway, this definitely surprised me. I may consider buying a mac to play around with soon.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: And what about Linux?
by MikeGA on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:30 UTC in reply to "RE: And what about Linux?"
MikeGA Member since:
2005-07-22

Yes, of course Apple must have stolen GPL software to make Windows run on their own hardware.

In particular, seeing as Boot Camp requires the new firmware versions released today, it seems more likely that they simply added BIOS compatability to their EFI firmware.

Reply Score: 1

RE: And what about Linux?
by yanik on Wed 5th Apr 2006 13:57 UTC in reply to "And what about Linux?"
yanik Member since:
2005-07-13

yeah, what bout linux? Will apple release linux drivers like they do for windows?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: And what about Linux?
by MikeGA on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:32 UTC in reply to "RE: And what about Linux?"
MikeGA Member since:
2005-07-22

Doubt it. They basically haven't publicly recognised Linux, so I doubt Apple will start telling people about how they also support Linux. I expect someone will find that it's fairly easy to use Boot Camp for Linux though.

Although lets face it, releasing "drivers for Linux" seems like it would be more hassle than it's worth for Apple to ensure compatability with all the distros.

Reply Score: 1

Prize money
by paul.michael.bauer on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:10 UTC
paul.michael.bauer
Member since:
2005-07-06

If only Apple had released this a few weeks back, THEY could have collected the $13000 bounty.
;-)

Reply Score: 5

RE: Prize money
by audun on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:15 UTC in reply to "Prize money"
audun Member since:
2005-07-13

Maybe they tried, but just didn't make it :oD

Seriously, I'm now considering very hard to buy my first Mac. My father worked at Apple in the 80's, so I always had a Mac in my room to play with. But I have never had a color-screen Mac..

Maybe the time has come, but I'll probably wait for the iBook-replacement..

Reply Score: 1

beos/zeta
by marcof on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:25 UTC
marcof
Member since:
2005-08-02

hmm.. interesting.. would Zeta/BeOS be able to install...

Reply Score: 1

Apple's take on Windows
by ApproachingZero on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:29 UTC
ApproachingZero
Member since:
2005-11-10

Even Apple's version of the Windows logo is impressive. The first time it's ever looked elegant.

Reply Score: 2

Warning
by Innova on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:36 UTC
Innova
Member since:
2005-09-30

[quote]
Word to the Wise

Windows running on a Mac is like Windows running on a PC. That means it’ll be subject to the same attacks that plague the Windows world. So be sure to keep it updated with the latest Microsoft Windows security fixes.
[/quote]

Priceless. This comment plus the dig at BIOS are classic "I'm better than you" apple.

Edited 2006-04-05 14:37

Reply Score: 1

RE: Warning
by Sphinx on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:47 UTC in reply to "Warning"
Sphinx Member since:
2005-07-09

Priceless. This comment plus the dig at BIOS are classic "I'm better than you" apple.

They seem to have scraped a better OS off the street in a 10th of the time Windows has been around to earn the bragging rights so let 'em.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Warning
by Get a Life on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:09 UTC in reply to "Warning"
Get a Life Member since:
2006-01-01

The PC BIOS is a steaming pile. I say let the haughty slap at it with a stick for a while. Perhaps it will learn to fear.

Reply Score: 1

May have pushed me over
by twowheels on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:40 UTC
twowheels
Member since:
2005-07-06

Wow... I've been sitting on the edge for some time now. I was thinking of a Mac for a public area of my house just because they look so nice. Was thinking of putting Linux on it... Now I can have all three major OS on the same computer! What excuse is there to buy any other now with the entry level Macs being so well priced & attractive? Too bad the well priced iMacs at CostCo aren't Intel based.

Reply Score: 1

RE: May have pushed me over
by Get a Life on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:14 UTC in reply to "May have pushed me over"
Get a Life Member since:
2006-01-01

One might always hold out for the Merom refresh and for the hardware bugs to be tested on the early adopters. One final sticking point could be the release of an Intel Mac with an NVIDIA GPU.

Reply Score: 1

lol
by sp29 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:40 UTC
sp29
Member since:
2006-01-04

First OS X, then iTunes on Windows, jump ahead now Windows on a Mac. What's Steve been drinking.......a cup of stiff competition for Dell. lol

Dell must be shaken...or screaming!

Reply Score: 1

First Mac last night
by wylde342 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:41 UTC
wylde342
Member since:
2005-08-12

I just bought a Mac Mini last night, and it is unreal. I can not believe how far ahead of Windows it is.

