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.
Windows on Mac and Mac OS X on PCs?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
peace, read this
Ok, Peace, you made me subscribe to the forum just to reply.
I am a Windows user. Most of you in this forum are Mac only or Mac/win users.
The question is:
If you were a windows only user like me (and many other individuals), and Apple laptops were running windows, which laptop would you buy to run windows?
a) Dell
b) Acer
c) Toshiba
d) HP-Compaq
e) Apple
Peace said:
Ok, Peace, you made me subscribe to the forum just to reply.
I am a Windows user. Most of you in this forum are Mac only or Mac/win users.
The question is:
If you were a windows only user like me (and many other individuals), and Apple laptops were running windows, which laptop would you buy to run windows?
a) Dell
b) Acer
c) Toshiba
d) HP-Compaq
e) Apple
i just found this post around; in case someone is curious, it could be useful...
The new intel Macs supports Target Disk Mode, Netboot, and all of the
previous features with the exception of booting into open firmware.
EFI will be implemented in Vista. We've done it in 10.4.4. Apple -- still
ahead after all these years.
If you haven't already taken a look, do so at Intel's web site:
http://www.intel.com/technology/efi/
SNAG KEYS
Booting on an external hard drive only works over FireWire, not USB. You
will still have boot key functionality similar to an OpenFirmware password
called password/security mode. These are called SNAG KEYS:
Snag keys currently implemented in firmware on Intel-based Macs are below.
"Snag Keys" are keys held down during system startup to affect the system's
behavior. Some are detected by the firmware, while others are detected by
the operating system loader.
1. The "T" Key
Boot computer into Target Disk Mode. Disabled when password/security mode
is enabled.
2. The "C" Key
Boot from the first optical device found with bootable media. Disabled when
password/security mode is enabled.
3. The "D" Key
Boot from the first optical device found with a valid, bootable diagnostic
booter on it. (The path to this file is "Blessed
Folder"/.diagnostic/diag.efi) Disabled when password/security mode is
enabled.
4. The "CMD-OPT-P-R" Keys
Clears all NVRAM variables. Disabled when password/security mode is
enabled.
5. The "N" Key
Pass in model property of machine booting and BSDP net boot from the most
appropriate BSDP server found. Disabled when password/security mode is
enabled.
6. The "OPT-N" Keys
BSDP net boot using "default" boot image set up on the BSDP server.
Disabled when password/security mode is enabled.
7. The "F1" Key
BSDP net boot using diagnostic boot image set up on the BSDP server.
8. The "OPTION" Key
Brings up the Picker interface. If security is enabled, it brings up a
dialog box to enter the security password before dropping into the Picker.
Pressing the "N" Key in Picker Searches for available NetBoot servers.
9. Mouse Button, F12, or Eject Key
Eject the optical drive media. Not disabled when security is enabled.
Snag keys implemented in the OS loader as of Tiger:
Command-S: boot to single user mode.
Command-V: boot in verbose mode with a text console log.
WinXP stability
That's the problem, you have to spend a lot of time on it to make it work properly. I had a sys-admin friend who was telling me how he kept his Windows machine stable by using different partitions, re-installing Windows after every major software installation or uninstallation etc. Although he did not think it was a big deal (he was explaining all that in a very "matter of fact" manner), I believe it is a big deal. An OS just should not degrade, lose track of its own temporary files over time etc.
Just because your particular hardware software combination is very stable, it is not a proof that WinXP just does not crash. Granted it is a great improvement over Win95/98 days, god that was a pain, WinXP still is not all that great. My laptop never hibernates properly more than five times before acting up and forcing me to either reboot or sometimes pull the batteries out. Every time I have to connect to a different wireless network, it takes me ten minutes of resetting, reconfiguring etc. A few months ago it once took my PC 45 minutes to uninstall Roxio, during which time CPU was too busy to do anything else. You know, I cannot just delete the application on Windows. I was forced to uninstall it in the first place, because it was freezing every other time and stopped recognizing my external DVD writer after burning a CD or two. And I installed it earlier, because it came with my external DVD writer. I once was forced to create a new account for myself after a Windows update somehow messed up my system and spending hours and days on it and trying to go back to the pre-update state just did not work. So on and on... I do see more stable Windows systems around (e.g. my wife's laptop), but it is no guarantee that the next you will purchase is gonna be one of those. And it is not like I use any hacks which might be causing the system to be unstable later on. Just a low demand user.
