More on Booting Windows on the Intel Mac?

[paddy]

I just have to ask.... WHY?

Why in the world would someone want to buy a Mac just to put Windows on it? It's like buying a new sportscar and putting a 3-cylinder econo-engine in it. Honestly, if you want to play your precious computer games, just keep your cheap-o Dell.

Your underestimating what an obstacle to switching the lack of computer games is. With most people I know, the only argument they can beat me in, in the pc v mac debate is the lack of mac games available plus their cost. Most if not all of them, would seriously consider buying a mac but for the lack of games.

 

[Marx55]

Look at at this way:

* How many people will install Windows on their Mac and then NOT use Mac OS X or buy Mac OS X software ever again? Very, very few.

* How many people will buy a Mac who never would have before, just because they have the "comfort" of knowing they COULD run Windows if they want to? A much larger group! (And many of them won't bother installing Windows anyway--but knowing they CAN is a mental safety net that allows them to consider a "scary" new way of computing.)

For some individual users, the ability to run Windows will be a great tool of last resort.

For Apple, it means Mac sales!

For Mac developers, it means more Mac users! Users who are seldom willing to buy a Mac and then just give up Mac OS X. Users who are buying Mac software.

Absolutely RIGHT!!!

10 out of 10

 

[Marx55]

Great! Anything that puts more money in Microsoft's pocket has to be a good thing. Hopefully it becomes so simple to dual boot in the future that some developers abandon making Mac versions of their software.

Nope. Wrong. KO.

See previous post.

 

[BornAgainMac]

Running windows on a laptop along side with Mac OS would be valuable. I hate going on a trip and having two laptops. Virtual PC is a good step forward for existing Macs but Intel Macs should have something like it.

Otherwise having a separate desktop is fine. Keep the Mac pure.

 

[Marx55]

Would you prefer "I'd never put that OS full of mailware, spyware, some bugs, viruses, clunky interfaces, stupid noises, crashing, and productivity killing on my MacTel?"

Oh, but I'd still add "FUGLY as all get out XP," 'cause it is.

Maybe you do not see it, but dozens of millions PC-Windows users out there will buy a Mactel and fell in love with Mac OS X. See three previous posts.

 

[Damek]

DirectX is the big thing

Running Windows in/on a Mac is nice and all, but the big thing for most people is going to be: can it play Windows games? I think this is the unspoken hope of most people here, however much we fear game companies not directly porting to the Mac if it's easy to play Win versions on Macs.

The problem is going to be DirectX. The Intel chip does little to solve this, since Mac OS X doesn't support DirectX. Game companies will still have to port DirectX functions.

It seems to be there are three options to running games on the new Intel Macs:

1) Something like Wine that "pretends" to be Windows, running Win programs directly in OS X. But it'll have to have great DirectX support. TransGaming has made good progress here for Linux - but from what I understand, it could be much better. Plus, the installation and running of both the Wine-environment and the games will need to be very Mac-like and easy to use.

2) An emulator type environment like VMWare or Virtual PC that runs "real" Windows in an enclosed space on Mac OS X. This would be better, but again, it'll have to support DirectX with audio/video hardware drivers, and from what I understand, no such system supports DirectX and interfacing with Mac OS X's hardware (or Linux's, for that matter).

3) Running Windows directly on the machine by dual-boot. This would be ideal for games, as they would have native access to the hardware. But it would be acceptible only to geeks, not your average user. Unless the Intel Macs have some magic way of running two operating systems at the same time and switching between them...

The more I think about it, the less likely it seems to me that the Intel Macs will have much possibilities for more games on Macs, at least for another year or so.

Me, I'm waiting anyway because I have a perfectly functional 1.5 year old iBook and expect it will take some time for all the software to go Intel-ready...

 

[Marx55]

And that is the biggest deal of all. A sale vs. no sale is sort of a nobrainer when it comes right down to it. Something that many who groan about Windows on Mac simply miss.

Looking at it another way with a Windows user going and purchasing a Mac there is at least some chance of them reloading OS X at some point vs. them going out and buying a Dell Latitude. Small chance is better then no chance. This needs to be accomplished and if that means that Apple needs to nudge it along with some update to EFI then so be it.

Yes, yes, and yes!!!

 

[Marx55]

Yup. I think this will be particularly important for the Enterprise. As an employee, being able to include the fact that it can run Windows (and therefore, could be used by other employees in the event I move on) might well be the deciding factor as to whether the IT department will sign off on the purchase.

You said it right. Big sales in the corporate market!!!

 

[stealthboy]

Yeah, I think you need to get over your blind prejudice. Step off that facade of a pedestal your on, and realize that we live in a world populated by windows users. Any incentive we give them to try out the Mac platform, is a win for Apple. Most people that try OS X grow to say they can't ever imagine going back to windows. Some Mac users seem like such elitist that I think they actually hurt the platform.