Now this??!! AWESOME!

Reply Score: 1

Nice Gesture
by TaterSalad on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:50 UTC
TaterSalad
Member since:
2005-07-06

This is a nice gesture on the part of Apple. While they did say they wouldn't support Windows, I didn't think they would go as far as to help out in allowing people to install Windows. Either way its still a win for Apple because they still get to sell their Macs even if it is running Windows, preinstalled with OS X of course.

Reply Score: 1

Very cool
by Nex6 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:54 UTC
Nex6
Member since:
2005-07-06

i think this is very cool, those that need windows for work, can have it. but who want OSX for personal use can have it also.

-Nex6

Reply Score: 1

This was probably planned all along ...
by wfdeller on Wed 5th Apr 2006 14:56 UTC
wfdeller
Member since:
2006-03-15

Apple has probably planned on releasing BootCamp all along, but waiting a couple of months to not detract from the excitement of their new products. If this was announced at the same time, all the press would have been talking about was running Windows on a Mac instead of the new equipment. It was a good PR move on Apple's part to release this (to push switchers along) and also wait to not steal the transitions thunder.

Reply Score: 2

Linux
by mjg59 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:15 UTC
mjg59
Member since:
2005-10-17

Yes, this will let you boot a Linux install CD. However, as of right now, we haven't figured out how to run the installed Linux - if you boot this way, you don't get access to EFI, so you can't install elilo.

Reply Score: 1

RE
by Kroc on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:22 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Mind blowing! I got a Macbook Pro only last week so that I could ditch windows, but dual boot Windows for legacy stuff and games. Now I can set it up even easier.

This is such a seriously bold statement. I'm in the belief that Apple are seeing new possibilities with these Dual core processors, and their current standing right now puts them in the perfect position to strike whilst the iron is hot with virtualisation where their competitors (i.e. Windows Vista) are floundering around.

Reply Score: 1

Hmm..
by BigZaphod on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:26 UTC
BigZaphod
Member since:
2005-07-06

Is it possible that Apple was one of the entities that put up a lot of money for that $13,000 prize (or whatever it was)? Could it be they actually had planned this all along and decided to invest some cash to see if it could be done?

Reply Score: 1

BryanFeeney
Member since:
2005-07-06

This does exactly the same thing as the winner of the Windows-on-Mac competition a few weeks ago. It creates a special installation disk for Windows, with the necessary drivers to get around the fact that Apple uses EFI.

I don't know where all the stuff about virtualization came from, this has nothing to do with it. Indeed, if Leopard is going to support this, then it's possible it may not support virtualisation. After all why offer dual-booting if you could just run Windows from OS X?

Reply Score: 1

Sweet...
by the__dude on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:31 UTC
the__dude
Member since:
2006-02-27

This is great news. I might actually consider a Mac on my computer given its ability to run Windows. I wont have much use for OSX though. I'd love to see Apple sell an OS less version of their computers.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Sweet...
by BigZaphod on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:39 UTC in reply to "Sweet..."
BigZaphod Member since:
2005-07-06

If you do get a mac, give OSX a try for a week or so before replacing it with Windows. OSX is really a much more superior experience.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Sweet...
by the__dude on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Sweet..."
the__dude Member since:
2006-02-27

I've used OSX quite a bit (I've been using Macs longer than Windows based machines) but I've never been a fan of their UI.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Sweet...
by TezKAh on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Sweet..."
TezKAh Member since:
2005-07-06

I've used OSX quite a bit (I've been using Macs longer than Windows based machines) but I've never been a fan of their UI.

but you'd rather use Windows? You dont want to use OS X?


Buy a Dell.

Reply Score: 1

Run Those Numbers
by enloop on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:45 UTC
enloop
Member since:
2005-11-13

I'm sure Apple has done the research and concluded that they can open up a market selling to people who need/want to run Windows but are fed up with Wintel hardware, and that they can do this without any impact on their current market.

People who buy Macs for the software are not going to see much of a reason to boot into Windows. So, they won't care. When Leopard offers the dual-boot setup, they'll just say "no thanks".

But people with serious Apple hardware envy -- especially folks drooling over the laptops -- will take their dual-boot and smile.

This is also a not-too-subtle way of getting Windows users to try Mac software. Who knows, they might just decide to swith 100% to the Mac.

