Windows XP Booting on Mac Contest Over

[AidenShaw]

'Virtual' doesn't always mean 'software emulation of everything'.
Remember when Mac OS made you think about "virtual memory" - and made it so slow that you'd usually want to make sure that it was turned off?

As gnujon says, look at what's out there today with VT, Xen, and other virtualization technologies.

Like virtual memory on the Mac OS - what was once slow and painful is becoming fast and indispensible.

[bketchum]

Here's my addtional purchase:

Wife needs a new computer - she likes the Macbook. I tell her - sorry dear, I can't get you a Macbook. My wife uses three things daily: Internet browser (OS independent), MS Office (there is a Mac version), MSN Messenger video/audio chat (no Mac version).

But, you cry--there are mac alternatives to Messenger.

Let me (re)introduce you to the concept of the network effect - none of the people that my wife chats/views has a Mac - most of them are not very adept with computers - her only option to chat/view them is MSN Messenger - because that's what they have.

My wife is more than savvy enough to dualboot - and use what she needs - with XP on Mac (once they get the video drivers working) I can buy her a Macbook (well - the new ibook when it is released in April) and she can switch to XP when she wants to chat with her friends.

So there you go - another Mac purchase because of the dualboot possibility.

Oh, get her a MacBook Pro you cheap bastard.

[jamesmcd]

nice comment, however in my opinion, if someone just wants to use, MSN Messenger, Office & Internet Explorer, they should go out and buy a $900 Dell laptop...

[generik]

Are you certain about that? Windows apps might not recognise the partition format, but they would still see the partition - so they might not be able to copy files to the OSX partition easily, but they might be able to wipe it.

So?

It is no different from sudo rm -rf /

When was the last time your partitions got wiped due to a virus? 1990?

[DannyBoye]

First let me say this. I support Apple, fully, I have a mini, both pre-intel and intel. I have TWO Ibooks, Had a pre-intel IMac and have an intel 17" intel IMac, got the IPod video, Point is I don't look down on the company. HOWEVER. Apple as a company has never looked at them selfs as a software company, but insted a hardware company and I think that has been thier downfall from the start. While I will NEVER argue with anyone that OS X is a FAR better OS than Windows, reality is most people have never had the chance to even use OS X. Why? Because Apple is not a software company, but a hardware company.

As a consumer you go to the store and you see an Apple, and a WinPC next to each other (if you can find such a store that has both, mind you) and they see the price. One can be as cheap as as say $350.00, WITH OS, WITH ALL THINGS NEEDED TO RUN IT and the other can be as cheap as $599.00, no keyboard, mouse, moniter, just a lil box. Now in most peoples minds they do the same thing, on the surface they do. Granted it's not till later that they find all the problems that come with MS XP. This is why they (Apple) will never be even close to #1, because in reality most people that purchase computers don't need it for anything more than everyday things. Email, internet, music, simple things.

Software companys are NEVER going to take time, money, and resources just to make software work on an Apple to please a few people, and I say few lightly, but in the scope of percentage, it is few as far as sales go.

I know I know everyone says that Apple is a hardware company and that's the reason thier OS works so great, and runs so great, and and and. But Serious think about it. We all bash, and beat up on MS because we say the OS sucks but is it really the OS? Or the other people making the software that allows the OS to get jacked up. I know I know, MS has put out some sorry a*s OS's, Win Me, 98, yah they were jacked from the code up. But (and I'm not sticking up for anything) XP is really not AS BAD as we all tear it up to be. I don't download crap, free games, P2P and my lil crap Dell Laptop works just fine, day in day out. My mom's however, she's always calling me, it's not working, it's slow, it's this and that, becuase she downloads those stupid 'free' casino games. Free in one aspect but costing you in the aspect of performance.

If OS X had had the market share that MS has, I have NO DOUBT, that there would be the same problems that exist with XP. Why would these companys that can barley afford to make a program and have to put ad aware in with the install to pay for the software, IE p2p software. There are ways to get such programs installed on a mac, the ad programs, it's not like Apple goes out of thier way to make sure that a program can not open a safari window to show an ad.