Yeah, and you know what? I have multiple computers. At work I use a windows box and my PowerBook.

If we can't get people to switch from windows to mac os x, they'll buy a mac, put windows on it, and os x marketshare will drop, while mac sales may increase. Is that really what you want?

 

[nagromme]

Ther's a certain amount of argument back and forth surrounding this issue, among people who in fact do AGREE on the two main things:

* That there are good reasons for a great many computer users to prefer OS X over Windows.

* That there are also reasons why some people would have to--or choose to--or like the idea of being able to--run Windows at times.

Some people may like to focus on one of the above and ignore the other, but they still know both are true

 

[Sunrunner]

Your underestimating what an obstacle to switching the lack of computer games is. With most people I know, the only argument they can beat me in, in the pc v mac debate is the lack of mac games available plus their cost. Most if not all of them, would seriously consider buying a mac but for the lack of games.

You make a very good point... this is the same thing I hear all the time...

 

[Glen Quagmire]

I just have to ask.... WHY?

Why in the world would someone want to buy a Mac just to put Windows on it? It's like buying a new sportscar and putting a 3-cylinder econo-engine in it. Honestly, if you want to play your precious computer games, just keep your cheap-o Dell.

Buy a Mac to *get away from the Windows world*. You'll never look back.

I can't believe people are so intent on pursuing this. It really is a travesty. The Mac experience is the combination of hardware and software, and the brilliant design in both. Am I the only one who sees this? Is the world going mad?

You need to broaden your horizons somewhat. Not everyone has the same needs you do. And what's with all the over-the-top language? "Travesty"? Come off it. And is anyone talking about just putting Windows on a Mac? No. Most of us are thinking about the dual (or triple, with Linux) boot opportunities.

Some of us need to use Windows. I work as a programmer, developing .NET-based applications. Last time I looked, you can't get .NET for the Mac (and Mono really, really doesn't count). I also use Chief Architect to do design work. Can't get that for the Mac.

I would love to switch totally to the Mac, but there are a few hold out applications that aren't available and show no indications of so becoming.

If, by the time the PowerMacs come out, you can boot XP (or Vista) on Apple hardware and everything works fine (or thereabouts), I would have no hesitation in replacing my nearly four-year-old PC with a top of the range PowerMac. Most of my needs could be met by OS X. Some of them would need me to use Windows, so I would dual boot or run the programs under emulation.

On the Apple Store, doing a BTO of the type of specification I'd go for if I wanted to buy a Power Mac today (quad 2.7s, etc, etc) would come to nearly £3000. That's £3000 going to Apple, instead of to some no-name PC shop or a load of faceless component manufacturers. Add in the software, OS upgrades and so on. Can't see how that could possibly be considered a "travesty". And then, eighteen months down the line and I decide I need a laptop, Apple would be in a prime position to supply it for me.

How horrid! All that tainted money rolling into Apple. Heavens forfend that I be so enamoured of my Mac experience that I get others to switch as well. Heavens forfend that I might transfer my Windows development skills to developing Mac applications at some point.

Sure, you Mac people can rightly show off about how great your computers are, but some of you are so disconnected from reality and common sense, it beggars belief. This sort of attitude made me hesitate for months and months before finally splashing out on a Mac mini (to test the water). Yet some people on here wonder why Mac users have such a bad reputation. Sometimes it's not hard to see where this view comes from.

 

[pgwalsh]

I am waiting to pick up a Intel-based Mac until there are confirmed reports of Windows running natively or at least emulating at decent speed. If this does not happen, I will probably get one anyway since the 400MHz TiPB I am typing this on is starting to show its age.

$0.02

Kudos to you for stick with an old machine!

I think you have a great piont on running windows natively or emulation at a decent speed. Hopefully will have both options which I think is the best of both worlds.

 

[nagromme]

If we can't get people to switch from windows to mac os x, they'll buy a mac, put windows on it, and os x marketshare will drop,

But do you really believe that will be a big percentage of computer buyers?

And do you believe it will be SO big that it will surpass the number of new Mac buyers who DO use Mac OS X and OS X apps?

Because unless both of those things are true, OS X usage will increase, and Mac developers' sales will increase.

There are three BIG reasons why Mac users will NOT be willing--on a large scale--to settle for running Windows on their Macs instead of demanding a Mac-native app. And with the Mac market growing (especially after the Intel change), developers will be more motivated than ever to sell to us (Besides, if they already have Mac experience and Mac apps to leverage, why throw them out?)

