Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Intel Transition, MacBook Name, and Windows on Mac?

Alright you hackers, you had better get working on whatever hack will be needed to cleanly duel boot to Windoze, becasue I just ordered myself an Intel iMac, and I want to be running Half Life 2, Deus Ex 2, FEAR and all the glorious games we Mac users have been denied ASAP :D
 
Machead III said:
Alright you hackers, you had better get working on whatever hack will be needed to cleanly duel boot to Windoze, becasue I just ordered myself an Intel iMac, and I want to be running Half Life 2, Deus Ex 2, FEAR and all the glorious games we Mac users have been denied ASAP :D
Click to expand...
I'm curious to see how fast WINE is available - with it, and a copy of Windows, you "should" be able to run Win32 apps seemlessly.
 
OSX will not run on PCs

jayscheuerle said:
Out of the box. Sure, somebody will crack it, but this crack won't be widespread enough to cause Apple any financial damage.
Click to expand...

I think it just got a lot harder - what's the bet that the release version of Mac OS X 10.4.4 for Intel doesn't support BIOS, only EFI.
 
iMeowbot said:
There's more to EFI than you may think. Read me.
Click to expand...

Yup. Did you read your own link? It says it allows a BIOS vendor to integrate their existing code for compatibility. It doesn't say its a required mode. Apple doesn't have legacy BIOS code. Apple also doesn't have anything at all that requires legacy BIOS code. Therefore Apple can save money, install a smaller flash ROM, and not have EFI CSM because they don't need it.

People need to just realize if they want windows, wait for VirtualPC, VMWare, or Vista.

We don't even know that the Apple firmware sits in the same location in memory as a standard BIOS. It was always a crippling design on IBM PCs that ROMs sat in the middle of memory space (it was originally at the top of memory space, until CPUs supported more than 1MB). Windows always got by that by changing how the memory appeared using paging; which works...but still left theugly design.

Here's to hoping Apple got rid of a bunch of legacy adhoc design changes made over the years by PC vendors.
 
eric_n_dfw said:
I'm curious to see how fast WINE is available - with it, and a copy of Windows, you "should" be able to run Win32 apps seemlessly.
Click to expand...

WINE isn't a good solution. WINE will only work with a handful of apps and frankly forget running anything that uses DirectX which a good majority of games do these days. the best performance you are going to get, for games of course since you don't really need performance for most everyday apps, is going to be booting into Windows with Windows controlling the GPU.
 
Wine

I'm curious to see how fast WINE is available - with it, and a copy of Windows, you "should" be able to run Win32 apps seemlessly.
Click to expand...

The whole point of WINE is that you do not need windows. It translates the win32 API into the native API. Currently that has been for the X-Windows APIs on the UNIX variants. DARWINE is porting it to OSX and to Aqua, I believe. That would allow cut and past between Windows and OSX aps.

Still if I have to run VMware and XP in a window, I will be very happy.
 
dguisinger said:
Yup. Did you read your own link?
Click to expand...
Yes, I did. did you?

It says it allows a BIOS vendor to integrate their existing code for compatibility. It doesn't say its a required mode.
Click to expand...
*golf clap* Who did say it was required? Not I.

Apple doesn't have legacy BIOS code.
Click to expand...
So, you have one of these production Macs in your hand and you've looked at the firmware? No, you haven't. None of us has, and this is the p[oint that you and others are missing.

We don't know where Apple got their firmware yet. We don't know what options were built in. It is unreasonable at this time to make any assumptions, based only on the knowledge that Apple used EFI for their firmware, about what will and will not work.

The required code is under 64K, space is not an issue. The only issue is whether or not Apple felt like leaving it in.
 