All I'm saying is that fact of the matter is untill Apple gets market share up by providing an OS to the vast majority of people without forceing them to buy thier hardware, software companys won't really look at it as A MUST to have thier software on OS X. I really wish Apple would dip it's feet in the software world, just give us a DVD to install X on any computer, don't give us support unless we use your hardware. But then again, then all these companys that hardly know how to make a decent peice of hardware would then have to make a peice of software to make that hardware run. And in lies more of the problem with XP, and the future of ANY OS that allows install on any machine and has a decent market share. That OS is not around yet, but when it is, the same problems will surface.

Lets see MS open up thier source code for a few decades and I guarantee we'd get it fixed and running right. Apple was VERY smart to use the base code of such an OS, one that was open for a very long time and that people that cared fixed and fixed and fixed again.

[ordin12]

Windows XP is horrible and old compared to OS X. So I would never want to use Windows XP. Apple notebook computers are nice but not spectacular as the design is almost 10 years old and could be improved in many areas. So why use an old operating system on old hardware? Makes no sense.

The opposite would be great. I would love to get a nice Sony Vaio laptop and run OS X on it. That would really rock.

[whooleytoo]

Apple notebook computers are nice but not spectacular as the design is almost 10 years old and could be improved in many areas.


?

Almost 10 years old? What are the big areas of improvement?

[janstett]

Windows XP is horrible and old compared to OS X. So I would never want to use Windows XP.

??? Maybe you mean "old-looking", but, uh, what exactly do you mean? I was going to start talking about the ages of both operating systems, but I want to make sure I know what the heck you're talking about first...

[Peace]

Windows XP is horrible and old compared to OS X. So I would never want to use Windows XP. Apple notebook computers are nice but not spectacular as the design is almost 10 years old and could be improved in many areas. So why use an old operating system on old hardware? Makes no sense.

The opposite would be great. I would love to get a nice Sony Vaio laptop and run OS X on it. That would really rock.

The PowerBook came out in 1996.That is 10 years however here's what it looked like "almost ten years" ago


As for "old hardware"

The PowerBook G4 had the same hardware as the typical Sony laptop.With the exception of the CPU.

Educate yourself..

[phomans@mac.com]

but, does the XP boot run at the acclerated speeds theoretically guaranteed by the new IMAC core processor technology-a lot of non-IMAC-Intel compiled software runs poorly, and slowly under Rosetta-would booting XP, for someone who has XP-based programs correct that until Software Developers come out with their new versions?

[ordin12]

OK everybody, I'm sorry, not 10. I made a mistake. More like 6 years old. in 2000, the powerbook looked exactly the same. Now, it still looks nice, but the Vaio is nice too. Just a matter of taste maybe but it's nice to know there's a company innovating every few months and letting you pick among a large number of computers. Apple could have introduced tilting screens, 2 buttons, and not everybody loves the alumium case.

I still remain loyal to OS X despite Apple obviously dropping the ball on Sync and a few other nice features that they used to support and keep up to date.

[Rusdude]

but, does the XP boot run at the acclerated speeds theoretically guaranteed by the new IMAC core processor technology-a lot of non-IMAC-Intel compiled software runs poorly, and slowly under Rosetta-would booting XP, for someone who has XP-based programs correct that until Software Developers come out with their new versions?

If you dual-boot, you would run Windows-native applications so the speed should be about the same as similarly-configured Windows PC. So a Windows version of, say, Photoshop would run much faster than Rosetta PPC version of OS X Photoshop.

One exception would be applications that require hardware graphics acceleration (e.g. games). Because video drivers are still a work in progress, those may not run or run very slow. I'm sure it'll be solved soon though. It's only two guys and a few testers and they cooperate online so there're certain logistic challenges.

[Tupring]

This is the worst virus those Windows propellor heads could have come up with for the Mac.I's a conspriacy to Kill Apple before it's too late.