Reply Score: 1

Kiss The Mac Software Market Goodbye
by MediaSex on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:50 UTC
MediaSex
Member since:
2006-02-08

ReadMe.txt
----------

Mac owners:

Step 1) Reboot into Windows
Step 2) Run the installer
...

With the massive number of companies/developers balking at porting to x86 Macs, the main architect of OS X, and now this move by Apple, it should be clear what little future OS X has.

"Didn't Apple use to make computers that ran their own OS back in the early 2000s before they became a digital media company?"

Reply Score: 0

tertiary_adjunct Member since:
2006-01-15

Hmm...that must be why more and more universal binaries are showing up. The developer's that have complained, for the most part, have said that there are delays in porting...not that they couldn't outright do it.

But you may be right. Their will likely be some developers that will see this as an opportunity to cease Mac porting. Of course, there might be others that see this as an opportunity to start porting to the mac.

Reply Score: 4

Dell
by tertiary_adjunct on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:51 UTC
tertiary_adjunct
Member since:
2006-01-15

There have been lots of comments that Dell must be "shaken"/upset by this recent development and that Steve wants to compete with Dell now.

This is not news.

It was a few years ago at the WWDC (I think - can't remember the exact event) that Steve Jobs put up a target on Michael Dell's face and said that was who they were going to go after. Dell has been the target of Apple's competition for sometime now...they've just been getting ready to compete. Now were starting to see some of those results. The Intel switch and Boot Camp are simply the latest incarnations of that competitive drive against Dell.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Dell
by moondog on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:19 UTC in reply to "Dell"
moondog Member since:
2005-08-23

<blockquote>
The Intel switch and Boot Camp are simply the latest incarnations of that competitive drive against Dell.
</blockquote>

It's more "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em".

Reply Score: 1

lol
by sp29 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:52 UTC
sp29
Member since:
2006-01-04

Reports have been out that XP is faster on a Mac than anything else.

So a Mac will be a good option to run XP on.

Now I can run Adobe stuff on my mac(not Unversal Binery yet!) and all my Apple stuff.

So cool!

Reply Score: 1

RE: lol
by Get a Life on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:20 UTC in reply to "lol"
Get a Life Member since:
2006-01-01

Now you can troll twice as fast!

Reply Score: 3

RE: lol
by miscz on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:03 UTC in reply to "lol"
miscz Member since:
2005-07-17

Which Mac? There are surely more powerful computers than iMac or McBook Pro (do you want chips with that? ;) ). When the PowerMacs are out I'll still doubt it. Reason? AMD ;)

Reply Score: 1

eh
by spikeb on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:55 UTC
spikeb
Member since:
2006-01-18

virtualization would have been better.

Reply Score: 1

Please..
by Drune on Wed 5th Apr 2006 15:57 UTC
Drune
Member since:
2005-12-04

I'm missing the point of this. What's the diference between my home-made-box P4 with a (non-laptop) MAC? I have USB, Bluetooth, Firewire, DVD, anything that a MAC has.
People thinks that Apple makes hardware miracles. I dont think so. Thanks in advance..

Reply Score: 1

RE: Please..
by MikeGA on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:39 UTC in reply to "Please.."
MikeGA Member since:
2005-07-22

Front Row? No, no-one could possibly want that.

Also of course, the UI of a computer is not of any importance whatsoever.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Please..
by sp29 on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Please.."
sp29 Member since:
2006-01-04

I want Front Row and could use it from time to time. Why not want it? It's one of those softwares that aren't used everyday, but can easily be used when needed.

Reply Score: 1

JohnMG
Member since:
2005-07-06

> Their will likely be some developers that will see this
> as an opportunity to cease Mac porting. Of course,
> there might be others that see this as an opportunity
> to start porting to the mac.

My guess would be that more will port *to* the Mac.

Dual booting is just a way for Apple to win more users. You can bet they've extensively studied the MS Windows XP experience vs. the Mac OS X experience on the same hardware and are confident that theirs is better.

Reply Score: 1

Most people don't get it
by Hae-Yu on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:20 UTC
Hae-Yu
Member since:
2006-01-12

I'm reading a lot of the comments and for a site that usually has smart people, a lot of you don't get it.

Why would they do this?
The #1 reason most people won't switch over to Apple is that they have to buy/ relearn all new software. Interviewing anyone who has really thought about switching and this is the show stopper. The Mac platform doesn't have as large a warez ecosystem as Windows, and most regular users don't know about warez anyway. So they look at the cost of rebuying all their apps and/ or relearning new apps because app x doesn't have an Apple release. This is more expensive than the hardware.