I am assuming that the MacBooks will go through another revision before April or May comes around. I really do appreciate the early adopters, though. ;)

I just hope this new MacBook Pro serves me well for four years when I buy one...
 
dguisinger said:
Yup. Did you read your own link? It says it allows a BIOS vendor to integrate their existing code for compatibility. It doesn't say its a required mode. Apple doesn't have legacy BIOS code. Apple also doesn't have anything at all that requires legacy BIOS code. Therefore Apple can save money, install a smaller flash ROM, and not have EFI CSM because they don't need it.
Click to expand...

And they could forget the switchers too. Schiller saying that it will run windows seems to indicate that the CSM module is present.
 
The name 'Mac Mini' was the first step in this new naming scheme.

We will have, by the end of this year:

Mac Mini (Celeron version of Yonah, coming in a few months)
Mac (? standalone Mac, not for power users, feasible but unlikey (Grrr!))
iMac (Integrated Mac)
Mac Pro (Replacing PowerMac, although PowerMac does have 'Mac' in it...)

MacBook Mini (10.6" laptop, feasible but unlikely)
MacBook (Repacing iBook - Celeron Yonah variant)
MacBook Pro (Replacing PowerBook, 17" and 13" will arrive within 6 months)

And, of course, the Mac Media, with 50" Plasma Display hehe :p
 
Blah, if he doesn't care that people will install Windows on a intel Mac, then he shouldn't care if people installed OS X for intell on PCs. What type of hypocritical ******** is SJ trying to pull.
 
AUBPsych said:
I am assuming that the MacBooks will go through another revision before April or May comes around. I really do appreciate the early adopters, though. ;)

I just hope this new MacBook Pro serves me well for four years when I buy one...
Click to expand...

I wouldn't think so since Merom is slated for release around July.
 
BenRoethig said:
Schiller saying that it will run windows seems to indicate that the CSM module is present.
Click to expand...

He didn't say that - he just said Apple won't be stopping you from installing Windows. There will not be a piece of hardware that detects Windows and disables it.

He didn't say you could buy a retail copy of Windows XP and install it then add a few drivers.
 
iMeowbot said:
Yes, I did. did you?


*golf clap* Who did say it was required? Not I.


So, you have one of these production Macs in your hand and you've looked at the firmware? No, you haven't. None of us has, and this is the p[oint that you and others are missing.

We don't know where Apple got their firmware yet. We don't know what options were built in. It is unreasonable at this time to make any assumptions, based only on the knowledge that Apple used EFI for their firmware, about what will and will not work.

The required code is under 64K, space is not an issue. The only issue is whether or not Apple felt like leaving it in.
Click to expand...

Actually Intel OpenSourced EFI code. Check their site, that is most likely where Apple got it. The Apple boot process will look and feel exactly like booting a PPC mac; you can bet they customized it to their hearts content. The question of CSM still is on the table; but my bet would be no CSM, which reflects their comment that they won't stop windows, but they wont say XP will run either.
 
SiliconAddict said:
WINE isn't a good solution. WINE will only work with a handful of apps and frankly forget running anything that uses DirectX which a good majority of games do these days. the best performance you are going to get, for games of course since you don't really need performance for most everyday apps, is going to be booting into Windows with Windows controlling the GPU.
Click to expand...

Transgaming currently allow Linux systems to run Windows Direct X games. I believe it uses Wine and an in-house reimplementation of Direct X targetting Linux technologies.

Indeed they also offer a Mac porting layer, but of course in the past the game needed to be recompiled to PowerPC. I wonder how many Mac 3D games use this extra layer translating Direct X calls to OpenGL calls - it might explain why some games run slower.

I don't think it will take them long to create a product that will allow Windows Direct X games to run directly on x86 Macs. Once that happens one of the major arguments for using Windows will disappear for a small fee.
 
BenRoethig said:
And they could forget the switchers too. Schiller saying that it will run windows seems to indicate that the CSM module is present.
Click to expand...

Not nessecarly. He didn't say would run Windows XP. It will run Windows Vista no matter what, because Vista works natively without CSM. Vista is only a year away, I'm sure Apple has access to the beta's through MSDN since they produce some complex software (aka QuickTime) for Windows. So they would know Vista works just fine.
 