[Heart Break Kid]

How difficult is Windows to instal on a mac?

Lets say someone like me who isnt completely computer illiterate tried to make his MBP dual boot - would they have serious issues?

With regards to the actual windows environment on a Mac - does it actually feel like windows? Does WiFi and audio and video work properly or do I still have to wait for that? If for example WiFi isnt working, when a sollution does become available, will I have to reinstall windows or will I just have to say install a patch / driver?

[Flowbee]

OK everybody, I'm sorry, not 10. I made a mistake. More like 6 years old. in 2000, the powerbook looked exactly the same.

You're still totally wrong. Keep trying.

( BTW, this was the Powerbook introduced in Feb. 2000...)

[Rusdude]

How difficult is Windows to instal on a mac?

Lets say someone like me who isnt completely computer illiterate tried to make his MBP dual boot - would they have serious issues?

With regards to the actual windows environment on a Mac - does it actually feel like windows? Does WiFi and audio and video work properly or do I still have to wait for that? If for example WiFi isnt working, when a sollution does become available, will I have to reinstall windows or will I just have to say install a patch / driver?

You probably should visit the Wiki, read the How-to guide and decide for yourself it it's something you can do. http://wiki.onmac.net/index.php/Main_Page

With regards to your other question, yes, it does feel like Windows because it IS Windows :) You are not running a VPC or something like that where it emulates Windows inside your OS X. This solution is dual-boot, meaning when you turn your computer you choose to load either OS X or Win XP. When you need to switch, you have to power down and choose the other operating system.

With regards to drivers, it's a work in progress, so check the Drivers section of the Wiki and read footnotes. As of right now, wireless works (issues with some routers for MBP), audio works only through headphone/speaker jack (not built-in speakers), and hardware video works only on Mac Mini (which means no games yet).

Bottom line is that unless you're the type that likes tinkering and messing around with computers, you may be well-served to wait. It's only been a few days since this became public so give programmers some time :D

[oingoboingo]

Are you serious?
LMAO!

An impressive rebuff. Nevertheless...would you care to expand a little?

[harveypooka]

Hardmac told me that apparently some work is going into sorting the video driver problem (which I guess it what most people are waiting for). I've no idea how they can get around the problem...the card does not support Windows. Will it just be flashing the card...every time you want to switch OS? I really really really really want to be playing Half Life 2 and Eve online...on my Mac, on Windows! I wonder what philosophical issues this raises...are you playing on a Mac...or on a PC?

[harveypooka]

I love the 'out-geeking' on this topic. It's class. I've read a bit of developers saying it'll be easier for them to develop and quite a few saying it won't make a difference. I win. 10 geek points!

[Amuraivel]

Company: Microsoft
Version: 5.1
Post Date: March 14, 2006
License: Freeware
File Size: 6.7MB
URL Type: Download
Download ID: 760


There is no MSN Messenger video/audio chat (no Mac version).

Why would she boot XP on a mac for a chat program?
Especially if the environment she uses is Mac OS X.

[VicMacs]

OK everybody, I'm sorry, not 10. I made a mistake. More like 6 years old. in 2000, the powerbook looked exactly the same.

stop looking like an a** when u speak dude :D ....here... download this

http://www.mactracker.ca/

nothing against learning

[zac4mac]

Ordin12-

Just got a MacBook - Dual 2GHz w/100GB - 7200 rpm HDD and a 256MB video card.
Hate to break the news to ya, but that's NOT 10 or 6 year old Tech. This 'Book is tight, fast and more impressive than ANY Vaio I've seen. Yes I'm an Apple wh0re, but the new Book is amazing as a revA device.

I very much want to be able to boot XP or Vista on my 'Book

Z

[harveypooka]

Why would she boot XP on a mac for a chat program?
Especially if the environment she uses is Mac OS X.

Because there is no audio/video support in the MS Messenger app!

