Windows XP Booting on Mac Contest Over

[SeaFox]

I only view this as a negative thing.

I don't believe that this will bring a significant amount of market share to Apple, unless Apple starts offering it as an option - very few people who want to run dual OS's are actually going hack around in their computer to do it.

Given your reasoning I don't see why this should be seen as negetive or positive. It is possible to dual boot now, giving people who need to the option. But it's not super easy so it wouldn't cause this mass exodus to Windows all the fanbois on here are worried about (why? if people wanted to run Windows instead of OSX to start with, would they have bought a Mac in the beginning?).

What's negetive about this? Unless you were hoping for a super-easy, go-into-EFI-and-change-this-zero-to-a-one solution nothing has really changed.

[mrplow]

Mmm, if I use window XP without surfing, will I still get viruses and spyware? :confused: I doubt it

If I run Office on or Photoshop on XP, will they be as "slow" as with rosetta since those apps are not UB yet? :confused: I doubt this also

I think having a choice is always good for users and most on this forum are experienced enough to know when and for what to boot into XP

besides, using firefox with all the plugins (not to mention ms's spyware remover in the background- tho it can be annoying)... and a slight bit of intelligence which i think this forum is abundant in, i find it unlikely you'll end up with any such problems

[iMeowbot]

true, but the procedure calls for a boot.img file that nero utilizes when creating it- i don't know of any mac software which does this.. especially since its speifically creating a generic pc bootable disk, something a mac certainly is not
mkisofs can work with those.

[mrplow]

mkisofs can work with those.

well then i stand corrected :)

ive just had alot of issues in the past where nero worked and toast/diskUtil didnt (especially with modding an xbox)

[harveypooka]

Oh, it doesn't work on the 20" Intel iMac?

[SeaFox]

I think any discussion of how this is going to affect software development for OS X (i.e., "OMG, now companies will just target Windows and forget about Mac OS") is totally ridiculous. No sane developer who is serious about wanting to sell their product to Mac users is going to expect them to install some hacked up bootloader and whatever else it needs so they can run Windows in order to use the product.

Maybe this wil be slightly more of a concern when something like Virtual PC comes out that can can smoothly run Windows at full speed in an environment fully supported by Microsoft, or if dual-booting can ever be achieved without downloading some dubious (to the average computer user) hacks.

Thank You!

God, I have been so sick of hearing that line of reasoning from people. They seem to completely ignore that Virtual PC or Windows are not free so if you start telling your Mac customers they have to boot Windows to run your program you might as well have told them you just raised the price of your software a couple hundred dollars.

[iSee]

I don't think many of you understand. This doesn't hurt development for the Mac overnight, it is a slow erosion that takes time. For example, read all the posts saying "I would only use it to run the occasional piece of software that is Windows only". Yes... and once you can do that easily and with native performance, there is *ZERO* pressure on the developer of that software to create an OSX version... he gets your money either way.

Case in point, Garmin announced at MWSF that they will make Mac-native versions of their GPS software... something that many people have been requesting for quite some time. If their software worked great under OSX through VPC or some fast switching solution, how motivated would they be to do that? Google Earth? Games? I doubt we'll ever see Autocad for the Mac again now. Then look at companies that may be on the edge of dropping Mac development for one reason or another. No MS Office for the Mac, anyone? Again, that won't happen overnight, but it could happen.

It takes time, but if Wintel software works as well and transparently on a Mac as it does on a PC, then you will see cases of this, guaranteed. It took years, but this was a huge factor in the slow and painful death of OS/2.

You're wrong. Extend the example a little: Suppose Garmin does indeed decide not to make a mac OS native version of their GPS software. Then XYZ company will instead. Now, suppose you were facing the choice of which product to buy:
* The one that requires that you buy a $300 version of XP (or become a criminal) and install it and then reboot your Mac every time you wanted to use the software and be foreced to use an XP UI to access the software.

or

* The Mac OS X native version.

Which one would you buy, all other things being equal?

Native Mac OS support is a tremendous competative advantage, and companies that have it will always beat out the ones that don't.

The general ability to run Windows on Macs will increase Mac market share; Apple will sell more Macs! A software developer will feel a lot more comfortable ignoring 3% of the market than 6%, or 10%. I'm not saying this alone will dramatically incease market share, but anything that increases market share will help convince developers to support Mac OS X.

This is a good thing, even for people that will never run it. It will increase Apple market shared, which will increase the resources developer are willing to allocate to it, which will lead to better and more software--OS X native software.

[baylormac]

I can't seem to get a FAT partition and a HFS+ partition in the same scheme. It only gives me one option or the other for both partitions.

Am I just missing something?

[dernhelm]

Mmm, if I use window XP without surfing, will I still get viruses and spyware? :confused:

Oh yes you can if you aren't up to date on your windows patches and are not behind a firewall or NATTed or something.

Which brings up an interesting point. With microsoft's new anti-piracy policies, will a mac hacked this way be able to get online updates of windows? Will it pass the on-line update "this is legal" checks?

[Steve1496]

I can't seem to get a FAT partition and a HFS+ partition in the same scheme. It only gives me one option or the other for both partitions.

Am I just missing something?


You are creating these from the installer's disk utility, and not in OS X, right?

[Steve1496]

Oh yes you can if you aren't up to date on your windows patches and are not behind a firewall or NATTed or something.

Which brings up an interesting point. With microsoft's new anti-piracy policies, will a mac hacked this way be able to get online updates of windows? Will it pass the on-line update "this is legal" checks?


Windows Update does work according to one person I asked.

[mrplow]

Oh yes you can if you aren't up to date on your windows patches and are not behind a firewall or NATTed or something.

Which brings up an interesting point. With microsoft's new anti-piracy policies, will a mac hacked this way be able to get online updates of windows? Will it pass the on-line update "this is legal" checks?


I'd bet the farm that it will- it verifies activation/cdkey/etc.. not whteher you have 'approved' hardware.. which of course, everything but the mac firmware EFI layer.. and i think the biggest piece of this hack was working around that to give windows something it understood :cool:

[Abulia]

Which brings up an interesting point. With microsoft's new anti-piracy policies, will a mac hacked this way be able to get online updates of windows? Will it pass the on-line update "this is legal" checks?Windows Update only checks to see that your license of Windows has been authenticated; WU doesn't "refuse" people based on their hardware configuration.

So, in short, if you have a legal copy of Windows, install it on your Mac, and activate it, Windows will update and patch normally.

[harveypooka]

Macworld reports one user stating that XP on the Mac is useless or pretty much useless for gaming. What are the reports of this? If it's easy to install the drivers for the iMac video card - what are the potential problems?

[liketom]

god dam it , got to the boot screen where i get all the text on boot after the win logo and it just stays there !!!

mmm must be doing something wrong


am i right in saying all i need from win xp to nero win xp image is the i386 files ?

[mrplow]

god dam it , got to the boot screen where i get all the text on boot after the win logo and it just stays there !!!

mmm must be doing something wrong


am i right in saying all i need from win xp to nero win xp image is the i386 files ?


i used EVERYTHING.. then added the patched files.. you def. can't forget about $OEM$ etc from patched folder.. as for non i386 folders on the actual XP disk, you got me.. (so i apologize if thats all you meant)

[iMeowbot]

ive just had alot of issues in the past where nero worked and toast/diskUtil didnt (especially with modding an xbox)
Yeah, Mac-centric tools would probably be less than useful for such an effort. Tools that sprung up out of the Lunix world, however, have already made big dents in the compatibility issues. The tools would have to be packaged up so that non-freaks could use them, but I believe everything may be there.

In places like mine, we really want to be able to show that all the licenses are squeaky clean on business machines, and even avoid the appearance that an OS was "borrowed" from another system. So that's something we'll have to play with once this procedure is debugged a little more.

[liketom]

i used EVERYTHING.. then added the patched files.. you def. can't forget about $OEM$ etc from patched folder.. as for non i386 folders on the actual XP disk, you got me.. (so i apologize if thats all you meant)
yep i\m buring another cd now - 6 cd's wasted so far :mad:

still kinda fun though :D

[Steve1496]

god dam it , got to the boot screen where i get all the text on boot after the win logo and it just stays there !!!

mmm must be doing something wrong


am i right in saying all i need from win xp to nero win xp image is the i386 files ?


What Mac do you have? He says you only need i386 but I think its a good idea to include support folder too.

[iSee]

The issue though is two fold. First most Mac users aren’t going to buy a license. (A Mac user purchasing Windows? NEVER!)
Secondly...

:confused: :eek: No Mac user needs to buy a license. If they don't want to run Windows XP they don't have to.

But if you are going to run it, you've got to pay for it. What about being a Mac user makes it OK to steal? Even if it's from M$?

(I know you aren't advocating this, SA, in your post. I'm directing this to the those of us who may be considering "obtaining" a copy of XP without a license.)

[mrplow]

so incase anyone cares, and maybe im wrong but i doubt it :cool: you should make sure to format the partition as FAT when installing XP and not NTFS--- FAT discs can be read/written in OSX where as NTFS can only be read


to the man burning 6 coasters-- what version of nero do you have? for the step that says to select the boot.img file I couldn't find it in Nero 6 and had to download Nero 7.. skipping this step would be detrimental

[liketom]

What Mac do you have? He says you only need i386 but I think its a good idea to include support folder too.
mac mini core solo ;)

HELP ME via iChat user name under my profile

[Steve1496]

so incase anyone cares, and maybe im wrong but i doubt it :cool: you should make sure to format the partition as FAT when installing XP and not NTFS--- FAT discs can be read/written in OSX where as NTFS can only be read


But doesn't FAT only support up to 32GB??

[mrplow]

But doesn't FAT only support up to 32GB??


..you might be right.

I'm planning on using MacDrive which lets windows utilize HFS+ partitions, so all my itunes etc will remain on the OSX partition.. I don't think I'm going to need more than 10GB space fo Windows

[lorien]

Also...is there ANYTHING going on here that if done improperly could render your mac unuseable?

Exactly what I'm worried about. To all you people with somebody elses mac at work, you go girl! But it's not coming anywhere near my rather expensive soon-to-arrive bundle of joy! Hopefully this experiment with "good" & "evil" in the same box won't cause flames, but turn out really good for the fledgling Apple universe. After a good deal of reviews I may give it a go ;)

[mrplow]

Exactly what I'm worried about. To all you people with somebody elses mac at work, you go girl! But it's not coming anywhere near my rather expensive soon-to-arrive bundle of joy! Hopefully this experiment with "good" & "evil" in the same box won't cause flames, but turn out really good for the fledgling Apple universe. After a good deal of reviews I may give it a go ;)

somehow my hard drive ended up being read as uninstallable for OSX no matter what I did.. then magically it came back and I got OS X installed :-D XP is installing now, so I really don't see any potential problems with getting back to stock configuration-- since I just did it :)

[milo]

Macworld reports one user stating that XP on the Mac is useless or pretty much useless for gaming. What are the reports of this? If it's easy to install the drivers for the iMac video card - what are the potential problems?

There's a simple solution for the video drivers. You need to put a piece of tape on the side of your mac that has the chinese writing for "this side" on it.

[Steve1496]

mac mini core solo ;)


You sure you're using the right xom.efi ? I'm not sure how it is in the final release package but in the test package, you needed a different (from imacs and MBP) package for the Mac Mini because people had that same problem.

Also note it takes around 3 minutes with no feedback on MacMini.

[harveypooka]

There's a simple solution for the video drivers. You need to put a piece of tape on the side of your mac that has the chinese writing for "this side" on it.

Helpful, thanks.

[DougTheImpaler]

Gah! I'm amazed at the people who think the Mac platform is in such dire straits as to think this hack, used by a small minority of the small minority of Mac owners who own an Intel Mac, could kill the platform. *sigh*

Funny that this argument popped up on a thread about 'how to make your Mac more PC!" :p
I declare you the thread winnar. LOL :D

Or maybe he'll just not bother making a video since all the ungrateful ***holes just whined about it anyway.
I never said I didn't appreciate it, it just gave me a headache to watch. :D

Next time I'll add an "LOL" or maybe a ":D" or possible a ":cool:" for the non-humor-inclined. :D :cool: LOL

[scheming]

this is good for people like me. i have enough money to have one computer. i know there are various programs (and games) that run only on windows, but i would much rather do all my regular work on mac osx. right now, i have an acer aspire 2010, pretty cool windows laptop, but i would much rather have a macbook pro. with the possibilty of having windows and mac osx coexisting on a single machine im in heaven.

[AEMV]

I dont think there is any way to damage the mac with this solution since there is no firmware hacking involved.

All you are doing is placing a new boot file inside the core services. Wiping out the hardrive should fix any problems you might encounter.

[liketom]

You sure you're using the right xom.efi ? I'm not sure how it is in the final release package but in the test package, you needed a different (from imacs and MBP) package for the Mac Mini because people had that same problem.

Also note it takes around 3 minutes with no feedback on MacMini.
mm good idea i will download a newer patch - i'm right in thinking the 777k xp folder is the one right ?

[janstett]

But for all those people who are waiting/drooling over "Virtual PC at native speeds," please pull your head out so it can get some air. Plenty of friendly people on this site (obviously not me) have kindly tried to educate you and you are simply ignoring them.

Absolutely. People are forgetting that Virtual PC does already exist on Windows, I use it all the time (mostly to run Red Hat 9 on my XP latpop). While it's usable, it is NOT anywhere near native speed. The way VPC behaves on Windows with other X86 operating systems will be a good indication (maybe even a best case) for intel VPC on Mac.

[plinden]

The install disk has to be copied and altered. Does Microsoft allow Windows install disks to be duplicated?
Anyone can create a slipstreamed XP CD for easy reinstallation. IT depts in companies often have a customized XP install that they use to quickly get users up and running.

The legal difficulty is in running more than one copy, but you can get a WinXP Pro OEM license for $70.

[SPUY767]

It should be noted, that while OS X is both far more stable and user friendly than Windows XP, OS X can also crash on occasion.

After updating to 10.4.5, running MS VPC 7.02 with Virtual Switch Networking, my G5 (Quad 2.5 with 8GB of RAM connected to a 30 inch Apple Cinema Dispaly through an nVidia FX4500) continually locked up.

If you've never seen it the screen whites over one line at a time starting at the top and displays a messages stating that you have to reboot using the power button.

Certainly much more aesthetically pleasing than MS's BSOD but equally as damaging.

The only solution was to change to Shared Networking in VPC. I'm hoping MS will issue a fix but I'm not holding my breath.

~iGuy

True, no matter how well written the OS is, it can't prevent poor programming by the application providers. When I was writing some multi-threaded SMP code in XCode, I forgot a crucial check in my code and my application would there by have both processors in my DP 2.5 access the same address in memory at exactly the same time. Out like a light. Some things the kernel just can't handle, and never will be able to. windows crashes more partle because the OS is cobbled together with backward compatibility for twenty years of crapware in mind, but also in part because there is more poorly coded SW on the windows side. It is of not, that with one exception, in four years of Running OS X I've only crashed twice where I couldn't directly attribute it to a software application doing something stupid.

[baylormac]

You are creating these from the installer's disk utility, and not in OS X, right?

I tried both. Neither gave me the option to format one partition one way and a second the other. I could pick between HFS+, HFS+ journaled and so on for both or the MS-DOS option for both.

[squigles@mac.co]

:confused: So in order to install Windows XP on a Mac your going to need to have a PC as well ?

