PDA

View Full Version : Windows XP Booting on Mac Contest Over




Pages : [1] 2 3 4

MacRumors
Mar 16, 2006, 12:08 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

The contest to boot Windows XP on the Mac (http://www.winxponmac.com/) is over. The winners will receive $13,854:

Contest has been won - updates to follow shortly. All further donations will go into an account to sustain the open source project that will be launched with the initial solution.

The instructions to the contest stipulated the following conditions:

- Boot Windows XP on the Intel Mac
- Windows must coexist with Mac OS X and may not interfere with the operation of the other
- Upon starting the computer, the user must be offered a choice of which OS to boot

A photo of the OS selection screen was posted in this forum thread (http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=11731&view=findpost&p=76489). Upon booting the Mac, an Apple logo appears on a grey screen. Pressing the down arrow key at this time brings you to a Windows logo on the same grey background. Hitting enter lets you proceed to boot the selected Operating System.

According to this post (http://forum.onmac.net/showthread.php?p=420#post420) the final solution will work on the 17" iMac, 20" iMac, Mac mini and MacBook Pro. The full solution should be posted shortly and appears it will include downloadable bootloader.



Heath
Mar 16, 2006, 12:11 AM
Well, I guess he can use the money to buy lots of windows software for his Mac.

narco
Mar 16, 2006, 12:12 AM
Is this a bad thing for Microsoft or Apple? I can't imagine since Microsoft doesn't sell computers and if Windows ran smoothly on a Mac, I'm sure Apple would sell more hardware.

Fishes,
narco.

rareflares
Mar 16, 2006, 12:14 AM
could be a problem for the Mac OS. Who would develop for OSX if users can just use Windows on the same machine?


I understand that only a small minority of computer users will actually do this but it's still a concern for Apple.

IJ Reilly
Mar 16, 2006, 12:14 AM
It's gonna need some video drivers to make it perform.

berkleeboy210
Mar 16, 2006, 12:14 AM
Time to see if my Windows XP Disc is still in the Garbage Disposal ;)

wheezy
Mar 16, 2006, 12:15 AM
Congrats to the winner! Didn't know dual-boot was required but that's pretty cool. A good geat way way way beyond my skills! I can hardly install XP on a made for XP PC. But I blame that on Windows.

mlrproducts
Mar 16, 2006, 12:21 AM
I don't want to see developers drop OS X. But since Adobe is being a PITA at least I can run PSCS on my MacBook Pro for now (or at least hoping to).

Who removed my second post, ARGH!?

Stpauleboy
Mar 16, 2006, 12:21 AM
Wow, that was fast. I hope the end of software being written for Power PC Mac's doesn't happen at a similar pace now.
:(

Apple Corps
Mar 16, 2006, 12:23 AM
I'd be interested in using OS X on a Sony Vaio- is anyone working on that angle?

Phat_Pat
Mar 16, 2006, 12:23 AM
Woooooooo!!!!!!!!!


yessss bing it on!!!!!!


XP on a mac


makes me crave that future Powermac.... mmmm

evilgEEk
Mar 16, 2006, 12:23 AM
Dual boot? Meh...

I want to be able to run it within OS X. With the new Intel Macs I'm assuming the next version of Virtual PC will run at native speeds.

That's what I want. :)

But regardless, kudos to these folks. :)

EricNau
Mar 16, 2006, 12:25 AM
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.

mulletman13
Mar 16, 2006, 12:25 AM
I personally don't believe that this will really hurt Apple, or that developers will stop developing for OS X. They know OS X is superior for nearly everything besides gaming -- but now people can have that too.

It's great no matter which way you look at it -- Apple will sell a ton of hardware because of this. Most users will play with OS X and get introduced to it now... only to find they really don't need XP :)

treblah
Mar 16, 2006, 12:28 AM
Funny, it took almost as long to get OS X on beige boxen as it did to get Windows on Apple boxen.

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.

Uhh, if the end user is savvy enough to know what 'dual boot' means I think they could handle it.

Kingsly
Mar 16, 2006, 12:30 AM
Yeeeeeee. wintel games, anyone? Wow, what a day to get my MBP. I knew it was gonna be close, but on the same day??!!

Ja Di ksw
Mar 16, 2006, 12:31 AM
I don't think there's a reason to worry about people dropping developing for OS X. I don't think many (any?) people were running macs *solely* for the hardware, wishing and hoping that they could run Windows instead, if only the hardware was made by Apple (yes, there are people who want Windows on Apple computers along with OS X, or OS X on non-Apple PC's, but those are different groups and do not affect this logic). The number of people running OS X will not (significantly) decrease, if at all, and so the incentive to develop for OS X will not (significantly) decrease, if at all. The only possible side effect would be more of the people who were already using Windows buying Apple computers, but that doesn't affect how much money developers can earn making programs for OS X.

tonybeak
Mar 16, 2006, 12:32 AM
I'd be interested in using OS X on a Sony Vaio- is anyone working on that angle?

It's already possible... right?

http://www.osx86project.org

matperk
Mar 16, 2006, 12:34 AM
It's already possible... right?

http://www.osx86project.org

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

QCassidy352
Mar 16, 2006, 12:34 AM
Not that I really have any interest in using windows, but if there's some software I'd have to run, this would be cool.

VPC at native speeds would rock too. :)

LagunaSol
Mar 16, 2006, 12:37 AM
Heck yeah! Goodbye ugly PC on my desk, annoying KVM switch, and spaghetti pile of cables. Hello sleek, quiet new iMac that will run any major software on the planet!

Or MacBook Pro....hmmm, decisions decisions...

mrplow
Mar 16, 2006, 12:37 AM
could be a problem for the Mac OS. Who would develop for OSX if users can just use Windows on the same machine?


I understand that only a small minority of computer users will actually do this but it's still a concern for Apple.

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.

IJ Reilly
Mar 16, 2006, 12:39 AM
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.

The difficulty of this installation hasn't been ascertained yet, but the question is certainly being asked. If loading Windows on Mac hardware becomes a non-technical task, I can see it being offered as an insurance policy to potential Mac buyers, much as VPC is now.

.Andy
Mar 16, 2006, 12:41 AM
Mac OSX up there for thinking (working!)

Windows XP down there for dancing (games!)*

*as long as the performance doesn't suck and all the video drivers and other whatch-ma-callits are cool :cool:.

Congrats to the winner. I can't believe people are out there smart enough to come up with this stuff.

dlpmaster
Mar 16, 2006, 12:42 AM
Pretty kol..
but what about if a user is working on Mac Only based programs and want to tranfer stuff from Windows only files or something? Will people have the availability to run both OS' at the same time.. like have one account under windows and another under OSX ?
Maybe that could be taken into consideration?

admanimal
Mar 16, 2006, 12:42 AM
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.

oingoboingo
Mar 16, 2006, 12:42 AM
I think this news is effectively the death-knell for companies like Aspyr who have traditionally ported PC games across to the Mac. With Windows XP dual booting on a Mac, there would seem to be little to no incentive for Mac users to wait 6-12 months for a PC game port to appear on Mac OS X, along with the potential loss of performance that porting a game sometimes introduces.

There might still be a hard-core of Mac OS X users who might be willing to wait out the porting time and pay a premium price for a native OS X port, but from what I understand, the margins in the Mac OS X game porting market are fairly slim as they are. I can't see Mac OS X game porters surviving this new twist in the evolution of the platform.

Thanks for the games while they lasted guys...

stefman
Mar 16, 2006, 12:43 AM
I wouldn't buy Apple hardware to run Windows. So I would say the main attraction to Apple is OS X and the user experience brought by a perfect marriage of hardware and software.

However, there is the occasional required piece of software that needs to Windows and that might be the only times that I would boot in Windows. In the meantime, there's still VPC for PPC Macs.

Backtothemac
Mar 16, 2006, 12:45 AM
I think this will sell a lot of Macs to people that otherwise would stick with a PC.

iMeowbot
Mar 16, 2006, 12:45 AM
why would anyone buy a mac if they intended to use windows to run applications?
It's for one reason, and one reason only. It ticks off people who want to know why anyone would run Windows on a Mac. It can't possibly involve anything practical, like a desire to cut down on the clutter of having two computers. That would make too much sense.

admanimal
Mar 16, 2006, 12:45 AM
There might still be a hard-core of Mac OS X users who might be willing to wait out the porting time and pay a premium price for a native OS X port

Actually, I think you have it backwards. The hard-core OS X user is the one who is going to be willing to install some unsupported software on their computer in order to dual boot with Windows and run some games. The average (majority) user isn't going to want (or feel they know how) to do this, and will stick to just buying official Mac games.

Lollypop
Mar 16, 2006, 12:47 AM
I can see why gamers might want to do duel boot, but personally I dont game, and all the things I need to do at home run incredibly well on my mac. Thus far the intel transition has only meant speed increases for me, nothing more, I dont want to run windows on a mac, I moved to a mac to get away from windows, and I think thats why most people use the mac, for OS X, and to get away from windows, this doesnt mean a lot to those people and me.

unigolyn
Mar 16, 2006, 12:48 AM
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.

Casual PC gamers whose number 1 reason not to switch is lack of games for OS X are not exactly insignificant. Personally, I'm thrilled I don't have to buy another non-Apple computer ever again. I need OS X for work (graphic design), I love OS X for everyday computer use, and now I can just boot up XP on my Mac if I feel like a 10-hour session of Arcanum or some other never-will-be-ported-to-Mac games of recent yore. I'll certainly buy all future software in the OS X version (if available or planned), but there's a whole world of software I don't have to give up now.

plinkoman
Mar 16, 2006, 12:50 AM
wow, looks nice. almost makes me want to replace my pc...

maybe i'd get a mac mini or something... but then again, my pc has a 6600GT, whats the mini got?

eh, it's good to know i'll have options in the future ;)

mainstreetmark
Mar 16, 2006, 12:50 AM
You guys are all missing the really big story here!

37 Postivies; 0 Negatives

(at the time of this post)

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

prostuff1
Mar 16, 2006, 12:51 AM
OK, now all i need is the directions to be published and most of the kinks to be worked out and i will more then likey sell my two computers and get a MBP. Will probably hold off until the MBP with merom chips are out.

Can you say really nice x-mas gift this year!!

arn
Mar 16, 2006, 12:52 AM
I think it will actually help Apple's marketshare considerably.

I think there are a large group of people who would like to buy Macs, but are concerned that their work or whatever will need them to use Windows. For these people, buying an Intel Mac that can boot windows if needed is a big safety net if they have any doubts that Mac OS X can handle their needs.

Also, there are people who do need to run Windows specific applications. Suddenly the value of an Intel Mac just went up considerably for these people.

arn

unigolyn
Mar 16, 2006, 12:52 AM
I wouldn't buy Apple hardware to run Windows. So I would say the main attraction to Apple is OS X and the user experience brought by a perfect marriage of hardware and software.

However, there is the occasional required piece of software that needs to Windows and that might be the only times that I would boot in Windows. In the meantime, there's still VPC for PPC Macs.

Actually, I think it's pointless to keep saying what you (and I, and a million other people) just said and have been saying for the past three months. I'm uncertain whether it's just trolling for a response or if some people are actually thick enough to not realize why people would want to dual-boot. Yes, Windows is crap. If people didn't prefer OS X, they wouldn't buy Apple hardware. Shiny white plastic and anodized aluminum only go so far.

oingoboingo
Mar 16, 2006, 12:54 AM
Actually, I think you have it backwards. The hard-core OS X user is the one who is going to be willing to install some unsupported software on their computer in order to dual boot with Windows and run some games. The average (majority) user isn't going to want (or feel they know how) to do this, and will stick to just buying official Mac games.

Possibly. The way I see it is that gaming on the Mac is already a niche within a niche. As on the PC platform, Mac gamers tend to know a little more about their hardware and how it hangs together with regards to performance. They are probably more likely to try something like dual-booting than Joe Average who uses his Mac for web surfing, e-mail and messing around with his digital photos.

I understand your point, but I just don't see the availability of Windows XP, the absolutely supreme gaming platform on personal computers without question, is going to help the already small and underwhelming native Mac OS X game market.

We'll see how it turns out. These are interesting times :D

bdkennedy1
Mar 16, 2006, 12:56 AM
Well, I guess he can use the money to buy lots of windows software for his Mac.

Well, I kinda feel the same way but dammit, there are times when I feel left out game-wise when my friends want me to play something and I'm like "I can't cause I have a Mac".

dejo
Mar 16, 2006, 12:57 AM
It's gonna need some video drivers to make it perform.

Gamers Beware! This is a HUGE factor for all those wanting to game with this breakthrough. It has been reported that XP is running on the Macs without any hardware acceleration.

tveric
Mar 16, 2006, 01:00 AM
No way could either one of us prove definitively one way or another if the images were Photoshopped... but I will make this promise: If this person claims the Windows on Mactel prize, I will personally eat crow right here on MacRumors.


I think you owe some bird-eating.

DOUGHNUT
Mar 16, 2006, 01:01 AM
Gamers Beware! This is a HUGE factor for all those wanting to game with this breakthrough. It has been reported that XP is running on the Macs without any hardware acceleration.

yeah, but with the method open now to everyone with intel mac's, people can work together to get the driver to work. The hackjob that is required should be minor.