[Gary King]

done and done.
Works? That's great news! :)

[g.x]

Sorry, but it's actually you (and the plenty of others you mention) who don't know what they're talking about.

You guys need to do some research into virtualisation.

If you read my post, you will see that I was reponding to those posters (and there are many) who are waiting for "Virtual PC" to run at native speeds. You may have a better understanding of virtualization, but you need to accept that "Virtual PC" is a software application...it emulation...it's an extra layer of code...it will never, by definition, run at native speeds.

My comment, in other words, says,

"A Core Duo running XP will never be as fast as a the same Core Duo running OS X running Virtual PC running XP."

This, I believe, is true.

[cal6n]

snip...

"A Core Duo running XP will never be as fast as a the same Core Duo running OS X running Virtual PC running XP."



I think that's ass-backwards, mate!

[g.x]

I think that's ass-backwards, mate!

Whoops! Here I am trying to defend myself and I just swallowed my entire foot!

Everyone knows what I meant (hopefully).

I'm an idiot.

[fisty]

How difficult is Windows to instal on a mac?

Lets say someone like me who isnt completely computer illiterate tried to make his MBP dual boot - would they have serious issues?

With regards to the actual windows environment on a Mac - does it actually feel like windows? Does WiFi and audio and video work properly or do I still have to wait for that? If for example WiFi isnt working, when a sollution does become available, will I have to reinstall windows or will I just have to say install a patch / driver?

its very easy, there is a howto file it tells you every single steps you have to make, this is my first mac ever and yeh played around with the OS on my brothers powerbook but its very easy,

audio works, only throufh headphones though so far, wifi and ethernet works 100%, the driver for the video card isnt out as this is a user effort and not a company effort it will take some time hence you can not play games under windows on ur new intel mac, but for writing or using aplications its good enough....it took me around 2 hours to install windows on my macbook from when i started and finished i.e this means having all my appz back in place, email redownloaded from my pop server in mail and stuff

enjoy :D

[fisty]

OK everybody, I'm sorry, not 10. I made a mistake. More like 6 years old. in 2000, the powerbook looked exactly the same. Now, it still looks nice, but the Vaio is nice too. Just a matter of taste maybe but it's nice to know there's a company innovating every few months and letting you pick among a large number of computers. Apple could have introduced tilting screens, 2 buttons, and not everybody loves the alumium case.

I still remain loyal to OS X despite Apple obviously dropping the ball on Sync and a few other nice features that they used to support and keep up to date.

why on earth would you want 2 buttons on the mac? you dont need it lol
ctrl click so easy....

macs are much more usefull thx to all the shortcuts....


nutter

[zac4mac]

Why on earth would someone want more than one button???
Are you effing serious?

Myself, when I'm surfing, working or gaming, I usually have a cookie, a stike or a beer in my left hand and my Intellimouse explorers many buttons are getting a workout in my right hand. This is a debate that has been kicked to death and finally Apple themselves make a multi-button mouse.

I have a 3 week old MBP 2.0 and it WILL have XP Pro in native code by the end of next week. If it's stable, THEN I'll buy a copy of XP.

[danny_w]

If you read my post, you will see that I was reponding to those posters (and there are many) who are waiting for "Virtual PC" to run at native speeds. You may have a better understanding of virtualization, but you need to accept that "Virtual PC" is a software application...it emulation...it's an extra layer of code...it will never, by definition, run at native speeds.

My comment, in other words, says,

"A Core Duo running XP will never be as fast as a the same Core Duo running OS X running Virtual PC running XP."

This, I believe, is true.
There is an x86 native Virtual PC for Windows that (I think) is only a virtualizaiton engine, and not an emulator. It allows you to run other OS's under Windows at (near) native speed I would think, similar to VMWare. It weems like this would be the basis of an x86 Virtual PC for Mac, if there ever is one, instead of the current Virtual PC/Mac, which must by definition include the emulation layer. Is this not correct? If it is, then we could indeed expect near native speed from an x86 Virtual PC for Mac, and this appeals to me much more than dual booting ever would.

