Well, no.I didn't know about that.
Sorry, my tone was a little harsh, wasn't it?
I don't know. There must be some client support in order for the technology to work, but whether you'll be able to get at it without Server is another story.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Leopard and Boot Camp: Faster "Restarts"
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sorry, my tone was a little harsh, wasn't it?
I don't know. There must be some client support in order for the technology to work, but whether you'll be able to get at it without Server is another story.
home on ipod is sorta back
Remember Home on iPod? Well it is kind of back in 10.5, although it seems only 10.5 server. There is a new version of portable home directories that lets you use any portable drive to store the users home directory but still manage the users in workgroup manager.
In fact, although Leopard client looks nice, the cool stuff seems to be in 10.5 server. The new AD stuff looks v good.
Remember Home on iPod? Well it is kind of back in 10.5, although it seems only 10.5 server. There is a new version of portable home directories that lets you use any portable drive to store the users home directory but still manage the users in workgroup manager.
In fact, although Leopard client looks nice, the cool stuff seems to be in 10.5 server. The new AD stuff looks v good.
nothing to wonder here, they've been busy porting osx to iphone of course
and the delay from spring to autumn? they needed to implement the iphone sdk, aka safari for windows 
Can't say I understand. Jobs very clearly spoke about the feature during the Keynote. Did his engineers not tell him something? Was it that last minute a decision? If they do take it out, it's not going to look good for Apple, having publicly announced it (and in a way, still are as the Keynote is on the website).
parallels
I still prefer parallels. It is much, much easier to have Win and OSX in multiple windows than having to hybernate back and forth.
I still prefer parallels. It is much, much easier to have Win and OSX in multiple windows than having to hybernate back and forth.
Consider this approach. You're using OS X and you want to restart into Windows (which is what the Apple page called the feature.) OS X goes to sleep and you see the boot up screen for Windows although your computer doesn't actually reboot. After a minute, Windows is running. You do whatever needs to be done in Windows (i.e., run virus software, defrag... you know, all those fun things) and then you decide it's time to go back to OS X. You "restart into OS X." The computer kills Windows completely, wakes OS X and you're back.
So, when you "restart into Windows", you're literally booting Windows and putting OS X to sleep. And when you "restart into OS X," you're unloading Windows completely and waking OS X. In that scenario, the only OS that would be responsible for being able to deal with disk changes during its sleep would be OS X. Windows never actually sleeps.
I bet that's the concept here, otherwise the menu item would likely have been described as "Switch to Windows" instead of "restart."
Weird, I actually read this particular item after the keynote on the bootcamp page as well and it sounded very interesting. I actually talked to a friend about this feature; how it worked. I thought that perhaps the state (memory contents) of the operating system would be written to disk and recreated upon 'rebooting' into either Windows or OS X...
Stupid they pulled it; it was one of the great new features...
Stupid they pulled it; it was one of the great new features...
Disappointed?
I'm not disappointed with Apple in any way. The WWDC is for developers. From what I've read about the OS, it will have a big impact on developers. So the WWDC focuses on the OS. Seems logical. So no new toys. Boohoo.
I've seen users on these boards slam Steve Jobs like he's some kind of messiah that didn't deliver a miracle on time. Sheesh, get a grip people.
The iPhone was the greatest thing since sliced bread but is now "total crap" because you can't write apps for it and it supposedly does not run Flash? Leopard was "the next big thing" but is now "just a boring minor release" because of a silly BootCamp feature that got taken out?
Really. The 'big feature' that got pulled from Boot Camp is no more than a handy shortcut for invoking hibernation on both sides. The remark that you don't need to download drivers is simply the fact that drivers will be available on the Leopard DVD. When you control the hardware, you don't need updates every other week.
But as with any messiah, Steve Jobs' words are totally over-analysed and re-interpreted. He's no guru, he's just an IT guy. With users this fickle, Apple doesn't need competitors. No wonder the company is usually completely silent about stuff in development.
I'm not disappointed with Apple in any way. The WWDC is for developers. From what I've read about the OS, it will have a big impact on developers. So the WWDC focuses on the OS. Seems logical. So no new toys. Boohoo.
I've seen users on these boards slam Steve Jobs like he's some kind of messiah that didn't deliver a miracle on time. Sheesh, get a grip people.
The iPhone was the greatest thing since sliced bread but is now "total crap" because you can't write apps for it and it supposedly does not run Flash? Leopard was "the next big thing" but is now "just a boring minor release" because of a silly BootCamp feature that got taken out?