DCapple
Mar 16, 2006, 01:01 AM
have one question though....did the one who won on the contest is the one who made the video i saw?....(i know its silly question..:confused: )

Backtothemac
Mar 16, 2006, 01:01 AM
Gamers Beware! This is a HUGE factor for all those wanting to game with this breakthrough. It has been reported that XP is running on the Macs without any hardware acceleration.

That is just a matter of time before that changes. There are x1600 drivers out there for windows, so it won't take long.

virus1
Mar 16, 2006, 01:01 AM
Is this a bad thing for Microsoft or Apple? I can't imagine since Microsoft doesn't sell computers and if Windows ran smoothly on a Mac, I'm sure Apple would sell more hardware.

Fishes,
narco.
its only bad for the user.

ie. viruses, slowness, stupidity, popups..

the casual microsoft windows.

mulletman13
Mar 16, 2006, 01:01 AM
Drivers will be found/written soon enough. Some company out there I bet is trying to get one out, just to be the first to do it.

Even if it takes a little longer, that'll give us enough time to configure and setup our windows partitions as we please :)

Mmm... I kindof also want a linux partition... :-D

tveric
Mar 16, 2006, 01:02 AM
It's for one reason, and one reason only. It ticks off people who want to know why anyone would run Windows on a Mac. It can't possibly involve anything practical, like a desire to cut down on the clutter of having two computers. That would make too much sense.

That's the best response I've seen to those jerkoffs yet. Bravo.:D

virus1
Mar 16, 2006, 01:02 AM
I think it will actually help Apple's marketshare considerably.

I think there are a large group of people who would like to buy Macs, but are concerned that their work or whatever will need them to use Windows. For these people, buying an Intel Mac that can boot windows if needed is a big safety net if they have any doubts that Mac OS X can handle their needs.

Also, there are people who do need to run Windows specific applications. Suddenly the value of an Intel Mac just went up considerably for these people.

arn
and eventually, they will be blown away by osx, and realize they don't need windows.

mulletman13
Mar 16, 2006, 01:02 AM
have one question though....did the one who won on the contest is the one who made the video i saw?....(i know its silly question..:confused: )

*BLINKS*:eek:

Yes :)

admanimal
Mar 16, 2006, 01:06 AM
I understand your point, but I just don't see the availability of Windows XP, the absolutely supreme gaming platform on personal computers without question, is going to help the already small and underwhelming native Mac OS X game market.


That I will agree with...I guess part of the question is whether the average or hardcore gamers buy a higher percentage of total games sold.

DOUGHNUT
Mar 16, 2006, 01:07 AM
and eventually, they will be blown away by osx, and realize they don't need windows.

I still need Windows to play Half-Life 2 and a buncha other games

JeffTL
Mar 16, 2006, 01:07 AM
I'm glad to see someone has finally gotten this working, even though I won't be buying an Intel Mac for a while now.

I have a triple boot on my Dell right now -- XP, 98, and Fedora Linux, though I am not sure the Linux is working right now. Multibooting isn't that inconvenient, really, and if this proves to be safe, I would seriously think about sticking Windows on an Intel Mac just to have it there for blue moon occasions and gaming, as the aforementioned Dell is starting to get a little old and I have no desire to buy another.

virus1
Mar 16, 2006, 01:08 AM
I still need Windows to play Half-Life 2 and a buncha other games
fair, but for the work (and everything else) purposes.


btw: I CAN NOT WAIT FOR THE INTEL IBOOKS! im ready.

nsknike
Mar 16, 2006, 01:09 AM
This is great news, but does not affect me right now as I don't have an Intel Mac yet. Also to every one that says you will get viruses. If people are smart enough to dual boot they are smart enough to know how to not get viruses. I used XP from the time it came out to last summer and never once did I get a virus, because I don't click on random links or download anything stupid. And I ran a virus scan of EVERYTHING I downloaded. Also you could just unplug your internet when you are using XP if you are that worried.

I want to be able to game with the same comp that I use daily.

Merom MacBook
Mar 16, 2006, 01:10 AM
Well, I kinda feel the same way but dammit, there are times when I feel left out game-wise when my friends want me to play something and I'm like "I can't cause I have a Mac".

Tell them, "Sorry, I don't play lame ass games."

mulletman13
Mar 16, 2006, 01:10 AM
All the people wanting to game...

Is the x1600 (or whatever it is) even capable of playing HL2 and other semi-demanding games?

VanNess
Mar 16, 2006, 01:11 AM
So what's the big deal? Apple already has a box that was designed from the ground up to run both Windows and the Mac OS. All you need to do is get your hands on one of these babies (http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac/stats/powermac_4400_200.html) and you're good to go, games and all. Well, it's not exactly dual-core, but it has two processors...

In any event, if running Windows on an Intel Mac was something Apple really wanted to happen, they would have designed it that way. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if one of the next OS updates (or Mac Intel firmware update) breaks it. Regardless of the oft-quoted Schiller remark, I can't see much of an upside for Apple and a lot of potential downsides (i.e., endless debates as to what was responsible for hosing the machine, OS X or Windows?). And there is still the yet-to-be-addressed issue of Microsoft's Virtual PC for the Mac, which seems to be in a state of suspended animation right now, but that doesn't mean MS doesn't have a vested interest in bringing it to the Intel Mac platform as the exclusive solution for running Windows (XP or Vista) on a Mac.

That said, I admire whoever got this to work. Nice bit of hacking - but I wouldn't count on the celebration going on for very long.

chasemac
Mar 16, 2006, 01:15 AM
:eek: :confused:

mulletman13
Mar 16, 2006, 01:15 AM
Another point I've been thinking of, is why would Microsoft care about this? They don't make computers, it's just more software for them to sell. As for an Apple update coming out in the near future to disable/break this... if that happens, there will always be a fix by hackers, etc.

Sortof like why OS X doesn't have serial numbers to mess around with, Apple knows that people will steal the OS no matter what, and find ways around activation and whatnot.

yg17
Mar 16, 2006, 01:16 AM
So what's the big deal? Apple already has a box that was designed from the ground up to run both Windows and the Mac OS. All you need to do is get your hands on one of these babies (http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac/stats/powermac_4400_200.html) and you're good to go, games and all. Well, it's not exactly dual-core, but it has two processors...

In any event, if running Windows on an Intel Mac was something Apple really wanted to happen, they would have designed it that way. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if one of the next OS updates (or Mac Intel firmware update) breaks it. Regardless of the oft-quoted Schiller remark, I can't see much of an upside for Apple and a lot of potential downsides (i.e., endless debates as to what was responsible for hosing the machine, OS X or Windows?). And there is still the yet-to-be-addressed issue of Microsoft's Virtual PC for the Mac, which seems to be in a state of suspended animation right now, but that doesn't mean MS doesn't have a vested interest in bringing it to the Intel Mac platform as the exclusive solution for running Windows (XP or Vista) on a Mac.

That said, I admire whoever got this to work. Nice bit of hacking - but I wouldn't count on the celebration going on for very long.

I don't think Apple is going to try to stop it in future updates. Running Windows only helps them, because there are a ton of people out there who would buy a Mac if they can run Windows....now they can.

Peace
Mar 16, 2006, 01:21 AM
This is a win-win for Microsoft and Apple judging by what people want to dual boot.The only legal way to dual boot now is with Windows on an Apple.

However I think the long term affects developerwise wont be truly known for another year since Apple and Microsoft both will be shifting to different stuff by then..Who knows what might happen.Apple could release an update to Tiger or Leopard that changes the EFI and thus puts a halt to the dual-boot..

In the near-mid term things look good for those wanting to use OSX and Windows on a Mac..I'm sure the video driver issue will be a non-issue within a week...

It will be quit interesting to see the first real benchmarks for both OS's..

Didn't one of the testers say his Mini was on par with a Dual 2.8 P4 ?

MacTruck
Mar 16, 2006, 01:25 AM
why would anyone buy a mac if they intended to use windows to run applications?


Oh jeez. 30,000 people say your nuts.

MacTruck
Mar 16, 2006, 01:28 AM
I think this will sell a lot of Macs to people that otherwise would stick with a PC.


This will not affect sales, or developers. Its a hack. When apple does this natively and they sell XP on their dual boot machines from the store then worry. Until then most people won't even attempt this, BUT I WILL!!

DOUGHNUT
Mar 16, 2006, 01:30 AM
All the people wanting to game...

Is the x1600 (or whatever it is) even capable of playing HL2 and other semi-demanding games?

yes, an Acer 8204 w/ 2.0ghz Core duo and x1600 has a 3dmark 05 result of 4157. My Dell desktop w/ 2.4ghz P4 and GeForce 6800 has an avg 3dmark of 3000. And that computer handles games like BattleField 2, Call of Duty 2, HL2 without any trouble.

Peace
Mar 16, 2006, 01:31 AM
This will not affect sales, or developers. Its a hack. When apple does this natively and they sell XP on their dual boot machines from the store then worry. Until then most people won't even attempt this, BUT I WILL!!

Multiply that by 10,000 and you have whats called a movement!!;)

dejo
Mar 16, 2006, 01:36 AM
Multiply that by 10,000 and you have whats called a movement!!;)

Upon hearing this news, I think I had a movement. ;)

kalisphoenix
Mar 16, 2006, 01:37 AM
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.

MacsomJRR
Mar 16, 2006, 01:38 AM
This is really exciting news! Oh boy oh boy:)

mozmac
Mar 16, 2006, 01:41 AM
Wow, I totally forgot about those old macs that had intel chips inside them. You guys remember Orange PC cards? I always thought it would be cool to have one, but me being merely 13 years old, it was pretty hard to convince my dad that I really needed one.

I remember the first day that I finally got my Centris and Performa in separate rooms networked together over AppleTalk...THAT was a glorious day. It looks like we've finally hit another glorious day. [Puts in Weezer's Green Album and turns on "Glorious Day."] Look how far we've come!!!!!!

And my two cents: I am thrilled about this. I only see good things coming out of this. I was forced to get Windows for work and must admit that some of its features are growing on me. I want both of them on one computer.

sunfast
Mar 16, 2006, 01:43 AM
Are we going to have contests for first blue screen of death, first virus, first major crash?

Elrond39
Mar 16, 2006, 01:45 AM
I think you owe some bird-eating.
Was the solution posted by the same guy/girl/hacker-person as the photos?

iMeowbot
Mar 16, 2006, 01:47 AM
Was the solution posted by the same guy/girl/hacker-person as the photos?
It was the same team.

Elrond39
Mar 16, 2006, 01:47 AM
Are we going to have contests for first blue screen of death, first virus, first major crash?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA:D :D :D

Elrond39
Mar 16, 2006, 01:47 AM
It was the same team.
Alright. Who's cooking the crow, then?
And, IJ Reilly, would you like some ketchup with that?

gammamonk
Mar 16, 2006, 01:48 AM
It's possible on certain Intel chipsets, but it's illegal, whereas running XP on an intel mac is not.
This is a little off topic, but I don't see what's so illegal about it. Yeah, I know, every version of OSX is an "upgrade." But so what. If you own a boxed copy of Tiger, why can't you load it on whatever computer you want?

kenzbud
Mar 16, 2006, 01:51 AM
Counter Strike :)

iMeowbot
Mar 16, 2006, 01:54 AM
This is a little off topic, but I don't see what's so illegal about it. Yeah, I know, every version of OSX is an "upgrade." But so what. If you own a boxed copy of Tiger, why can't you load it on whatever computer you want?
There are no boxed copies of the Intel version of OS X so far, so the only way to get it for now is to steal it from a Mac.

The other problem is that the license contains language about using the software only on Apple hardware, though people disagree if that part would really stick. In any event it certainly won't be supported.

aussie_geek
Mar 16, 2006, 01:54 AM
This is great news, but does not affect me right now as I don't have an Intel Mac yet. Also to every one that says you will get viruses. If people are smart enough to dual boot they are smart enough to know how to not get viruses. I used XP from the time it came out to last summer and never once did I get a virus, because I don't click on random links or download anything stupid. And I ran a virus scan of EVERYTHING I downloaded. Also you could just unplug your internet when you are using XP if you are that worried.

I want to be able to game with the same comp that I use daily.

Same here. It would be stupid to use your Window$ partition for anything other than gaming. I welcome the whole concept of being able to do all your normal 'Mac' stuff and then when you feel the need for some entertainment, reboot and you have a PC dual core gaming firecracker at your disposal. :D

Hardware video acceleration will be the next thing in the pipeline for these guru's to implement.


I can't believe there are some Mac fanboys on these forums (mind you I am one) that don't think this is a great concept :rolleyes: . All in all this is a great moment for Mac users. We can now have EVERYTHING on our Mac's!!! :)


aussie_geek

neeshman
Mar 16, 2006, 01:55 AM
How about a round of Macbook Pro's for eveyone! Just put it on Apple's tab!

Kelmon
Mar 16, 2006, 01:59 AM
There's a couple of issues here that I can think of and one of them's new:

1. How difficult is this going to be to achieve and, more importantly, how risky is it? Can I permanently kill my Mac with this or is there a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card that can be played should things go wrong?

2. Not and issue with an iMac or Mac Mini, but with a MacBook Pro will you be able to right-click without an external mouse connected?