[janstett]

why on earth would you want 2 buttons on the mac? you dont need it lol
ctrl click so easy....

macs are much more usefull thx to all the shortcuts....


nutter

I have been using a Microsoft mouse with my MBP and it's just so natural to use the right click. Apple should just give it up and put 2 (or more) buttons there, it sort of did with the mighty mouse, but still on the MacBooks give us 2 buttons please. They could even mimmick the mighty mouse and make the button tip left/right for a left/right click.

[janstett]

I just want to set some expectation levels for people like Danny_W regarding what to expect out of virtual PC. Yes, there is a Virtual PC for Windows. Yes, it doesn't have to do CPU translation like the Mac version does.

However, I use VPC for Windows all the time. Mostly to use Red Hat 9 and Fedora Core 4 on my laptop, or in a pinch when I can't have a stand-alone desktop for these operating systems. I also use it to test with foreign versions of operating systems (needed Dutch Media Center not too long ago) and Win ME, Win2000, etc.

It's OK, but it is not quite "near natve" in speed. I haven't benchmarked it, but based on compiles I've done on the same machine in both environments, I'd say maybe 60% of the performance. It is still preferable to have the OS on bare metal. First, all the hardware is still virtualized (video card, network card, etc.) so the virtual machines don't have to deal with the underlying hardware. They present themselves as certain fixed things, like an S3 video card. In Red Hat and Fedora I have to do some tricks to get decent video modes involving VESA drivers. In short I'm a fan of VPC for Windows, but it's not as good as a real PC and it's not as fast as using a dedicated PC.

[fisty]

I have been using a Microsoft mouse with my MBP and it's just so natural to use the right click. Apple should just give it up and put 2 (or more) buttons there, it sort of did with the mighty mouse, but still on the MacBooks give us 2 buttons please. They could even mimmick the mighty mouse and make the button tip left/right for a left/right click.


dude a laptop is to be used with no mouse in theory..if you do than do be my quest...i sometimes use a external mouse too if its on a desk or something but i mostly use my laptops on sofas or in compfy position and not at desks in that case u dont use a mouse, if you need to right click ctrl click easy peasy...

you dont like the idea...well than i guess a mac laptop isnt for you...lol

more buttons...more than 2 ur a wierd person lol....osx is so nice cuz its simple..adding buttons just make ppl phreak out.. you want to take this brilliant easiness on a machine cuz ur too lazy to make ctrl click...:confused:

[Abulia]

more buttons...more than 2 ur a wierd person lol....osx is so nice cuz its simple..adding buttons just make ppl phreak out.. you want to take this brilliant easiness on a machine cuz ur too lazy to make ctrl click...:confused:You're calling him lazy even though you can't use complete sentences and spell out your words?

Irony gold. :D

[quicksilver77]

dude a laptop is to be used with no mouse in theory..if you do than do be my quest...i sometimes use a external mouse too if its on a desk or something but i mostly use my laptops on sofas or in compfy position and not at desks in that case u dont use a mouse, if you need to right click ctrl click easy peasy...

you dont like the idea...well than i guess a mac laptop isnt for you...lol

more buttons...more than 2 ur a wierd person lol....osx is so nice cuz its simple..adding buttons just make ppl phreak out.. you want to take this brilliant easiness on a machine cuz ur too lazy to make ctrl click...:confused:


Laziness has nothing to do with it. Its the ease of use factor. Apple even came out with a two button mouse (a garbage one but one even so). Right clicking is easier than taking your other hand and using ctrl. Macfanatics (most) never get this...if Steve says to do it....U do it...sheep

[Anonymous Freak]

Laziness has nothing to do with it. Its the ease of use factor. Apple even came out with a two button mouse (a garbage one but one even so). Right clicking is easier than taking your other hand and using ctrl. Macfanatics (most) never get this...if Steve says to do it....U do it...sheep

I actually don't have any problem at all with Control-clicking (or Option, or Command, or Shift,) because I tend to leave my left hand on the keyboard when mousing. I find that I need to hit a modifier often enough during normal computer use that I just keep one hand on the keyboard. Even when I'm using a two-button mouse on a Mac (as my primary desktop has,) I tend to hit Control-click as often as using the 'real' right-click. On Windows machines, I find myself TRYING to Control-click fairly often, too.)

