Windows on Mac and Mac OS X on PCs?

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
7,451
8,517


The release of the first Intel Macs has rekindled speculation and discussion about Apple's long term plans with regard to their platform and the level of "openness". This comes in two forms.

First, is the possibility to run Windows on the Mac. As mentioned previously, Apple's official stance is one of indifference - That's fine with us. We Don't mind. This, however, may require some work. Of note, MacWindows claims that Microsoft execs said that while the current version of Virtual PC won't run on the Intel Macs, the company is "committed to porting the emulator to the Intel Mac platform. No time frame is given. This delay may be due to claims by eWeek that the Virtual PC team was caught off guard by the Intel Mac announcement back in June 2005 and that "Apple has yet to provide developers with the deep hooks needed for such virtualization".

Meanwhile, Businessweek discusses the flip side of that scenario -- opening Mac OS X up to run on generic PCs. While Apple has no plans to do such a thing at this time, that doesn't stop analysts from asking "What if..." The author gives a balanced look at the options Apple might have and even notes that Microsoft's license-platform-to-all strategy may be hurting the consumer adoption of their Windows Media/MP3 players.
 

KyleC

macrumors member
Oct 9, 2004
81
0
Dallas, Texas
windows on mac hardware excites me, i love apple hardware, but still need a windows machine, but the other way around doesn't.
 

Synapple

macrumors regular
Mar 29, 2004
243
0
Rome, Italy
I bet Microsoft will at least operate VPC directly on the hardware... which could be great for some of us who have to stick to Windows for business
 

datkins23

macrumors newbie
Jan 11, 2006
2
0
Virual PC

I think we will have dual booting or some other type of virtualization long before we get anything from Microsoft.

datkins23
 

macosxuser01

macrumors 6502a
Jan 10, 2006
600
124
Sacramento, CA
why would you run Windows on a Mac. thats stupid. runing OS X on PC would make sense. running xp on an mac would be like be like driving a ferrari with a honda civic engine in it
 

justicart

macrumors newbie
Jan 11, 2006
2
0
One thing Mac has over windows is that they control all the hardware. They have a standard set. Windows will run on any piece of crap and that opens itself up to all kinds of problems. I think running OS X on any piece of crap is a bad idea.
 

Synapple

macrumors regular
Mar 29, 2004
243
0
Rome, Italy
macosxuser01 said:
why would you run Windows on a Mac. thats stupid.
If that's what you want to call it.. then yeah, I agree. But, where I work, no Mac OS is allowed to join the corporate network... hence, the freaken Acer I am typing this on.
 

Maestro64

macrumors regular
Jan 5, 2005
208
0
Philadelphia
Well it would be nice to have dual boots, and screw the VPC idea. As much as i try to find ways not to deal with Windows in the business world, there are solutions that require you to be in windows for it to work correctly.

So the ability to switch back and forth between OS as needed would be great. Not that i spend that much time in the windows environment it still would be nice not having to deal with the limitations of VPC.
 

Gizmotoy

macrumors 65816
Nov 6, 2003
1,081
118
macosxuser01 said:
why would you run Windows on a Mac. thats stupid. runing OS X on PC would make sense. running xp on an mac would be like be like driving a ferrari with a honda civic engine in it
Hmm... so would running OS X on PC be like driving a Civic with a Ferrari engine in it? ;) Guess it would. Don't see how your analogy is good if you like one version but dislike the other.
 

greeneggs

macrumors newbie
May 9, 2005
15
0
Intel-Macs use EFI, This will prevent Windows XP from running.

With the switch to Intel processors, Apple also moved from Open Firmware to EFI, which is an updated BIOS specification developed by Intel. Due to Apple's use of the extensible firmware interface (EFI) rather than BIOS, current Windows releases will not run on the systems.

http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/universal_binary/universal_binary_diffs/chapter_3_section_10.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002217-CH240-BAJGDABG

Looks like this might prevent Windows from running on MacTel for the time being. This also may prevent OS X from running on BIOS systems.
 

danp

macrumors member
Sep 26, 2005
57
0
Cambridge, UK
Stepping away from brand-jingoism or zealotry for a moment, I think that making Mac OS X available for generic PC hardware is a *good* idea in theory.