I'm very happy at the news and the OS selector screen looks a bit swish. What would be nice is the ability to save the state of each OS when switching from one to the other but I guess that's a bit of a pipe dream and something best left to the virtualisation route. With another 6-months or so before I replace my PowerBook the future is looking very promising and I'll finally be able to scrap my ageing P4 system.

aussie_geek
Mar 16, 2006, 02:01 AM
Counter Strike :)

Counter Strike SOURCE!!!! :) :) :)

Battlefield 2 :) :) :)

Star Wars Battlefront ... Um yes it is already on Mac but there is never anyone playing it online :rolleyes:

Star Wars Galaxies>>>

the list goes on!!!


aussie_geek

Elrond39
Mar 16, 2006, 02:05 AM
The EA Sports NHL catalogue... hooray!

roach
Mar 16, 2006, 02:06 AM
Counter Strike SOURCE!!!! :) :) :)

Battlefield 2 :) :) :)

Star Wars Battlefront ... Um yes it is already on Mac but there is never anyone playing it online :rolleyes:

Star Wars Galaxies>>>

the list goes on!!!


aussie_geek

he he he...just finished playing battlefield 2 - european special force...see you in the field mac boy...between my iron site! I have SLI and battlefield 2 looks pretty!!

aussie_geek
Mar 16, 2006, 02:06 AM
There's a couple of issues here that I can think of and one of them's new:

1. How difficult is this going to be to achieve and, more importantly, how risky is it? Can I permanently kill my Mac with this or is there a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card that can be played should things go wrong?



Maybe we could use a firewire HD or when the intel PowerMac's are released we could just have another drive totally committed to running Window$.

As for the rest of the Mac (chips / boards / cards etc) I'm not sure - can anyone clarify if there is hardware modifications required to do this? Is there any flashing of eprom's here or opening up the Mac and re-soldering jumpers?

aussie_geek

DOUGHNUT
Mar 16, 2006, 02:09 AM
Counter Strike SOURCE!!!! :) :) :)

Battlefield 2 :) :) :)

Star Wars Battlefront ... Um yes it is already on Mac but there is never anyone playing it online :rolleyes:

Star Wars Galaxies>>>

the list goes on!!!


aussie_geek

here is what I wanna play: Star Wars Empire At War

As far as I know, all the modifications are done through software. No flashing any firmwares, or major modifications. If you screw up, just reinstall OS X and start over.

cycocelica
Mar 16, 2006, 02:31 AM
Wow I didn't think this would happen so quick. I want to see where this goes. I just hope it doesnt go negative.

skullsplitter
Mar 16, 2006, 02:36 AM
Brilliant work! I would help donate if it meant closer to a hardware release and would buy if it did.

rikers_mailbox
Mar 16, 2006, 02:42 AM
i think this is great. next time my dad wants a new PC, I can tell Apple h/w will boot into Windows too. Make mom happy too b/c she hates using the PC cause it's too complicated.

Windows booting eases 'switching' fears. I'm sure someone had already said it.

50548
Mar 16, 2006, 02:47 AM
I just hope this is not officially supported by Apple...otherwise, NO developer will care about porting anything to OS X...and why? Because you WILL have the choice of buying a crappy copy of XP for 100 bucks and running everything PC-friendly on it...

I don't see any reason for celebration, apart from gamers that feel like playing the latest Star Wars blablabla on their white Macs...

A sad day for the Mac community indeed.

petej
Mar 16, 2006, 02:58 AM
I welcome this news. Though not for the gaming potential that so many rant about.
This will now allow me to have 1 computer and run all the applications I want / need to. It is not as neat as running VPC but since VPC or equivalents have some way to go on the Mac/Intel platform then it is a good start.
I have several applications that I need to run that simply do not have Mac Versions. I also develop applications that have to run on Windows platform. I therefore do not care about whether there are native video drivers. Rebooting to switch between OS's is a pain but tolerable. Disabling the network adaptor in the windows device manager is simple.

My iMac purchase has just moved 1 step closer. All I need now is some more Universal Applications. Lets have those Photoshop on XP on iMac benchmarks.

Shamus
Mar 16, 2006, 03:01 AM
Personally, If I had an intel Mac at the moment I wouldn't waste the Hard-drive space installing Windows XP alongside Mac OS X. So far, any program that I have needed is available for Mac OS X anyway. Who would bother putting a 5 year-old OS on their Mac?

....for games maybe....but thats all....

And developers arent going to drop OS X just because Windows runs on Macintosh hardware. Mac users use Mac primatily because its their preferred OS. Developers know that there is a huge market out there using OS X who want software.

ReanimationLP
Mar 16, 2006, 03:04 AM
Half-Life 2. ;)

Sweetness. :D

(L)
Mar 16, 2006, 03:18 AM
This is a little off topic, but I don't see what's so illegal about it. Yeah, I know, every version of OSX is an "upgrade." But so what. If you own a boxed copy of Tiger, why can't you load it on whatever computer you want?

I see no problem so long as you own the disc, though it'll probably void any warranty or service. No problem whatsoever to use what you buy as you will and can without breaking other laws. But, there are a lot of people with hacked versions of OS X that never bought it in the first place...this is like if I, a mac user, just went out and stole a copy of OS X. That's what's wrong in this picture.

BlueRevolution
Mar 16, 2006, 03:20 AM
I went from a windows 98 box straight to my current power mac G5. I'd certainly welcome the ability to play all those games that neither computer can/could handle (needless to say, the 98 box is collecting dust).

if I wasn't a gamer, I wouldn't care... but I've played most of the recent Mac games out there and have enjoyed 7 of them enough to keep installed (plus Lemmings, but it's not exactly recent). the unending aisles of games to waste my hardearned money on... *drools*

this is not a bad thing at all. the only negative effect I can see is for the companies porting Mac games, since $60 for a 5 year old game will be a tough sell when you can play the same game on the same computer for $30, and have been able to for years.

and of course, as arn mentioned, it provides that extra safety net for us, Apple's noble ambassadors, to point out to potential Switchers.

so woo hoo.

c-Row
Mar 16, 2006, 03:22 AM
Ha! :D I decided that my current PC would be the last PC I would buy or upgrade before finally completely moving to Apple. Well, now that decision has become even easier.

Any word yet if the XP'ed MacBook Pro will support its Airport right out of the box under Windows?

(L)
Mar 16, 2006, 03:23 AM
I just hope this is not officially supported by Apple...otherwise, NO developer will care about porting anything to OS X...and why? Because you WILL have the choice of buying a crappy copy of XP for 100 bucks and running everything PC-friendly on it...

I don't see any reason for celebration, apart from gamers that feel like playing the latest Star Wars blablabla on their white Macs...

A sad day for the Mac community indeed.

Apple has said it wouldn't bother preventing users from booting Windows. I too think it would be bad for the Mac community if developers are discouraged from porting software to the Mac community. Perhaps Apple expects developers to release universal versions, which will certainly happen more. Perhaps Apple has taken the stupidity of the developers of Windows into account and has confidence they can be beaten with OS X somehow. Plus, radical hardware changes could always be in the works...some day, perhaps, a large change in hardware design will throw the ancient approach of Windows right out the window.

MacsRgr8
Mar 16, 2006, 03:24 AM
Half-Life 2. ;)

Sweetness. :D


Checking the date..... ok, too early for a huge April fool's ;)

Must admit after seeing the video footage of the XP-booted Mac last night (CET), I thought it was fake.
*foot-in-mouth* :o

Now we first need hacked drivers for the X1600. I sure hope that the Mac "ROM" on those grfx cards (still there in the MacIntels I assume??) don't spoil the whole show, otherwise DirectX could be a no-go for a long time (or flash the grfx card, making it unusable running Mac OS X -if you do that, you're totally bonkers), and thus no 3D gaming.

I'm very anxious to know!!!

:)

BollywooD
Mar 16, 2006, 03:33 AM
personally i think this is fantastic news!
I would love to be able to check the compatibilty of websites i build on windows and osx, on one computer. At the moment i do this (painfully) through VPC, or by checking on a PC up at the local library!

quick question: can you easily transfer files between partitions on a dual boot system? or would you need to burn to disk and transfer manually?

bmuyl
Mar 16, 2006, 03:35 AM
I need to use Unigraphics and Catia.
Will that solution allow to run some major CAD apps on mac book pro ?

derboy
Mar 16, 2006, 04:00 AM
I need to use Unigraphics and Catia.

Finally designers and engineers will be able to use a mac for solidworks, proE and all the stuff that you have to have a pc for. This is the real business good news, sorry gamers.

Everyone that this would benifit wanted this situation for ages. Even when IBM predicted chips that could emulate windows 2x faster, in thier crazy roadmap ages ago. Unless you have a reason to have to use a pc, then doesnt really affect mac users.

though, i dont think i'll bother with a little partition for mario kart or whatever...

monkeyandy
Mar 16, 2006, 04:10 AM
Personally, If I had an intel Mac at the moment I wouldn't waste the Hard-drive space installing Windows XP alongside Mac OS X. So far, any program that I have needed is available for Mac OS X anyway. Who would bother putting a 5 year-old OS on their Mac?

....for games maybe....but thats all....

And developers arent going to drop OS X just because Windows runs on Macintosh hardware. Mac users use Mac primatily because its their preferred OS. Developers know that there is a huge market out there using OS X who want software.

Some of us have jobs that require the use of XP. I am an ICT teacher. I hate PC's but have to teach kids to use them. I currently get by with Virtual PC on my iBook which is rubbish and slow. I want a nice new Intel iBook which will duel boot for games and programs such as Access and Publisher that I use in my lessons! :) Get a life! The world doesn't just revolve around OS X!

oingoboingo
Mar 16, 2006, 04:27 AM
Get a life! The world doesn't just revolve around OS X!

LOL! Take a look around chief. Which web site do you think you're on?

weg
Mar 16, 2006, 04:42 AM
I'd be interested in using OS X on a Sony Vaio- is anyone working on that angle?

Would be illegal, while the other way around (Windows on a Mac) is perfectly legal.

bmuyl
Mar 16, 2006, 04:53 AM
For major CAD apps, will there be any need for special graphic driver ?

macros
Mar 16, 2006, 05:02 AM
For major CAD apps, will there be any need for special graphic driver ?

I dont think so, because SolidWorks is running fine even on VPC only its really slow, (VPC does not have any hardware acceleration)

So in theory it sould be running great on those macs.

derboy
Mar 16, 2006, 05:07 AM
For major CAD apps, will there be any need for special graphic driver ?

i doubt it. Most programs use software rendering for the general environment, and then optimise if a card is available. So no need to have it but it would benifit from it.

Most of the dedicated rendering applications are mac native already. The CAD packages are not ported to mac because of the cost of translating the collosal maths based apps, which are quite specialised.

barstard
Mar 16, 2006, 05:09 AM
Yes. The contest looks like it has been won. And some of us get to use wiindows for some stuff. I tell you what, at least I will be able to use certain audio plugs that aren't available for my beloved Apple studio computers. No POS taking up space, one Mac running Pro Tools, one running Reason and one (the windows one) running Cubase or similar, with instruments going in to PT via Cubase or other for the plug-ins. Wow, I can't wait.:D

sjl
Mar 16, 2006, 05:10 AM
Some of us have jobs that require the use of XP. I am an ICT teacher. I hate PC's but have to teach kids to use them. I currently get by with Virtual PC on my iBook which is rubbish and slow. I want a nice new Intel iBook which will duel boot for games and programs such as Access and Publisher that I use in my lessons! :) Get a life! The world doesn't just revolve around OS X!
Dual boot for games? Yeah, I can see that.

For programs like Access and Publisher? Nope. For my money, I'd rather get a package like VMWare and run Windows in a virtual machine to gain access to those.

Sure, you lose a bit of performance, but you gain a much greater degree of flexibility. No longer do you have to choose one or the other.

Granted that VMWare hasn't announced a port of their software to OS X. In my mind, though, it's only a matter of time. There's probably a few other packages out there that do the same thing, for that matter, too.

mark88
Mar 16, 2006, 05:11 AM
Why is it everytime this topic comes up we have the same discussion over and over again, with people getting their knickers in a twist about the death of the mac software. It's pathetic.

deltrotter
Mar 16, 2006, 05:13 AM
I'm one of the ones who really needs to use XP inside of OS X at a decent pace. Does the winning of this competition make this more likely to happen? I.e. does it make it more possible if you see what I mean.

I use VirtualPC at the mo and it crawls. I am looking at upgrading to an Intel iMac, but have been waiting for the above.

Cheers

Del

mark88
Mar 16, 2006, 05:22 AM
LOL! Take a look around chief. Which web site do you think you're on?

Nevertheless, this blind faith and ignorance is not something to be proud of. So so many people here think OS X is just without flaw and that XP is so bad they can't understand why anyone uses it. Everyone is an OS X user simply waiting to break free of the Windows world....

Half these people haven't even used XP.

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 05:26 AM
I was one of the testers. It does NOT yet work on a 20" iMac. There's an issue with handling the framebuffer on the 20" output. When booting into Windows for the first time to run setup, the CSM is supposed to hang for about 2 and half minutes with no feedback. It never gets past this.

But the graphical boot screen is really nice, although it is offcentered on the 20" at this time.

