Windows Virtualization on Intel Macs

[tomax7]

What I'd like to know is if anyone loaded BootCamp onto a Mac Mini Solo.

I got a mac mini solo 1.5 with 512 ram. I know bootcamp "can" be loaded on it, but with xp will the system just be a slow dog then?

cheers
tom

 

[BillyShears]

Using bridged Ethernet I cannot ping myself from the same machine. Does that answer your question? It probably can be made to work but doing a quick test that is what I get.

Argh, yes that answers it... in the negative. Maybe I will hold off until I hear some confirmation of it working.

(You are trying to ping the Windows IP address from the OS X terminal right?)

 

[:DRS:Church]

bla bla bla, where are the benchmarks? Thats what really matters. I wanna see some 3dMark05 scores. And i want to see the same cpu used in the macs, used on wintel machines. See a lot of you are saying its faster than windows machine. Well I bet your windows comp dont have the same intel chips that apple is using right now. These are the same people that think every apple OS update makes their comp run faster Also (this is where I get flamed) whats to say apple didnt find a way to make windows run like 10% slower on apples hardware? Makes sense right. You dont want somebody elses OS running faster on your hardware, right? So flame away. I have had macs in my house longer than some of you have been alive(got my first mac in 86). Also I think this is great!! One less comp in my house, although I doubt I will ever trade my gaming PC for a mac. Its just cheaper to build a PC to play games on, plus you can upgrade a PC. As far as gaming goes on a mac there are just to little options as far as upgrading your comp. Anyway, I think this is cool. Now lets see the benches.

 

[rdrr]

dreams of quad core?

Imagine when quad core chips come out...

Host OSX

One VM running windo$e
One VM running Solaris X86
One VM running Linux

 

[balamw]

I got a mac mini solo 1.5 with 512 ram. I know bootcamp "can" be loaded on it, but with xp will the system just be a slow dog then?

It'll run like XP on a typical Pentium M laptop, since that's essentially what you've got i.e. think of the performance of a Pentium M 1.4 GHz with integrated graphics and 512MB of RAM.

No speed demon, but no slouch either.

B

 

[tomax7]

Thanks, but...

Thanks for the reply, but did you actually install it on a Mini?

Don't take me wrong, but I would like to know if someone did and how they rate it. We don't have the Duo's up here in Calgary yet, so wondering if I buy the Solo (to learn Apple) I won't be really dissappointed in performance.

It'll run like XP on a typical Pentium M laptop, since that's essentially what you've got i.e. think of the performance of a Pentium M 1.4 GHz with integrated graphics and 512MB of RAM.

No speed demon, but no slouch either.

B

 

[dizastor]

One word:

Marklar.

Sorry, matey. If Steve sends that puppy out, it'll be a free-for-all.

Didn't marklar already get sent out? I thought that was the code name for the OSX on x86 project inside Apple, which was secret until last june, which is running on the intel macs at this very moment?? Is there yet another secret OSX on x86 project inside Apple hq? I don't understand what they would be doing.

 

[daveschroeder]

What I'd like to know is if anyone loaded BootCamp onto a Mac Mini Solo.

I got a mac mini solo 1.5 with 512 ram. I know bootcamp "can" be loaded on it, but with xp will the system just be a slow dog then?

Why would it be?

(Answer: no, it isn't slow. Slower than a 2.0 GHz Core Duo with 2GB RAM? Sure. But definitely not slower than any other 1.5 GHz Core Solo system running Windows.)

 

[daveschroeder]

Imagine when quad core chips come out...

Host OSX

One VM running windo$e
One VM running Solaris X86
One VM running Linux

You don't need 4 cores to run 4 VMs. You can do that now. That's part of the beauty of VT. The real concern is having enough *RAM* for all of your VMs.

 

[ZeeG]

Any .NET developers out there with an MBP and Parallels?

I build Compact Framework apps in VS2005. From the descriptions of Parallels, and my previous experience with 'native' VM software (VMWare on PC), I'd imagine that Visual Studio itself will run absolutely fine.

But can anyone out there try to connect a PocketPC device (via USB cradle) and see if ActiveSync/Visual Studio detect and deploy to it correctly?

If so, then 'goodbye' to every single PC I own, and work can take their Dell back

I'm very interested in this too.
The only reason I'm using Windows is the Visual Studio that I need to use for my project. I don't access i/o devices such as USB or Pararell port in my program, so I'm assuming VS will run perfectly and smoothly on the MBP.
I'm getting exiting about MBP! I hope to get it soon. - I have to get rid of this powerbook first, though...

 

[rdrr]

You don't need 4 cores to run 4 VMs. You can do that now. That's part of the beauty of VT. The real concern is having enough *RAM* for all of your VMs.

But doesn't windows require atleast half your resources?

 

[riversky]

Just think what Microsoft will do

This is like virtual PC. Very cool. Run Windows within the Mac OS....but....

I think the Intel version of MS Virtual PC will kick ass. Think of the optimization that Microsoft will do knowing the secret hooks in Windows and the fact that it will probably be optimized for Vista too and have much deeper Direct X support. (for games)

This is a great product but I expect MS to have a faster more native product available at the WWDC.