Forgive me but am I missing something here ????

[Steve1496]

:confused: So in order to install Windows XP on a Mac your going to need to have a PC as well ?

Forgive me but am I missing something here ????


For now yes. But you only need it for about 10 minutes to create the CD. It does not require you own a CD, you could just a friends PC to burn the disc on.

[AEMV]

You only need a PC to use Nero and burn the Mac Friendly XP CD. There might be other OSX CD burning utilities which support the same feature needed from nero so that no PC in needed.

BTW, forums.onmac.net are UP!!

[Steve1496]

mm good idea i will download a newer patch - i'm right in thinking the 777k xp folder is the one right ?


I'm not so sure what's going on here. I downloaded the final from mirror #4, and it only includes 1 xom.efi. Blanka stated you needed a different one for a MacMini...well, since the forum is down, I can't get it and I can't figure out why its not in the release package.

[glazerman]

I'm a newbie on this forum, but a long time Windows and mac user. I don't know if instructions have been posted yet, but if they have, can someone help me find instructions for booting XP on the MacBook Pro? If it hasn't been posted yet, any idea of when?

Thanks

[AEMV]

DOWNLOAD MIRRORS

Mirror 1:
http://harrisonjordan.com/Winxponmac_0.1.zip

Mirror 2:
http://leewilkins.com/share/winxponmac0.1.zip

Mirror 3:
http://www.jerrybrace.com/Winxponmac%200.1.zip

Mirror 4:
http://www.geekdinner.co.uk/winxponmac0.1.zip

Mirror 5:
http://www.apple.tempex.sk/wordpress/Winxponmac%200.1.zip

[liketom]

I'm not so sure what's going on here. I downloaded the final from mirror #4, and it only includes 1 xom.efi. Blanka stated you needed a different one for a MacMini...well, since the forum is down, I can't get it and I can't figure out why its not in the release package.
this could be the reason why i'm nopw on my 8 cd rom :rolleyes:

has anyone with a Mac Mini Solo or duo got this working ? if so info please :cool:

[Steve1496]

Since the forums are back up, I downloaded the xom.efi Blanka made for MacMini. Here's the file.
EDIT: Why isn't MR accepting my upload? Its only 120KB
Drivers from my post at onmac forums:
Wireless: http://tinyurl.com/jxqsn
Ethernet: http://www.marvell.com/drivers/upload/SetupYukonWin_x32_v84923.zip


*WARNING* to MacMini users: Do not install Intel Video drivers! They will render your install useless and you'll have to start over.

[mrplow]

so if nothing else i hope others can learn from my mistakes

i made two partitions, huge OSX and small MSDOS... whenever i go to install XP the instructions say to choose partition 2, but my MSDOS prtition is now partition 3.... AKA- when using Disk Utility, you MUST make the first partition your MSDOS and the second one OSX.... ((just trying to help))

[quigleybc]

Exactly what I'm worried about. To all you people with somebody elses mac at work, you go girl! But it's not coming anywhere near my rather expensive soon-to-arrive bundle of joy! Hopefully this experiment with "good" & "evil" in the same box won't cause flames, but turn out really good for the fledgling Apple universe. After a good deal of reviews I may give it a go ;)



Agreed, I'll let others experiment for this for a long while..and let them be the guinea pigs...

I don't even install Mac OS updates for a few days..so..ya..I'll be watching this one for a while..

Not that I even have an intel mac....

But

By the time I do get one, I figure this will be all sorted out and perfected.

Until then....good luck to you all...

[VanNess]

You guys are all missing the really big story here!

(at the time of this post)

I doubt even the Mac 128k woulda had that good a rating, had Macrumors existed in 1984.


Are you crazy? The Mac 128K would get universally negative reviews.

"Mouse? WTF is a mouse, and where does Apple get these retarded names?"

"********. It doesn't even have a hard drive. My Lisa can fit ten Twiggy disks on the hard drive. And it doesn't have any expansion capabilities. Millions of options are available for my Lisa. Show me something impressive, Steve. At this rate, I won't be upgrading for years."

"Apple is switching to square pixels? Worst... mistake... ever."

"Look at that bloated worthless excuse for an OS. Think of how much power you'd have running just Microsoft BASIC or something light like that."

"It's only 6MHz faster than my Apple III. Lousy speed bump."

"It's... not... backward-compatible. It can't run Apple II or III or Lisa programs? And wtf is that little slot on the front of the machine. I know that ain't for floppies. Not my floppies. Great, Steve. I spent $360,512 on software that just became absolutely worthless. **** it, I'm switching to Osborne."

"OMG LOL integrated monitor? 9 inches? I wonder if I could hack in a 10 if I got a curling iron and a heavy-duty stapler."

"Lame. That GUI makes it look like a little girl's toy. If I used something with a GUI, I'd have deep questions about my heterosexuality."

"Yeah, but will it run XENIX?"

"You're an idiot fanboy if you think this was a positive step. Steve's RDF is clearly going to his head. They'll let that idiot do anything now."

"Sorry. Sony already patented Burrell Smith."

This should really be a thread of its own.

You mean like this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=500)? :eek:

[mrplow]

You mean like this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=500)? :eek:

That site certainly needs archived for life...


to be fair, $399 sucked the balls.

[plinden]

Surely this wouldn't affect games like Minesweeper and FreeCell. ;)

OK these probably already work on Darwine, but for lots of Windows users these are games they miss on a Mac.

B
Minesweeper (http://www.roastedsoftware.com/sw/Aqua-Mines/)
Freecell (http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/cards_puzzle/freesolitaire3d.html)

[Mr. Zarniwoop]

But doesn't FAT only support up to 32GB??

That would be a bummer for all the 40GB and 60GB iPods for Windows that use FAT!

FAT32 (introduced in 1996 with an update to Windows 95) is limited to 8TB volumes, but a maximum 4GB file size. However, the FAT32 formatting support in Windows 2000 and XP is limited to drives of 32GB, which effectively forces users of modern hard drives either to use NTFS or to format the drive using other tools outside Windows. One workaround to this involves using a version of mkdosfs that has been ported from Linux to Windows.

Also, the current OS X seems to be able to read, but not write, NTFS volumes. They have a maximum 16EB volume size, same as HFS+. (1 exabyte = 1,024 petabytes = 1,048,576 terrabytes)

[aegisdesign]

why would anyone buy a mac if they intended to use windows to run applications? this whole theory that software development will cease to exist is ridiculous... apple exists because it has a superior OS, not because their hardware is superior to the windows world (and is alot more expensive!).

point in case- why does anyone support Linux when Windows has been around for over a decade, running on the same hardware? or vice versa... nothing will change. The only thing that might receive less attention is games.. but with how weak it is to begin with, who the hell cares- they're going to run faster through XP regardless.

You'll notice that Linux doesn't have very many mainstream applications on it.

I'll take a couple of examples of why being able to run Windows is a BAD THING.

1) I'm an engineer. My company wants me to produce drawings in AutoCAD format but since there is no MacOSX version I would normally run VectorWorks or some other Mac only product that can produce AutoCAD files even if there may be slight problems. Now that I can run it natively on Windows, I'll use AutoCAD instead of buying the comparative Mac product. The Mac CAD developers die off gradually.

2) I'm a 3D artist. There's a kick ass product for 3D only on Windows. I boot into Windows and use that instead of buying a comparable OSX product. 3D Mac app developers who don't want to compete for a dwindling market drop out of the market.

3) I'm an accountant. Not content with MYOB, Incognito or the mess that is Quicken on the Mac, I boot into Windows and run Sage. Mac accountancy software dies off even more than the poor state it is today.

I hope you can see why being able to run Windows applications at full speed is a bad thing for the Mac market in general. It may not be bad for users in the short term but in the medium to long term you want strong Mac development, even if it means that excludes the heavyweights from the Windows world. Many Mac only developers exist because the big Windows only companies don't bother with the Mac.

[tdar]

Since the forums are back up, I downloaded the xom.efi Blanka made for MacMini. Here's the file.
EDIT: Why isn't MR accepting my upload? Its only 120KB
Drivers from my post at onmac forums:
Wireless: http://tinyurl.com/jxqsn
Ethernet: http://www.marvell.com/drivers/upload/SetupYukonWin_x32_v84923.zip


*WARNING* to MacMini users: Do not install Intel Video drivers! They will render your install useless and you'll have to start over.


Steve: I think I found the video driver for the Mac book and the Imac....

The launch partner for the X1600 mobility was (is) ASUS. The launch laptop is the ASUS A7G

http://www.ati.com/buy/promotions/AsusA7G/index.html

If you look on the ASUS support pages for the A7G you will find:
Graphics Driver
ATI Graphics driver for WinXP

the current version is v8.204 (dated 2/21/2006)

I'm downloading now even though I don't yet have my Imac to look at the driver files...

[Steve1496]

Steve: I think I found the video driver for the Mac book and the Imac....

The launch partner for the X1600 mobility was (is) ASUS. The launch laptop is the ASUS A7G

http://www.ati.com/buy/promotions/AsusA7G/index.html

If you look on the ASUS support pages for the A7G you will find:
Graphics Driver
ATI Graphics driver for WinXP

the current version is v8.204 (dated 2/21/2006)

I'm downloading now even though I don't yet have my Imac to look at the driver files...


Are these the catalyst drivers? If they are, they probably won't work. But I will try and see if I can find someone can test them.

[PtMD]

Since the forums are back up, I downloaded the xom.efi Blanka made for MacMini. Here's the file.


Any idea where I can find the xom.efi file for the MBP? I tried the one packaged with the release and had no joy. :confused:

[tdar]

Are these the catalyst drivers? If they are, they probably won't work. But I will try and see if I can find someone can test them.

file name is VGA_XP_060221.zip

[jared_kipe]

Steve: I think I found the video driver for the Mac book and the Imac....

The launch partner for the X1600 mobility was (is) ASUS. The launch laptop is the ASUS A7G

http://www.ati.com/buy/promotions/AsusA7G/index.html

If you look on the ASUS support pages for the A7G you will find:
Graphics Driver
ATI Graphics driver for WinXP

the current version is v8.204 (dated 2/21/2006)

I'm downloading now even though I don't yet have my Imac to look at the driver files...
The mini doesn't use an X1600, but if it did it would be bad ass.

[Detlev]

Booting up Windows is something to be done only when there's no other option.
Or maybe when you want to use the majority of software on the market or use a better version of a product that is available on the Mac only by default or you have use commercial services that do not support the Mac platform. His explanation was quite on target.

Look at how many people are already trying it. The gate has opened. It will take some refining but it's done. This is better than most sci-fi movies. Resistance is futile, you are being assimilated.

[williedigital]

supposing they wanted to, could M$ kill this with windows updates?

[macidiot]

It's possible on certain Intel chipsets, but it's illegal, whereas running XP on an intel mac is not.


Maybe I'm missing something, but assuming the person purchased a copy of osx, why would it be illegal? It might void any sort of warranty or support, but I'm pretty sure you won't go to jail...

[adese]

okay so

Is there a way of doing this without using that Nero burn file? what are the steps for that?



so macrumors main page is saying that this will work with 20" models but I'm seeing many posts saying this is not the case...

[tdar]

supposing they wanted to, could M$ kill this with windows updates?

no and why whould they?

[CompUser]

New challange, make OS X and Windows XP run at the same time. Have 1/2 the screen be for windows, the other half be for mac os x.

:) :) ;)

[mrplow]

You'll notice that Linux doesn't have very many mainstream applications on it.

I'll take a couple of examples of why being able to run Windows is a BAD THING.

1) I'm an engineer. My company wants me to produce drawings in AutoCAD format but since there is no MacOSX version I would normally run VectorWorks or some other Mac only product that can produce AutoCAD files even if there may be slight problems. Now that I can run it natively on Windows, I'll use AutoCAD instead of buying the comparative Mac product. The Mac CAD developers die off gradually.

2) I'm a 3D artist. There's a kick ass product for 3D only on Windows. I boot into Windows and use that instead of buying a comparable OSX product. 3D Mac app developers who don't want to compete for a dwindling market drop out of the market.

3) I'm an accountant. Not content with MYOB, Incognito or the mess that is Quicken on the Mac, I boot into Windows and run Sage. Mac accountancy software dies off even more than the poor state it is today.

I hope you can see why being able to run Windows applications at full speed is a bad thing for the Mac market in general. It may not be bad for users in the short term but in the medium to long term you want strong Mac development, even if it means that excludes the heavyweights from the Windows world. Many Mac only developers exist because the big Windows only companies don't bother with the Mac.


You're an engineer who does CAD while holding down a job as a 3d animation artist and yet you find time to perform as an accountant!?!


... point being, don't speak on behalf of a group(s) of people of which you are not a part! To think that this hack will be mainstream is ludicrously stupid... I'm having enough trouble getting the partition scheme to work, muchless think that more than .05% of the mac community would even attempt this much less be successful. My friends can't even copy DVDs with automated apps much less patch/reburn an XP disk and then reform their drive inorder to apply an EFI patch to which they then use that patched XP install.

[janstett]

There is a good question...has anyone tried a PC game like Battlefield 2 to see what happens? Lots of PC games (Mac games included) do some funky direct-hardware calls to video cards and such for performance reasons. Be interesting to see how well something like that runs.

Nobody does direct hardware calls anymore. DirectX has been in place for more than 10 years for this purpose -- it provides an abstraction layer which people write the games to, and it does provide direct access in a manner of sorts (direct access to hardware buffers) but it abstracts cards (so you don't need to know if the user has an nVidia or an ATI) and it also gives a software implementation of things the card doesn't do in hardware. These DirectX drivers are part of the general video display driver installation.

Which is where the current problems are -- getting proper display drivers for the ATI in the intel Macs.

[Maaij]

Since the forums are back up, I downloaded the xom.efi Blanka made for MacMini. Here's the file.
EDIT: Why isn't MR accepting my upload? Its only 120KB
Drivers from my post at onmac forums:
Wireless: http://tinyurl.com/jxqsn
Ethernet: http://www.marvell.com/drivers/upload/SetupYukonWin_x32_v84923.zip


*WARNING* to MacMini users: Do not install Intel Video drivers! They will render your install useless and you'll have to start over.


Steve: Can you sent me the xom.efi for the mac mini? Maaij28ATgmail.com

thanx

[plinden]

What I find funny about this is how easy it was to effectively add EFI support to Windows XP, yet MS can't do it for Vista.

[xJus10x]

Hey guys I can't read through these 23 pages lol.... I'm just wondering what this means for gaming? Right now the only game I can play on my PB is WoW, does this mean if I buy an iMac I would be able to run PC games too? I can only hope....

[tdar]

What I find funny about this is how easy it was to effectively add EFI support to Windows XP, yet MS can't do it for Vista.

It's not that they can't add EFI support to 32 bit Vista ,it's that there is no point in doing so. I would bet you can not find ONE 32 bit system (PC) that has EFI support with out a CSM.....EFI support will come as we move to a 64 bit world. We are not there yet.

[baylormac]

I still cannot make a MS-DOS (FAT) partition from Disk Utility on the Install Disk.

My media has Disk Utility 10.5.4 build 198.9

Can someone who has successfully made a MS-DOS partition check their version for me?