Baldanzi
Mar 16, 2006, 05:27 AM
Could be a good thing for some of us Architects.

Like it or not Autocad is our industry standard for drafting - and they is no Mac version currently. Yes I know that Archicad and other Mac drafting programs write/read DWG files (but it's never 100% correct in my experience). I know lots of Architects that have small firms that go to the wintel machines because they HAVE TO use Autocad (lots of clients demand it now). I also know that many of these same guys would much prefer and all Mac office (easier to manage 10 macs without a full time IT guy than 10 wintel machines!). This could really help a lot.....I could image a small 10 person firm with a mix of 20" iMacs and Powermacs running Archicad, and one or two of those being dual boot with Autocad installations. Even better if it was not a dual-boot scenario and a VPC type thing!

(Us Architects are a pretty vain bunch - I think deep down inside we really just like Apple hardware 'cuz it just simply looks so much better!)

bmuyl
Mar 16, 2006, 05:33 AM
Will we be able to use same files from windows and mac osx on the hard drive ?
I mean access file we could need in both environnement from the two environnement (say excel...)

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 05:35 AM
Will we be able to use same files from windows and mac osx on the hard drive ?
I mean access file we could need in both environnement from the two environnement (say excel...)


If Windows can see Mac OS X Journaled partitions (which I don't think it can) then yes.

c-Row
Mar 16, 2006, 05:37 AM
Will we be able to use same files from windows and mac osx on the hard drive ?
I mean access file we could need in both environnement from the two environnement (say excel...)

I guess if you set up a FAT32 partition, you could use it to share files between both OS'.

iluang
Mar 16, 2006, 05:40 AM
I will never install Windows XP as a dual-boot option on my Mac. It should be confined to its case -- Microsoft Virtual PC or something else! But it is, however, a good news that more PC users might switch to Mac because of this. Some of my friend were thinking about switching, and they asked that can they boot Windows on the new Intel Macs. Maybe it is important for heavy XP users to have a XP in their computer -- after they press the power key.

dernhelm
Mar 16, 2006, 05:43 AM
I think their site has been hacked and bad photoshop jobs were placed on the front page. I maean look at that bear! Could it look more fake? The windows logo is practically floating off the screen! :p

Swinny
Mar 16, 2006, 05:47 AM
I can see the potential in this...We are looking at buying a cheap windows laptop in the near future as a test-bed for html, multimedia work etc and also to use a few non-Mac applications (a client uses Publisher a lot and its a pain to use in VPC)...now though, the option is to get a low-end intelMac and have the best of both worlds.

I dont think this is the kind of things thats going to really effect the general Mac/Windows balance...its just a nice-to-have for a few niche markets within the traditional Mac user-base.

barstard
Mar 16, 2006, 05:48 AM
I was one of the testers. It does NOT yet work on a 20" iMac. There's an issue with handling the framebuffer on the 20" output. When booting into Windows for the first time to run setup, the CSM is supposed to hang for about 2 and half minutes with no feedback. It never gets past this.

But the graphical boot screen is really nice, although it is offcentered on the 20" at this time.

Interesting. Hopefully this will quickly be resolved. Sure this is the first of a few issues which will be had, but I also expect them to be hastily repaired. I'll have to go and buy myself XP Pro.

barstard.

mspicklechunks
Mar 16, 2006, 05:50 AM
This is fantastic news and is just one more tick on the 'Pros' side of my Pros & Cons list for purchasing a MacBook Pro. Being a PC owner for the past 10+ years I'm looking forward to experiencing OS X and in particular taking advantage of what iLife has to offer.

Whilst a Mac will satisfy most of my software needs there are still a few PC apps that I need to access; boring things mostly like MYOB. Dual booting means I'll have everything I need and my partner will be happy as well because he'll be able to play Soldier of Fortune when we're on holiday.

In corp speak it's a win/win - whichever way you look at it. :)

reyesmac
Mar 16, 2006, 05:55 AM
I want to see if Apple sues or breaks this hack. I will be very disappointed if they do. Being able to boot to windows and mac sort of makes the higher price you pay for a mac more than worth it.

barstard
Mar 16, 2006, 05:57 AM
Bloody Hell! XP Pro at Officeworks is AUD$474.:mad:

What a rip.

Oh well, maybe home is enough for my needs. AUD$319. What a crock.

Either way it's expensive. But then, if I want it. Pay the price.:D

barstard.

MitchCumstein
Mar 16, 2006, 06:00 AM
This can only be a good thing for Apple and a bad thing for Microsoft.

First let me say it was inevitable. Even if dual-booting never happened at some point we'll see near-native speed using virtualization. Apple knows this. In fact they filed a patent describing how a user can switch between OSX, Windows, and Linux. Since Apple will not liscence OS X for PCs, their computers become the superset - the buying decision with the least amount of risk.

I'm a recent switcher to Macs from Windows even though I had been admiring OS X since it was first introduced. Like many, it was hard for me to switch because my work required me to use Windows-only programs. Last year's introduction of the mini made it easy for me to test the waters - dual-booting will have the same effect on the thousands of people on the fence.

Although there will be some downside (some Windows programs may not be developed for OSX) I think the upside is far greater. Like someone getting a taste of freedom for the first time, once they take OSX for a test drive they'll be hooked. I know I am.

While Microsoft will be able to sell more copies of Windows. It hurts them that a barrier to switching is crumbling. As an ex-employee of Microsoft I can tell you they spend an emormous amount of effort finding ways to keep your entrails wrapped around the Microsoft technology stack. This is not a good day for my ex-colleagues in Redmond.

Gordy
Mar 16, 2006, 06:02 AM
I was one of the testers. It does NOT yet work on a 20" iMac. There's an issue with handling the framebuffer on the 20" output. When booting into Windows for the first time to run setup, the CSM is supposed to hang for about 2 and half minutes with no feedback. It never gets past this.

But the graphical boot screen is really nice, although it is offcentered on the 20" at this time.


Out of interest how easy is the process of getting the solution installed?

Or are you not able to say yet?

:)

technicolor
Mar 16, 2006, 06:04 AM
I don't want to see developers drop OS X. But since Adobe is being a PITA at least I can run PSCS on my MacBook Pro for now (or at least hoping to).

Who removed my second post, ARGH!?
YOu dont need to dual boot to do that. It runs pretty damn good under rosetta.

Dagless
Mar 16, 2006, 06:07 AM
Nice! More reason for me to upgrade. can finally get rid of my hideous laptop PC.

technicolor
Mar 16, 2006, 06:09 AM
I think this news is effectively the death-knell for companies like Aspyr who have traditionally ported PC games across to the Mac. With Windows XP dual booting on a Mac, there would seem to be little to no incentive for Mac users to wait 6-12 months for a PC game port to appear on Mac OS X, along with the potential loss of performance that porting a game sometimes introduces.

There might still be a hard-core of Mac OS X users who might be willing to wait out the porting time and pay a premium price for a native OS X port, but from what I understand, the margins in the Mac OS X game porting market are fairly slim as they are. I can't see Mac OS X game porters surviving this new twist in the evolution of the platform.

Thanks for the games while they lasted guys...
Are you serious?
LMAO!

macros
Mar 16, 2006, 06:12 AM
Nevertheless, this blind faith and ignorance is not something to be proud of. So so many people here think OS X is just without flaw and that XP is so bad they can't understand why anyone uses it. Everyone is an OS X user simply waiting to break free of the Windows world....

Half these people haven't even used XP.

I have to agree, but this is pretty much a human nature. There always will be people like this.

I have discovered some problems with multitasking in OS X the other day, and was searching in google about it. All i could find was forum posts and articles saying how OS X multitasking is superior, and how XP sucks, but nobody really questions those claims.
Sorry for being off topic there.
XP on a mac in my opinion is good news, the more functionality for the end user - the better.

janstett
Mar 16, 2006, 06:14 AM
I'd be interested in using OS X on a Sony Vaio- is anyone working on that angle?

Yes, it's already been done, do a google on "Maxxuss". I have OS X running on a Gateway tower. The catch is driver support. It worked with everything except my nVidia video card (uses generic VESA instead limited to 1024x768) and sound card (but it worked with an old USB sound card I had lying around). Someone is working on nVidia support (MacVidia project) but they haven't posted an update in 2 months.

Detlev
Mar 16, 2006, 06:16 AM
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.
Don't expect it to remain a hack. I think going into this with the years of "secret" research on the Apple campus that they knew this would happen, planned on it, or at least expected it. They'd be foolish not too and would deserve the reduced development if they did not. Good grief it was one of the first things mentioned in these forums the day MacTels were announced.

As for developers your forgetting one key aspect: money. Mac users are such a small group and development is expensive. Given the option to write code once rather than reinventing it or rewriting it is an economics debate not to be confused with wants and desires. Developers are already dropping development and have been for years while others come on board. It's a natural progression. Am I expecting companies like Adobe, Intuit, or Microsoft to stop development tomorrow, no. As this develops I think it would foolish not to discuss it as I am sure their developers who are. Again, since day one of the Intel announcement users of many software have been asking if they can boot the PC version. If sales of Mac version software lag it can be expected that developers will at least slow development and possibly discontinue. Not tomorrow, but in the near future.

Off topic: does anyone know the sales numbers of retail versions of Tiger? How does it compare to previous versions?

janstett
Mar 16, 2006, 06:18 AM
I'm glad this finally happened. I'm looking forward to trying it myself. While it will eat precious disk space, it will give me an emergency parachute when I am using my MacBook Pro. And I think it will get my boss to dump his Powerbook and get a MacBook Pro, if he can now use just one laptop instead of two.

Eventually I still think I'd prefer Virtual PC (partitioning will be wasteful) but I like knowing I can do this, and that when I retire the MacBook in years to come I have the option of running Windows (or Linux) on it if I want.

Or, if XP can boot off of an external disk, maybe I'll keep a USB drive handy from which I can boot XP, and keep my internal drive untouched.

This is a win for me; I start a new job in 2 weeks, now I have a reason to bring my MacBook.

janstett
Mar 16, 2006, 06:25 AM
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!).

Oh come on! Where have all the industrial design fanboys gone? One of Apple's biggest advantages was the industrial design, not just of the Macs but the iPods. Now all of a sudden you guys are crawling up in the fetal position and sucking your thumbs, "It's all about OS X, it's all about OS X".

I've heard people say they would buy Apple hardware to run Windows and only Windows. Think about it -- no other laptop offers MagSafe or a slot loading DVD drive, or a battery with a charge indicator. If the MacBook costs in the same vicinity as a Dull or whatever else, and has these design features, why not buy it and load it up with XP instead of buying a Brand X notebook?

Personally I don't think I'd do it, but I can see where some people would. Heck my boss wouldn't shut up about the "elegant design" when he got his PowerBook -- well, now he can buy a MacBook and put XP on it.

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 06:32 AM
Out of interest how easy is the process of getting the solution installed?

Or are you not able to say yet?

:)


Since it's won now, I guess I can talk. The install requires a Windows XP PC, with which Windows is already installed. From here you use Nero Burning ROM to mix files from your XP SP2 CD, copy them to a new project, and add in some $OEM$ files and folders, and fix some of the files in i386. From here, you use xom.efi (which is the bootloader), and bless it in Terminal. Once it's blessed on startup you get a pretty nice selector, and you choose Windows. From here the CSM layer pauses for 2.5 Minutes while it does whatever its doing. Then you'll get into Windows Setup.

I should also mention at this time, you cannot reboot Windows. You need to shutdown. If you attempt rebooting it will hang at Windows is Shutting Down screen.

joelypolly
Mar 16, 2006, 06:32 AM
Don't expect it to remain a hack. I think going into this with the years of "secret" research on the Apple campus that they knew this would happen, planned on it, or at least expected it. They'd be foolish not too and would deserve the reduced development if they did not. Good grief it was one of the first things mentioned in these forums the day MacTels were announced.

As for developers your forgetting one key aspect: money. Mac users are such a small group and development is expensive. Given the option to write code once rather than reinventing it or rewriting it is an economics debate not to be confused with wants and desires. Developers are already dropping development and have been for years while others come on board. It's a natural progression. Am I expecting companies like Adobe, Intuit, or Microsoft to stop development tomorrow, no. As this develops I think it would foolish not to discuss it as I am sure their developers who are. Again, since day one of the Intel announcement users of many software have been asking if they can boot the PC version. If sales of Mac version software lag it can be expected that developers will at least slow development and possibly discontinue. Not tomorrow, but in the near future.

Off topic: does anyone know the sales numbers of retail versions of Tiger? How does it compare to previous versions?

While what you say does have some truth you are forgetting that while Mac sales are less than 5% its still a large enough market in the relevant industries e.g. the market for photoshop might be around 50/50 between Mac and PC some how I doubt that Adobe will drop photoshop for Mac. Also a lot of software on the Mac side are Mac only.

janstett
Mar 16, 2006, 06:35 AM
Are we going to have contests for first blue screen of death, first virus, first major crash?

If people FEAR OS X the way you FEAR Windows, nothing is ever going to change.

