Apple Releases Boot Camp Beta

[Whistleway]

And I hope that the virus issue will be confined to the win partition!

Please., I run both windows and mac and I havn't seen a virus in several years. If you just don't download software from unreliable sources and not open every damn attachement from someone you don't know, you would be alright. STOP cribbing about viruses. It is just not true.

How hard it is to not run .exe that you don't trust?

 

[1macker1]

If I log off my post cannot be seen. WTH.

What the crap my original post is gone...!??!

 

[Village]

Originally Posted by nostrum
It does raise an interesting issue though. If people start using this technology on their Macs, and it becomes quite widespread, why bother writing software for Macs? Could it lead to the death of the Mac software industry and ultimately of OS X?

Which really scares me. I hope Apple know what they are doing here.

I can see the concern, but isn't the Mac hardware only half of its assets? OS X is still a compelling alternative, and if I simply wanted Windows XP, I'd settle on cheaper hardware than a PowerMac or MacBook Pro.

 

[Roy Hobbs]

..

the GOOD:

1. It stops all of these "hacked" solutions to dual boot Windows on a Mac. Apple provides a simple (but not very sexy) solution that has good official driver support for Windows.


the WEAK:
1. It's not a virtual machine. There are some caveats (don't pick the wrong drive or Windows will reformat your Mac!!

Not sexy?? How can you have a sexy dual boot option??

Not a virtual machine is weak?? That is the biggest stregth of BootCamp, if you are dumb enough to chooses the wrong partition in the XP setup you should be messing with Boof Camp.

 

[DTphonehome]

Installing now. So far I'm at the partitioning stage, and I've already burned the CD with the drivers.

Please keep us updated. And run some benchmarks and games

 

[nubero]

Technically... yes. This could be what Dvorak was talking about. It does scare me a little bit but hopefully Apple just wants to attract would-be Mac users to increase their market share. However, if Apple does end up like Dvorak predicted... I swear I will get angry.

i don't read dvorak anymore but could he have said something ike this?: if i was a windows developer and i would have played with the idea of making a mac version of my app, now i wouldn't do it anymore.

so how good is that?

and adobe? their cs2 (and all the adobe apps since maybe psd 3 and illustrator 5) are not realy optimized for mac anymore)

now i know that there is no such thing as optimized for windows since it's such rubish. but where would a software developer get the motivation from to develop its apps for os x if its not using all the new technology? quartz, coreimage, coreaudio, corevideo and the other APIs come to mind...

we know that this stuff is great. but be honest: there is not one mayor app, which uses this stuff (except apperture and motion from apple which are btw both unusable for professionals)

 

[tcmcam]

Virus rewrites partition table

One ugly thought, if a Windows Virus rewrites the master partition table on the hard drive, it could toast the OSX partition as well.

Yuck, Yikes, I still hate Windows!

 

[BGil]

Technically... yes. This could be what Dvorak was talking about. It does scare me a little bit but hopefully Apple just wants to attract would-be Mac users to increase their market share. However, if Apple does end up like Dvorak predicted... I swear I will get angry.

WOW!!!
All that stuff Dvorak said makes a lot more sense now. Maybe Apple is going to move to the NT kernel. I hesrd that they considered moving to NT before they decided upon NeXT as the base for their new OS.

Maybe that's why Avie left?

From what I've heard, even many Linu-zealots (read: Slashdot, OSNews) view the NT kernel as a pretty good kernel to build upon.

 

[itsbetteronamac]

Best news I have heard in a long time. I think it is nice to see a company embrace it customers, more than it's own beliefs. Looks like apple won't try to have windows run natively within Mac OS X. Probably feel it's too unstable, and would make OS X crash Wow, this makes me think about getting a new Macbook Pro, or iMac as a home computer. I'll wait until vista though. It would be a great computer I realized for my parents and other people who want to use a mac, but because of work, have to have a PC too. Now, they don't need to have both!

 

[DTphonehome]

It's not as bad as everyone makes out. Don't use IE, don't double click emails, don't use p2p, use a firewall and a virus checker and you'll be fine

FWIW I never run windows update

Now we just need Apple to officially make that statement so people don't screw up their macs.

 

[Chaszmyr]

Something just occurred to me. Maybe in Leopard, Apple will have an option to do like Fast User Switching into a Windows environment.

 

[MacHarne]

I wonder how Adobe will handle this.

::segue ripples::
"Well, everyone can run Windows now; let's just put that Universal Binary project on hold..."
::fade to black and original setting::

That makes me shudder. I don't have the money to get a new computer for a while; I've been working with older hardware for a long time (except for my summer 2005 12" PB purchase). An Intel Mac would be nice, but it is not in my budget at the moment.

 

[mark88]

The decisions that led to my switch to Apple has nothing to do with the internet. My confidence in Apple's machines is that I never have to worry about the "blue screen of death" that plagues Windows.

Have you even used XP? I have numerours machines all running XP Pro and not once in 4-5 years have I *ever* had a blue screen of anything. It's a stereotype carried over from the 95 and 98 days. ME improved alot upon error messages and such, XP went another step further.

 

[DTphonehome]

What does this say about the virtualization rumors for Leopard? If they offer this as a standard feature, does that mean that virtualization is out of the question for 10.5?