PC users can clearly see why Apple hardware is better looking, and with the switch to Intel can see why its better performing (for now, at least). What your average PC buyer can't comprehend is why Mac OS X is a better OS than Windows, and few will take the risk of buying a £1000 iMac to test that theory. Boxing up Mac OS X and making it run on their existing hardware may tempt them to buy the real thing next time around - and at the very least, puts some more money Apples way.

In practice tho, I don't think this will happen. Its not clear whether Apple have the development, testing and support resources to ensure Mac OS X's smooth operation with the glut of third party PCI/PCI-E/AGP hardware out there. Although drivers etc are the ultimate responsibility of the third party manufacturers, Apple will need to be confident that it will work 'well enough' out of the box to capture the users.

And thats a pretty tall order.
 
Business Week said:
But Apple has an intriguing new possibility now, as a result of the move to Intel chips: license Windows, and have it run in Macs alongside the Mac OS. That way, consumers could run their trusty Office applications such as Word and Excel using Windows and also have access to Apple's slick iLife programs
I hate how Journalists always make it sound like Microsoft Office does not run on Mac OS X
 

runninmac

macrumors 65816
Jan 20, 2005
1,495
0
Rockford MI
It would be nice to be able to use Windows for a breif period of time (aka games). I would just hope that when a Mac gets a Windows virus it doesn't pass it to the windows thats on the HDD, if that makes sense.
 

Pete T.

macrumors newbie
Jan 11, 2006
1
0
Both Platforms

I work in both mac and windows and have to cary both machines with me in my backpack every day.
I if the new laptop could boot up with both systems my life would be much simpler and lighter. There are lots of us out here in the entertainment who cary two machines just like me.
PLEASE make a machine that will boot up both. Virtual PC is useless!!!
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,551
1,186
VPC is going to be great, if you need Windows--I've always assumed a new Intel Mac version would be coming.

No dual boot, no delay, no hassle, just use ANY app ANY time, drag-and-drop between them, etc... use Mac and Windows apps TOGETHER. Having only half your apps at any one time is no good. Simultaneous on one screen is good! (And cool in a geeky way.)

Best of all, this way if Windows gets a virus it canNOT wipe your Mac's HD. It can only attack the VPC hardfile. That's the way I like my Windows--safely abstracted away from my hardware, keeping its malware to itself. (Of course if you opt to share some of your Mac HD with the Windows side--you open up those files to Windows malware. So I don't do that--I just drag Mac files onto the Windows desktop when I want to share saved files.)

And no matter HOW you run Windows... just knowing there ARE ways to do it (some easier than others) creates a great comfort zone for switchers. Most of them will never need to run Windows on their Mac in reality--or will just keep their old PC under the desk for that. But knowing the CAN will make them less afraid. Irrational fear of the unknown is what makes people find the current dire state of Windows "acceptable" after all.
 

mkjellman

macrumors regular
Oct 14, 2003
158
0
as other people have pointed out, these new machines are using EFI, so you will have to wait for Vista to run anything on your intel mac.
 

mdntcallr

macrumors 65816
Aug 1, 2000
1,442
118
i'd love to load windows on my macbook pro when i get it.

why? games!!! and some other stuff that wont work on a mac yet.

i emphasize yet, because i love running software more on os x!

why? it is just better! more stable and reliable.

macs are better, but being able to load windows would be a good safety net.

only problem i see is no BIOS on macs for windows to use. Can there be virtual bios on a mac to "emulate" the technology needed to run windows?
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,551
1,186
macosxuser01 said:
why would you run Windows on a Mac. thats stupid. runing OS X on PC would make sense. running xp on an mac would be like be like driving a ferrari with a honda civic engine in it
Well, many people have no need for Windows. Macs have apps for nearly everything. But some specific apps--especially used by some businesses--are not on Mac and so having both worlds means the dilemma is solved.


datkins23 said:
I think we will have dual booting or some other type of virtualization long before we get anything from Microsoft.
Agreed--VPC won't be the only, or first solution. It will be a very user-friendly one, attractive to switchers, though: one disc, officially from MS, pop it in your Mac and Windows is installed alongside OS X.