BenRoethig said:
I wouldn't think so since Merom is slated for release around July.
Click to expand...

O RLY? That would be kinda good for me, since I could hold off for a month and a half to buy a Merom machine. I really need one in late May...but from all the talk, Merom sounds like it would be worth the wait. Thanks for that bit of info :)
 
AndrewMT said:
Since the intel iMacs are shipping today, I'm hoping that someone will test them for dual booting pretty soon. I am particularly intersted in intel iMac and Macbook's video game performance under Windows, because the only reason I put up with my Windows PC is the game library.

Unfortunately, Apple went with the X1600 for their first "Pro" intel laptop, instead of the much more powerful Nvidia Geforce Go 7800 (or even the 6800), which can be found in most professional Windows laptop's (including Dell, with the magnificently powerful XPS laptop).
Click to expand...

The 7800 won't fit in the MacBook Pro's form factor. These are more for the ThinkPad crowd. Look, Apple is about form over function and will be as long as Steve Jobs is at the helm.
 
Hattig said:
The name 'Mac Mini' was the first step in this new naming scheme.

We will have, by the end of this year:

Mac Mini (Celeron version of Yonah, coming in a few months)
Mac (? standalone Mac, not for power users, feasible but unlikey (Grrr!))
iMac (Integrated Mac)
Mac Pro (Replacing PowerMac, although PowerMac does have 'Mac' in it...)

MacBook Mini (10.6" laptop, feasible but unlikely)
MacBook (Repacing iBook - Celeron Yonah variant)
MacBook Pro (Replacing PowerBook, 17" and 13" will arrive within 6 months)

And, of course, the Mac Media, with 50" Plasma Display hehe :p
Click to expand...

i think it would make sense, but without the "standalone mac", so:

Mac Mini
iMac
Mac Pro

and

MacBook Mini
iBook
MacBook Pro
 
the name i have only slight qualms with. it's stuff that i'll quickly get over i'm sure. but the biggest problem for me is the price. the MacBook Pro is more expensive than the PowerBooks were. i thought one of the benifits of going to intel was that it was going to mean cheaper machines. nope. guess not.
 
dguisinger said:
Not nessecarly. He didn't say would run Windows XP. It will run Windows Vista no matter what, because Vista works natively without CSM. Vista is only a year away, I'm sure Apple has access to the beta's through MSDN since they produce some complex software (aka QuickTime) for Windows. So they would know Vista works just fine.
Click to expand...

And with Vista having so many Mac like feature, how many do you think would choose Apple after having to wait that long?
 
iCraig said:
I'd wait if I were you even Steve himself said Photoshop doesn't run under Rosetta that fast, well fast enough for professionals anyway.

Besides why do you need a new Mac so bad? Your current one blown up or don't you own one at the moment?

Back on topic, like has been mentioned above the name Powerbook was coined in October 1991 in the Sculley era, even when Powerbooks used Motorola 68000's so nothing to do with PowerPC's.

My reckoning is Steve wants to get away from the names coined by his predecessors at Apple while he was away. Already gone after a few months in office were the Centris, Quadra and LC names and branding, along with Newton etc etc, and he probably wanted to get rid of Powerbook and PowerMac too maybe just that would've and is taking longer to do?

Just my slant on things of course?:D
Click to expand...

Here's my dilemna. I am currently MAC-less, with a cheapo HP desktop at home, and a wintel laptop at the office. I've been looking at getting a MAC for awhile, and had decided on the 20" imac. Although I didn't anticipate the imac being intel-ed so soon, I decided to wait for the expo. I currently do not own ANY Mac software, and am starting a graphic design online program shortly. I don't feel like buying the G5 is the good option, so should I just bite the bullet, by the Intel, and by the software and deal with rosetta until the binaries come out? Is there another option I'm not seeing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back