[janstett]

dude a laptop is to be used with no mouse in theory..

When I use it on a desk, I use a mouse. It's just easier. I hate, hate scratchpads. I prefer the trackpoint that IBM uses. But neither are as precise as a mouse. I carry a mini mouse with every laptop I have.
more buttons...more than 2 ur a wierd person lol....osx is so nice cuz its simple..adding buttons just make ppl phreak out.. you want to take this brilliant easiness on a machine cuz ur too lazy to make ctrl click...:confused:

I know typing complete words is a chore for you, so I wouldn't expect u 2, err, you to understand. Using your argument, OSX is too simple, so simple that it is inflexible. (It's not OSX, it's the input device Apple chooses by default). The right click is natural -- get over it Apple. The fact that they added it on the Mighty Mouse shows they are cracking.

I use an MS Intellimouse on my desktop. Left click, right click, PLUS two buttons at my thumb which are used for next/previous page in a web browser, VERY convenient. Plus the scroll wheel (Apple's still behind on this great invention by Microsoft and lamely copied it on the mighty mouse) -- the scroll wheel not only scrolls, but can be pressed as a 5th button, and can be used to scroll side to side not just up and down.

I guess your solution is to not have this flexibility to "keep it simple". When I'm using the MacBook without an external mouse, I feel like I might as well be wearing boxing gloves. u get wht i mn d00d, cuz yer stile iz 1mp0z1bly cntrctd?

Look at the way they design controls for fighter pilots. The idea is to keep the pilot's eyes in the skies, on his target, and not looking down at control switches. Every time I have to take my hand off the keyboard, and my eyes off the screen, to find the little clover key, (or move the mouse to the left/right browser buttons), I'm breaking my workflow. With a well designed multibutton mouse, you can do that without taking your left hand off the keyboard or breaking your workflow.

[barstard]

When I use it on a desk, I use a mouse. It's just easier. I hate, hate scratchpads. I prefer the trackpoint that IBM uses. But neither are as precise as a mouse. I carry a mini mouse with every laptop I have.


I know typing complete words is a chore for you, so I wouldn't expect u 2, err, you to understand. Using your argument, OSX is too simple, so simple that it is inflexible. (It's not OSX, it's the input device Apple chooses by default). The right click is natural -- get over it Apple. The fact that they added it on the Mighty Mouse shows they are cracking.

I use an MS Intellimouse on my desktop. Left click, right click, PLUS two buttons at my thumb which are used for next/previous page in a web browser, VERY convenient. Plus the scroll wheel (Apple's still behind on this great invention by Microsoft and lamely copied it on the mighty mouse) -- the scroll wheel not only scrolls, but can be pressed as a 5th button, and can be used to scroll side to side not just up and down.

You are right in that Apple will eventually have all multiple-button mice. A couple of points neeed to be corrected though. Apple's Mighty Mouse does scroll side to side and at 45 degrees too! The scroll wheel can be used as a button, and the grips can also be used as a button.

When doing work in most audio apps, it is basically a necessity to have your non-mouse hand on the keyboard, working in Pro-Tools with shortcuts (there are hundreds of them) is SOOO much more efficient than using contextual menus or searching through the main menus for your task. So when in Pro-Tools, I have absolutely no need for a multiple button mouse, the only thing a mouse is used for is to select certain points in the edit window or to change mixer levels on-screen (if no control surface to use).

I know plenty will disagree with me but this is how I work!

Basic Finder use and web browsing is definitely easier with a multi-button mouse, but not everything is.

Oh, and how did this topic end up talking about mice?:D


barstard.