This benefits Apple greatly and has a marginal benefit for MS. Dual booting - and providing the partitioning tools, boot loader, and drivers - allows users to painlessly switch without sacrificing their functionality. Most serious users (as in people who really live off their boxes) who own Macs also have a Windows box around. I'd say @ 60% but that's just people I know.

MS benefits in that they can sell a few extra retail copies.

If you look at the functionality offered & the FAQs on the Boot Camp pages, Apple is offering broad enough basic functionality to perform Task X in Windows. Things that aren't geared toward that - in general anything that's a Bell & Whistle - isn't supported. You won't get too comfortable working on the Windows partition, and it will give you a nudge to encourage you to work out of OS X. Besides 3rd parties can make up all those extras if someone seriously wants to run Windows as the primary OS.

Apple loses nothing. This doesn't make them look bad and it isn't an embarrassment for them. It just eases the transition to Apple.

With MS releasing Virtual Server free along with supporting major Linux distros and now this, I don't know if I can stand all the OS free love running around.

ascheinberg
I've used (logitech & MS) Wireless Mouse & Keys for years on Windows and I've never had a problem with Windows recognizing them on install or boot.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Most people don't get it
by Adam S on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:12 UTC in reply to "Most people don't get it"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

I've used (logitech & MS) Wireless Mouse & Keys for years on Windows and I've never had a problem with Windows recognizing them on install or boot.

IR wireless may be supported, but integrated Bluetooth is not. Anything that plugs in to an dongle with an adapter that recognizes a device is probably not really "wireless," but rather, mimics a non-wireless device.

Reply Score: 5

re. Dell
by JohnMG on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:21 UTC
JohnMG
Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't get these "OMG, Dell is upset!" posts either.

1. Dells are still easier to repair,
2. Dells are still easier to get parts for, and
3. (as someone else already posted), you may not even be able to install GNU/Linux on the x86 MacBooks.

When I buy hardware, those are the 3 questions I ask myself (easy to repair?, easy to get parts for?, and, is it an open platform which runs GNU/Linux well?).

Incidentally, I don't see anything listed on the terrasoftsolutions (YDL) site about the MacBook...

Reply Score: 2

RE: re. Dell
by Get a Life on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:47 UTC in reply to "re. Dell"
Get a Life Member since:
2006-01-01

Rather than worry about whether Dell is a superior purchase option, you could simply point out that Apple could have released PC BIOS legacy support with a CSM from the start if they had really wanted to, and that this simply brings the reality of Apple's Intel Macs into alignment with the expectations of many when Apple said that it would take no steps to prevent Windows from running on them. Apple is no more a threat to Dell today than it was that day, and this simply rectifies what was a disappointing primary decision on Apple's part.

I think the more obvious reason that this doesn't threaten Dell is that it doesn't replicate all of the "special deals" and other ways in which the typical Dell price is regularly shaved for the consumer. To shave costs from Apple's products you need to be a student or to buy a refurb. Dell seemingly offers some sort of "sale" every day.

Part-hunting for a computer isn't really something normal people want to do at all. And YDL is interested in the PPC.

Reply Score: 2

Apple are you listening?
by suryad on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:26 UTC
suryad
Member since:
2005-07-09

My requirements for a MAcbook Pro:
- 4 gigs of RAM
- 160 gig hdd @ 7200 rpm (coming soon actually)
- either the nvidia quadro go 2500 M or a mobile 7900 gtx
- 1920 x 1200 @ 17 inch with the isight camera built in
- dual core merom...heck quad core by the time merom comes out in 2k7

That way with dual booting I can have the best of both worlds. I can have Leopard for everything and XP for running games and doing my vdo editing stuff on adobe premiere 2.0 HD.

Sad thing is though Dell is probably going to have all this before Apple does...

Reply Score: 1

RE: Apple are you listening?
by miscz on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:07 UTC in reply to "Apple are you listening?"
miscz Member since:
2005-07-17

Why would anyone want such a notebook? It would weight a lot, battery time would be poor and in sense it would be a stationary computer that is a bit easier to carry around. Notebooks are not portable game systems.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Apple are you listening?
by suryad on Wed 5th Apr 2006 18:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Apple are you listening?"
suryad Member since:
2005-07-09

How close minded can people get? This is 2006 people! I want that because I need that. I can lug it around because I am not a weakling. I already have a Dell XPS laptop and I would not trade it for the world. When you work with Java all day and night and do video editing and need to be mobile you need a powerhouse workhorse of a laptop. You can be happy with your anemic 12 inch notebooks...I cant. Performance is paramount for me. As one who writes and uses a lot of software, performance is paramount for me. How you got modded up is beyond me.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Apple are you listening?
by Gryzor on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:23 UTC in reply to "Apple are you listening?"
Gryzor Member since:
2005-07-03

Sad thing is though Dell is probably going to have all this before Apple does...