Open your mind. Let go of your fear.

c-Row
Mar 16, 2006, 06:36 AM
or a slot loading DVD drive, or a battery with a charge indicator

Slot loading DVD drives are built into Acer notebooks. Batteries with charge indicators are quite regular in our office - don't remember whether it was Dell or something else, though...

janstett
Mar 16, 2006, 06:43 AM
Personally, If I had an intel Mac at the moment I wouldn't waste the Hard-drive space installing Windows XP alongside Mac OS X. So far, any program that I have needed is available for Mac OS X anyway. Who would bother putting a 5 year-old OS on their Mac?

....for games maybe....but thats all....

Are you really this dense? You think there aren't professional applications that don't exist on the Mac? Just for starters, let's look at the gaping holes in the Office suite. Mac: Offce doesn't have Outlook, doesn't have Access, and what torpedoes it for me are the absence of MS Project and Visio. Just those two alone torpedo the Mac in any development house. Shall I continue?

Manatee
Mar 16, 2006, 06:45 AM
Congratulations to the winner! :)

I think this will sell a bit more Apple hardware. More importantly, people like myself who use OS X wherever possible, but make a living with Microsoft Visual Studio and SQL Server, will be able to live with one machine. (Ok, can anybody really live with one machine? Of course not! ;) )

janstett
Mar 16, 2006, 06:47 AM
quick question: can you easily transfer files between partitions on a dual boot system? or would you need to burn to disk and transfer manually?

Good question. Since OS X can read but not write to an NTFS partition, you would need to

(a) Use FAT32 for the XP install, or
(b) Use NTFS for the OS and keep a common FAT32 partition to share between OSX and XP.

sishaw
Mar 16, 2006, 06:48 AM
Slot loading DVD drives are built into Acer notebooks. Batteries with charge indicators are quite regular in our office - don't remember whether it was Dell or something else, though...

My old Toshiba satellite has a battery indicator.

Also, while we're de-bunking myths---the Windows BSOD was a Win98 thing. Under XP, it's more like OSX--individual program crashes/freezes are isolated to the program, which can be stopped separately using the task manager. I don't recall ever seeing a BSOD in the several years I had an XP computer.

Veldek
Mar 16, 2006, 06:51 AM
Since it's won now, I guess I can talk. The install requires a Windows XP PC, with which Windows is already installed. From here you use Nero Burning ROM to mix files from your XP SP2 CD, copy them to a new project, and add in some $OEM$ files and folders, and fix some of the files in i386. From here, you use xom.efi (which is the bootloader), and bless it in Terminal. Once it's blessed on startup you get a pretty nice selector, and you choose Windows. From here the CSM layer pauses for 2.5 Minutes while it does whatever its doing. Then you'll get into Windows Setup.

I should also mention at this time, you cannot reboot Windows. You need to shutdown. If you attempt rebooting it will hang at Windows is Shutting Down screen.Oh, this means it's still quite complicated and has a lot of room to improve...

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 06:54 AM
Oh, this means it's still quite complicated and has a lot of room to improve...



Actually it sounds tough, but it's really easy. There are step by step (really dumbed down) instructions for everything.

Veldek
Mar 16, 2006, 06:58 AM
Actually it sounds tough, but it's really easy. There are step by step (really dumbed down) instructions for everything.Perhaps. But you still need a PC with XP on it, which is contrary to the number 1 reason people want to have XP on a Mac...

janstett
Mar 16, 2006, 07:00 AM
Since it's won now, I guess I can talk.

Congratulations! Is it possible to install XP on an external USB drive?

Marx55
Mar 16, 2006, 07:04 AM
The ultimate machine should be capable of booting as:

Mac OS X
Linux
Windows

Wow!!! Great for University computing facilities!!! Apple will sell millions of new Mactels with such a feature!!!

And once people taste Mac OS X, they will not want Windoze ever!!!

janstett
Mar 16, 2006, 07:05 AM
Perhaps. But you still need a PC with XP on it, which is contrary to the number 1 reason people want to have XP on a Mac...

It sounds to me like you only need a PC running XP in order to doctor up the XP SP2 install CD. The same way you needed a Mac running OSX to doctor up the OS X install CD to run OS X on generic PCs. Once those images are made, once could theoretically get the ISO/DMG image from a hypothetical file sharing service and simply install. Theoretically.

DPazdanISU
Mar 16, 2006, 07:05 AM
Nevertheless, this blind faith and ignorance is not something to be proud of. So so many people here think OS X is just without flaw and that XP is so bad they can't understand why anyone uses it. Everyone is an OS X user simply waiting to break free of the Windows world....

Half these people haven't even used XP.

I have to agree, but this is pretty much a human nature. There always will be people like this.

I have discovered some problems with multitasking in OS X the other day, and was searching in google about it. All i could find was forum posts and articles saying how OS X multitasking is superior, and how XP sucks, but nobody really questions those claims.
Sorry for being off topic there.
XP on a mac in my opinion is good news, the more functionality for the end user - the better.

Ok, you guys are generalizing about the people that use Mac OSX. Most of the people that do speak of its superiority have and still DO use windows. I have been using windows since DOS and I am only 22 so you can see that I clearly grew up with computers around me. I used macs at school and liked certain things about them but Mac OSX gave me a reason to switch. As for problems with multitasking in OSX, there are some, I mean very very few (that I have seen). Last time I checked I can burn a dvd, have ten sites open, 10 widgets, ichat, imail, itunes playing music, and whatever else going on with no problems ever (osx does deal very well in my eyes with these tasks). On a windows machine I feel like after opening two things, I can't even get a third thing open without clicking it a few times b/c windows has ADD. Also it runs very sluggish when switching between apps, etc. I get frustrated trying to do these things on a windows machine. So, Macros and Mark88, I have to say on this topic, you guys probably have a similar approval rating to Bush and Cheney.

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 07:06 AM
Congratulations! Is it possible to install XP on an external USB drive?


I'm not sure this would work. Since xom.efi detects partitions that are MS-DOS on the main (internal) drive, it seems unlikely. But it doesn't sound like that would be hard to implement. Then you also have the issue of XP killing USB devices during install.

I was just chatting with Blanka (very nice person by the way), and he has sent me a modified xom.efi to debug and get this going on 20" iMacs. I'll fool around with it today and let you know if I get any more progress!

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 07:08 AM
It sounds to me like you only need a PC running XP in order to doctor up the XP SP2 install CD. The same way you needed a Mac running OSX to doctor up the OS X install CD to run OS X on generic PCs. Once those images are made, once could theoretically get the ISO/DMG image from a hypothetical file sharing service and simply install. Theoretically.


Yes you could definitely make an ISO of the CD. It comes out to a little over 550MB, so it's not very large either.

EDIT: fixed a typo

Digitalclips
Mar 16, 2006, 07:12 AM
Congratulations to the winners! I never had any doubts:)

I look forward to both dual OS boot (or multi-OS boot for that matter!) but also side by side XP in a Mac OS window for work in XP (Vista) and OS X with copy and paste between (a VPC app that works native speed).

I fully appreciate games and power-user PC apps etc. will be best in a single boot mode and this is great news for those situations but for office work, both at the same time would be great too - cake and eat it :).

My wife is a Realtor and we have to suffer owning three PCs (home, her office and a laptop) just because Sarasota's board of Realtors insists on making their multiple listing service (MLS) work on IE 6 only (should be against the Law!). As soon as we have a side by side situation (VPC is too slow we have tried this) where XP will only be used for IE 6 and all else in OS X we can donate three PCs to the Gate's Foundation :)

Keep up the good work!

janstett
Mar 16, 2006, 07:13 AM
I'm not sure this would work. Since xom.efi detects partitions that are MS-DOS on the main (internal) drive, it seems unlikely. But it doesn't sound like that would be hard to implement. Then you also have the issue of XP killing USB devices during install.

I was just chatting with Blanka (very nice person by the way), and he has sent me a modified xom.efi to debug and get this going on 20" iMacs. I'll fool around with it today and let you know if I get any more progress!

Thanks for the feedback, Steve. If they're still looking for testers, I have a MacBook Pro I'd be willing to test with. I'm willing to partition up the internal drive but I'd like to leave it alone (if possible) and give XP a nice big sandbox on an external drive. Firewire is also an option.

mark88
Mar 16, 2006, 07:17 AM
Ok, you guys are generalizing about the people that use Mac OSX. Most of the people that do speak of its superiority have and still DO use windows. So, Macros and Mark88, I have to say on this topic, you guys probably have a similar approval rating to Bush and Cheney.

I laugh everytime someone says 'I don't want no BSOD on my mac'. I have 4 machines running XP 24/7 for work and not once since using XP have I ever had a blue screen of anything. I've had malware and crashes a couple times but never BSOD.

I look at comments like these from certain mac users about windows and can only assume they have not used XP, they're just going off what they heard and stereotypes. Just because you use both, doesn't mean all the other Windows bashers have.

It's not hard to see why windows has such a bad rap when it comes to crashes and wot not, 90% of computers users use Windows, 5% use OS X. It's hardly surprising that you hear more about the problems with Windows than you do with OS X...

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 07:22 AM
Thanks for the feedback, Steve. If they're still looking for testers, I have a MacBook Pro I'd be willing to test with. I'm willing to partition up the internal drive but I'd like to leave it alone (if possible) and give XP a nice big sandbox on an external drive. Firewire is also an option.


Actually the files and instructions should be posted in a few hours. :)

Veldek
Mar 16, 2006, 07:23 AM
Yes you could definity make an ISO of the CD. It comes out to a little over 550MB, so it's not very large either.But wouldn't this render this thing illegal?

You must either have a PC to do it the right way, which is no option for everyone who wants to leave the PC away. Or you need this ISO file which you have to download via P2P. Or would it be allowed to download an "altered version of XP" if you own the original?

p0intblank
Mar 16, 2006, 07:25 AM
This is great news! Congrats to the winners... it obviously wasn't easy. :)

Next project: the ability to run Windows programs within OS X

Now that would be even greater!

peharri
Mar 16, 2006, 07:25 AM
could be a problem for the Mac OS. Who would develop for OSX if users can just use Windows on the same machine?


I understand that only a small minority of computer users will actually do this but it's still a concern for Apple.

I'm not really sure why this would happen. Unless:

1. The majority of Mac users decide to install Windows

and

2. Most of them spend most of their time in the Windows environment

then Windows software will never be attractive to the majority of Mac users.

The real benefit this hack has is that it will provide an environment for the few types of apps where "must use" users are a minority, or where the market is so small and the costs of porting so high, that a Mac version would never be on the cards anyway.

The real issues will come not with this, but with systems like Darwine, where, as they gain compatability, they'll provide compatability without requiring users to buy Windows, and without users feeling like they have to leave the Mac environment to run those Windows applications. Arguably, this is more of a problem than Windows XP being able to run.

Now, before there's mass panic (ahem, but reading some of the comments along the lines of "OMG OMG! It can't be true! It's unpossible that Macs can run Windows, The Steve would never allow it, and the world will come to an end" when the initial screenshots were released, you can see my justification) about the above, the real test will be if there's a signficant market for Mac OS X apps. If we see a market share of 20-30% in the near future, then most Windows developers will want to develop an OS X Native version of their applications (possibly even using Darwine to help) because if they don't, they're likely to lose 20% of their sales to the first OS X developer that comes up with a genuinely OS X friendly version. On the other hand, if Apple doesn't get out of the 3-10% bracket, then, well, you'll be lucky if they even test their apps against Darwine.

That could go either way. The fact is potential switchers now have the security of knowing that if the alien but desirable Mac OS X turns out not to work out for them, they'll be able to switch back to Windows XP for whatever the cost of XP is these days. And that should mean more switchers.

On the other hand, Apple's watchword was quality at a little higher price than the other manufacturers, and I seriously do not think they realise what a problem the IIG issue is. Saying "It's ok, because most Dells in that price range have the same thing" is a non-starter: many Dells in that price range have proper accelleration, and more to the point, "Same as a Dell, different Operating System" is not a competitive edge.

Regardless, this - dual booting - is a good thing for Apple as it provides real security for switchers. The wildcard is Darwine coupled with Apple's market share, not Genuine Windows.

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 07:26 AM
But wouldn't this render this thing illegal?

You must either have a PC to do it the right way, which is no option for everyone who wants to leave the PC away. Or you need this ISO file which you have to download via P2P. Or would it be allowed to download an "altered version of XP" when you own the original?

I think its just adding some files and hacking NTLDR so it reads those files (in $OEM$), so I don't think thats illegal. Then again, in order for it to be legal (because the ISO would contain files from the Windows CD), you'd need to get some method of ensuring people have a valid copy of XP. This is why you need a PC, they don't want to distributed pirated copies of Windows.

deadturtle
Mar 16, 2006, 07:33 AM
Glad to see its been done. Now I just have to find a 'tel Mac to test this on. I was reading engadget, and the comments there were far less civil than macrumors. It was amazing to say all the nay sayers screaming fake. I wonder what rock they will crawl under today? I understand that being skeptical, and sharing a point of view is essential to the health of any forum, but people were almost violent last night. Hopefully this will serve as a message, when the next big thing comes along, to just chill, have a little patience and see what comes down the pipe before screaming fake! fake! and then proceeding to blast anyone and anything that disagrees with your narrow point of view.

macros
Mar 16, 2006, 07:34 AM
... Last time I checked I can burn a dvd, have ten sites open, 10 widgets, ichat, imail, itunes playing music, and whatever else going on with no problems ever (osx does deal very well in my eyes with these tasks). On a windows machine I feel like after opening two things, I can't even get a third thing open without clicking it a few times b/c windows has ADD. Also it runs very sluggish when switching between apps, etc. I get frustrated trying to do these things on a windows machine....