[jared_kipe]

What I find funny about this is how easy it was to effectively add EFI support to Windows XP, yet MS can't do it for Vista.
I've been thinking the same thing. Microsoft is so Lazy, I personally think Vista is gonna flop. They'll be lucky to get 10% or NEW users running Vista. Most people won't care/won't have good enough computers/won't like vista.

The thing about Vista I don't get is that they don't have anything "new" in it. I mean it both being that they have taken lots of OSX ideas, and that the added content is so so. For XP it was like, "oh wow NTFS, thats gonna be awesome". But name one "feature" of Vista that is even slightly technologically advanced (other than its HIDIOUS GUI)? Only one I can think of is protected environment for IE, but is that really a feature or a bug fix?

[tdar]

I've been thinking the same thing. Microsoft is so Lazy, I personally think Vista is gonna flop. They'll be lucky to get 10% or NEW users running Vista. Most people won't care/won't have good enough computers/won't like vista.

The thing about Vista I don't get is that they don't have anything "new" in it. I mean it both being that they have taken lots of OSX ideas, and that the added content is so so. For XP it was like, "oh wow NTFS, thats gonna be awesome". But name one "feature" of Vista that is even slightly technologically advanced (other than its HIDIOUS GUI)? Only one I can think of is protected environment for IE, but is that really a feature or a bug fix?

you are so wrong.....Vista is LOADED with new things....And had added "plumbing" for many more.

WinFX is not new?
WinFS support is not new?
WDDM is not new?

[jared_kipe]

It's not that they can't add EFI support to 32 bit Vista ,it's that there is no point in doing so. I would bet you can not find ONE 32 bit system (PC) that has EFI support with out a CSM.....EFI support will come as we move to a 64 bit world. We are not there yet.
That goes with all new hardware. You don't say "oh we're not going to support it cause nobody has it". Because nobody can have EFI until they suport it, so its a chicken and the egg argument. Vista NEEDS to support EFI, or EFI will go nowhere, not "we'll add it when they need it".

As a good example, look at iMovie HD. Most if not all users of iMovie didn't have an HD camcorder, yet apple PROACTIVELY added support for things to come. They didn't say "hey if enough users buy HD camcorders we'll add it".

[bwintx]

you are so wrong.....Vista is LOADED with new things....And had added "plumbing" for many more.

WinFX is not new?
WinFS support is not new?
WDDM is not new?

WinFS support won't be present in Vista, at least at first. That was big news several months ago.

[milo]

1) I'm an engineer. My company wants me to produce drawings in AutoCAD format but since there is no MacOSX version I would normally run VectorWorks or some other Mac only product that can produce AutoCAD files even if there may be slight problems. Now that I can run it natively on Windows, I'll use AutoCAD instead of buying the comparative Mac product. The Mac CAD developers die off gradually.

2) I'm a 3D artist. There's a kick ass product for 3D only on Windows. I boot into Windows and use that instead of buying a comparable OSX product. 3D Mac app developers who don't want to compete for a dwindling market drop out of the market.

3) I'm an accountant. Not content with MYOB, Incognito or the mess that is Quicken on the Mac, I boot into Windows and run Sage. Mac accountancy software dies off even more than the poor state it is today.

I hope you can see why being able to run Windows applications at full speed is a bad thing for the Mac market in general. It may not be bad for users in the short term but in the medium to long term you want strong Mac development, even if it means that excludes the heavyweights from the Windows world. Many Mac only developers exist because the big Windows only companies don't bother with the Mac.

I'll give you the same situation, circa two days ago.

I'm a XXX. I don't like the mac version of XXX. So instead I run a windows app on a windows box.

Before this, the people in the examples you mentioned simply wouldn't run mac at all. How is that any worse than booting XP on Apple iron?

[O and A]

you are so wrong.....Vista is LOADED with new things....And had added "plumbing" for many more.

WinFX is not new?
WinFS support is not new?
WDDM is not new?

WinFS isn't in vista anymore...COMMON KNOWLEDGE...the biggest reason to upgrade isn't there.

Not saying its not a decent upgrade just saying that so many promised featuers were canceled. AND they were IMPORTANT features. Thats what makes it a decent upgrade and nothing more. Not to meniton so many of todays computers won't even be able to run it well.

[millypede]

I await from Apple
a) A patch 'or' upgrade to stop this from working.
b) Law suit
c) Some other crafty thing from Apple Legal, they will find a way, they always do.

This is kinda good, but XP why for the love of god does it always have to be XP, at least make something that will allow me to put Win2k on.

[bwintx]

To think that this hack will be mainstream is ludicrously stupid... I'm having enough trouble getting the partition scheme to work

Yep. I had to chuckle at your comment after reading this in the "howto.txt" doc:

The iMac needs to be repartitioned in order to do this.
This procedure requires reformatting the HD. I have not tried
partition managers but if you're feeling adventurous you may
try one. I do not guarantee results in those cases, though.

That info, alone, will stop the vast majority cold.

[jared_kipe]

you are so wrong.....Vista is LOADED with new things....And had added "plumbing" for many more.

WinFX is not new?
WinFS support is not new?
WDDM is not new?
WinFX="superset of .NET" Tell me why you need this? Like Cocoa?

WinFS=needed for their version of Spotlight?

WDDM="Wavelength-Division Demultiplexing"? "Worldwide Direct Democracy Movement"? "Windows Display Driver Model"?? New yes, but its like adding glitter to a piece of poo.

Everything you have brought up kinda makes me wonder... They call things new simply cause they are. Not because they are original or wanted. Maybe its just me but when I look at an XP desktop I don't think, "you know whats missing.... transparencies so that I can look THROUGH the menu bars!!"

[tdar]

WinFS isn't in vista anymore...COMMON KNOWLEDGE...the biggest reason to upgrade isn't there.

Not saying its not a decent upgrade just saying that so many promised featuers were canceled. AND they were IMPORTANT features. Thats what makes it a decent upgrade and nothing more. Not to meniton so many of todays computers won't even be able to run it well.

that's why I said WinFS SUPPORT....don't you think it takes API hooks to fully use it?

[milo]

I await from Apple
a) A patch 'or' upgrade to stop this from working.
b) Law suit
c) Some other crafty thing from Apple Legal, they will find a way, they always do.

If that were the case, why did apple say months ago that they didn't care and would do nothing to stop people from doing this?

And what grounds would they have to try and stop people from running third party software on their boxes? I doubt they could stop this with a patch, if they did it could likely be hacked around again.

And I'm sure the same thing can be done with other versions of windows. Someone just has to care enough to go to the trouble.

[tdar]

Are these the catalyst drivers? If they are, they probably won't work. But I will try and see if I can find someone can test them.

Here's some info from the INF file of the drivers.....

[Version]
Signature="$Windows NT$"
Provider=%ATI%
ClassGUID={4D36E968-E325-11CE-BFC1-08002BE10318}
Class=Display
DriverVer=12/20/2005, 8.204.0.0
CatalogFile=CX_29563.CAT

[DestinationDirs]
DefaultDestDir = 11
ati2mtag.Miniport = 12 ; drivers
ati2mtag.Display = 11 ; system32

[ControlFlags]
ExcludeFromSelect=*
;
; Driver information
;

[Manufacturer]
%ATI% = ATI.Mfg, NTx86

[ATI.Mfg.NTx86]
"ATI Mobility Radeon X1400" = ati2mtag_M54, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_7145&SUBSYS_13331043
"ATI Mobility Radeon X1600" = ati2mtag_M56, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_71C5&SUBSYS_10B210



looks to be only X1X mobility drivers so I don't think they are catalyst drivers

[janstett]

For goodness sakes !! Why all the bother ? The windows boxes are cheap enough to buy one.....don't mess up a great product ( Mac ) with the crap from microsoft....

Simple, to piss off people like you :)

[John61254]

I guess it's always fun to beat a challenge (and get paid besides), but who really cares if you can boot Windows on a Mac? If I wanted to boot Windows, I'd buy a PC. And has anybody thought about the fact that booting Windows may/will now make your previously safe Mac susceptible to all the Windows-specific viruses out there? Don't go crying to Apple to fix your machine when it's all mucked up from running Windows.
I bought a Mac for the software, as much as the hardware.
I'll stick to OS X on my Mac, thank you very much.:D

[janstett]

OS2 isn't much of a comparison since it never had much of a user base to start with.


I'm not so sure about that... I believe in the 1992-1995 timeframe OS/2 equalled or surpassed the Mac's market share and may have even been as high as 7%. And Apple did drop as low as 2-3% in the dark days.

[janstett]

I guess it's always fun to beat a challenge (and get paid besides), but who really cares if you can boot Windows on a Mac? If I wanted to boot Windows, I'd but a PC.

Have you not been reading any of the 10,000 threads on this?

People want to run Windows on Macs, and conversely OSX on PCs, for the geek factor. But then there are people who want to do it for "legitimate" reasons.

Like carrying ONE notebook instead of TWO. Like having ONE machine instead of TWO on your desk. Like running OSX on a laptop that weighs less than five pounds.

And has anyb ody thought about the fact that bboting Windows may now make your previously safe Mac susceptible to all the Windows-specific viruses out there?

Oh no, the VIRUUUUUUUSES, the VIRUSSSSES, as soon as you log onto Windows the machine explodes from VIRUUUUUUSES. Talk about FUD. Anybody here watch "Drawn Together"? Ling-Ling the Asian thing inserts the key into the ignition for his drivers' test, and immediately the entire city crashes into him including a 747 falling from the sky. Reminds me of you guys ;)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4942162778167603560&q=apple+switch

[milo]

If I wanted to boot Windows, I'd buy a PC.

And if you wanted to (or needed to) run mac AND windows apps? I guess you'd spend a few hundred bucks and buy a PC too?

I'm very impressed.

:rolleyes:

[Shaker]

Anybody here watch "Drawn Together"? Ling-Ling the Asian thing inserts the key into the ignition for his drivers' test, and immediately the entire city crashes into him including a 747 falling from the sky. Reminds me of you guys ;)


That was hilarious...I remember...:D :D :D

[RichCoder]

Sorry to go offtopic for a second, but what's with the Toshiba Laptop ads on here? That's pretty bad ad placement ;)

Okay back to the "why would you want to put XP on your mac" posts.

-rich

[Pragmato]

Apple does not mind this at all :) They want the business/user that they would otherwise not get. Not get for a long time. Company XYZ running PlumberClassic2000.mdb will continue to use windows until their office burns down, but prob forever. Run your business app on windows, do everything else in os x. Apple solid state disk Macs could help with Fast OS Switching.

[Church]

If I had an iMac I would try this myself...
but from this http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=12185 thread there is this http://support.toshiba-tro.de/tools/Tecra/ta7/xp/display-ta7-xp-8204051220a1.zip driver. Probably close to something already posted for the video drivers FOR IMAC. Just trying to help the cause. ;)
(take note, the download is from .de (denmark? germany?) so it's not going to go super fast. I tried the dl and it was about 120kb/s from Alabama on my 3mb connection for that 70mb file)

[dejo]

that's why I said WinFS SUPPORT....don't you think it takes API hooks to fully use it?

Well, since Microsoft plans on adding WinFS support to Windows XP as well, I don't find this much of a Vista bonus.

[Maaij]

I think I will wait for a complete torrent file :)

[bumfilter]

Can someone please explain to me why some people keep saying:

"It's like putting a crappy engine in a ferrari" (you get what I mean)

and posts of that nature, basically suggesting, why would you want to run XP on a Mac, just buy a PC.

Why can't people understand that some of us need functionality like this? Some of us don't want to have to carry two laptops everywhere we go. Some of us don't want to use a PC at work and would rather use our laptops (then sneak into OSX when we can).

I'm getting sooo tired of reading posts like that and of posts like mine whinging about it. I just can't believe how stupid some people are. What is the psychology behind this?!

[Senbei]

Will this know open up our macs to the windows world of viruses??
The malicious code would need to be written specifically for OS X. By default, Windows XP does not natively read/write HFS+ partitions. Using something like MacDrive though, it does open up the possibility to inject OS X specific malicious code or do something nasty like deleting files on your Mac volume as you would not be protected by the usual OS X authentication methods while running under Windows. This is some of the known dangers of dual booting as opposed to virtualized solutions where things run in their own sandbox.

I haven't been able to discover if they've implemented the acceleration option available for QEMU when it's an Intel processor emulating an Intel processor. Anyone know if this has been done?
There is a virtualization module for QEmu called QVM86 (which will be a kernel extension for the universal binary of Q) being worked on which will replace the emulation code. Not really sure how far along that is coming but it should bring a nice speed boost.

I think better methods are coming along, including the BAMBIOS project, which would add complete BIOS support to an EFI system. Then, all you'd need is a standard XP install disk.
Exactly. The winning method is great as far as it being a proof of concept but it is still a hackjob and nowhere near a mainstream solution. This is basically just the starting point to something simpler and refined. For dual boot, I personally am looking forward to Amit Singh's BAMBIOS since they are striving for transparency which will work without a need to hack together an installation CD. While the blanka/narf bootloader is pretty nice, I'm hoping BAMBIOS comes up with something that is integrated with the current Mac volume chooser like Clay's graphical boot volume chooser (http://www.flickr.com/photos/cwaidoh/113186068/) so that it shows up with the press of the option key.

Am I the only one thinking that the MacBU at Microsoft should be paying a lot of attention to this? If I'm working on the Intel Virtual PC development team, I've just learned of a great way to install MS Windows on a Mac. I now just need to develop some sort of user friendly installation and I'm almost done.
They are but it is probably out of their hands. Originally during MacWorld, a marketing manager for the Mac BU was quoted in eWeek (January 10) as saying, "We are committed to moving forward with Virtual PC" (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1909736,00.asp). In Microsoft's official Q&A (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2006/jan06/01-10MacWorld.mspx) though, that has been changed to "we’re working with Apple to figure out the best way to bring this technology to Intel-based Macs. We’ll have a better idea once we have the new machines and can accurately evaluate just what is required to transition the product.".

I believe the Mac BU were overruled at a higher level. Jim Allchin (who has a notorious dislike for that group) might have had something to do with it. There was also an interview with him a few weeks later where he addressed Vista on Intel-based Mac's (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002770700_btallchinqa30.html). The relevant parts is where he says they have no plans to bring Vista to the Mac and about Vista being targeted at the sizeable business market where Apple has no real presence. Microsoft is known for their paranoia and there might be some techno-politics involved to insure that Intel Mac's (while highly unlikely to be considered in many corporations anyway even if they could cleanly dual boot; which will be the only sanctioned way since many corporations will not want to invest time in training their people to learn OS X as people are already familiar with the way Windows works) sales don't accidently get a helping hand from them.

I hope you can see why being able to run Windows applications at full speed is a bad thing for the Mac market in general. It may not be bad for users in the short term but in the medium to long term you want strong Mac development, even if it means that excludes the heavyweights from the Windows world. Many Mac only developers exist because the big Windows only companies don't bother with the Mac.
And this is where this same argument falls flat on its face. Before all of this Intel switch even happened, these developers saw no reason to develop for the Mac anyway. They had an exclusive PowerPC-based Mac OS X market to deal with as well. Yet many chose to stay out. Why? Because of that thing called marketshare. Neither did you hear developers telling potential customers to go and run their apps under Virtual PC for Mac.