... except OSX

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Apple are you listening?
by Kroc on Wed 5th Apr 2006 21:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Apple are you listening?"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

and iLife, and decent build quality, and so on....

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Apple are you listening?
by suryad on Wed 5th Apr 2006 23:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Apple are you listening?"
suryad Member since:
2005-07-09

Decent build quality? You must be kidding. Both companies have nightmare stories. I dont know much about the lower end line of Dell machines but out of 2 that I have worked on and 1 that I own, they are very sturdy. I have come into contact with 3 Apple notebooks in my life, 2 17 inch decked out notebooks and a little Ibook, and the Ibook and the 17 inch notebooks have crapped out an unbelieveable amount of times. I am not going to get into a pissing contest here but honestly...there are nightmare stories from both sides.

Reply Score: 1

now all we need...
by jtrapp on Wed 5th Apr 2006 16:41 UTC
jtrapp
Member since:
2005-07-06

is software for the mactel...and.....

let the benchmarks begin!!!!

Reply Score: 1

RE: re. Dell
by JohnMG on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:00 UTC
JohnMG
Member since:
2005-07-06

> And YDL is interested in the PPC.

Doh! Right. Thanks.

Reply Score: 1

Might be a bad move
by miscz on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:10 UTC
miscz
Member since:
2005-07-17

Now that we can boot WinXP on Macs and it is almost official and supported (altough Apple won't do this) software developers are less likely to write apps for OSX :|

Reply Score: 1

RE: Might be a bad move
by Get a Life on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:29 UTC in reply to "Might be a bad move"
Get a Life Member since:
2006-01-01

What developers were itching to rewrite large portions of their applications to make them suitable for Mac users, that are now going to say, "Well, I guess you can just buy and use Windows." That would presuppose that the Mac has a sufficient marketshare that developers care to absorb the development costs to begin with. This is a bogeyman that seems to assume that developers are suddenly going to see the light and flock to our niche platforms in droves to tap the vast financial gold mines that we represent.

Reply Score: 1

Has anyone tried it?
by Gryzor on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:32 UTC
Gryzor
Member since:
2005-07-03

Could I replace my Windows Box with a MacBook Pro? I need to use Visual Studio most of the time, but then again, I switch to OS X and live happily.

Please report back with experiences!

Reply Score: 1

The business side of things
by Kris on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:35 UTC
Kris
Member since:
2005-07-24

Very interesting from a business point of view:

- It should increase the market share of Apple hardware because more options simply means more people likely to buy it. This could of course lead to lower prices and thus even more market share..you get the idea

- It should increase the market share of Apple software (namely OS X) because people who buy it to eventually run Windows as well will give OS X a try first because of the bundling.

- It should decrease the market share of Microsoft Windows. While someone pointed out that it would actually increase the market share I disagree because for every Windows license sold for Apple hardware there'll pretty much be one license less sold for other hardware.

I think while Dell should be scared (they pretty much will have to compete on price) Microsoft should be scared as well. Apple has the potential to slowly take away the desktop-OS market share from them. With every Apple-box sold they will
a) sell it as a windows box
b) sell it as an OSX box
c) sell it as a mixed box
While they would like to see only b happening, a and c will gain them market share hardware wise. With this happening we might eventually see Apple hold a big market share and the roles in the supply chain get rearranged. Apple could actually be excercising power over Microsoft.

Can't wait to hear the official MS response.

Of course one might always dream and hope for Dell to react by truly embracing (GNU)?/Linux ;)

Reply Score: 1

Ulterior motive?
by Big Al on Wed 5th Apr 2006 17:43 UTC
Big Al
Member since:
2005-06-29

You know, the more I think about this, the more I wonder if Apple isn't about to release a laptop that they think will be the perfect school laptop. What better way to make it even more attractive by saying, "Oh, and it will be able to run both Windows and OS X so you can buy this laptop no matter what your school's requirements are!"