SiliconAddict said:
That's the problem, you have to spend a lot of time on it to make it work properly. I had a sys-admin friend who was telling me how he kept his Windows machine stable by using different partitions, re-installing Windows after every major software installation or uninstallation etc. Although he did not think it was a big deal (he was explaining all that in a very "matter of fact" manner), I believe it is a big deal. An OS just should not degrade, lose track of its own temporary files over time etc.
Just because your particular hardware software combination is very stable, it is not a proof that WinXP just does not crash. Granted it is a great improvement over Win95/98 days, god that was a pain, WinXP still is not all that great. My laptop never hibernates properly more than five times before acting up and forcing me to either reboot or sometimes pull the batteries out. Every time I have to connect to a different wireless network, it takes me ten minutes of resetting, reconfiguring etc. A few months ago it once took my PC 45 minutes to uninstall Roxio, during which time CPU was too busy to do anything else. You know, I cannot just delete the application on Windows.
I was forced to uninstall it in the first place, because it was freezing every other time and stopped recognizing my external DVD writer after burning a CD or two. And I installed it earlier, because it came with my external DVD writer. I once was forced to create a new account for myself after a Windows update somehow messed up my system and spending hours and days on it and trying to go back to the pre-update state just did not work. So on and on... I do see more stable Windows systems around (e.g. my wife's laptop), but it is no guarantee that the next you will purchase is gonna be one of those. And it is not like I use any hacks which might be causing the system to be unstable later on. Just a low demand user.
chuchin said:
To run Windows?By itself ?
I have run Windows.From 3.11 to XP circa SP2
I actually have my DTK doing a dual-boot..NDA doesn't say I cant.
Had 2 laptops.A Compaq circa 1998 and a Dell Inspiron circa 2001? and of course my mighty Rev.A Powerbook G4 aluminum 1.0ghz.
Built 5 systems by hand using ASUS MB's and top of the line hardware..
I Now own a 1.6 G5 Powermac.A dual 2.3 Rev B Powermac and the DTK soon to be Intel iMac 17".
I'd use the top of the line Acer for Windows only..
But only because that system is built specifically for a Windows environment and by ASUS
Don't get me wrong.I'd probably wanna try the dual boot also.
But mainly for geek purposes since I dont really need Windows for any critical apps..
theBB said:That's the problem, you have to spend a lot of time on it to make it work properly. I had a sys-admin friend who was telling me how he kept his Windows machine stable by using different partitions, re-installing Windows after every major software installation or uninstallation etc. Although he did not think it was a big deal (he was explaining all that in a very "matter of fact" manner), I believe it is a big deal. An OS just should not degrade, lose track of its own temporary files over time etc.
Just because your particular hardware software combination is very stable, it is not a proof that WinXP just does not crash. Granted it is a great improvement over Win95/98 days, god that was a pain, WinXP still is not all that great. My laptop never hibernates properly more than five times before acting up and forcing me to either reboot or sometimes pull the batteries out. Every time I have to connect to a different wireless network, it takes me ten minutes of resetting, reconfiguring etc. A few months ago it once took my PC 45 minutes to uninstall Roxio, during which time CPU was too busy to do anything else. You know, I cannot just delete the application on Windows.
running windows on a computer isnt like trying to handle plutonium...
its no problem at all and you dont have to spend ages to make it work properly. to get the basics up and running, simply keep all the important software on a dvd, antivirus, lan drivers, soundcard drivers, stuff like that.