I know what you are saying, that was also one of the reasons I have switched.
For normal use i think OS X is great, but for syuf like realtime video playback, or music performance, there is just no way to tell OS X to concentrate on one app and make other apps sluggish.
In windows I can just select higherst priority and the interface will go sluggish, but the software will play no matter what.
You know in your signature I can see you use a mac connected to a TV. Are you happy with video playback while having other apps open?
Having sayd that, I am in minority so and I still would choose mac for day to day things.. (Sorry for being off topic again :o )

DPazdanISU
Mar 16, 2006, 07:37 AM
But wouldn't this render this thing illegal?

You must either have a PC to do it the right way, which is no option for everyone who wants to leave the PC away. Or you need this ISO file which you have to download via P2P. Or would it be allowed to download an "altered version of XP" if you own the original?

I don't think it's illegal to create an ISO for personal use from your pc to your mac. You purchased the software so you can essentially do this. If you post that ISO all over a P2P then it's illegal. At least that's how I see it.

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 07:39 AM
I don't think it's illegal to create an ISO for personal use from your pc to your mac. You purchased the software so you can essentially do this. If you post that ISO all over a P2P then it's illegal. At least that's how I see it.


But he's talking about them offering an ISO download. This is illegal, yes.

I don't see the big deal about making a CD on your PC. If you don't have a PC, then you can use a friends or go to an Internet Cafe.

Photorun
Mar 16, 2006, 07:43 AM
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.

This was the best post EVER!!!

millar876
Mar 16, 2006, 07:47 AM
Gamers Beware! This is a HUGE factor for all those wanting to game with this breakthrough. It has been reported that XP is running on the Macs without any hardware acceleration.

maybe Im just being a bit dence, BUT couldnt you just go download the official ATI Catalyst, or nVidia Forceware graphics drivers for xp from the ATI/nVidia site to get some graphics drivers. OR even 3rd party ones like Detenator drivers or Omega-drivers, heck the WINfox driver cd that came with my Winfox 6800GT (256MB GDDR3 @ 1GHz) is still in a sealed envelope, shrinkwrapped to the instruction book.

in summary - WHY wouldnt there be video drivers?

Veldek
Mar 16, 2006, 07:51 AM
But he's talking about them offering an ISO download. This is illegal, yes.

I don't see the big deal about making a CD on your PC. If you don't have a PC, then you can use a friends or go to an Internet Cafe.Sorry, but there's no difference between getting these files from a P2P network or getting them from an internet café nor from a friend. It would be illegal either way as long as it's not your OWN disc.

g.x
Mar 16, 2006, 07:51 AM
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."

AndyR
Mar 16, 2006, 07:52 AM
Since it's won now, I guess I can talk. The install requires a Windows XP PC, with which Windows is already installed.

Thats interesting because if your using a copy of XP that is already installed and being used, in order to stay within the licensing agreements once you have in on your Mac you'll have to wipe it of the PC, else you'd have two copies of XP running from the same key.

Whether this would bother you or not I dont know as most of the people I know who run XP have never bought it anyway :rolleyes:

Anyway, well done to the chaps for getting this done! Amazes me how quick its happened. Just want MS to come out with an Intel version of VPC and I'll order myself an iMac :)

Veldek
Mar 16, 2006, 07:54 AM
Thats interesting because if your using a copy of XP that is already installed and being used, in order to stay within the licensing agreements once you have in on your Mac your have to wipe it of the PC, else you'd have two copies of XP running from the same key.

Whether this would bother you or not I dont know as most of the peopel I know who run XP have never bought it anyway :rolleyes:This is another point one has to consider... Seems to me, although there IS a solution, there might be some serious problems with it.

50548
Mar 16, 2006, 07:56 AM
Nevertheless, this blind faith and ignorance is not something to be proud of. So so many people here think OS X is just without flaw and that XP is so bad they can't understand why anyone uses it. Everyone is an OS X user simply waiting to break free of the Windows world....

Half these people haven't even used XP.

Sorry, but you have no clue whatsoever on why people are worried about this. It's not "blind faith" or "ignorance", it's about manifesting concern in terms of the future environment for software development on Macs.

If you are company "considering" the development of a OS X-native program, you will think TWICE, if not THRICE, to make such a bold move. Again, I just hope that Apple does NOT support that crappy dual-boot thing officially...otherwise any prospective company won't even bother about Universal binaries or XCode...mark my words.

Veldek
Mar 16, 2006, 07:58 AM
If you are company "considering" the development of a OS X-native program, you will think TWICE, if not THRICE, to make such a bold move. Again, I just hope that Apple does NOT support that crappy dual-boot thing officially...otherwise any prospective company won't even bother about Universal binaries or XCode...mark my words.I think that's why they won't support it in fact.

BTW, is "thrice" an actual word? :confused:

50548
Mar 16, 2006, 08:00 AM
Since it's won now, I guess I can talk. The install requires a Windows XP PC, with which Windows is already installed. From here you use Nero Burning ROM to mix files from your XP SP2 CD, copy them to a new project, and add in some $OEM$ files and folders, and fix some of the files in i386. From here, you use xom.efi (which is the bootloader), and bless it in Terminal. Once it's blessed on startup you get a pretty nice selector, and you choose Windows. From here the CSM layer pauses for 2.5 Minutes while it does whatever its doing. Then you'll get into Windows Setup.

I should also mention at this time, you cannot reboot Windows. You need to shutdown. If you attempt rebooting it will hang at Windows is Shutting Down screen.

Ah, I feel better now...it's great to know it's complex as hell...thanks for the effort but I will stick to my pure OS X...APPLE FOREVER..!

Counter
Mar 16, 2006, 08:02 AM
I like the choice made of which arrow to press to select XP.

The DOWN arrow.

Although I think it could be improved. Pressing down once should get you OS9. Pressing down again should get you a question mark and the wording "are you sure you want to go this low". Pressing down another 5 times would result in similar messages.

Pressing down a 6th time would get you XP.

Pressing return then would result in a blue screen.

A pause would occur here.

6 or 7 seconds pass, it seems like a lifetime....

Then, at full blast, in Vicki (35 year old female, North American English MacinTalk) voice your speakers scream "**** YOU I'M BOOTING OSX".

And OSX boots.

50548
Mar 16, 2006, 08:02 AM
I think that's why they won't support it in fact.

BTW, is "thrice" an actual word? :confused:

hehe, I know someone would ask that...from the dictionary:

thrice |?r?s| adverb chiefly formal poetic/literary three times : a dose of 25 mg thrice daily.

mark88
Mar 16, 2006, 08:05 AM
Sorry, but you have no clue whatsoever on why people are worried about this. It's not "blind faith" or "ignorance", it's about manifesting concern in terms of the future environment for software development on Macs.

If you are company "considering" the development of a OS X-native program, you will think TWICE, if not THRICE, to make such a bold move. Again, I just hope that Apple does NOT support that crappy dual-boot thing officially...otherwise any prospective company won't even bother about Universal binaries or XCode...mark my words.

What a silly POV. If your argument is true, why do people even bother developing for the mac platform in the first place?

After a few months of dual booting, VPC8, VMWARE or whatever else. I'll be happy to pick this thread back up and say "hey look, people are still developing software for OS X".....

I actually think mac developers will be insulted that you think they are so spineless.

milo
Mar 16, 2006, 08:08 AM
could be a problem for the Mac OS. Who would develop for OSX if users can just use Windows on the same machine?

Developers who want to keep selling to people who won't ever do this, and people who will do this but still will buy the mac version over the windows version. And who wouldn't do that?

If anything, this will put more pressure on developers to do simultaneous release or close to it.

Don't forget, you have to actually reboot the machine to run windows. Telling a user "just run the windoze version" is still a kludge solution. That may change when we see VPC or WINE running at native speeds.

very few people who want to run dual OS's are actually going hack around in their computer to do it.

Come on, very few people want to run dual os's. And they're hacking around to do it already. It's not like it's a mainstream thing, this is WAY more appealing than running windoze and linux to the mainstream user.

Was the solution posted by the same guy/girl/hacker-person as the photos?

Absolutely. Were you living under a rock? When the video was posted, the guy in charge of the contest posted that he had been in touch with the team and thought it was likely the contest was over.

I want to see if Apple sues or breaks this hack.

That would be surprising considering Apple has already said they're fine with it. Not to mention that there's nothing remotely illegal about it.

My old Toshiba satellite has a battery indicator.

Also, while we're de-bunking myths---the Windows BSOD was a Win98 thing. Under XP, it's more like OSX--individual program crashes/freezes are isolated to the program, which can be stopped separately using the task manager.

I've had full system crashes in XP. And I'm pretty sure the screen still goes blue.

Perhaps. But you still need a PC with XP on it, which is contrary to the number 1 reason people want to have XP on a Mac...

Until someone just makes an install DVD and puts it on torrents and newsgroups. Which of course would be illegal and bad. Bad hacker! Or just a patch that patches an existing XP install disk, which is much more legal.

If you are company "considering" the development of a OS X-native program, you will think TWICE, if not THRICE, to make such a bold move.

So the big loss to the Apple community...is apps that already aren't available for mac? "We weren't going to do an OSX version...but now we're REALLY not going to do one!"

kerbawya
Mar 16, 2006, 08:10 AM
...not once since using XP have I ever had a blue screen of anything...I look at comments like these from certain mac users about windows and can only assume they have not used XP...
Yea, that must be it... :confused:
All I can say is good luck with that...

50548
Mar 16, 2006, 08:14 AM
What a silly POV. If your argument is true, why do people even bother developing for the mac platform in the first place?

After a few months of dual booting, VPC8, VMWARE or whatever else. I'll be happy to pick this thread back up and say "hey look, people are still developing software for OS X".....

I actually think mac developers will be insulted that you think they are so spineless.

Is "spine" another word for "business"?

I am talking about developers that COULD be porting things to Mac, and this includes prospective business software and games...if Apple says: "No problem, we do Windows too, just install a legacy XP CD", what the hell is the appeal for a OS X version of AutoCAD (that has been seriously considered for the last months)? NONE.

People developed for Mac OS because it represented a DIFFERENT PLATFORM, with DIFFERENT AUDIENCE and DIFFERENT HARDWARE. Never had we such quick and easy solutions for running PC software. Even Macs that had x86 boards represented a costly niche market, with add-on items and so on.

If all goes well, soon we'll be seeing WinOnMac packages for just 50 bucks...Aspyr will be just one of the first companies going the way of the dodo...and Autodesk will OBVIOUSLY pink-slip any future porting plans...after all, WHY BOTHER?

freeny
Mar 16, 2006, 08:17 AM
It's gonna need some video drivers to make it perform.
Didnt you swear this was a fake a thread or two ago?:rolleyes:

iSee
Mar 16, 2006, 08:19 AM
Perhaps. But you still need a PC with XP on it, which is contrary to the number 1 reason people want to have XP on a Mac...

Yeah, but now that you can install XP on your Mac and get it off there. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Sunrunner
Mar 16, 2006, 08:19 AM
Pretty kol..
but what about if a user is working on Mac Only based programs and want to tranfer stuff from Windows only files or something? Will people have the availability to run both OS' at the same time.. like have one account under windows and another under OSX ?
Maybe that could be taken into consideration?


While Windoze, being the retarded OS that it is, cannot see HFS partitions, Mac OS can. Thusly, getting files between the two should be an easy copy back and forth (in the Mac OS only though). Not a big deal at all.

Mikey Mike
Mar 16, 2006, 08:20 AM
Now can anyone out there make Win XP & Linux spin around like Fast User Switching with Shared Drives:) That'll be cool, but, maybe not too far away:eek:

Veldek
Mar 16, 2006, 08:20 AM
I don't see the big deal about making a CD on your PC. Hmm, here's another idea. Don't know if this would work though.

Could you do the things you need to do for this install with an install via VPC? So if you have a G5 Mac with VPC, could you do these things (slowly) and get yourself a disc that you can use to install XP on your MacTel?

virus1
Mar 16, 2006, 08:22 AM
Hell just froze over!
:eek: :confused:
no, heaven just installed a self destruct button

Veldek
Mar 16, 2006, 08:22 AM
Yeah, but now that you can install XP on your Mac and get it off there. Boy you must be really dense. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:I don't think I am but I think you missed the point. Of course there are some that can use their existing PCs but there might also be the folks who don't have a PC yet and still like to have XP on their Mac.

kerbawya
Mar 16, 2006, 08:23 AM
Now can anyone out there make Win XP & Linux spin around like Fast User Switching with Shared Drives:) That'll be cool, but, maybe not too far away:eek:
I was just dreaming about that as well! :eek:

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 08:26 AM
Thats interesting because if your using a copy of XP that is already installed and being used, in order to stay within the licensing agreements once you have in on your Mac you'll have to wipe it of the PC, else you'd have two copies of XP running from the same key.

Whether this would bother you or not I dont know as most of the people I know who run XP have never bought it anyway :rolleyes:

Anyway, well done to the chaps for getting this done! Amazes me how quick its happened. Just want MS to come out with an Intel version of VPC and I'll order myself an iMac :)


Actually I have a Sony MCE PC and I just bought a copy of Windows XP Pro about two months ago.