So what has changed with moving to Intel? From the developer perspective, it is still a Mac. From a user perspective (for those who have a need to run Windows programs), the ability to run Windows programs is no longer going to be tied to slow emulation. Additionally, this trait opens up a whole new ballgame with regards to the way different markets look at the Mac platform as it will offer ways to legally run the two main consumer desktop operating systems on a single piece of hardware. This holds more relevance to the home market and niche business markets that are dual platform (where a single box has an economic impact by lowering hardware costs as well as expenses related to lowering that electricity bill). Within that realm is the potential to increase marketshare and part of that will depend on the solutions for running Windows on the Intel Mac (hack jobs naturally won't cut it which is why some of us are going to wait to see how BAMBIOS will turn out for dual booting). If the Mac market can grow, that provides developers a better metric for considering a native application. The dual boot/virtualization crowd is a smaller fraction of the overall market and software vendors like in the past aren't going to tell the non-technical customers to jump through hoops to run their programs in those environments.

[bruf]

Can someone please explain to me why some people keep saying:

"It's like putting a crappy engine in a ferrari" (you get what I mean)

and posts of that nature, basically suggesting, why would you want to run XP on a Mac, just buy a PC.

Why can't people understand that some of us need functionality like this? Some of us don't want to have to carry two laptops everywhere we go. Some of us don't want to use a PC at work and would rather use our laptops (then sneak into OSX when we can).

I'm getting sooo tired of reading posts like that and of posts like mine whinging about it. I just can't believe how stupid some people are. What is the psychology behind this?!

100% agree on this. It would be great if this topic could focus only on installing/configuring/troubleshooting Windows XP on our Intel Macs. We have already more than 20 pages of posts... Thanks.

[jmbear]

Good news for...

Consumers, now you can natively run Windows on the best looking and best performing computers in the world.

Apple Hardware, now they will attract PC users to try out their nifty computers without worrying about software not running on them.

Bad news for...

Dell, IBM, Sony and every single PC manufacturer. Usually PC users would not consider Apple because, it can't run Windows, but now, every single Intel Mac will compete directly with PC manufacturers, and frankly, the Mac is superior in all aspects, plus you get OS X! Its like a whole new brand entered the PC market, and its an awesome brand!

Mixed news for...

Apple Software, think for a minute here, Mac OS X and Windows used to compete from different hardware, Apple for the Mac OS X or PCs for Windows. Now they will be able to compete on the same computer since speed is no longer an issue because Windows can run natively on the Mac. People will be able to administer their computer through one OS and use the other to run specific applications for that OS. Basically the battle will be for which OS ends up being the "main OS" in which people usually work, and which OS ends up being the "bitch OS" which people use to run specific applications. If people like OS X better, then they will do most of their stuff on OS X and boot Windows when they want to play a game or use some Windows only software. The opposite is true. In my opinion, OS X is superior to Windows in most aspects, the only draw back from OS X used to be software that would not run on it, that is no longer a problem, so this means...

Microsoft will have trouble, why? Well, most people pirate Windows and Mac OS X, the true sales for those OS come from those pre-installed in brand-name computers (you can count OS upgrades too, but then again, they are pirated). Apple will continue to sell OS through their computers, and since people are likely to start buying more Macs (since they can now run Windows, and Macs are cute :) ), for every Mac bought, there is an OS X sold, but not a Windows sold. People will likely pirate Windows to run it on a Mac, or use the Windows disc from a previous computer. Again, Windows and Mac OS X will compete to see who ends up as the "main OS" and the "bitch OS". I honestly think that Windows will be the "bitch OS".

It would be awesome if somebody developed a tool that ran Windows on the background so you don't have to see its ugly face, then when you run a Windows specific application, it just launches it in "window" but you never have to deal with the OS. Sort of like when you ran Mac OS 9 applications on the X, that is the best analogy I can think of. Microsoft could do the same thing, but then again, why would anyone prefer Windows over OS X?

My 2 cents.

- My ideas are bastardized when they travel from my brain to the world -

[Pistol Pete]

I await from Apple
a) A patch 'or' upgrade to stop this from working.
b) Law suit
c) Some other crafty thing from Apple Legal, they will find a way, they always do.

This is kinda good, but XP why for the love of god does it always have to be XP, at least make something that will allow me to put Win2k on.


more so agreed. but I still hate all windows users...ok ok .... just the computer not the user ;)

[mrplow]

Why would Apple do anything? This doesn't modify any of their code- it's simply an EFI environment that loads another OS- if anyone owns soemthing it's intel... plus, it would cost them oney.. why would they spend money on something that (if you read through this forum) motivates people to buy a mac?

stop being silly...


now, anyone know where driver discussion is taking place? the osx86 forum preivously mentioned is erroneous and brief...

[tdar]

Why would Apple do anything? This doesn't modify any of their code- it's simply an EFI environment that loads another OS- if anyone owns soemthing it's intel... plus, it would cost them oney.. why would they spend money on something that (if you read through this forum) motivates people to buy a mac?

stop being silly...


now, anyone know where driver discussion is taking place? the osx86 forum preivously mentioned is erroneous and brief...

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=12185&st=0

[Steve1496]

Just want to let everyone know: Me and Blanka are making great progress on the 20" iMac. We just to resolve another small issue.

[notmenotyou]

is it possible that steve wants head to head fight with bill? when ppl buy a intel mac then run both OS on the same machine, they can see for themself how OSX is better then windoz, if ppl want to dual boot, they must have apple hardware first, the more they buy intel mac, the less REAL PC will be bought, so that apple market share will goes up, and when the software developer see apple market share goes up, they will develop native software for mac, it's no question ask, just my two cents.:p

[tdar]

Just want to let everyone know: Me and Blanka are making great progress on the 20" iMac. We just to resolve another small issue.
great news:)

[SPUY767]

supposing they wanted to, could M$ kill this with windows updates?

I think that the MS developers are swamped just trying to get vista out on time. The angry chimpanzees that they have coding windows fixes don't have time to trifle with this.

[iSee]

You'll notice that Linux doesn't have very many mainstream applications on it.

I'll take a couple of examples of why being able to run Windows is a BAD THING.

1) I'm an engineer. My company wants me to produce drawings in AutoCAD format but since there is no MacOSX version I would normally run VectorWorks or some other Mac only product that can produce AutoCAD files even if there may be slight problems. Now that I can run it natively on Windows, I'll use AutoCAD instead of buying the comparative Mac product. The Mac CAD developers die off gradually.

2) I'm a 3D artist. There's a kick ass product for 3D only on Windows. I boot into Windows and use that instead of buying a comparable OSX product. 3D Mac app developers who don't want to compete for a dwindling market drop out of the market.

3) I'm an accountant. Not content with MYOB, Incognito or the mess that is Quicken on the Mac, I boot into Windows and run Sage. Mac accountancy software dies off even more than the poor state it is today.

I hope you can see why being able to run Windows applications at full speed is a bad thing for the Mac market in general. It may not be bad for users in the short term but in the medium to long term you want strong Mac development, even if it means that excludes the heavyweights from the Windows world. Many Mac only developers exist because the big Windows only companies don't bother with the Mac.

Your logic is flawed: In each scenario, you assume a Mac user would choose the Windows solution over an available Mac solution. :confused: Why would they do that??? If they perferred the Windows software to the Mac software, they would have bought a Dell, not a Mac, in the first place.

I'm sorry, but what you are saying makes no sense.

[kerbawya]

Speaking of updates...

from Apple Insider:
Apple posts Security Update 2006-002 v1.1
Mar 16 - 7:00 pm EST Apple on Thursday released yet another Security Update, labeled Security Update 2006-002 v1.1, for both Mac OS X PPC (13.9MB) and Mac OS X Intel (15.4MB). The update presumably aims to fix issues that remained uncertified following the release of Security Update 2006-002 (1.0).

[BeigeUser]

It's possible on certain Intel chipsets, but it's illegal, whereas running XP on an intel mac is not.

Tampering with the windows disk to make it book on Macs... Isn't that illegal?

[ThomasM]

could someone help me out on this one ?

6. Copy the xom.efi bootloader to the hard disk and bless it.

- Copy the xom.efi file into your home directory.
- In the terminal type:
sudo cp xom.efi /System/Library/CoreServices <-- you will have to enter
your password here
cd /System/Library/CoreServices
sudo bless --folder . --file xom.efi --setBoot

............

i have copied the xom.efi file to my folder "/users/name"
i have typed sudo cp xom.efi /System/Library/CoreServices and entered my password afterwards

typed cd /System/Library/CoreServices and pressed enter
but what next ? how to i type the last one in.
do i just type sudo bless --/users/name . --file xom.efi --setboot ?

[mrplow]

yep

you copy it to user folder because thats where the terminal goes by default and he was trying to simplify the terminal code

the first terminal command copies the files to /sys/lib/coreserv
the next line changes the terminal directory to that folder, instead of being in the user/home folder

the final command tells the xom.efi to boot


be sure that when your installing XP that the partition you install to is Partition2 and you use NTFS... i had a mess of trouble, the partition i wanted windows on kept showing up at partition3 and i did FAT... finally it showed up at partition2 and i decided to just cave in and do NTFS and everything was happy..

[mark88]

Consumers, now you can natively run Windows on the best looking and best performing computers in the world.

....but now, every single Intel Mac will compete directly with PC manufacturers, and frankly, the Mac is superior in all aspects, plus you get OS X! Its like a whole new brand entered the PC market, and its an awesome brand!


How is any Intel Mac 'superior in all aspects' to a [similar spec] PC? please explain. You do realise more or less the exact same components are used in each?

[Steve1496]

could someone help me out on this one ?

6. Copy the xom.efi bootloader to the hard disk and bless it.

- Copy the xom.efi file into your home directory.
- In the terminal type:
sudo cp xom.efi /System/Library/CoreServices <-- you will have to enter
your password here
cd /System/Library/CoreServices
sudo bless --folder . --file xom.efi --setBoot

............

i have copied the xom.efi file to my folder "/users/name"
i have typed sudo cp xom.efi /System/Library/CoreServices and entered my password afterwards

typed cd /System/Library/CoreServices and pressed enter
but what next ? how to i type the last one in.
do i just type sudo bless --/users/name . --file xom.efi --setboot ?


No, no..Make sure you're CDd to /System/Library/CoreServices Then enter:
sudo bless --folder . --file xom.efi --setBoot
exactly as I wrote it

[ThomasM]

trying now

[mark88]

Your logic is flawed: In each scenario, you assume a Mac user would choose the Windows solution over an available Mac solution. :confused: Why would they do that??? If they perferred the Windows software to the Mac software, they would have bought a Dell, not a Mac, in the first place.

I'm sorry, but what you are saying makes no sense.

Exactly, this is what no-one with this argument seems to understand. People buy macs to run OS X not Windows!

[ThomasM]

here is exactly what i did.

i copied it to my home directory.

i typed sudo cp xom.efi /System/Library/CoreServices password
-pressed enter-
i typed cd /System/Library/CoreServices
-pressed enter-
i typed sudo bless --folder . --file xom.efi --setBoot
exactly as it says there
-pressed enter-

got up a bunch of information.
most important information
bless: unrecognized option `--setboot `

[Tupring]

Can someone please explain to me why some people keep saying:

"It's like putting a crappy engine in a ferrari" (you get what I mean)

and posts of that nature, basically suggesting, why would you want to run XP on a Mac, just buy a PC.

Why can't people understand that some of us need functionality like this? Some of us don't want to have to carry two laptops everywhere we go. Some of us don't want to use a PC at work and would rather use our laptops (then sneak into OSX when we can).

I'm getting sooo tired of reading posts like that and of posts like mine whinging about it. I just can't believe how stupid some people are. What is the psychology behind this?!Windoze sucks... It makes sense to me. If no one used it, there wouldn't be a need (desire) for it, then all would be good. Mac User don't need Windows. Period.

[Aztechian]

Steve,

If you don't mind could you enlighten me on what the --file option to bless means? I haven't seen it in any documentation (for PPC anyways), and was wondering if thats an "intel builds only" option.

Thanks!

[ThomasM]

got it working:)

[Steve1496]

bless: unrecognized option `--setboot `

Needs to be setBoot not setboot. Case-sensitive.

Aztechian,
As far as I know it just tells which file in the current directory to bless.

Update on iMac 20" Progress: We're going to release a xom.efi for 20" iMac users. My Nero is acting up and won't record a proper disc. Anyways, we need anyone who owns a 20" iMac to test it and get back to us.

Thanks!!
Steve

[iSee]

Needs to be setBoot not setboot. Case-sensitive.

Aztechian,
As far as I know it just tells which file in the current directory to bless.

Update on iMac 20" Progress: We're going to release a xom.efi for 20" iMac users. My Nero is acting up and won't record a proper disc. Anyways, we need anyone who owns a 20" iMac to test it and get back to us.

Thanks!!
Steve

Congrats! :) :) :)

[Mac Fly (film)]

Everybody is entitled to one caveman expirence!

Who gives a **** about windowzz!

[ThomasM]

congratulations:)
and thanks for making my life a whole lot easier! i am a student and i have to use autocad. i hoped that someone would be able to make a installer for windows on the new intel macs, so i pre-ordered the macbook pro as soon as apple store opened.

[ThomasM]

****.

The install prompts you for the format type to use: NTFS/FAT Quick/Slow
If the partition is too large, only the NTFS Quick/Slow options will be shown.
It is VERY IMPORTANT that you get prompted with this step. If you are
not prompted for a filesystem to install SOMETHING WENT TERRIBLY WRONG!!!
YOUR INSTALL WILL NOT WORK in that case.

i wasnt prompted for the format type to use, only ntfs quick/slow.
so i have to do the whole thing over again, making a smaller partition for windows ?

[mrplow]

any chance of this forum moving back to productivity and less arguing ..because i really don't think anyone cares about anyone elses opinion at this point, since everyone is saying the same thing (either pro or negative) so .. how about those who are negative sign off and those who are pro continue to make it better?


because some x1600 drivers would be sweet right now..

[RichCoder]

any chance of this forum moving back to productivity and less arguing ..because i really don't think anyone cares about anyone elses opinion at this point, since everyone is saying the same thing (either pro or negative) so .. how about those who are negative sign off and those who are pro continue to make it better?

because some x1600 drivers would be sweet right now..

Ok, I think this is the status up to this point(from reading this and other forums):

catalyst drivers - don't work
toshiba, asus, acer, ... x1600 specific drivers - don't work
firmware on the Mac's x1600 is at least slightly different than on "PC" laptops (because it utilizes UGA and not VGA)

It seems very likely that (baring a major hack) ATI will need to include support in an upcoming driver release. If they do, I'm sure it will not be done with a major announcement so they don't cause friction with Apple.

-rich

[Steve1496]

****.

The install prompts you for the format type to use: NTFS/FAT Quick/Slow
If the partition is too large, only the NTFS Quick/Slow options will be shown.
It is VERY IMPORTANT that you get prompted with this step. If you are
not prompted for a filesystem to install SOMETHING WENT TERRIBLY WRONG!!!
YOUR INSTALL WILL NOT WORK in that case.

i wasnt prompted for the format type to use, only ntfs quick/slow.
so i have to do the whole thing over again, making a smaller partition for windows ?


No that's correct if your partition is over 32GB you gotta use NTFS. Nothing went wrong here. I recommend the Quick format.

[RichP]

INSTALL NOTE:

If you cant read, like mrplow and myself, and you make the partitions backwards, when you go back to correct it (and thus reinstall OSX AGAIN!) it will not allow install on either partition.