1. Cost. You have to BUY Windows. And possibly some helper app, either for installation or to actually host Windows like VPC. (Which also means a whole extra set of setup steps you have to go through before you can run Windows apps--not too difficult I'm sure, but not something your Mac can do out of the box.) And potentially an extra hard disk as well. More expense--unless you don't mind erasing and reformatting your Mac to get two partitions.

2. Usability. You give up the benefits of OS X, which gets better all the time and is the reason you HAVE a Mac. You either accept the time and effort and inconvenience to dual-boot--in which case you give up OS X entirely for those times, and cannot use those apps in conjunction with your Mac apps... or else you run Windows and Mac simultaneously (with a fast new VPC, or even WINE to run--some--apps without Windows itself). Running both at once is cool in a geeky way, but it's terrible usability: working back and forth between two GUIs at once! That's not Mac user friendliness. Working in ONE environment is more productive if you have the choice. Not to mention a possible performance hit when running multiple OS's together.

3. Security and privacy. The advantages of NOT running Windows in this regard have been much discussed

When you stop and think about it, can you really imagine most Mac users settling for Windows?

For these reasons, users will continue to DEMAND Mac apps. (Even games, to a lesser extent. The GUI is not always an issue for those, but the other issues remain. I know I'll give my money first for native Mac games.)

Running Windows on Mac WILL be great for certain things--such as to give a comfort zone to people fearful of straying from Windows, and thus grow the Mac platform hugely. And it's great as a last-resort option for Mac fans who need a certain Windows app for work or whatever. We already use VPC for that, and VPC (or something) will soon be full-speed and work even better! But it won't make us LIKE running Windows, and won't make us want to buy Windows apps. We'll do it only when we HAVE to.

And we already do: if we HAVE to--and often by choice for games--we run VPC or simply own a PC. No change there. (And neither option is free!) So the people most likely to accept a Windows app or game on their Mac are the very people ALREADY buying Windows apps--for their PC game systems, or their old PC they keep around, or VPC to run some app from their employer, or whatever.

Conclusion: the market for native Mac apps is about to grow, not shrink, and developers will deliver!

 

[MacTruck]

All these people trashing the idea of putting windows on a mac need to zip it. Real computer users need windows. Its not the operating systems folks, its the apps and "THE APPS" that some of us NEED are not built for OSX. OSX threading for database apps SUCKS. This is why Databases and servers are a windows world kids. Don't give me a bunch of junk about how oracle works on osx, it doesn't. Oracle is an enterprise database. No IT director in the world would attempt such a disaster especially for the price oracle charges for its licences and support. So far OSX is only good for movie making. All graphic work can be done on a pc as the apps are similar if not identical.

In a perfect world windows would not exist but then macs would be $20,000 for a quad G5. Competition is good don't forget that.

Apple really needs to get the new intel macs able to load windows without hacks. This is why I was excited about the move. Without that then this move is a waste of time and money for everyone.

Keep in mind that many developers built software for OSX as a one time shot. They might not port their apps to intel. It took many many years for all the apps to finally go OSX that are needed. I'm talking FTP apps, graphics apps, science apps. Look how long it took Quark to port their stuff to OSX. Like over a year.

No, the world needs windows. There are millions of apps out there that are windows only and the mac and all its glory can never account for that loss.

Give windows users the ability to install windows on a mac and everyone will buy macs. Take that ability away by making it impossible without some geek hack and not only will you not get windows users to buy macs but you will lose some apple customers in the process as they won't go out and purchase all new apps for a minimal speed increase.

Sorry apple zealots, windows is here to stay, apple should start to play.

 

[stealthboy]

You are the stereotypical Mac fan boy. Congrats.

Some people here are geeks, get excited about all technology, and are intrigued by the possibility of having a desktop/laptop capable of running multiple OSes.

In fact, I'm not the stereotypical Mac fan boy. What I care about is design. There is not enough good design in this world. People put up with mediocrity every day, and most people don't care about it. That's fine for them, but for me I care about things just looking and feeling right. I care that a company put effort into making things look sleek, simple, elegant. Attention to detail is something that really means a lot to me.

This is why I recoil in horror at the thought of Windows on a Mac. It's that simple. I think there is an elegance to the Mac and its operating system that are just.... right. I guess I want other people to share in that experience. Someone buying a Mac for the first time would do themselves and the Mac a disservice by putting Windows on it.

I mean, honestly... Just think about this. Am I wrong?

 

[Marx55]

I'll bet hundreds of thousands of Offices, Gamers, IT Depts, schools and the general public, used to using XP, would switch to a Mac in a second if they could also run Windoze on their machines at native speeds

We are one of those. We wll purchase several thousand of Mactels for our University if they can boot Mac OS X, Linux and Windows at native speed. Otherwise, we will keep on purchasing PC boxes. Apple: do you get the message? Please, release Mactels that boot natively any OS Intel can boot. And then, as previously said, once people taste Mac OS X, they will switch from Linux and Windows by millions. That is for sure. No problem with developers, because increasing Mac OS X market share can only make them release more titles for Mac.