insert the xp sp2 cd, reboot,format the c drive and install, 50mins later you are all set and go (with the driver dvd installed as well).
you dont keep your computer stable by using partitions, its just a great method to both organize and do some damage control. windows is the most common os in the world, wich increases the risk of viruses etc, having a partition means that if you get infected by a virus, all you have to do is take some copies of your documents and then reinstall windows,you dont have to worry about losing all your mp3 files, movies etc, because stuff like that is placed on different partitions.
most problems in windows are caused by the user or the hardware, simple as that. if you have some faulty ram, its going to cause problems, windows xp or os x, it will still cause problems, same goes for a cpu that gets overheated, graphic card issues, old hdd thats about to break down.
i have had a windows laptop for some time, has never been any issues with it, i installed windows xp sp2 and nod32 antivirus, i even disabled the firewall.
if you know what do to, you wont be in trouble.
could you use this app (http://www.win4lin.com/content/view/64/125/) and x11 to run windows?
Just a thaught.
Just a thaught.
Deleting this myself as it's a rant and it's way off topic. The whole thread is way off topic now.
millar876 said:
Only if you installed Linux on a Mac. Win4Lin is a linux binary (not executable on Intel Macs) and requires a linux kernel module to be loaded, which is not compatible with Macs.
Of course, there's nothing to stop that company producing a version of Win4Lin for Intels Macs I guess, except I think that they license their Windows compatibility off Microsoft and MS might say "no".
Windows on Mactel
I think the whole point of NOT running Windows on a VMWare type of setup is that it is slow, because you don't have direct hardware access. It doesn't matter if it's the same architecture, virtual machines suck. The benefits of dual booting are obvious for corporate environments using their Windows only software, as well as gaming in Windows. I would rather dual boot up any day then then have a virtual machine going. Think of Wine for Linux. It sucks, because it's trying to emulate Windows, and it's running on x86 hardware but that doesn't matter because it's still emulated and therfore still slow. The advantages for dual booting should be obvious to everyone. The only thing missing is Windows XP support for booting with EFI. I think it's just a matter of time before we see a hack for this. Somebody somewhere will make it their mission to be the first to dual boot Windows XP and Mac OS X on a new intel Mac.
I think the whole point of NOT running Windows on a VMWare type of setup is that it is slow, because you don't have direct hardware access. It doesn't matter if it's the same architecture, virtual machines suck. The benefits of dual booting are obvious for corporate environments using their Windows only software, as well as gaming in Windows. I would rather dual boot up any day then then have a virtual machine going. Think of Wine for Linux. It sucks, because it's trying to emulate Windows, and it's running on x86 hardware but that doesn't matter because it's still emulated and therfore still slow. The advantages for dual booting should be obvious to everyone. The only thing missing is Windows XP support for booting with EFI. I think it's just a matter of time before we see a hack for this. Somebody somewhere will make it their mission to be the first to dual boot Windows XP and Mac OS X on a new intel Mac.
Different solutions to different problems. As a developer, I want to, at minimum, run Windows XP with Internet Explorer to test my web app for compatability. Dual-booting is a MUCH worse solution than running a virtual software Windows machine for this problem. I agree dual booting for games is a better solution than the virutal one though.Randall said:I think the whole point of NOT running Windows on a VMWare type of setup is that it is slow, because you don't have direct hardware access. It doesn't matter if it's the same architecture, virtual machines suck. The benefits of dual booting are obvious for corporate environments using their Windows only software, as well as gaming in Windows. I would rather dual boot up any day then then have a virtual machine going. Think of Wine for Linux. It sucks, because it's trying to emulate Windows, and it's running on x86 hardware but that doesn't matter because it's still emulated and therfore still slow. The advantages for dual booting should be obvious to everyone. The only thing missing is Windows XP support for booting with EFI. I think it's just a matter of time before we see a hack for this. Somebody somewhere will make it their mission to be the first to dual boot Windows XP and Mac OS X on a new intel Mac.