To fix, first use "erase" on the harddrive and format the entire volume in MacOS Journalized, then use partition and make the 2 partitions correctly.

Worked for me at least..now to wait while the OS's install.

edit: none of these x1600 drivers working really sux; that is the point of running dual boot rather than emulation!

[tknelson]

Dual boot doesn't run windows apps "easily". It runs them, but it's a pain since you have to reboot the machine. And the motivation for writing OSX versions is that they will sell. They'll be bought by the 90% of mac users who won't do this AND the 10% who do.

No MS office? Doubtful since for every 1 mac user who switched to the XP version you'd have 10 who would stick with the last released version or find other office apps.

Mac market share is on the rise, and this may boost it even more. Go look at the news reports of this on PC sites and read all the comments from PC users saying that now they're finally willing to buy a mac. If you make a mac version, mac users will buy it. Period. And if you don't make a mac version, customers will be more likely to buy a competing product that does have a mac version than a PC version that requires a reboot.

OS2 isn't much of a comparison since it never had much of a user base to start with.



So Rob, does that mean you're willing to spring for one? Sounds like you can afford to if you think a few hundred bucks can be tossed away that easily.

How naive. I'm not talking about the current, very balky, solution. I'm talking about something like "fast user switching" or "seamless". It won't be long until we have that.

Something other than Office? For many, many users, that is not an option.

BTW, OS/2 had marketshare >10% at its peak. What is OS/X now... 4%? Don't get me wrong, I love my Mac, but after living through the war between OS/2 and the (much inferior) Windows products of its time, I'm more than a little apprehensive.

-Tim

[ThomasM]

No that's correct if your partition is over 32GB you gotta use NTFS. Nothing went wrong here. I recommend the Quick format.

weird. i used quick format and it restarted when it was done. took out the cd while the computer was starting and selected xp. nothing happened, it stood still for 5mins.

[cicciu]

[
Hey Steve,

I tried setting up my 20" iMac but it hangs after patching (before the xp installation screen). Any chance you could send me the file and I'll try it?

Thanks,

Alex

[RichCoder]

BTW, OS/2 had marketshare >10% at its peak. What is OS/X now... 4%? Don't get me wrong, I love my Mac, but after living through the war between OS/2 and the (much inferior) Windows products of its time, I'm more than a little apprehensive.

-Tim

Here, here! It's never enough to have a better product. I bet anyone here can make a better hamburger than McDonald's, but just try to take them on as a business.

At the time OS/2 had an even bigger gap of features and functionality than OSX has over XP now, but it couldn't beat the ubiquity of Microsoft.

-rich

[mklos]

I case anyone is having trouble viewing the pics, information, and/or the zip file, I've posted the information on my website as well.

http://www.macxpressonline.net

[Steve1496]

[
Hey Steve,

I tried setting up my 20" iMac but it hangs after patching (before the xp installation screen). Any chance you could send me the file and I'll try it?

Thanks,

Alex


As soon as Blanka is out of his meeting he'll get the xom.efi ready. It's not released yet, so don't bother with current versions. We got exactly what we were looking for (and boy was it a process--i had to keep guessing at the fill size hundreds of times to get it going!).

[flir67]

amazing, instructions released today and with in 24 hours it looks like most of the drivers will be found ,I just want to say... good job guys .... its a huge world effort to get it going asap... freakin awesome...wahooo


. you know what amazes me is we have all this so called bandwidth out there but yet sites keep getting knocked out by the huge traffic of surfers.

just my 2cents. NOW GET BACK TO WORk...

LOL
:) :) :) :) :D

[DCapple]

*BLINKS*:eek:

Yes :)


thanks!!! ;)

[flir67]

will any of the intels chipset listed links work for the mini or just a certain one

[geoffrevB]

My crazy vision is of a mac running windows officially licensed by apple only to run games software.

[flir67]

My crazy vision is of a mac running windows officially licensed by apple only to run games software.


right there with ya on that one

[kyeblue]

Well, some of you might think that I am crazy. but i am serious.

I have three computers at home, a G4 mini, an intel iMac, and a 6-year-old dell in an ugly beige box. My wife and I occationally need to use the PC. I have been thinking of replacing it with a newer machine but I couldn't find a PC box that has the look that I likes. Now I found one: new intel mac mini.

The new mac mini will run windows most of the time. Don't tell me that it doesn't make sense to you. I love my macs, but i need a PC, and seriously I could find a PC box that is as sleek as the mac mini. Besides, with new features available in vista, I can put it by my HDTV and use it to record and replay TV.

[opq]

Has anyone thought about installing MacDrive Pro onto the IntelMac to see HFS partitions?

[Steve1496]

I'm going to attempt uploading this file to MR (nevermind didn't work). It's an updated xom.efi for 20" Intel iMacs. We aren't done testing it but it should work.

Enjoy, and huge thanks to blanka!

http://d10.yousendit.com/E/34P5YIBRHYS54216UNYZEFN3ZO/xom.efi

(let me know if there's problems with that link.)

[Anonymous Freak]

Besides, with new features available in vista, I can put it by my HDTV and use it to record and replay TV.

You can do that now with an eyeTV 500 in Mac OS X. (No fun Front Row interface for it, but it can be done.)

[joelypolly]

Needs to be setBoot not setboot. Case-sensitive.

Aztechian,
As far as I know it just tells which file in the current directory to bless.

Update on iMac 20" Progress: We're going to release a xom.efi for 20" iMac users. My Nero is acting up and won't record a proper disc. Anyways, we need anyone who owns a 20" iMac to test it and get back to us.

Thanks!!
Steve
I'll be happy to test when i get home tonight

[aegisdesign]

Your logic is flawed: In each scenario, you assume a Mac user would choose the Windows solution over an available Mac solution. :confused: Why would they do that??? If they perferred the Windows software to the Mac software, they would have bought a Dell, not a Mac, in the first place.

I'm sorry, but what you are saying makes no sense.

It's got nothing to do with preference. Most Mac users that *NEED* software will make do with distinctly average software because that is all there is available for them natively on the Mac. Generally we're ok in most sectors but I pointed out three where we don't have the market leader. Accounting, CAD and 3D. Could you imagine if we didn't have Photoshop on the Mac?

To flesh out one example, do you use Mac accounting software? It's pretty bad. Windows packages are head and shoulders better and most accountants are on Windows. There's more choice too. Just to be compatible filing your returns, it makes sense to use Windows software often unless you can find a rare accountant that does Macs.

If all I was doing was running accounting software then I'd buy that Dell. As it is I run MYOB about once a week on my Mac which is 99% of the time being used for web design and programming. MYOB is distinctly average software that has been kicking around with the same poor interface since OS7 days. Underneath it's ok but it's very quirky. Now however, I have the option of running something else with Windows on my Mac instead of MYOB on MacOSX. I no longer have to put up with poorly written Mac software.

See what I'm getting at yet? If the best Mac software isn't as good as the Windows software in that sector, it won't get used at all. Some will say that's a good thing as now Mac software developers have to compete against leading Windows packages in free competition where they had none before. I somewhat agree. The problem is, many of the Mac developers are small outfits that don't have the resources to go head to head up against Microsoft or AutoDesk or Sage or whatever mainstream companies developing Windows only software. If users start using Windows software instead of their Mac software, for whatever reason, the developers market gets smaller.

Some will say 'Bring it On' and produce software that is much better than the competition on Windows. Others will just die, because they can't compete against the Windows juggernaut.

I'd also dispute the market share thing. If you're the only small fish in a small pond then you can be quite happy swimming away happy in the knowledge that you own the pond. If you're suddenly an even smaller fish tossed into the ocean you've got to swim a lot harder to not get swallowed by a shark.


Apple has it's work cut out now to make sure it keeps developers happy and keeps them writing native applications. And they need to intensify their efforts to get leading Windows developers to develop for MacOSX.

[john7jr]

weird. i used quick format and it restarted when it was done. took out the cd while the computer was starting and selected xp. nothing happened, it stood still for 5mins.

Leave the disc in... if you pull it out the boot hangs.

instead, press f2 several times WHILE you press Enter to accept the Windows boot and the installer will pick up where it left off from the HD.

I got stuck there too.

=)

[baylormac]

This was posted from my MacBook Pro 2.0 GHz running Windows XP SP2

:)

[mrplow]

INSTALL NOTE:

If you cant read, like mrplow and myself, and you make the partitions backwards, when you go back to correct it (and thus reinstall OSX AGAIN!) it will not allow install on either partition.

To fix, first use "erase" on the harddrive and format the entire volume in MacOS Journalized, then use partition and make the 2 partitions correctly.

Worked for me at least..now to wait while the OS's install.

edit: none of these x1600 drivers working really sux; that is the point of running dual boot rather than emulation!


you make me feel so much better hahaha

[Buschmaster]

This was posted from my MacBook Pro 2.0 GHz running Windows XP SP2

:)
Did anyone else cringe while reading this?:(

[AidenShaw]

For XP it was like, "oh wow NTFS, thats gonna be awesome".
NTFS was part of Windows NT 3.1 about 15 years ago.... Anybody who thought that it was new with XP was a few cards short of a full deck.

[mrplow]

Has anyone thought about installing MacDrive Pro onto the IntelMac to see HFS partitions?

done and done.

[aegisdesign]

My crazy vision is of a mac running windows officially licensed by apple only to run games software.

Never going to happen. That would be Apple sending a big F U to it's OSX developers.

[AidenShaw]

Consumers, now you can natively run Windows on the best looking and best performing computers in the world.
"best looking" subjective, at best.

IMO, white plastic is so 20th century, and the big blank space under the screen of the iMac completely destroys its proportions... Ugly.

MBP - there's a line between "minimalist" and "boring". The MBP is way over the line on the boring side.

de gustibus non disputandum est

OTOH, "best performing" - when every single chip and component is identical to other commodity PC vendors?

[QuarterSwede]

Never going to happen. That would be Apple sending a big F U to it's OSX developers.
Especially since games tend to run better on OS X when they are written properly for it and don't have tons of Windows garbage still in the code from being ported.

The hard part is getting devs to write clean game code for OS X.

[Steve1496]

I'll be happy to test when i get home tonight


Thanks! So far we've got graphics loaded, but there is a problem. Setup gets stuck at Setup is copying files (0%) and it seems its killing devices during install too (for example the Caps Lock light won't work on the keyboard).

Can you try this and see if you have the same issue?

[beatle888]

"best looking" subjective, at best.

IMO, white plastic is so 20th century, and the big blank space under the screen of the iMac completely destroys its proportions... Ugly.

MBP - there's a line between "minimalist" and "boring". The MBP is way over the line on the boring side.

de gustibus non disputandum est

OTOH, "best performing" - when every single chip and component is identical to other commodity PC vendors?


cant figure you out Shaw. WHY do you come here? you really have a lot of time on your hands i guess.

[ModestPenguin]

"best looking" subjective, at best.

IMO, white plastic is so 20th century, and the big blank space under the screen of the iMac completely destroys its proportions... Ugly.

MBP - there's a line between "minimalist" and "boring". The MBP is way over the line on the boring side.

de gustibus non disputandum est

OTOH, "best performing" - when every single chip and component is identical to other commodity PC vendors?


Are you serious? so 20th century? I dont believe that anyone can say that and not laugh. Thats sooo 20th Century And stop being so bitter.

[aegisdesign]

Exactly, this is what no-one with this argument seems to understand. People buy macs to run OS X not Windows!

Most people buy computers because they've work to do, not just because of the OS.

On OSX there's gaps in the available software needed to do your job. These can now be filled by running Windows applications. How does this encourage developers to fill those gaps with native OSX applications now they are competing with established Windows applications, often from much larger companies?

As I said, I think this a a BAD THING for the Mac platform in general. It will only be a GOOD THING if it brings in a huge market share shift and Apple and Apple developers can produce some stunning Mac OSX software. I think they will, but it's going to be a risky few years.

Dual booting isn't the answer anyway for apps as switching back and forth is a pain in the arse. When VirtualPC/Q is native, then we've real competition. At the moment I'd guess only game developers have any major concerns as they'll see the market for MacOSX ports dry up with people running the Windows version months before their port is finished.

[mrplow]

any prize money for the first person to get a virus on MacXP? cause I tihnk I just won it if so... =\ reinstalling.... (i kept getting an error about this setup.exe trying to execute 16bit code and it couldnt do it (prolly missing from the efi layer) and then whenever i finally installed/run aim the machine just haulted dead....

[tdewey]

any prize money for the first person to get a virus on MacXP? cause I tihnk I just won it if so... =\ reinstalling.... (i kept getting an error about this setup.exe trying to execute 16bit code and it couldnt do it (prolly missing from the efi layer) and then whenever i finally installed/run aim the machine just haulted dead....

Nice post number - looks like your machine is possesd.

All-in-all, very cool. I'm planning on picking up a new Macbook for my wife because of this (assuming they get the video drivers to work).

[mrplow]

welp thanks tdewey, you officially creeped me out for th enight

[ThomasM]

11. After rebooting, do the following:
- Press F2 to disable CD booting (there's no feedback, but you can
press F2 many times, it doesn't hurt). Alternatively, eject the XP CD
as per step 8.
- Choose XP by using the down arrow
- Hit enter.

NOTE: This time the wait is not that long... just sit tight and wait
for about 30 secs.

------------------
i cant get past this stage.
i have the cd in, i press the windows logo and it gets turned upside down. then nothing happens

[Marlon_JBT]

Did anyone else cringe while reading this?:(
Yip... I did. :(

[RichP]

any prize money for the first person to get a virus on MacXP? cause I tihnk I just won it if so... =\ reinstalling.... (i kept getting an error about this setup.exe trying to execute 16bit code and it couldnt do it (prolly missing from the efi layer) and then whenever i finally installed/run aim the machine just haulted dead....

Whahaa! We are idiotproofing this install! I cant get the damn partitions to work. I set them up correctly, and when windows went to install, it showed my "XP drive" as unpartitioned space.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d1/Mr_Plow.gif/150px-Mr_Plow.gif

[mrplow]

Whahaa! We are idiotproofing this install! I cant get the damn partitions to work. I set them up correctly, and when windows went to install, it showed my "XP drive" as unpartitioned space.


you still don't have it working right? ill help you..

soon asi help myself, the 'restore' option didnt show up when i tried to fix my partition? kinda pissin me off.. it hink i ahve to reinstall XP again.. and then install the internet drivers agian.. then dl the updates again.. might hold off on that one until i get it working for a couple days


and did i mention the PC i'm on right now, although has the potential to be very nice (athlon 64) is a royal piece of crap with how much my dad has done to it? there are alteast 4 antiviruses running, 3 firewalls, etc... but guess what- he doesn't like passwords, so of couse we don't worry about that security risk.

[arn]

For the time being I've created a subforum for this discussion, since this single thread isn't the best way to organize it all.

http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=86

[runninmac]

Oh good job with the new sub-forum it was getting a little hectic with everyone problems in here. So how long is this going to be here for?

[Stridder44]

Did anyone else cringe while reading this?:(


Did I cringe? Do you remember the feeling you got when you watched the Twin Towers fall on 9/11? Ok, so that's a little extreme but you know what Im sayin.

[Stridder44]

They got windows xp to work on a Mac??



How about getting windows xp to work on a pc? That would be news.

[me_94501]

"best looking" subjective, at best.