Sorry, but there's no difference between getting these files from a P2P network or getting them from an internet café nor from a friend. It would be illegal either way as long as it's not your OWN disc.

No, no I meant using your Windows CD, you can go to a friends computer to use Nero Burning ROM to make your install CD.

Guys, I'm not a pirate.

thegreatunknown
Mar 16, 2006, 08:27 AM
why why WHY WHY. I don't use windows for a reason. why this?? why introduce terrible ***** to our precious lives. ack!

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 08:27 AM
Hmm, here's another idea. Don't know if this would work though.

Could you do the things you need to do for this install with an install via VPC? So if you have a G5 Mac with VPC, could you do these things (slowly) and get yourself a disc that you can use to install XP on your MacTel?


If Virtual PC supports CD burning, yeah, I don't see why that wouldn't work.

Mikey Mike
Mar 16, 2006, 08:28 AM
I was just dreaming about that as well! :eek:

Well lets put up $100 bucks and see what happens :)

Great minds think alike :)

virus1
Mar 16, 2006, 08:28 AM
I actually think mac developers will be insulted that you think they are so spineless.
well he is actually saying they aren't. he is just calling them stupid.

Veldek
Mar 16, 2006, 08:29 AM
No, no I meant using your Windows CD, you can go to a friends computer to use Nero Burning ROM to make your install CD.

Guys, I'm not a pirate.Ah yes, this is a possibility. I didn't mean to sound like you were supporting piracy. I just thought that these were some points to consider.

virus1
Mar 16, 2006, 08:29 AM
no, heaven just installed a self destruct button
better yet, heaven just got a new window into hell

kerbawya
Mar 16, 2006, 08:30 AM
Actually I have a Sony MCE PC...
It's not in his sig!!
DON'T BELIEVE HIM!!!
NO APPLE COMPUTER WILL EVER BOOT WINDOWS!! MUHAHAHA

[god i don't want to study...:( ]

iSee
Mar 16, 2006, 08:30 AM
I don't think I am but I think you missed the point. Of course there are some that can use their existing PCs but there might also be the folks who don't have a PC yet and still like to have XP on their Mac.

Sorry, I was just kidding--a little circular logic humor. Well, fortunately I don't make a living as a comedian :o :) :) :)

virus1
Mar 16, 2006, 08:32 AM
Now can anyone out there make Win XP & Linux spin around like Fast User Switching with Shared Drives:) That'll be cool, but, maybe not too far away:eek:
i think they were talking about intel creating a chip that can run two os's at once. that would be cool, but without that chip, i doubt it could work.

kerbawya
Mar 16, 2006, 08:32 AM
Well lets put up $100 bucks and see what happens :)

Great minds think alike :)
Can I borrow a $100?...:(

weg
Mar 16, 2006, 08:33 AM
Developers who want to keep selling to people who won't ever do this, and people who will do this but still will buy the mac version over the windows version. And who wouldn't do that?

If anything, this will put more pressure on developers to do simultaneous release or close to it.


Totally agree.. I can imagine that there are even people who'd say to themselves "Ok, I'll run a pirated copy of Software X for Windows until they release the Mac version.. no way I'm going to pay twice".

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 08:34 AM
It's not in his sig!!
DON'T BELIEVE HIM!!!
NO APPLE COMPUTER WILL EVER BOOT WINDOWS!! MUHAHAHA

[god i don't want to study...:( ]


It's not sig worthy ;)

weg
Mar 16, 2006, 08:35 AM
why why WHY WHY. I don't use windows for a reason. why this?? why introduce terrible ***** to our precious lives. ack!

Nobody forces you to install Windows on your Mac.

mark88
Mar 16, 2006, 08:36 AM
Is "spine" another word for "business"?

So back to my question, if what you're saying is true. Why is ANY BUSINESS developing solely for OS X? You're basically saying these people are "business-less"...?


I am talking about developers that COULD be porting things to Mac, and this includes prospective business software and games...if Apple says: "No problem, we do Windows too, just install a legacy XP CD", what the hell is the appeal for a OS X version of AutoCAD (that has been seriously considered for the last months)? NONE.

If you expect me to believe that Adobe are gonna turn round and say "hey, we're not making anything for OS X anymore, if you wanna use our software. Download this bootloader, hack around a bit, buy a copy of windows, install it on your mac. Everytime you need to run our software, simply restart your machine and run windows, then launch our apps. What could be simpler!!!".....then I think you're havin' a laugh.

pianodude123
Mar 16, 2006, 08:38 AM
Woooooooo!!!!!!!!!


yessss bing it on!!!!!!


XP on a mac

makes me crave that future Powermac.... mmmm

is that sarcasm?

DeathChill
Mar 16, 2006, 08:39 AM
This makes me laugh. First off, the Mac's don't use a specialized Mac only firmware for their graphics cards. They use one that supports UGA with a tiny bit of VGA support. UGA is just the next step after VGA and is NOT Mac specific.

As well, does booting Linux stop developers from creating Windows applications? This won't change anything for developers, except that they can more easily make multiple ports of their programs without lugging around two machines.

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 08:39 AM
I can't seem to find out where I'd find this, so if anyone knows please let me know. Where can I find a device dump tree log? I need to get the dump tree of the graphics card. The EFI shell doesn't want to write to a log, so entering
dh -v > dhv.txt
into the EFI shell gives me what I want but doesn't write to a log.

As an update to getting the 20" iMac going, I've been working inside the console here changing the scanline size and Video card size around. So far I've had a little luck in getting a blue flash, but it doesn't go anywhere. What I want to find out is the scanline size, and the linear framebuffer on the 20" iMac.

iSee
Mar 16, 2006, 08:40 AM
So, what does it take to do this legally? (Come, on, let's not be pirates, OK? :) )

You've definitely got to have a licensed and otherwise unused copy of Windows XP floating around. However, isn't it true that you can't (legally) use the OEM versions that typically come with a PC on a different PC?

I guess I'd have to go home and read the EULA to find out. (which I'm not going to do)

If that's true, I'd have to go out and buy a ridiculously expenside full retail version of XP (I'd need Pro for my work)--which costs ~$300! :eek:

Maybe I'll read that EULA after all...

Mikey Mike
Mar 16, 2006, 08:42 AM
i think they were talking about intel creating a chip that can run two os's at once. that would be cool, but without that chip, i doubt it could work.

Just thinking of the future here, one not very far away at all. Think of what a Quad Dual Core could do with the talented people out there. Intel Macs have not been out long and dual boot has already happened from a simple request on the net...

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 08:43 AM
If that's true, I'd have to go out and buy a ridiculously expenside full retail version of XP (I'd need Pro for my work)--which costs ~$300! :eek:


That's what I spent. Of course it can be found for cheaper online.

nik002
Mar 16, 2006, 08:43 AM
I know what you are saying, that was also one of the reasons I have switched.
For normal use i think OS X is great, but for syuf like realtime video playback, or music performance, there is just no way to tell OS X to concentrate on one app and make other apps sluggish.
In windows I can just select higherst priority and the interface will go sluggish, but the software will play no matter what.
You know in your signature I can see you use a mac connected to a TV. Are you happy with video playback while having other apps open?
Having sayd that, I am in minority so and I still would choose mac for day to day things.. (Sorry for being off topic again :o )

You should know that OsX is based over a BSD Unix system.
Every Unix system has a set of commands called nice and renice that allows you to set custom priorities of processes.
However this way is not extremely easy, but OsX does not provide an interface just because its scheduler is good enough for the average user.

Anyway, you can always try a program called Renicer (from northernsoftworks.com) that set priorities using the nice and renice commands:
it has a visual interface and it's a lot more powerful than the Windows priority setting.

Another thing: by the way, the nice command is more effective than Windows priority handler, and allows a very fine tuning.

Enjoy.

Detlev
Mar 16, 2006, 08:43 AM
no, heaven just installed a self destruct button
Actually it was the Ctrl-Alt-Del key combination. :D

Mikey Mike
Mar 16, 2006, 08:48 AM
Can I borrow a $100?...:(

LOL what's someone with a dual G4 & 20" Apple LCD doing asking to borrow $100... Hey I'm still using a 533MHz G4 Tower:)

Yeh time for an upgrade, sounds like I might wait for a Intel Power Mac now!

glassbathroom
Mar 16, 2006, 08:53 AM
what the hell is the appeal for a OS X version of AutoCAD (that has been seriously considered for the last months)? NONE.


Hey BRLawyer,

Have you heard anything about Autocad coming out on OSX? Last I heard they had a survey out to any interested parties back in 2003. I have heard nothing since.

I really hope it happens. Personally I don't think this will dual booting will change their mind either way.

Mikey Mike
Mar 16, 2006, 08:54 AM
That's what I spent. Of course it can be found for cheaper online.

If you're buying a new Intel Mac then I guess you're eligable for an OEM version of XPP:D

AidenShaw
Mar 16, 2006, 08:58 AM
If Virtual PC supports CD burning, yeah, I don't see why that wouldn't work.
Still not legal, though.

You might also find that Activation will help keep you honest - the copy of Windows will ask to be activated, and Microsoft will know that you're stealing from them.

tdar
Mar 16, 2006, 08:58 AM
If you're buying a new Intel Mac then I guess you're eligable for an OEM version of XPP:D

in fact that's true....most OEM sellers have concluded that the OEM rules require you to buy "any hardware" as the entry to buying an OEM licence for windows....a Imac is hardware! But remember the hardware and the OEM licence must be on the same invoice...do you think that Apple is going to sell XP OEM?

balamw
Mar 16, 2006, 08:58 AM
This is great news! Congrats to the winners... it obviously wasn't easy. :)

Next project: the ability to run Windows programs within OS X

Now that would be even greater!
But that's been done for a while with Darwine (http://darwine.opendarwin.org/) and Q (http://www.kberg.ch/q/). Running Windows on bare metal has much higher potential for tasks where full performance and compatibility are required.

Congrats to narf and blanka!

B

iSee
Mar 16, 2006, 08:58 AM
That's what I spent. Of course it can be found for cheaper online.

Oh, well. It's cheaper than a whole additional non-Apple laptop. (Side question: are those online versions of XP for around $150 for real, unrestricted license versions?)

Seriously, my next computer was going to have to be a non-Apple laptop--I love Macs & OS X, but to make a living I need to run Windows, and my current one is dying (usable if you type softly :( ). I was going to make do with by old iBook and separate Windows box.

But now I get to order a beautiful new MBP :D :D :D .

ampd
Mar 16, 2006, 08:59 AM
I am happy to hear that someone has finally been able to do this as it opens doors for many users. After using windows for my entire life up until this point I personally dont see the need to dual boot Mac OS X and any other OS especially windows. I feel that dual booting is just one more hassle I have to deal with on boot and also that I tend to favor one OS over the other. Dual booting to me is a waste of space. However there is plenty of users that need windows for their jobs and also want to be able to use OS X as their main OS. Its all user preference and the requirements of a certain OS for jobs, school, etc. I just dont want developers to drop the OS or as dvorak and some other articles stated that apple will totally switch to windows. I believe that if mac users were offered the choice to have OS X and Windows dual booted off the shelf that this could actually benifit apple as I believe users will be able to compare both operating systems and notice that OS X is superior. :)

j-a-x
Mar 16, 2006, 09:01 AM
I knew it would happen!!

AidenShaw
Mar 16, 2006, 09:02 AM
i think they were talking about intel creating a chip that can run two os's at once. that would be cool, but without that chip, i doubt it could work.
This is exactly what the VT (Virtualization Technology) in Yonah and other Intel chips is for.

To oversimplify - it puts the "Virtual PC" layer in the silicon itself, so that with the help of some extra "drivers" the chip could simultaneously run OSX, Windows, Linux and Solaris.

balamw
Mar 16, 2006, 09:02 AM
If you're buying a new Intel Mac then I guess you're eligable for an OEM version of XPP:D

Or just buy some hardware with the OEM XP CD, I think various places "suggest" a $1.99 power cord. ;) As long as you're only planning to to "bare metal" installs OEM CD's are just fine.

B

tdar
Mar 16, 2006, 09:05 AM
Oh, well. It's cheaper than a whole additional non-Apple laptop. (Side question: are those online versions of XP for around $150 for real, unrestricted license versions?)

Seriously, my next computer was going to have to be a non-Apple laptop--I love Macs & OS X, but to make a living I need to run Windows, and my current one is dying (usable if you type softly :( ). I was going to make do with by old iBook and separate Windows box.

But now I get to order a beautiful new MBP :D :D :D .

If you are willing to run OEM code you can find XP Pro online for around $95

Mikey Mike
Mar 16, 2006, 09:06 AM
in fact that's true....most OEM sellers have concluded that the OEM rules require you to buy "any hardware" as the entry to buying an OEM licence for windows....a Imac is hardware! But remember the hardware and the OEM licence must be on the same invoice...do you think that Apple is going to sell XP OEM?

I know, I'm a reseller :) And yes I can put an iMac Intel and an OEM of XPP on one invoice no problem. MS licences say with any new hardware, OEM MS wireless mouse with that:)

tdar
Mar 16, 2006, 09:06 AM
Or just buy some hardware with the OEM XP CD, I think various places "suggest" a $1.99 power cord. ;) As long as you're only planning to to "bare metal" installs OEM CD's are just fine.