Agreed. It would be nice to do both, since some people just need to run that one app. I would love to be able to dual boot it though, seeing as it's the same architecture and all, and finally being able to play those Windows only games with my buddies is important for me. Gaming and hardware intensive tasks are where WINE and other emulators like Virual PC and VMWare fall painfully short.macintel4me said:
Please tell me that somebody will find a way to make dual booting a reality. 
Randall said:Gaming and hardware intensive tasks are where WINE and other emulators like Virual PC and VMWare fall painfully short.
I can garuantee that it will be done soon, if it is possible. Whether it will be possible to dual boot without breaking someboady's EULA is another matter. But I'm sure that people are already working on it, since the new iMac is now out in the wild.
People have already mentioned that the new iMacs will not simply boot XP or Vista discs, but obviously few people expected it to be that straightforward.
Very wrong, having used VMWare for a good few years I can say that productivity applications run excellently under VMWare on Linux, especially in full screen mode. Only stuff where GFX acceleration is necessary (i.e. games) do they lag.Randall said:
Actually I think the benefit of dual booting in a corperate environment is extremely inobvious. Most people who need to run Windows are going to be running some windows specific business app. These run fine in a VM. The time lost through having to switch OSs constantly is a huge inefficiency in dual booting. Really dual booting is only best for games if Windows in a VM is available.
Wrong! Wine is not an emulator (hell the acronym WINE stands for "Wine Is Not an Emulator". Its a rewriting of the Win32 API under X11/Unix. Therefore any slowness is just due to either inefficiently written code, or the fact that it has to run under X11. In fact you'll find the when WINE works well, Win32 apps work extremely fast under Linux, certainly enough to play games using Cedega's Transgaming platform for example. In some cases games run quicker under Linux on the same hardware.
I.e. Gamers.
Someone brought it up before, is this all due to EFI? Perhaps we have to wait for the first PCs to ship with a revved version of XP that can handle EFI BIOS.
Are there any PCs on the market with EFI yet other than the iMac?
Are there any PCs on the market with EFI yet other than the iMac?
janstett said:
There's an Acer laptop. 8200 Travelmate I think.
EDIT: oops no that laptop has standard BIOS.
What makes a mac?
Here's an (unlikely?) hypothetical situation.
Let's say you have an intel based apple computer running windows only (i.e. no trace of OS X on it). Let's also say Apple release OS X for PCs and you have a PC (let's say a Dell) running OS X only with no trace of windows.
Which is a mac? Both? Neither?
Here's an (unlikely?) hypothetical situation.
Let's say you have an intel based apple computer running windows only (i.e. no trace of OS X on it). Let's also say Apple release OS X for PCs and you have a PC (let's say a Dell) running OS X only with no trace of windows.
Which is a mac? Both? Neither?
sunfast said:
The one sold by Apple is a Mac. The one sold by Dell is a Dell.
EDIT: If you install Linux on your Dell do you say "oh my laptop? yeah that's a Linux"?
maverick808 said:
I see your point, but people talk about Dells and so on being "windows boxes" or "pcs". Neither of which would be true if it ran Mac OS X, would they?
A pretty pointless post I guess - because I don't want to see OS X anywhere other than on an apple.
I really and truly hate windows with a passion after all the bs i went through with them buh i have grown up useing a windows machine so i do kno much more about them then macs so i do like the ide of haveing windows on a mac machine buh with mac os as the admin of the machine
Run Windows on your Intel Mac
http://openosx.com/wintel/
I think this link kind of covers it.
Now if I could do the opposite with this "P"iece of "C"arp HP I have to use at work.
http://openosx.com/wintel/
I think this link kind of covers it.
Now if I could do the opposite with this "P"iece of "C"arp HP I have to use at work.
Big Lar said:
The only prob with this software, IMHO, is that OpenOSx as a company is right up there with Microsoft when it comes to the scum factor.
http://fink.sourceforge.net/pr/openosx.php
I won't do business with those people.