IMO, white plastic is so 20th century, and the big blank space under the screen of the iMac completely destroys its proportions... Ugly.

MBP - there's a line between "minimalist" and "boring". The MBP is way over the line on the boring side.

What would you suggest as an alternative? blue LEDs? Cheap gray or black plastic? A return to the candy-colored days of yore? :confused:

[iMeowbot]

What would you suggest as an alternative? blue LEDs? Cheap gray or black plastic? A return to the candy-colored days of yore? :confused:
There is something kind of sterile about recent Apple hardware. With the exception of the AirPort Extreme that hasn't changed much in years, it seems that every Apple product is just a box.

The candy colors are a bit dated, but the graphite stuff in between those and the current bland industrial boxes found a nice middle ground between serious and something with a bit of personality.

[jmbear]

How is any Intel Mac 'superior in all aspects' to a [similar spec] PC? please explain. You do realise more or less the exact same components are used in each?

I am a fan boy, I will think Mac is better than Windows regardless if they use the same components. Steve Job's "Reality Distortion Field" caught me at graduation in Stanford, I am now his mindless slave. :eek:

[AidenShaw]

What would you suggest as an alternative? blue LEDs? Cheap gray or black plastic? A return to the candy-colored days of yore? :confused:
Look at other consumer electronics.... Do you see tacky white plastic 45" LCD TVs? With or without a huge blank white area below the screen?

The "candy-colored days of yore" were mainly from Apple and some accessory vendors.

Only Apple went so low on the style scale as the "dalmation" and "flower power" iMacs. I'm surprised that Ive didn't crawl into a burrow and off himself when those were released.

[fusionstudios]

Here's what I want...
A bootleg of windows that would proceed to load Half-Life 2 directly. That way, I could game on my mac without every having to watch in horror as the microsoft logo appears on my screen!

[jmbear]

"best looking" subjective, at best.

IMO, white plastic is so 20th century, and the big blank space under the screen of the iMac completely destroys its proportions... Ugly.

MBP - there's a line between "minimalist" and "boring". The MBP is way over the line on the boring side.

de gustibus non disputandum est

OTOH, "best performing" - when every single chip and component is identical to other commodity PC vendors?

Performance is not only about hardware, dumbass. Think OS X. And for the "best looking", I guess that is in the eye of the beholder, but the average Joe will think a Mac is "better looking" than mosts PCs. :rolleyes:

[Demoman]

To all of you Mac regulars, who are actually pro-Apple:

Do you know how many Microsoft 'moles' are regular posters here? I am a newbie and read much more than I post (as newbies should). But, I cannot fail to notice that many of the 'regulars', and lower-class, are actually just out to bust Apple's chops. Seems obvious that Brand X does not want too much good stuff being written without slanderous/libelous rebuttal. With all of the high-powered intellect around here, I wondered what the history is.

[Wes Jordan]

I guess the important thing to remember is that some people just do like flash and ugly blinking lights. I realized a long time ago that a vast majority of people are not as design-conscious as me and some people really prefer tacky design to a nice clean look. I love Apple hardware and think it looks gorgeous, and I think any Windows user, no matter how much they hate Apple, would agree that the hardware is superior to any hardware running Windows.

[remingtonhill]

What would you suggest as an alternative? blue LEDs? Cheap gray or black plastic? A return to the candy-colored days of yore? :confused:

Hey my new HP Pavilion zv6130us resembles that remark!;)

[skwert]

Here's what I want...
A bootleg of windows that would proceed to load Half-Life 2 directly. That way, I could game on my mac without every having to watch in horror as the microsoft logo appears on my screen!

haha, i'm right there with you. now instead of having to build a gaming rig, i can buy a beautiful power mactel for video editing and gaming. it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. come onnnn august. after all, whats another 2 grand to the college debt?

[mongoos150]

Only Apple went so low on the style scale as the "dalmation" and "flower power" iMacs. I'm surprised that Ive didn't crawl into a burrow and off himself when those were released.

Wow...you're really excited about Apple's *successful* marketing of the iMac in different colors...calm down, buddy :rolleyes:

[kerbawya]

Did I cringe? Do you remember the feeling you got when you watched the Twin Towers fall on 9/11? Ok, so that's a little extreme but you know what Im sayin.
Just a little... yikes... :confused:

[berkleeboy210]

Do you REALLY need a PC around to make the XP CD?

[Yesurbius]

My take on the whole intel thing:

Microsoft committed themselves to developing Office on the Mac platform for 5 years. My guess is that Apple said they would not prevent windows from running on the mac *IF* Microsoft committed themselves. Of course Microsoft did.

Its good for Microsoft because they get to sell more copies of Windows, Office, and the windows platform will be more accessible to all - allowing them to spread whatever they want further. It also helps Microsoft against the vast number of antitrust suits it is fighting worldwide.

Its good for Apple because Microsoft's Office will remain developed for Mac OS X, not just for Windows running ON a Mac. My guess is that Apple has already, or intends to, license the Windows source code (which Microsoft has said they will license) in order to make Mac OS X run Windows applications natively, alongside Mac OS X applications. This is a definate plus for Apple.

Its good for us because now we only need one machine. I have a Mac Mini G4 now, and an Athlon 2600. I only use the Athlon to play games because I did the math ... the difference in price between identical mac and PC games can pay for a new computer inside of a year. ** BUT NOW ** I can simply dual boot, and spend my money upgrading only one machine instead of two.

[freddiecable]

I liker your thinking and hope you're right!

My take on the whole intel thing:

Microsoft committed themselves to developing Office on the Mac platform for 5 years. My guess is that Apple said they would not prevent windows from running on the mac *IF* Microsoft committed themselves. Of course Microsoft did.

Its good for Microsoft because they get to sell more copies of Windows, Office, and the windows platform will be more accessible to all - allowing them to spread whatever they want further. It also helps Microsoft against the vast number of antitrust suits it is fighting worldwide.

Its good for Apple because Microsoft's Office will remain developed for Mac OS X, not just for Windows running ON a Mac. My guess is that Apple has already, or intends to, license the Windows source code (which Microsoft has said they will license) in order to make Mac OS X run Windows applications natively, alongside Mac OS X applications. This is a definate plus for Apple.

Its good for us because now we only need one machine. I have a Mac Mini G4 now, and an Athlon 2600. I only use the Athlon to play games because I did the math ... the difference in price between identical mac and PC games can pay for a new computer inside of a year. ** BUT NOW ** I can simply dual boot, and spend my money upgrading only one machine instead of two.

[liketom]

Do you REALLY need a PC around to make the XP CD?
no you can try this solution

but it's not been 100% tested

http://wiki.onmac.net/index.php/HOWTO#Possible_Mac-Only_Solution

i've worked out why my install kept on failing on my mac mini - sp2 and sp1 was added ontop of sp1 in my slipstream xp disk not the latest xp disk with sp2 already included right outa the box.

14 cd-r's later and i can say i have it working :)

[Amuraivel]

While I do not think booting XP on Mac is an imminent threat, there is some concern as to wether developers will consider the rewards greater than the effort to port to Mac, and for smaller developers this is not really a consideration because apps are not highly complex, but when facing the cost of porting something massive CS, AutoCAD, etc. Then the small marketshare is a consideration.

Strategically, I think the best think to do would be for Apple to create
a rubust developing environment for Windows so that creating Mac applications is a trivial undertaking for developers.

As one person said, controlling the devleoping environment would insure that Mac continues to get support. I personally tried to use Visual Studio and XCode and found the latter easier to learn. If there could be a major "Windows" library plugin (and Linux plugin) for XCode with click button build for Mac and Windows, you have support for the Mac plattform incidentally. Suddenly, OSX becomes plattform of choice because it can port to any plattform with not too much trouble.

[BRLawyer]

I don't think many of you understand. This doesn't hurt development for the Mac overnight, it is a slow erosion that takes time. For example, read all the posts saying "I would only use it to run the occasional piece of software that is Windows only". Yes... and once you can do that easily and with native performance, there is *ZERO* pressure on the developer of that software to create an OSX version... he gets your money either way.

Case in point, Garmin announced at MWSF that they will make Mac-native versions of their GPS software... something that many people have been requesting for quite some time. If their software worked great under OSX through VPC or some fast switching solution, how motivated would they be to do that? Google Earth? Games? I doubt we'll ever see Autocad for the Mac again now. Then look at companies that may be on the edge of dropping Mac development for one reason or another. No MS Office for the Mac, anyone? Again, that won't happen overnight, but it could happen.

It takes time, but if Wintel software works as well and transparently on a Mac as it does on a PC, then you will see cases of this, guaranteed. It took years, but this was a huge factor in the slow and painful death of OS/2.

Thanks for seeing the obvious, at least one additional person perceives what will happen in the near future, if that effort becomes OFFICIALLY supported or TOO EASY.

Sometimes I have the impression that this forum is full of 15-year olds who are only interested in their individual gaming needs, as they have NO idea about the medium-term or long-term impact of WindowsOnMac; so we see a lot of excited posts regarding "my chances to play Counter Strike Source or Star Wars whatever", paying no attention to the prospective developers out there that will just PULL ALL STOPS in software porting efforts.

Already responding to another poster, it's NOT about those that have already spent a lot of R&D on Mac software, like MS or Adobe, they will continue with Macs for the time being...it's about those that thought about creating some new for the Mac, like Autodesk or others...they will NOT port anything if the same software can be run on a Windows partition flawlessly.

And why? Because you, Windows supporters, prefer to take the easy route and say "Ah, I don't wanna wait, let's run the Winblows version anyway"; and if Windows is just a boot away, why bother? Why hire 10 Mac programmers when the Windows product is already on the shelves for desperate Mac-go-Windows users? It's so clear I cannot even understand how some people disagree with this fact.

Go figure, y'all...this might be even worse than having OS X on normal PCs. Only blind gamer kids cannot see that (or are not worried anyway); well, soon they will be playing Half-Life 2 on a white box...and they will be happy in a great selfish way...bleargh.

[BlueRevolution]

As one person said, controlling the devleoping environment would insure that Mac continues to get support. I personally tried to use Visual Studio and XCode and found the latter easier to learn. If there could be a major "Windows" library plugin (and Linux plugin) for XCode with click button build for Mac and Windows, you have support for the Mac plattform incidentally. Suddenly, OSX becomes plattform of choice because it can port to any plattform with not too much trouble.

huh. I've always found Xcode confusing. then again, I cut my teeth on Visual Basic 5 (all groan), so that's the interface I'm most comfortable with. VC++ though I never really got, not that I tried terribly hard.

as for the part about a dual platform development environment, you're totally right... except, can you imagine most Windows apps compiled for OS X, with Aqua buttons instead of Windows grey ones? (think Quicken or MS Office for Mac.) using that kind of stuff would leave me feeling violated.

[iMeowbot]

Don't worry too too much about native Mac software. Recently (as in post-Intel), when IBM announced renewed support for Mac (http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/dailyarchives.jhtml?articleId=177102190&printableArticle=true), one of their resellers gave a nice summary of how these things work.

“Mac support for Lotus is a check-box item,” said Jim Murphy, practice manager for Strategic Computer Solutions, a Syracuse, N.Y.-based IBM partner. “We have a lot of health-care customers and maybe 1 percent of a company’s research department is on Macs but they have 99 percent of the influence.”

That kind of influence isn't limited to health care. Big cross-platform vendors who support OS X now will keep on doing that because those Mac sales are the gateway to the bigger Windows pie.

Mac specialists aren't going away either, they serve the Mac market because they aren't lost in the noise with a billion competitors.

Apple certainly know all this too. They wouldn't have used the nearly-generic hardware that permits Windows to run otherwise.

[Maaij]

Anyone DL the winxp mac cd from the torrent? Did it work?

[Maaij]

Anyone got it working with the Macmini?

[eXan]

unless Apple starts offering it as an option

Apple will never officially support booting Windows on Mac. Its a personal matter of Jobs and Gates :D

[lord_flash]

Apple will never officially support booting Windows on Mac. Its a personal matter of Jobs and Gates :D

Yes... but... no... because didn't even the earliest Apple computers use Bill Gate's BASIC? Yes, they did, didn't they?

Apple will do whatever it suits them to do commercially. Hell, if abandoning OS X and selling expensive but very attractive Windows boxes suited them, they'd do that. Mercifully their share of the market is, just about, large enough for them to avoid such a fate.

Steve Jobs is someone who knows how to make money out of technology. His, other peoples, whichever suits him.

[MacSA]

I thought everyone hated Windows lol.......how come everyone wants it suddenly? lol.

[iMeowbot]

Yes... but... no... because didn't even the earliest Apple computers use Bill Gate's BASIC? Yes, they did, didn't they?
That's a good question. Applesoft BASIC came from Microsoft, but it doesn't really behave quite like all the other Microsoft BASIC flavors, so who knows where they got it from!

[BrianDavid0523]

I'm certainly not a "techie" but logic says if you install a piece of **** OS like Windows on Apple hardware, you're still going to have all the associated frustrations that come with running Windows. So what's the point? Why would anyone buy an Apple box just to run Windows. I don't see Windows fans running out to their local Apple store any time soon.

You can put lipstick on a pig - but it's still a pig.

[tdewey]

I'm certainly not a "techie" but logic says if you install a piece of **** OS like Windows on Apple hardware, you're still going to have all the associated frustrations that come with running Windows. So what's the point? Why would anyone buy an Apple box just to run Windows. I don't see Windows fans running out to their local Apple store any time soon.

You can put lipstick on a pig - but it's still a pig.

So I can run WoW on XP on a Mac(well, when the video drivers are fixed).

Ask a silly question....

It's funny that this gets beaten to death on this forum:

(1) Because you can.
(2) Because regardless of how wonderful OSX is, there are a hella lot of applications (and in particular games) that don't run on it.
(3) Because most people can't afford two computers.
(4) Because, Because, Because.

[AidenShaw]

Performance is not only about hardware, dumbass. Think OS X. :rolleyes:
I was replying to a post about running Windows on "the best performing system".

Since OSX isn't running, it *is* only about the hardware.

[BRLawyer]

I thought everyone hated Windows lol.......how come everyone wants it suddenly? lol.

Yep, I pose the same question to the enlightened new MR members here...

[crees!]

I would like to do this (once I own a new Mac) but have Windows installed only on an external drive. Questions are. If the external is not attached will the bootloader just boot straight into OS X without any intervention when you turn the machine on? Has anyone installed on an external drive and can they test this?

\m/

[dornoforpyros]

you know, I don't actually mind that people want to run windows & OS X side by side on the same machine. I certainly understand why you'd want to do it, the thing that gets me is how everyone (ok most) people in these forums go around bashing Windows users & M$, but now that they can run windows on their mac they are giddy with excitement over it.

I guess I'm just saying that "silly windows users" comments should probably stop now since it's apparent you don't all hate windows as much as you claim.

[BRLawyer]

I just can't understand yet, especially given the potential risks to Mac-native software, if the solution turns out too easy in the near future...and NO, I don't see any value in having Winblows on my Mac...VPC and the like are more than enough...and for gaming go buy a PS3, it's much cheaper.