 

[Little Endian]

This is Great!! now people can run the Windows versions of Adobe products and other equivalent Apps that are not UB yet and see how much faster they are on Windows. I also forgot Games why wait for a possible port to OSX when you can just boot into Windows and play it now with better performance than would be possible with a native OSX port. In fact why should anyone Develop for OSX anymore. OSX for iLife, Windows for everything else.

Sense the Sarcasm? Really this is great news and I welcome it. However this just means that Apple and it's third party developers had better be "burning the midnight oil" to get OSX and Apps running at speeds equivalent or better than using similar apps on Windows. I'm just worried that with Apple making it this easy to run Windows it might eventually lead to Developers getting Cheap and not porting to OSX in the first place.

Worse yet is that Apple and developers are Under more pressure than ever to improve OSX performance on intel. In the past we could blame poor performance on Motorola/IBM, poor ports, and optimizations of applications for our hardware platform. Now with being able to run both Windows and OSX on the same exact hardware it is now easier than ever to compare performance of both operating systems without any hardware differences. Bad thing is that when OSX fails to perform in a certain area or Application performance is slower on OSX it now places the blame on the very essence of the Macintosh which is the OS itself.

Will all developers see the need to make their applications as optimized for OSX as their Windows Counterparts? How long will it take?

 

[Platform]

Something just occurred to me. Maybe in Leopard, Apple will have an option to do like Fast User Switching into a Windows environment.

Virtualization technology

 

[iMeowbot]

os/2

remember that and what killed it?

Why, yes! Microsoft threatened companies who dared bundle it with pricing penalties. Microsoft had to fork over close to a billion dollars to IBM over that one.

I know that people like to think that is was the compatibility thing, but that was a distant second.

 

[oingoboingo]

Because not everyone has a copy of Windows XP SP2. This Boot Camp is aimed at professionals and enthusiests.

Windows XP SP2 is about as ubiquitous as oxygen, and with Apple sounding like they are going to add a Boot Camp-like feature to OS X 10.5 (either as dual booting or virtualization), it's not going to be just the enthusiasts who discover that their Intel Mac can run Windows games.

 

[ImAlwaysRight]

Wow. This is an amazing move on Apple's part.

I've got Virtual PC 7 w/XP Pro, which, WON'T RUN on an Intel Mac. I plan to get rid of my Mac Mini for a 13" Macbook as soon as they come out. (got the shortest path to my Apple Store planned already).

So... can I somehow install XP Pro with Boot Camp and use the XP serial number that came with VPC 7? I won't be using the VPC anymore.

 

[iSee]

Whoa, didnt expect this! downloading to go on my MBP tonight =)

So they raised 13k for nothing for the xponmac contest?

I don't know if it was for nothing. I don't think the timing of this release is coincidental--a few weeks after xponmac. xom almost certainly influenced the timing of Apple's release of Boot Camp. It may have forced Apple to release it at all. Boot Camp may have been a backroom, only-in-case-of-emergency-but-hopefully-never kind of project (like OSX on Intel once was), but with xponmac, Pandora's box had been opened, so Apple may have decided to get on top of it rather than let the hackers dominate this branch of Apple's future.

At the very least, xponman demonstrated the intense interest people have in running XP on Macs.

Anyway, this is a GREAT thing for me (sorry, but I *have* to run some Windows software).
I'd been holding off on a new MacBook, 'til maybe the next CPU or VirtualPC for Intel Macs, but I just can't wait anymore...

 

[840quadra]

That will never happen, atleast I think. Can't say never to anything apple does.

But from business point, it would instantly kill the whole mac platform for software. The decent middle ground is, reboot to run windows app. so that if that software is available natively for mac, you would buy it rather than just emulate it from your windows copy.

I understand what you are saying, and somewhat agree with that. Apple would like to keep users happy and loyal to their products, however they also understand that not every old, current, or new software platform will be written to utilize their hardware, or OS.

They have to find a way to compromise with this, keep sales strong, and existing users in love with their products. If they fail to complete those tasks, they will watch users flock to Microsoft systems, and other hardware.

 

[Jarbo]

Now that I know I can do it

It Suddenly Seems less appealing.

 

[phatpat88]

hell as finally frozen over


and the secrecy at apple has certainy gotten better

 

[bluefire75]

Have you even used XP? I have numerours machines all running XP Pro and not once in 4-5 years have I *ever* had a blue screen of anything. It's a stereotype carried over from the 95 and 98 days. ME improved alot upon error messages and such, XP went another step further.

Yup, use it at work and I also use a mac at work as well. The difference, to me, is night and day. Again, just my personal preference.

 

[Stridder44]

During installation, the Windows XP installer asks me to format the Windows partition using NTFS or FAT. Which should I use?

If the partition is 32 GB or smaller, you can use either FAT or NTFS. If it's larger than 32 GB, then you can only format it using NTFS. Mac OS X can read and write FAT volumes, but only read NTFS volumes. Refer to the Windows XP documentation if you are not sure which best suits your needs.

So currently Mac OS can read and write to FAT but can only read to NTFS...anyone think this could change with 10.5 perhaps? (apparently FAT can only support up to 32GB while NTFS can support just about anything above that...although I hear NTFS is a better choice). Thoughts?