Jesus said:
I'd love to have a native windows emulator like Darwine or Wine (or VPC) running on my new iMac allowing me to play games and ... and ... well, I think thats it.
Darwine is coming :) It sounds far from a complete solution, but it will be an option. Windows apps... without Windows at all. That means no need to BUY Windows :) All good.



As for games... my money is going first to support REAL Mac games. Games that I don't have to reboot for. Games that don't open up my machine to malware. Games that don't ask me to learn to maintain and troubleshoot Windows. Games you don't have to pay for a copy of Windows to use. (Linux games would be a second choice though.)

Windows is a great option for some gamers, don't get me wrong. But for me, it's a second best and there are more Mac games out there than I have time to play anyway :)

What I AM motivated to use Windows for is for game editing tools. But those are starting to come to Mac more too. I'd consider getting UT2004 for Windows even though I already have it for Mac: so I could start learning UnrealEd 2. Because UnrealEd 3 (UT 2007's editor) has been announced for Mac and I don't know if I can wait! :D
 

monkeyandy

macrumors member
Jan 9, 2006
72
0
Windows on Mac

I am a massive Apple fan but also an ICT teacher. Sadly 99.9% of schools have Windows. I would love to able to use Mac but also have access to a fully blown machine for demos, etc. If I can run both I wll upgrade straight away!

:D
 

kainjow

Moderator emeritus
Jun 15, 2000
7,745
3
greeneggs said:
With the switch to Intel processors, Apple also moved from Open Firmware to EFI, which is an updated BIOS specification developed by Intel. Due to Apple's use of the extensible firmware interface (EFI) rather than BIOS, current Windows releases will not run on the systems.

http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/universal_binary/universal_binary_diffs/chapter_3_section_10.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002217-CH240-BAJGDABG

Looks like this might prevent Windows from running on MacTel for the time being. This also may prevent OS X from running on BIOS systems.
Not 100% right. Here's how I understand it:

First: Macs use EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface), which is open source. EFI is the modern replacement for BIOS. EFI does support legacy BIOS, however it's up to the distributor (Apple) to include these options.

Second: Windows XP requires BIOS. Windows Vista is compatible with EFI. So if Apple chose to include legacy BIOS support in their EFI implementation, then Windows XP and other Windows versions will be bootable. If not, Windows Vista will be the only bootable version of Windows.

However, my guesses is that Apple left the legacy BIOS support in EFI. Why? Because they make tons of profit on hardware. If they can get you to buy their hardware, they could care less what OS you use. Having the Mac hardware is enough of a switch, and it's almost guaranteed you will try out OS X and possibly switch to it full time.

Lastly, hopefully the guys behind VMWare will update their software to run in OS X. This is open source, correct? But M$'s Virtual PC 8 may be a nice commercial version also.

Either way: I want OS X and Windows to run together. I want both running in full screen on 2 separate monitors. The *perfect* productivity environment :D
 

Evangelion

macrumors 68040
Jan 10, 2005
3,314
5
macosxuser01 said:
why would you run Windows on a Mac. thats stupid.
Some of you simply do not "get it". So allow me to educate:

Not everyone uses OS X. There are lots and lots of people who are Windows-users (or Linux-users, or *BSD-users). And many people use those OS'es by choice. They WANT to run those OS'es! Now they (Well, Linux & co runs on macs as we speak) have the option of running their OS of choice on Apple-hardware.

Yes, OS X is a fine OS. But many people WANT to use something else instead. And they have that right. And if they can run their favourite OS on Apple-hardware, more power to them!
 

zzcoop

macrumors member
Nov 10, 2003
48
0
emulator said:
I bet you don't play games, do you? And how much the OSX:Windows software ratio? 1:20 ?
Right. And just how much of that is crappy shareware or one of fifty different buggy little apps designed to do the exact same thing in slightly different, yet equally quirky ways? There's a lot of redundancy in the Windows software world.