[corywoolf]

Glad I decided to go with the 1.83 Ghz MBP with a Dell 20" monitor instead of the 20" iMac! Can't wait to be playing Half Life 2 on my widescreen.:D

[corywoolf]

I just can't understand yet, especially given the potential risks to Mac-native software, if the solution turns out too easy in the near future...and NO, I don't see any value in having Winblows on my Mac...VPC and the like are more than enough...and for gaming go buy a PS3, it's much cheaper.
How is a PS3 going to be much cheaper???? Hmmmm.... $500 PS3 + $60 games vs. Windows XP Professional ($150 on new egg) + $30-$50 games....

VPC is weak too, sounds like you have a little mactel ENVY??? Don't have one yet, so you bash the privileged who do. ;)

Edit: and no, I doubt there will be much of a risk for OS X software (until Microsoft officially sells XP made to run natively on the Mac without patches), If anything it adds pressure to Apple to turn out better products that can compete with the XP only Pro Apps. Still laughing that Adobe Premier is coming back to the Mac. Within the coming months I wouldn't be shocked to hear VPC 2007 is going to be the last release of VPC and that Apple and Microsoft have came up with a special version of their OS's to run on mactels at the same time. Think Dashboard, they could even add a 5th icon for windows, although some might want easier access then having to launch Dashboard every time they want to switch OSs.

[1macker1]

Blah, I say this should be stopped. If Apple refuses to let OSX be loaded on a PC, I say MS should stop people from loading Windows on Mac hardware.

[jimN]

you know, I don't actually mind that people want to run windows & OS X side by side on the same machine. I certainly understand why you'd want to do it, the thing that gets me is how everyone (ok most) people in these forums go around bashing Windows users & M$, but now that they can run windows on their mac they are giddy with excitement over it.

I guess I'm just saying that "silly windows users" comments should probably stop now since it's apparent you don't all hate windows as much as you claim.

it's not a case of wanting to use windows because they like it but because with the majority of the computer world running windows inevitably there is a lot of software that demands it. Most people want dual booting for system specific games or programs, needing to use an OS and wanting to use it are two different things.

[aLbAn]

Thanks for seeing the obvious, at least one additional person perceives what will happen in the near future, if that effort becomes OFFICIALLY supported or TOO EASY.

Sometimes I have the impression that this forum is full of 15-year olds who are only interested in their individual gaming needs, as they have NO idea about the medium-term or long-term impact of WindowsOnMac; so we see a lot of excited posts regarding "my chances to play Counter Strike Source or Star Wars whatever", paying no attention to the prospective developers out there that will just PULL ALL STOPS in software porting efforts.

Already responding to another poster, it's NOT about those that have already spent a lot of R&D on Mac software, like MS or Adobe, they will continue with Macs for the time being...it's about those that thought about creating some new for the Mac, like Autodesk or others...they will NOT port anything if the same software can be run on a Windows partition flawlessly.

And why? Because you, Windows supporters, prefer to take the easy route and say "Ah, I don't wanna wait, let's run the Winblows version anyway"; and if Windows is just a boot away, why bother? Why hire 10 Mac programmers when the Windows product is already on the shelves for desperate Mac-go-Windows users? It's so clear I cannot even understand how some people disagree with this fact.

Go figure, y'all...this might be even worse than having OS X on normal PCs. Only blind gamer kids cannot see that (or are not worried anyway); well, soon they will be playing Half-Life 2 on a white box...and they will be happy in a great selfish way...bleargh.

well... you are right on some things. but are you REALLY considering the possibility that Apple will ever support this stuff? that would be cutting your own fingers, and Apple knows that. Apple would have supported BIOS and all that crap if they ever had considered supporting winonmac officially some time in the future. or do you think that Apple does not plan ahead for years with the intel-switch and so on??

another point: you guys seem to forget that people buy macs to run OSX!!!
that means, that whatever other OSes the hardware supports, it wouldn't matter because we use OSX with a reason: because many people consider it to be one of the best OSes at the moment. in other words: an OSX version of any software is still worth the trouble, even if the hardware can run other OSes. it is all comparable to OSX on pc's.... a number of people have done it, but it is nothing more than a gimmick for those people; i seriously doubt that they have ever done anything useful with it. why? because those people prefer windows over OSX. otherwise they would have had a mac already.:D

[Shaker]

Makes you wonder if we'll start to see bootleg Slipstream CD's pop-up on the market such as e-bay or elsewhere.

[kungfu]

Apple will do whatever it suits them to do commercially. Hell, if abandoning OS X and selling expensive but very attractive Windows boxes suited them, they'd do that.

see, that's where you're wrong. steve jobs is too much of a perfectionist to adopt an os he has no control over. if he was in it for the money, he wouldn't be at apple. he's a stickler for detail, that's all.

[mattfrox]

I know nothing about Mac and very little about OS's in general. Here it goes:

Now that there is a way to run XP on a Mac do you think it will work vice versa? That is: "Is it possible to run Mac OS-X natively on a PC?". I mean non emulator style.

[AidenShaw]

see, that's where you're wrong. steve jobs is too much of a perfectionist to adopt an os he has no control over. if he was in it for the money, he wouldn't be at apple. he's a stickler for detail, that's all.
Ultimately, Apple's owners will make that decision, not Jobs.

[peharri]

...produce a program that does this:

- Is associated with a ".windows" file type.
- Configures Mac to boot into Windows
- Configures Windows to autorun the app specified in the .windows file.
- Configures Windows to restore Mac system upon app exiting.
- Saves entire state of Mac OS X (running applications, etc) (probably achievable by dumping memory to a great big swap-like file.)
- Reboot.

Confused? Ok, this is how it appears to the user.

User installs, under Windows, WinGame III: The Killing, an amazing FPS/SEU/Platformer that's taking the world by storm and, alas, is only available for Windows.

User sets up "WinGameIII.windows" on the Mac.

Whenever user wants to run WinGame III, they double click on WinGameIII.windows. Within seconds, it's playing.

They exit WinGame III, and it's as if nothing's happened, they're back in Mac OS X, their Safari/Firefox sessions are still there, documents open, etc.

This is probably a nightmare for the "All developers will switch to Windows" mob, but would be rather nice for the rest of us. I don't really care what OS a game runs under, given it takes over the entire PC when it runs anyway. I'm more bothered about production apps, which typically need to be used in cooperation with others.

I'd actually love this for PowerPC/Mac OS 9. Some games, such as SiN and the original UT, work better in OS 9 than under OS X, even if you have the carbonized binaries. I would imagine the save/restore state thing would work quite well if you take advantage of the suspend (Sleep mode) features of Darwin.

[dejo]

Ultimately, Apple's owners will make that decision, not Jobs.

"Apple's owners" meaning...? People who uses their products? Stockholders? Some other group? Just seeking clarification here.

[mrplow]

Why is it that ANYONE has a professional opinion? You all take this so political and professional... accusations flying about about how we "ripped on windows users" ... you have any idea how many people post to the forum? I highly doubt it's the same users saying one and then the other- no one person speaks on behalf of this forum (perhaps arn)... To say that ANYTHING should not be done on a computer is ludicrous. Why should anyone deny anyone the right to do anything? This goes right along with my hatred for DRM...

Please DON'T ANSWER this because I really don't care about it making some billionaire software company unhappy. I am a user, I own my hardware and my software and I will use it in whatever way I please without the consideration of the rich bastard that created it!

[dornoforpyros]

it's not a case of wanting to use windows because they like it but because with the majority of the computer world running windows inevitably there is a lot of software that demands it. Most people want dual booting for system specific games or programs, needing to use an OS and wanting to use it are two different things.

I dunno, just seems that in the same breath people are bashing it embracing it at the same time.

[reyesmac]

Heres a theory. Apple is counting on the Windows booting on a Macintel hype to sell Macintels. They need a large number of macintel owners to get give developers a reason to port their apps over to it. And one day they can disable the hack once they have a large enough user base and developers port enough native apps over. If the developers stop porting to mac, the hack is disabled to protect the Mac OS. If there is a huge wave of developers developing universal binaries Apple can still disable the hack once it has a large enough number of native apps.

Sorry, I can't put it beneath Apple to use hype to sell its machines. Or to use bait and switch tactics to sell Macintels. Until Apple comes out with its own BlueBox solution I don't see them embrasing Windows on a Mac.

What Apple should do is disable all windows hacks and make one of their own. They should allow Windows to boot on a Mac at full speed, but the Mac OS has to run at the same time, it would resemble fast user switching. That way, windows people will have a greater chance of switching since they can't turn the Mac side of the Mac off!

[kungfu]

Ultimately, Apple's owners will make that decision, not Jobs.

while steve is around, he's gonna do things his way. maybe in the after-steve, apple will follow money (no matter how perverted its path), but to me, that's just not apple. money follows apple.

business is important, but computers are paramount. (and if by 'owners' you mean shareholders, there ain't no way in hell they'd oust steve at this point)

[janstett]

You'll notice that Linux doesn't have very many mainstream applications on it.

I'll take a couple of examples of why being able to run Windows is a BAD THING.

1) I'm an engineer. My company wants me to produce drawings in AutoCAD format but since there is no MacOSX version I would normally run VectorWorks or some other Mac only product that can produce AutoCAD files even if there may be slight problems. Now that I can run it natively on Windows, I'll use AutoCAD instead of buying the comparative Mac product. The Mac CAD developers die off gradually.

2) I'm a 3D artist. There's a kick ass product for 3D only on Windows. I boot into Windows and use that instead of buying a comparable OSX product. 3D Mac app developers who don't want to compete for a dwindling market drop out of the market.

3) I'm an accountant. Not content with MYOB, Incognito or the mess that is Quicken on the Mac, I boot into Windows and run Sage. Mac accountancy software dies off even more than the poor state it is today.

I hope you can see why being able to run Windows applications at full speed is a bad thing for the Mac market in general. It may not be bad for users in the short term but in the medium to long term you want strong Mac development, even if it means that excludes the heavyweights from the Windows world. Many Mac only developers exist because the big Windows only companies don't bother with the Mac.

Your argument is insightful and well thought out. However, I must point out that the status quo (holding out for Mac-only versions of programs) is futile and will inevitably lead to the same outcome as running Windows applications, or at best it will maintain the status quo for a time longer.

Yellow Box (apps developed with Apple developer tools that run on both OS X and Windows) is the only way out of this quagmire.

[quicksilver77]

Yep, I pose the same question to the enlightened new MR members here...


This is getting to be a very old and tiresome question posed by people not in the know. Please try and pull ur head out of your ass and read. There are 29 pages on this thread and I bet 25 of them are about the value of Windows on a mac.

[quicksilver77]

Why is it that ANYONE has a professional opinion? You all take this so political and professional... accusations flying about about how we "ripped on windows users" ... you have any idea how many people post to the forum? I highly doubt it's the same users saying one and then the other- no one person speaks on behalf of this forum (perhaps arn)... To say that ANYTHING should not be done on a computer is ludicrous. Why should anyone deny anyone the right to do anything? This goes right along with my hatred for DRM...

Please DON'T ANSWER this because I really don't care about it making some billionaire software company unhappy. I am a user, I own my hardware and my software and I will use it in whatever way I please without the consideration of the rich bastard that created it!


And Steve Jobs is poor?

[Windshadow]

Strong arguments are being made on both sides of this and as I am involved with the best CAD software for the Mac right now (Concepts Unlimited 3.0) I understand the danger... but what about Game software that will never be ported? The Elder Scrolls games jump to mind Morowind was never ported and they have said that Oblivion will also never get a OS X Port... I would Far rather be able to run it on an Intel Mac Than either have to buy a PC or an XBOX 360 the Game is the only one announced for the XBOX360 I have any interest in and on the 360 you give up access to the modding that is in the PC version... and the extra cost to run it on my 20" iMac is just that of a copy of XP and the game... the other options cost far more I have a 3 year old PC that I use ONLY for morowind it would cost me more than $500 to upgrade it to run Oblivion and I am looking forward to giveing it to charity once I can run the Elder Scrolls games on my 20" iMac

The point now is not whether this is good or bad for Apple... the XP Djinn is out of his bottle and once the video card and Bluetooth driver issues are sorted gamers will be doing this...

Take Photoshop... I own Mac Photoshop I do not own PC photoshop... I am not going to spend $800 to get another copy to run under XP for a few months... I am going to run Photoshop and other software that is too slow under rosettea on my old Dual 2 gig G5 tower and play and develop and work on my new 20" imac untill the universal Photoshop and other neded pro apps and the intel Mac Tower computer are released... people who Use photoshop in their work already have a fairly powerful G5 and they will either not change over untill the universal photoshop and tower macs are out or they will do like I did and get a core duo now as a 2ed machine

[janstett]

Good news for...

Consumers, now you can natively run Windows on the best looking and best performing computers in the world.

Well, they're just PCs like everybody else. I have a MBP, is it magically a better performer than any other Dual Core 2.0 GHz box especially those ALSO using the same motherboard?


Bad news for...

Dell, IBM, Sony and every single PC manufacturer. Usually PC users would not consider Apple because, it can't run Windows, but now, every single Intel Mac will compete directly with PC manufacturers, and frankly, the Mac is superior in all aspects, plus you get OS X!

Yes, but there is a flip side to this, it's a double-edged sword. What about when Apple's hardware ISN'T superior? For example, if I want an ultraportable subnotebook, Apple's 12" Powerbook is a heavy porker at 5 pounds. What if I want to run OSX on a Thinkpad X60 which weighs half as much as a PorkerBook?

Mixed news for...

Apple Software, think for a minute here, Mac OS X and Windows used to compete from different hardware, Apple for the Mac OS X or PCs for Windows. Now they will be able to compete on the same computer since speed is no longer an issue because Windows can run natively on the Mac. People will be able to administer their computer through one OS and use the other to run specific applications for that OS. Basically the battle will be for which OS ends up being the "main OS" in which people usually work, and which OS ends up being the "bitch OS" which people use to run specific applications. If people like OS X better, then they will do most of their stuff on OS X and boot Windows when they want to play a game or use some Windows only software. The opposite is true. In my opinion, OS X is superior to Windows in most aspects, the only draw back from OS X used to be software that would not run on it, that is no longer a problem, so this means...


I have to break some news here that people may not want to hear.

Apple has always been a two-headed beast -- hardware and software. And as long as Steve Jobs is CEO, the hardware comes first and the software comes last.

That's why no generic OS X for PCs, even though it would mean $99 sales for Apple and application sales as a result. That's why no iLife for Windows.

My previous company dealt with Apple, we wanted to make a device that would allow iPods to stream to UPnP compliant network devices. Apple's people told us they don't care unless it sells more iPods or Macintoshes.

Given this attitude which comes straight from the top, let me reiterate the lesson: selling Macintosh hardware comes first, selling OS X comes last.

So, if Jobs can sell hardware he doesn't care about OS X as much. I'm sure if they ever do offer Windows pre-loaded you'll still have to pay the OS X license fee. More fuel for the Dvorak theories...

I keep saying Apple should realize hardware is a commodity and software is what's important. OSX, Quicktime, iTunes, iLife, Final Cut Studio, all those are the true magic. Maybe there is some hope and Apple will release these applications into the Windows world as Yellow Box apps.

[Abulia]

I guess I'm just saying that "silly windows users" comments should probably stop now since it's apparent you don't all hate windows as much as you claim.Especially since this sub-forum has more people viewing it than the rest of MacRumors combined.

[damon5334]

I just can't understand yet, especially given the potential risks to Mac-native software...