Apple: go for it. Now!!!

 

[stealthboy]

You need to broaden your horizons somewhat. Not everyone has the same needs you do. And what's with all the over-the-top language? "Travesty"? Come off it. And is anyone talking about just putting Windows on a Mac? No. Most of us are thinking about the dual (or triple, with Linux) boot opportunities.

Some of us need to use Windows. I work as a programmer, developing .NET-based applications. Last time I looked, you can't get .NET for the Mac (and Mono really, really doesn't count). I also use Chief Architect to do design work. Can't get that for the Mac.

Just for the record, I use Windows, Mac, and Linux computers EVERY DAY. I am a software developer, and use all platforms for my work. I've been using Linux every day since 1993 (pre-1.0 days), but there's no way I would want to put Linux as a dual-boot on my Mac.

Hey, if I'm the only one thinking this, fine, I'll just shut up. I just see it as a possible dilution of the Apple brand.

 

[Airforce]

We are one of those. We wll purchase several thousand of Mactels for our University if they can boot Mac OS X, Linux and Windows at native speed. Otherwise, we will keep on purchasing PC boxes. Apple

Wow, your university is willing to pay for 3 OS licenses for each machine? Must be nice having all that money allocated to your department

 

[Marx55]

Running Windows in/on a Mac is nice and all, but the big thing for most people is going to be: can it play Windows games? I think this is the unspoken hope of most people here, however much we fear game companies not directly porting to the Mac if it's easy to play Win versions on Macs.

The problem is going to be DirectX. The Intel chip does little to solve this, since Mac OS X doesn't support DirectX. Game companies will still have to port DirectX functions.

It seems to be there are three options to running games on the new Intel Macs:

1) Something like Wine that "pretends" to be Windows, running Win programs directly in OS X. But it'll have to have great DirectX support. TransGaming has made good progress here for Linux - but from what I understand, it could be much better. Plus, the installation and running of both the Wine-environment and the games will need to be very Mac-like and easy to use.

2) An emulator type environment like VMWare or Virtual PC that runs "real" Windows in an enclosed space on Mac OS X. This would be better, but again, it'll have to support DirectX with audio/video hardware drivers, and from what I understand, no such system supports DirectX and interfacing with Mac OS X's hardware (or Linux's, for that matter).

3) Running Windows directly on the machine by dual-boot. This would be ideal for games, as they would have native access to the hardware. But it would be acceptible only to geeks, not your average user. Unless the Intel Macs have some magic way of running two operating systems at the same time and switching between them...

The more I think about it, the less likely it seems to me that the Intel Macs will have much possibilities for more games on Macs, at least for another year or so.

Me, I'm waiting anyway because I have a perfectly functional 1.5 year old iBook and expect it will take some time for all the software to go Intel-ready...

Concerning 3, that is possible and is called Intel virtualization technology built-in the new Intel chips to come out by the middle of this year. Wow, our dreams come true!!!

 

[snkTab]

Question: What's the difference between dual-booting Windows and a root-kit.

Answer: Dual-booting windows would require another partition.

(Not trying to be a fanboy, just saw everyone else having fun cracking on Microsoft and felt like joining in)

The similarities: Both are hidden from the OS and allow virii to come in.

 

[PtMD]

I mean, honestly... Just think about this. Am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong!

There, Im glad I could solve this with such an easy answer.

 

[Randall]

This whole thread is turning into an OS flame war. I thought the point of it would be to discuss the new Mactel's EFI and how to get other x86 based OSes booting off it. I guess I missed the point...

 

[Marx55]

Wow, your university is willing to pay for 3 OS licenses for each machine? Must be nice having all that money allocated to your department

Windows we have had an unlimited campus-wide license for years. Linux is free. Mac OS X comes with the Mactels. No problem!

 

[PtMD]

Just for the record, I use Windows, Mac, and Linux computers EVERY DAY. I am a software developer, and use all platforms for my work. I've been using Linux every day since 1993 (pre-1.0 days), but there's no way I would want to put Linux as a dual-boot on my Mac.

Ok, so let me get this striaght... You use Linux every day? Yet you dont see the advatage of dual booting to Linux on your Mac? I dual boot to Debian on my PB and I wouldnt have it any other way.

Why should I take 2 laptops with me when I can take 1? Now when my MPB arrives in Feb and we work out the Windows boot issues, I will be able to take my games along with me. And dont give my any line about running Mac games. I don't see Battlefield2 avaliable yet after how long?