Really. The 'big feature' that got pulled from Boot Camp is no more than a handy shortcut for invoking hibernation on both sides. The remark that you don't need to download drivers is simply the fact that drivers will be available on the Leopard DVD. When you control the hardware, you don't need updates every other week.
But as with any messiah, Steve Jobs' words are totally over-analysed and re-interpreted. He's no guru, he's just an IT guy. With users this fickle, Apple doesn't need competitors. No wonder the company is usually completely silent about stuff in development.
Thank god this was pulled. I was horrified when I first heard of this "feature".
Like others have mentioned, this was going to cause massive data corruption on any partition with read/write support on both OSes.
For example, if Leopard has MacFUSE/NTFS3g installed, and Windows makes changes to an NTFS partition which Leopard doesn't know about (due to being suspended), corruption will occur to the NTFS partition.
Similarly, if Windows has MacDrive installed, and Windows makes changes to an HFS/HFS+ partition which Leopard doesn't know about, then corruption will occur to the HFS/HFS+ partition.
The same effect always occurs with FAT32 partitions, since these are always read/write on both OSes.
It is never safe to use suspend-to-disk to switch between two OSes which mount the same partitions.
So, thank god it was pulled.
Like others have mentioned, this was going to cause massive data corruption on any partition with read/write support on both OSes.
For example, if Leopard has MacFUSE/NTFS3g installed, and Windows makes changes to an NTFS partition which Leopard doesn't know about (due to being suspended), corruption will occur to the NTFS partition.
Similarly, if Windows has MacDrive installed, and Windows makes changes to an HFS/HFS+ partition which Leopard doesn't know about, then corruption will occur to the HFS/HFS+ partition.
The same effect always occurs with FAT32 partitions, since these are always read/write on both OSes.
It is never safe to use suspend-to-disk to switch between two OSes which mount the same partitions.
So, thank god it was pulled.
"Safe Sleep" is available on all MacBooks and MacBook Pro's, just not directly in the user interface: If you put the MacBook to sleep, unplug it, and wait a few days for the battery to run low, it will put itself into "deep sleep" mode once power runs low. You don't want to use it usually because it is a lot slower than normal sleep. Vista and XP probably have the same feature. All Apple has to do is to put the machine in a state where one OS goes into Safe Sleep mode and the other OS wakes up.
But the main problem is to do this reliably. Your MacBook will go into Safe Sleep mode only very rarely; if there is a one in thousand failure rate that would be annoying, but not fatal. But if this is a feature in Bootcamp, people would use it all the time, and the same failure rate would now be totally unacceptable. Plus they have to make sure that Windows does it reliably as well.
well, I tried this last night, with the DeepSleep widget. when you power back on, it ignores you holding down Option, so I dont see how you got this to work?
care to share?
Hibernating windows takes a while.. hibernating OsX also takes a while..
less time than rebooting, but still - its not exactly instantaneous, and I doubt they'll have made a new, super-fast hibernation system for either OS..
Even if it was instantaneous I don't see it being a threat to parallels, and Apple certainly wouldn't pull a feature so Parallels can make more money - they already gave parallels and VMware free advertising in the keynote.. It doesn't matter to Apple at all how well Parallels sells.. Why would it?
I suspect it's just not a finished feature yet.. Not entirely reliable.
less time than rebooting, but still - its not exactly instantaneous, and I doubt they'll have made a new, super-fast hibernation system for either OS..
Even if it was instantaneous I don't see it being a threat to parallels, and Apple certainly wouldn't pull a feature so Parallels can make more money - they already gave parallels and VMware free advertising in the keynote.. It doesn't matter to Apple at all how well Parallels sells.. Why would it?
I suspect it's just not a finished feature yet.. Not entirely reliable.
You wouldn't be "unloading" Windows, you would be hibernating. This is equivalent to putting a Mac to sleep, but you can actually turn the power off. Restarting Windows from hibernation takes a fraction of the time of a full boot.
Sean
It's a great feature that I would have loved to have. And I'll hold out hope that it will reappear either in Leopard or in a later OS.
I don't see why Apple removed it. I know, there's still the integrity of the disk, but you could still change/delete files on the XP drive (assuming FAT32) from inside OS X and screw things up even worse. And what I do know is this: for hibernation, XP creates a hibernation file (hibernation.sys, I think) on the disk as it writes the RAM contents to HD.
If that file is corrupted (has happened to me before) there is no real issue as Windows just deletes the file and does a full restart. So I fail to see the problem with a corrupt file, and if that is what Apple's saying I just don't buy it.