Are you talking about Mac-native software development? Because you do know that Windows XP can't see your Mac partition, right? Therefore everyone's fear about spyware and viruses moving from their windows partition to their mac partition is foolish. In fact, given the fact that file sharing is easier with virtualization, I'd say that'd be more of a risk (if that stuff even ran on a mac in the first place).

[whooleytoo]

Are you talking about Mac-native software development? Because you do know that Windows XP can't see your Mac partition, right? Therefore everyone's fear about spyware and viruses moving from their windows partition to their mac partition is foolish. In fact, given the fact that file sharing is easier with virtualization, I'd say that'd be more of a risk (if that stuff even ran on a mac in the first place).

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.

[cr2sh]

so they might not be able to copy files to the OSX partition easily, but they might be able to wipe it.

Wow.. that is a scary thought.

:eek:

[janstett]

This was posted from my MacBook Pro 2.0 GHz running Windows XP SP2Did anyone else cringe while reading this?:(

I'm posting this from my Gateway P4 2.5 GHz running OS X. I booted it specifically just for this message :)

It's a different world!

[janstett]

NTFS was part of Windows NT 3.1 about 15 years ago.... Anybody who thought that it was new with XP was a few cards short of a full deck.

And even that was an outgrowth of OS/2 1.x's HPFS filesystem that dates back to around 1988.

Early NT trivia: The first versions of NT still supported HPFS filesystems, and Microsoft even had an optional subsystem to run OS/2 1.x programs, including Presentation Manager GUI applications.

[janstett]

Especially since games tend to run better on OS X when they are written properly for it and don't have tons of Windows garbage still in the code from being ported.

The hard part is getting devs to write clean game code for OS X.

You did notice that Bungie was bought up by Microsoft around 5 years ago, right?

The Mac game market is dead as far as I'm concerned.

[skellener]

Running Win on Mac hardware could very well increase Mac sales. My brother needed a new laptop for work, He really liked the 12" Powerbook he had bought last year for home. When he heard about the possibility he could run XP on a MacBook Pro, he started considering the purchase. He even through in some dough for the contest. When the news about Vista came out about not supporting EFI he was thought that was the end of it and was ready to place an order for a Lenovo. Thank God the contest was won just in time! He just placed an order for the MacBook Pro now that he knows he can run XP on it. He's not too worried about Vista. Someone out there will get it to run as well.

So chalk one business Mac sale up to the contest. :)

[janstett]

Sometimes I have the impression that this forum is full of 15-year olds who are only interested in their individual gaming needs, as they have NO idea about the medium-term or long-term impact of WindowsOnMac; so we see a lot of excited posts regarding "my chances to play Counter Strike Source or Star Wars whatever", paying no attention to the prospective developers out there that will just PULL ALL STOPS in software porting efforts.

And sometimes I think this forum is full of blind zealots who can't see the forest through the trees. Mac OS X is NOT a brand new operating system. It's been around for several years. If the great application push hasn't happened up until now, why would it start now?

Your attitude makes me laugh... "How dare those selfish 15 year olds boot Windows for their greedy gaming needs? Don't they see they're harming The Cause? Don't they see they are betraying my Holy Crusade to evangelize OS X?" Yeah, pretty selfish of people to actually try to use a computer instead of taking part in The Holy War.

I already spent my time as a zealot with OS/2. I did the advocacy thing. I see so much of it in you. I can relate to your zealotry. At some point you have to realize you're fighting a losing battle. In the end, people don't care about theoretical advantages of your OS brand (and OS/2 was in a much superior position vis-a-vie its contemporary Windows than OS X is over XP today). People don't care that Bill Gates has hooves and eats puppies. They just want to use their computers with the applications they want. Is it so evil?

Already responding to another poster, it's NOT about those that have already spent a lot of R&D on Mac software, like MS or Adobe, they will continue with Macs for the time being...

The MS that doesn't even give us a complete Office (no Outlook, no Access, no FrontPage, no Project, no Visio, etc.), and the same Adobe that won't give us Universal Binaries until 2007.... Just checking.

it's about those that thought about creating some new for the Mac, like Autodesk or others...they will NOT port anything if the same software can be run on a Windows partition flawlessly.

And they're tripping over their own feet to get it done now? Sheesh, how long has Autodesk been around, and how long has Mac OS been around? Are you not getting the message? THEY DON'T WANT ANY.

And why? Because you, Windows supporters, prefer to take the easy route and say "Ah, I don't wanna wait, let's run the Winblows version anyway"; and if Windows is just a boot away, why bother? Why hire 10 Mac programmers when the Windows product is already on the shelves for desperate Mac-go-Windows users? It's so clear I cannot even understand how some people disagree with this fact.

You act like OS X just came out 2 months ago. It's not new. Why haven't the applications materialized up until now?

Go figure, y'all...this might be even worse than having OS X on normal PCs. Only blind gamer kids cannot see that (or are not worried anyway); well, soon they will be playing Half-Life 2 on a white box...and they will be happy in a great selfish way...bleargh.

As opposed to the blind zealots who will go down with the ship, like you?

I did that with OS/2. As soon as Windows 95 came out, it was over. Windows 95 was not as good as OS/2, but it was good enough to end the war and send OS/2 on the road to the scrap heap.

OS X is not in this position yet. But you have to realize that your grand dream of having every application ported to OSX just isn't going to happen. You are blind and naive if you think this will happen. I say Apple's only way out is Yellow Box.

[tdewey]

So chalk one business Mac sale up to the contest. :)

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.

[mrplow]

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.


Actually there is MSN Messenger for mac.. it installs with Office for mac.. and it can be downloaded off the internet... and www.adiumx.com triumphs all communication apps, as it supports ALL of them *beautifully* (except skype)

and I don't mean to be insulting, but you said 'mac alternatives dont work' because they use MS Messanger? you just connect to MS through Adium and everyone on MSMes. has NO IDEA whether your using microsoft's own client or not... its exactly the same.. well, no, its better.. because Adium is the balls.

Adium w/ MS Messanger Support:
http://www.adiumx.com

MS Messanger from MS for Mac OS:
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/default.aspx?pid=msnmessenger


((dual booting = good thing.. but x1600 drivers would make it a great thing))

[janstett]

as for the part about a dual platform development environment, you're totally right... except, can you imagine most Windows apps compiled for OS X, with Aqua buttons instead of Windows grey ones? (think Quicken or MS Office for Mac.) using that kind of stuff would leave me feeling violated.

iTunes?

[janstett]

I just can't understand yet, especially given the potential risks to Mac-native software, if the solution turns out too easy in the near future...and NO, I don't see any value in having Winblows on my Mac...VPC and the like are more than enough...and for gaming go buy a PS3, it's much cheaper.

Ha ha ha, the last estimates I saw on the PS3 put it at $700. Keep dreaming. Sony is going to hit at least $500 retail, after the $399 precedence of X-Box, plus the BD-ROM drive, et al.

[quicksilver77]

Actually there is MSN Messenger for mac.. it installs with Office for mac.. and it can be downloaded off the internet... and www.adiumx.com triumphs all communication apps, as it supports ALL of them *beautifully* (except skype)

and I don't mean to be insulting, but you said 'mac alternatives dont work' because they use MS Messanger? you just connect to MS through Adium and everyone on MSMes. has NO IDEA whether your using microsoft's own client or not... its exactly the same.. well, no, its better.. because Adium is the balls.

Adium w/ MS Messanger Support:
http://www.adiumx.com

MS Messanger from MS for Mac OS:
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/default.aspx?pid=msnmessenger


Msn Messenger for mac is not as good as the windows version. I have been using both for some time. The newer version for the mac is ok but not great. For windows trillian is a good multi chat messenging system.

[tdewey]

and I don't mean to be insulting, but you said 'mac alternatives dont work' because they use MS Messanger? you just connect to MS through Adium and everyone on MSMes. has NO IDEA whether your using microsoft's own client or not... its exactly the same.. well, no, its better.. because Adium is the balls.

last time i checked (which wasn't recently) you couldn't video chat b/n Mac and PC. Has that changed?

[janstett]

business is important, but computers are paramount. (and if by 'owners' you mean shareholders, there ain't no way in hell they'd oust steve at this point)
I think Steve will be too busy running Big Mouse and will hand the reigns over.

Think about it -- he's brought Apple back from the brink. Turned it around. Revolutionized MP3 players and in the process music distribution. I think he's running out of rabbits to pull out of his hat at Apple. The Mac is never going to break out of its marketshare doldrums and even The Steve knows it. He's beginning to repeat himself. I think a guy like him gets bored once the revolution is over, and he's looking for a new challenge. I can see Steve walking away from Apple in the next few years.

[aegisdesign]

Apple will never officially support booting Windows on Mac. Its a personal matter of Jobs and Gates :D

Hey, people were saying Macs would never go Intel last summer.

And last month, they'd never use integrated graphics.

And they'd not drop firewire on the iPod...

[mhunter]

Hello All,

Here's a question:

We know that the iMac's fan will run in top speed if OS X does not boot in a certain amount of time.

This is a safeguard to prevent the system from cooking itself if OS X isn't running to control all the vital parts.

This is particularly noticeable when you boot from a Utility CD such as the hardware test.

So, my question is:

Since Windows XP doesn't know about all the intricate parts of Apple's power management system, the controls for the fans, etc. How do the fans sound?

Are they running at full speed like when you run other software outside of the OS X environment?

Or, does Windows XP somehow control the fans properly, and keep all the heat generating parts under control?

Looking forward to any input here.

Note: I don't have an Intel Mac yet. So, I am just going by what I know about the behavior of the G5 and other Mac systems.

[avus]

The Mac is never going to break out of its marketshare doldrums and even The Steve knows it..... I can see Steve walking away from Apple in the next few years.

Yeah, Steve Jobs already said that back in 1996. Why did he even bother to come back, then?

Don't say things like you know the guy.

[destroyboredom]

Janstett-

I think you are ignoring the major fact that Macs are now on the Intel platform, and while I'm no developer by any stretch, I would imagine it makes porting applications to OS X a little easier.

That's not to say it will help, but I think you need to consider it.

[g.x]

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.


Even if her friends only use MSN Messenger, your wife can use any number of OS X chat clients that support MSN Messenger. Adium, Gaim, Fire, etc. They all support MSN.

Her MSN-using friends won't even know what client she's using...to them, she'll just appear on the MSN network.

[g.x]

Since Windows XP doesn't know about all the intricate parts of Apple's power management system, the controls for the fans, etc. How do the fans sound?

...

Or, does Windows XP somehow control the fans properly, and keep all the heat generating parts under control?



An excellent question. Curious myself. Since the fan is plugged into the power supply (for juice) and the motherboard (for control), I would think a driver of some sort was required for the OS to talk to.

[Todd H]

I think I'm going to wait until they iron out all the problems with the drivers before I give it a try. It would certainly be nice to get rid of my other computer and save some space. Plus, my iMac is a good bit more powerful than my PC.

[tdewey]

Even if her friends only use MSN Messenger, your wife can use any number of OS X chat clients that support MSN Messenger. Adium, Gaim, Fire, etc. They all support MSN.

Her MSN-using friends won't even know what client she's using...to them, she'll just appear on the MSN network.

As I commented to the other guy - as far as I know - none of these solutions support video chat with Windows MSN Messenger.

This goes to the heart of the XP on Mac argument - there are simply no substitutes for a large number of windows programs.

Even if you think windows is the worst thing in the world - you have to admit that. It doesn't matter if you don't personally use those applications - you != every other user in the world.

As someone who has owned Apples since the Apple II+ - and as a former Unix administrator - I'm as big a fanboi of MacOSX as the next person - but my primary platform these days is a windows laptop because of the applications I need to use daily.

In addition to purchasing my wife an Intel ibook, I'll migrate to an MBP in a few months.

Frankly, I think the lipstick-on-a-pig folks should be overjoyed at this turn of events - its going to drasticlly bump up the number of Mac purchases over the short and long term. Resulting in more Mac specific products.

[mhunter]

An excellent question. Curious myself. Since the fan is plugged into the power supply (for juice) and the motherboard (for control), I would think a driver of some sort was required for the OS to talk to.


That's my thought as well. I would think that a driver of some sort is required to control the fans.

While the normal fan range isn't too obnoxious, they are quite noisy if they are running at their top speed (fail-safe mode).

[freeny]

I think Steve will be too busy running Big Mouse and will hand the reigns over.
Steve has already stated that Apple is his true calling and has no intention of leaving any time soon. The sale of Pixar only leaves more time for Apple. The seat at Disney is really just a trophy.

[crees!]

Already responding to another poster, it's NOT about those that have already spent a lot of R&D on Mac software, like MS or Adobe, they will continue with Macs for the time being...it's about those that thought about creating some new for the Mac, like Autodesk or others...they will NOT port anything if the same software can be run on a Windows partition flawlessly. Eventhough you can install Windows on a Mac I believe you're somewhat off on this. Apple said they will not support Windows installations on their machines. That should be enough for developers to continue making Mac versions of their software. If Apple said they would support it then it would be death to the Mac version of that software. Developers also want to reach out to as many people as they can with their software. A lot of people aren't going to put Windows on their Mac.. most won't even know they can. With this developers would still create for the Mac to grow their user base. Also there's nothing to say in an update that Apple will "tweak" the EFI. Heck, they could reinstall the EFI over the hacked one if they wanted.

[janstett]

Janstett-

I think you are ignoring the major fact that Macs are now on the Intel platform, and while I'm no developer by any stretch, I would imagine it makes porting applications to OS X a little easier.

That's not to say it will help, but I think you need to consider it.

Well, actually, I am a developer, and it doesn't make porting applications any easier.

The vast majority of applications use C or C++ (or C#) to talk to functions (known as an Application Programming Interface, or API) the operating system provides. On the Mac this is Carbon/Cocoa et al, on Windows this is the Win32 API, MFC, ATL, etc. These things don't really change when the Mac moved to Intel from PPC.

There are SMALL areas where moving to Intel helps -- such as raw buffer manipulation (like Digital Signal Processing, or DSP) or assembly code, which is very rare in high level applications. The big difference at a low level used to be endianness (Intel was little endian, PPC was big endian) and of course assembly.

But in general OS X being on Intel doesn't make anything significantly easier. If anything, being based on BSD was the best thing that could have happened since it opens the Mac up to GPL/Linux projects, but even then, the problem is the lack of seriousness of the GPL projects relative to the major software vendors.

[simonrobbie]

This is the worst virus those Windows propellor heads could have come up with for the Mac.

[gnujon]

For those who need/want dual-boot (like me), this is great.

For those who slam this and would prefer virtualization, chill out. It's coming.

But for all those people who are waiting/drooling over "Virtual PC at native speeds," please pull your head out so it can get some air. Plenty of friendly people on this site (obviously not me) have kindly tried to educate you and you are simply ignoring them.

"Virtual" = running withing a software environment, which is essentially a software application.

Therefore "Virtual at native speeds" translates to "Please provide me with software that uses absolutely no system resources, no cpu, no RAM, nothing...please provide this as it is my God-given right as someone who does not understand physics or reality."

Sorry, but it's actually you (and the plenty of others you mention) who don't know what they're talking about. Have you never heard of Wine, Win4Lin or MacOnLinux? Or even using Virtual Real Mode to run DOS applications under Windows for that matter?

You guys need to do some research into virtualisation. Look up 'Vanderpool' and 'Intel Virtualisation Technology' for some interesting reading. 'Virtual' doesn't always mean 'software emulation of everything'.