This could be the opening shot of a war over a bigger piece of the educational market. First you make sure everyone knows your equipment handles both OS's and then you release a decently-priced laptop. Apple could clean Dell's clock if they're motivated.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Ulterior motive?
by Wemgadge on Thu 6th Apr 2006 04:43 UTC in reply to "Ulterior motive?"
Wemgadge Member since:
2005-07-02

absolutely! If the replacement for the iBook gets endorsed by Universities, Colleges and High Schools, the sales would be huge!

Reply Score: 1

dogen
Member since:
2005-11-13

Dual-boot anything was never very useful for me. I tended to use one OS or the other. And computers (non-apple computers anyway) are so cheap if you need Windows it's more conveniant to have a dedicated Windows computer off in the corner.

Apple's lagging stock price took off on the news, but it's sort of gimmicky news to me.

Reply Score: 3

pphahnl
Member since:
2005-07-06

I think that a reasonable number of users wants a sleek-looking computer that's silent and just works (tm). But they didn't go for a Mac, because they needed a special Windows Application. Now this reason doesn't exist any more - and that means more hardware sales for Apple.

I just remember the OSNews Forum back in the day Apple announced the Intel switch - maybe two thirds of the posters were screaming 'Now I can finally get a Mac an dual-boot, because I need Windows application x!'

Reply Score: 1

JohnMG
Member since:
2005-07-06

> Dual-boot anything was never very useful for me. I
> tended to use one OS or the other.

Same here. Though, I think gamers will go for it.

Reply Score: 1

mini-me Member since:
2005-07-06

My previous beige-box dell at work had enough space to comfortably have XP, Linux, OS2, and BeOS on it. I did install all of them. I spent most of my work time on Windows.

Multibooting was really useless to me - now I would like the option of dual boot on my future macs for two reasons:
1. Experiment with other OSes (unless VMware kicks in and makes this obsolete ;) )
2. Play games (again unless VMware kicks in and makes DBing obsolete)

Reply Score: 1

Mr. Cringely did (I think)
by blahblah on Wed 5th Apr 2006 21:18 UTC
blahblah
Member since:
2006-03-23

I think this was one of Robert Cringely (Revenge of the Nerds) predictions for 2006...

Reply Score: 1

Gaming
by Hae-Yu on Wed 5th Apr 2006 23:36 UTC
Hae-Yu
Member since:
2006-01-12

A big benefit of this is that Mac users will finally be able to play (real & current) games. I think this should be realistically viewed though. It's not going to be the greatest gaming experience due to platform limitations and the mid-low level specs. But since most PCs sold are budget boxes, it will offer a comparable experience for the average user. A "gamer" won't use Apple hardware for gaming regardless. It's budget box hardware with budget box numbers.

The hardware isn't spec'd for gamers. Part of the reason that Macs always get 3 year old games is that their hardware is 3 years out of date. While you aren't going to be doing hardcore gaming on a MacBook or iMac, you are going to expect future intel-based PowerMacs to have some oomph.

Current lineup:
ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 on the MacBook Pro.
On board Intel video on the Mac Mini
Power Mac G5 (assuming it will xfer over to Intel with similar specs) NVIDIA GeForce 6600 LE with 128MB of GDDR SDRAM or the regular 6600 with 256M
iMac - PCI-Express ATI Radeon X1600

4 of those would qualify as "budget" (<$80) categories by most definition and 1 would be lower end of mid-range.

While OS X may be able to leverage more performance out of a given set of hardware, gaming will be all XP and XPs performance on those cards is well documented.

Reply Score: 1

This is not new
by malxau on Thu 6th Apr 2006 05:04 UTC
malxau
Member since:
2005-12-04

I remember this - it was in DP4 (May 2000.) I wondered what happened to it. It must have had some work to support Windows, but that's what Apple were using for OSX/OS9 dual boot support (startup disk is a serious PITA.)

Looking forward to a reunion with an old friend =)

Reply Score: 1

ASUS making Ibooks
by suryad on Thu 6th Apr 2006 05:20 UTC
suryad
Member since:
2005-07-09
Beginning of the end for Microsoft?
by Khoji on Thu 6th Apr 2006 14:35 UTC
Khoji
Member since:
2005-08-17

It's probably too early to say but this could be the beginning of a major sea change in the OS market. Much depends on whether Vista turns out to be a flop or not -- there are signs on the wall in both directions at the moment, so it's hard to say, although the culture at Microsoft seems to be both defensive and in serious disarray. If Vista flops and turns out to be Microsoft's Copland then MS will go into free fall for several years and Apple is looking more and more to be the top contender to take over from them.

Reply Score: 1