I don't see why Apple removed it. I know, there's still the integrity of the disk, but you could still change/delete files on the XP drive (assuming FAT32) from inside OS X and screw things up even worse. And what I do know is this: for hibernation, XP creates a hibernation file (hibernation.sys, I think) on the disk as it writes the RAM contents to HD.
If that file is corrupted (has happened to me before) there is no real issue as Windows just deletes the file and does a full restart. So I fail to see the problem with a corrupt file, and if that is what Apple's saying I just don't buy it.
You wouldn't be "unloading" Windows, you would be hibernating. This is equivalent to putting a Mac to sleep, but you can actually turn the power off. Restarting Windows from hibernation takes a fraction of the time of a full boot.
Sean
Right, but again as mentioned, hibernating Windows would not work because it would cause data corruption if you write to the volume while in OS X. Moreover, this would hardly be a feature, SINCE PEOPLE CAN ALREADY DO THIS ANYWAY!
So, to all those whining about this feature being "dropped", just go ahead and hibernate Windows when you boot into OS X, just don't write to the volumes Windows has mounted (and probably avoid Mac Drive on the Windows side) and you're probably fine. Trust me, I did this for a while myself, but then I noticed it would cause problems every time I tried to copy data to the Windows volume from OS X.
I disagree, the entire point of this is to suspend the RAM (and only the RAM) to a file on the HD. Dual-booting (without suspending to disk) on any system that has read/write capabilities across multiple boot partitions could potentially have the same effect as you're describing, so running Boot Camp in general could potentially corrupt a system (A FAT32 Windows disk would be both visible and writable in OS X - therefore you could potentially corrupt any data on that partition. Similarly Windows + Mac Drive could corrupt any data on the OS X partition).
The worst-case scenario you propose is entirely possible already with only BootCamp having been installed.
osx laptops do exactly the same thing, cept the ram contents on the harddisj are harder to find. good one apple
You're missing the point. It's not writing to the other volume that causes corruption, it's writing while the other OS is in hibernation that causes the problem. Windows XP expects the file system to look the same as it did when it went to sleep. If it doesn't, then it can cause various problems. (The one I experienced was that my files either would disappear or just be unreadable).
Big enough for me
. Don't get me wrong, I love a lot of what Leopard has brought to the table, but Boot Camp seems unfinished, almost an after thought. Booting up to get into another OS would have been perfect had seamless switching been incorporated into the final release (and yes, it hasn't been released yet, but if it were in the final release it would most likely be in the "near final" beta release as well). I think Apple missed the boat on this one, and with the whimper of success from 
TV, is biting off more than they can chew this year.Exactly. The issue is that you are making changes with one OS when another still technically has it mounted.
The least of your problems would be file corruption.
The worst case scenario is total loss of the volume, as the MFT on NTFS, the FAT on FAT32, and the *whatever HFS calls it* on HFS can become corrupted.
Files disappearing is a lesser symptom of MFT corruption, with total loss essentially being the next worst thing which could happen.
An extremely crude workaround would be to force dismounting at sleep time, and remounting at wake time. However, this does nothing to protect unexpected changes in open files, and is not an option for the boot volume anyway.
Apple spent too much resource over iPhone. Are we down to 299 features now? Or this was the 301th feature got removed?
The more I read on Leopard development, the more I feel it is less attractive as when we upgrade to Tiger. Honestly, a lot of these what Apple called the Leopard top "secret" features (eye candy, file backup, better finder) can be added to Tiger 10.4.11, 10.4.12, etc if Apple really wanted to. Only those real advance features are meant to make into the next OS revision, e.g. ZFS (write), real virtualization that takes advantage of Intel VT (boot multiple OSs concurrently and sharing the same hardware resource), or runs Windows app natively inside OSX (remember yellow box)? None of them are going to be in Leopard!
Please enlighten us with other top secret features that are not covered by keynote. Someone must have messed up Steve's keynote presentation material, for some reason, it feels like deja vu.
The more I read on Leopard development, the more I feel it is less attractive as when we upgrade to Tiger. Honestly, a lot of these what Apple called the Leopard top "secret" features (eye candy, file backup, better finder) can be added to Tiger 10.4.11, 10.4.12, etc if Apple really wanted to. Only those real advance features are meant to make into the next OS revision, e.g. ZFS (write), real virtualization that takes advantage of Intel VT (boot multiple OSs concurrently and sharing the same hardware resource), or runs Windows app natively inside OSX (remember yellow box)? None of them are going to be in Leopard!
Please enlighten us with other top secret features that are not covered by keynote. Someone must have messed up Steve's keynote presentation material, for some reason, it feels like deja vu.