B

I had forgotten that....that's why they say "any hardware"....

AidenShaw
Mar 16, 2006, 09:07 AM
Or just buy some hardware with the OEM XP CD, I think various places "suggest" a $1.99 power cord. ;) As long as you're only planning to to "bare metal" installs OEM CD's are just fine.

B
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16837102059

And before the expected whining chorus of "but that's XP Home, I need Pro" appears, it's really unlikely that many people who occasionally dual-boot into XP will need any of the added features in Pro. If they do, XP Pro OEM is $40 more.

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 09:07 AM
Still not legal, though.

You might also find that Activation will help keep you honest - the copy of Windows will ask to be activated, and Microsoft will know that you're stealing from them.



How is using Virtual PC to write to a CD not legal? Assuming that he has 1 copy of XP on Virtual PC, and a seperate copy for installing to dual boot.

YoNeX
Mar 16, 2006, 09:11 AM
I know NO one will do this, but I remember somewhere in the XP manuals it says you MUST put the XP sticker (the one with all the license information) somewhere on the computer that you are installing XP to. Now seriously, who would do this? :D

Here is my opinion (whether legit or not) on the images of XP (.iso). Microsoft could care less if you make copies of the XP. But, as long as you buy a license for it, it should be perfectly acceptable. That is why the XP cd says "Do not make illegal duplicates." So its ok to make copies, as long as you do it legally.

Also, for those students out there, http://www.msdnaa.net/search/SchoolSearch.aspx?/ Search for your schools, and email the admin to get your login. This should give you EXCELLENT discount off of XP. If you are lucky, even free XP license!

dornoforpyros
Mar 16, 2006, 09:18 AM
eh as little as this interest me I suppose over all it's a good thing.

Mikey Mike
Mar 16, 2006, 09:18 AM
I know NO one will do this, but I remember somewhere in the XP manuals it says you MUST put the XP sticker (the one with all the license information) somewhere on the computer that you are installing XP to. Now seriously, who would do this? :D

Here is my opinion (whether legit or not) on the images of XP (.iso). Microsoft could care less if you make copies of the XP. But, as long as you buy a license for it, it should be perfectly acceptable. That is why the XP cd says "Do not make illegal duplicates." So its ok to make copies, as long as you do it legally.

Also, for those students out there, http://www.msdnaa.net/search/SchoolSearch.aspx?/ Search for your schools, and email the admin to get your login. This should give you EXCELLENT discount off of XP. If you are lucky, even free XP license!

Yes, that's true, I can now offer my clients a Intel Mac with XPP pre loaded with a sticker.

Elrond39
Mar 16, 2006, 09:18 AM
Absolutely. Were you living under a rock? When the video was posted, the guy in charge of the contest posted that he had been in touch with the team and thought it was likely the contest was over.

:o :o I was having a spot of trouble with my windows xp-based laptop which I didn't get around to solving until this morning. So I missed the video, and posted that comment before I saw it. I was excited to read the posts in this thread ;)

Ace25
Mar 16, 2006, 09:19 AM
Will this know open up our macs to the windows world of viruses??

Why is nobody scared of this. Remember it was the OS that was saving us, not the hardware. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Convenient, maybe...scary, definitely!

50548
Mar 16, 2006, 09:20 AM
So back to my question, if what you're saying is true. Why is ANY BUSINESS developing solely for OS X? You're basically saying these people are "business-less"...?



If you expect me to believe that Adobe are gonna turn round and say "hey, we're not making anything for OS X anymore, if you wanna use our software. Download this bootloader, hack around a bit, buy a copy of windows, install it on your mac. Everytime you need to run our software, simply restart your machine and run windows, then launch our apps. What could be simpler!!!".....then I think you're havin' a laugh.

OK, I am gonna say it again...my concern is about future development/porting of products; it's a simple rule of business.

OS X products exist because there is a DEDICATED market for them. Smaller, I know, but it's there with who-knows-how-many millions of Macs around the globe. So if you wanted to enjoy this group of customers, you'd have to create specific software for them. Some companies made a lot of money, like MS, Adobe, perhaps Quark or even Aspyr...Mac users are a faithful bunch, and they like good products.

So why do firms like Aspyr exist? Because it was inconvenient, if not impossible, to run great games on the Mac. And with licensing agreements, Aspyr was able to make money where no others like EA or Id Software dared or bothered to go on their own; it's simple, it's obvious.

The same happens for MS with its Office 2004, Adobe etc., who have spent a lot of R&D money on their Mac versions, and already have a captive market.

Now let's move to scenario 2:

Autodesk, according to some published reports, was willing to port AutoCAD to the Mac if sufficient demand appeared in front of them; so they were asking for feedback from Mac users and professionals.

Yep, NO AutoCAD for Mac exists now; but it was highly probable that it would be deployed, following the upsurge in Mac purchases in recent years.

However, Apple comes today and tells us all: "We love Windows, officially support it and assert that you can install it on Macs without any hurdles".

Now think for a moment: Why on Earth would Autodesk, with such news in hands, even BOTHER about porting an extensive piece of code to XCode/Mac-specific requirements, if all you happy PC-loving campers can buy its Winblows version for the same price and run it natively on a white Mac? Again, I am not talking about something that is already there; I refer to things that WERE supposed to happen in the near future...and if Windows comes easily on the Mac, forget about recalcitrant companies coming to OS X and its beautiful and safe Aqua environment...yep, FORGET IT; that's all I have to say.

Mikey Mike
Mar 16, 2006, 09:20 AM
Will this know open up our macs to the windows world of viruses??

Why is nobody scared of this. Remember it was the OS that was saving us, not the hardware. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Convenient, maybe...scary, definitely!

You're dead right! NOD 32 Licence with every iMac NOW!!! :eek:

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 09:21 AM
Will this know open up our macs to the windows world of viruses??

Why is nobody scared of this. Remember it was the OS that was saving us, not the hardware. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Convenient, maybe...scary, definitely!


It could destroy your Windows partition yes, but not your hardware or Mac OS X partition

Spanky Deluxe
Mar 16, 2006, 09:25 AM
It'll only damage your OS X partitions if the virus is designed to corrupt hard drives. Besides which, if you're scared of viruses, don't put Windows on, its as simple as that!!

Mikey Mike
Mar 16, 2006, 09:31 AM
It'll only damage your OS X partitions if the virus is designed to corrupt hard drives. Besides which, if you're scared of viruses, don't put Windows on, its as simple as that!!

How on Earth can you have a headless eMac Spanky? Your monitor die or are you an Apple tech with resources to bits? :)

Whistleway
Mar 16, 2006, 09:36 AM
Macs are gonna sell like crazy for a while !!!

mark88
Mar 16, 2006, 09:39 AM
OK, I am gonna say it again...my concern is about future development/porting of products; it's a simple rule of business.

CS3 is not a future product then? I'd say Adobe/Macromedia are pretty business savvy, and I'd going out on a limb to say they won't be stopping porting their products to mac

Autodesk, according to some published reports, was willing to port AutoCAD to the Mac if sufficient demand appeared in front of them; so they were asking for feedback from Mac users and professionals.

But the demand is still there, don't you see! The demand is for a Mac version of the product! Not simply 'a version that runs on my machine' (ie, windows versions running inside windows on my intel mac). This is a profressional product right? I hazard a guess most professionals could quite easily afford a PC or 4 if they wanted them.

Have faith. Look at is from this angle, with XP and OS X running on the same machine it gives millions of people the chance to compare them side by side, people that otherwise wouldn't even have thought about buying a mac. Now, if the general feeling of this group is true, that most of these people will end up loving OS X over XP then just think about that for a second? These people will now want all their software to run under OS X, why would they settle for software running on their non prefered OS? Therefore, the demand for OS X software is even greater.

I could only see this being a bad thing for Apple *if* Windows was actually better than OS X, which must of us here would agree it isn't. Therefore I really don't see why people are getting so worried.

godrifle
Mar 16, 2006, 09:43 AM
I completely agree. In fact, I've convinced one person at work who was solidly anti-Mac to purchase a new Core Duo because of this. I know so many people who have held back for a variety of reasons. Some people pooh-pooh those reasons, but an individual's reasons for avoiding Apple only have to be real to the user to prevent him/her from purchasing Apple. This goes a LONG way to diminishing those various concerns.


I think it will actually help Apple's marketshare considerably.

I think there are a large group of people who would like to buy Macs, but are concerned that their work or whatever will need them to use Windows. For these people, buying an Intel Mac that can boot windows if needed is a big safety net if they have any doubts that Mac OS X can handle their needs.

Also, there are people who do need to run Windows specific applications. Suddenly the value of an Intel Mac just went up considerably for these people.

arn

awesomebase
Mar 16, 2006, 09:47 AM
It does make you wonder if it took this amount of time for somebody to do this, why the heck is it taking MS so long to come up with VPC? I mean, does anybody see the irony in this? A company that spends literally $B is being usurped by a few people competing in a contest. Not taking anything away from MS, I'm just amazed at the work that has gone into this and the solution that is provided.
I don't think it is a threat in any way to OS X. My guess is that people will use it for games (though now both the XBOX and PS3 will finally do HD resolutions for graphics) and perhaps the odd utilities that may not be available for the Mac.

Gordy
Mar 16, 2006, 09:51 AM
Since it's won now, I guess I can talk. The install requires a Windows XP PC, with which Windows is already installed. From here you use Nero Burning ROM to mix files from your XP SP2 CD, copy them to a new project, and add in some $OEM$ files and folders, and fix some of the files in i386. From here, you use xom.efi (which is the bootloader), and bless it in Terminal. Once it's blessed on startup you get a pretty nice selector, and you choose Windows. From here the CSM layer pauses for 2.5 Minutes while it does whatever its doing. Then you'll get into Windows Setup.

I should also mention at this time, you cannot reboot Windows. You need to shutdown. If you attempt rebooting it will hang at Windows is Shutting Down screen.


Sounds relativly easily , its like creating your own windows xp disk pretty much

Thanks for the info :)

SeRgIo_42
Mar 16, 2006, 09:51 AM
Is there any reason to believe that booting XP into the mactels will give you a fast GUI ? I have seen people looking forward to play games, use intensive graphics stuff (CAD, etc) but the raw reality is that you will need good drivers for the graphics card.

I have doubts that MSN messenger (and its better webcam support for webcams) will work in a reasonable way up to this point.

Booting is just the start-up of a long process, which I doubt anyone will actually wait until the end. If you need to use Windows, keep that ugly gray box around.

woolfgang
Mar 16, 2006, 09:53 AM
What I'm curious about is, will companies with programs like 3ds Studio Max, be making versions that will run on the intel macs.

tdar
Mar 16, 2006, 10:00 AM
It'll only damage your OS X partitions if the virus is designed to corrupt hard drives. Besides which, if you're scared of viruses, don't put Windows on, its as simple as that!!

if your THAT scared of viruses don't run a computer:)

Steve1496
Mar 16, 2006, 10:01 AM
Is there any reason to believe that booting XP into the mactels will give you a fast GUI ? I have seen people looking forward to play games, use intensive graphics stuff (CAD, etc) but the raw reality is that you will need good drivers for the graphics card.

I have doubts that MSN messenger (and its better webcam support for webcams) will work in a reasonable way up to this point.

Booting is just the start-up of a long process, which I doubt anyone will actually wait until the end. If you need to use Windows, keep that ugly gray box around.


We're stilling searching for drivers for Windows. So far we have ethernet, wireless, and the chipset drivers. The Omega drivers for the x1600 (which IS a mobility) don't do anything even though they report as installed.

The Catalyst drivers so far, don't work.

tdar
Mar 16, 2006, 10:01 AM
What I'm curious about is, will companies with programs like 3ds Studio Max, be making versions that will run on the intel macs.

NO software companies will be supporting this....it's a geek thing

IJ Reilly
Mar 16, 2006, 10:03 AM
I think you owe some bird-eating.

I do. Yum, tasty crow... :)

Macnoviz
Mar 16, 2006, 10:04 AM
Also, while we're de-bunking myths---the Windows BSOD was a Win98 thing. Under XP, it's more like OSX--individual program crashes/freezes are isolated to the program, which can be stopped separately using the task manager. I don't recall ever seeing a BSOD in the several years I had an XP computer.[/QUOTE]
I have an HP Pavilion, that's not connected to anything (internet, other computers,...), runs XP SP2, and doesn't use any uncommon programs, but I've had several BSOD's in the last year. It has something to do with kernel memory, but I don't really know much about it

IJ Reilly
Mar 16, 2006, 10:06 AM
Alright. Who's cooking the crow, then?
And, IJ Reilly, would you like some ketchup with that?

No thanks -- pass me the tabasco sauce!

whaley
Mar 16, 2006, 10:09 AM
Uhh, if the end user is savvy enough to know what 'dual boot' means I think they could handle it.


I agree. I am no technical wizard and I am running a dual boot 9 and X box. This boot process sounds very familiar....

Hodapp
Mar 16, 2006, 10:10 AM
NO software companies will be supporting this....it's a geek thing

They will be supporting it because they support machines that run Windows XP. Programs base their support around an operating system.