By the way I never ever expected in my lifetime to read a Mac board and see discussion after discussion and topic after topic on WINDOWS!! Wow, I keep looking out the window for the dark clouds signaling the end of it all.

 

[vamp07]

Argh, yes that answers it... in the negative. Maybe I will hold off until I hear some confirmation of it working.

(You are trying to ping the Windows IP address from the OS X terminal right?)

It's a free download. Why not try it out?

 

[cyberddot]

bla bla bla, <snip>

No flamiing here, you're allowed to misunderstand how all of this works and to speculate wildly! Thinking Different is what it's all about, and yer working it! I'm sure you're not trolling for a flaming, so I'll respond with some misdirection:

Boot Camp vs Parallels for Gaming <- not really necessary, since gaming on Parallels is in the least pointless, and in worst cases, impossible

or

Gaming on Apple Boot Camp (XP)

or


Boot Camp XP GFX performance

If all else fails, use the multicolored link to the left <-- in my signature to dig up some results!

​

 

[maxtheape]

Shared resources

Perhaps this has already been mentioned, but the best possible scenerio would seem to me to be one where Parallel's system could be run so that I could use my standard fare of basic applications, and XP could be run natively via Boot Camp for those situations where I want to squeeze every last drop of capability that XP can use from my system. But I don't want two installs of XP. I want one set of preferences, bookmarks, etc. If that were doable, then I would be in heaven. Of course I'll stick to my OSX for the majority of things, but if I need to run Access, Parallel will do fine. If I want to exercise my gaming skills, I'll reboot.

--maxtheape

 

[BillyShears]

It's a free download. Why not try it out?

I would, but I don't have an Intel Mac... and I'm not going to buy one until I can confirm this is working.

 

[:DRS:Church]

hey thanks cyberddot. I wasnt trolling, i just know up tight us mac people can be when somebody goes against the grain

 

[dylansm]

Argh, yes that answers it... in the negative. Maybe I will hold off until I hear some confirmation of it working.

(You are trying to ping the Windows IP address from the OS X terminal right?)

I just sent you a private message with my email. Send me yours and I'll keep you posted on this issue when I get my Mac Book next week. That goes for anyone else who wants to know more about the whole networking situation between Parallels and OS X.

I'll post here too.

 

[rlreif]

Just use aMSN - it supports cam and MSN just fine. Works with built in iSight on the iMac, plus firewire and USB cams too. And it is free! Plus it works great!

http://amsn.sf.net/

/vjl/

DUDE!
thanks... MSN messenger is the only reason i can think of that i would want to run windows... i wasnt aware of that program

 

[bubbalwz]

My intial reaction when I saw that Apple released Boot Camp and Parralel's released their virtualization solution was "AWESOME!!!...I can play all of those games I always want to buy...and now my daughter can buy the educational games she always wants and she can run that scooby-doo disc that came in her serial box."

But over the past 24 hours I have began to reevaluate my intial reaction. I think this is an awesome solution to a problem that us mac users have always had which is running Windows apps we can never run. However, that is good for the short term. What does this mean LONG TERM? While the big Mac OS software houses will probably not change (blizzard, adobe, etc.), this is almost certainly the end of Quicken and other medium-sized software houses. I mean those companies can't help but look at this from a business perspective which day-after-day results in them barely making their return on their Mac Software Divisions. If Quicken sells 5% of their software to Mac users, it will make much more business sense to axe their Mac OS developers and require Mac users to now "Option Boot" into Windows XP, knowing that they will probably retain half of their original Mac users that will be willing to actually do that. In the end, they save money and headcount. And if key software packages like that go away, it reduces the Mac OS as a viable alternative OS to Windows XP. Why would grandma want to boot into Mac OS X at all if she has to boot into Windows XP to do her Quicken which is very important to her...just buy a Mac and run Windows XP...

And you can just forget about those companies that work so hard to bring PC games to the Mac. I mean sure you can run them in XP on your Mac now, but that also means there is one less Mac OS software developer out there now and ultimately another win for Microsoft.

I just think we are treading on some seriously dangerous times here. While I think it does solve our problems short-term, if not dealt with carefully this could be the start of the end of Mac OS.... Sure...the Mac may still exist, but will there be a future where more people run Macs with Windows than Macs with Mac OS? And how could Apple ignore that?!?

Anyone else feel happy and concerned as I am?????

You aren't alone: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/192003/

 

[guez]

Why not?

For those who are saying this marks the death of the Mac, don't forget that prior to the Intel machines you could virtualize windows on a mac using VPC and various other solutions.

OK, so the emulation was just that, emulation and it wasn't as quick as you'd really want it to be, and now we have the speed we've dreamed of.

I work for a macintosh development company. Am I worried that I'm now out of a job or that we'll stop writing our software for mac? No I am not. There is a need for our software product and as long as macs run Mac OS, our software should be there.

I assume that there is a Windows equivalent for the software you sell? Aren't you worried about the added competition? If not, why not? Either this Windows on Mac thing spreads like wildfire, and you guys are in trouble (more competition) or it doesn't, and its not a big deal. I just don't buy the "wow-this-is-great-now-I-can-use-all-of-the-Windows-programs-I-want-but-Mac-developers-don't-have-to-worry-cause-no-one-else-will" line.

Second pet peeve. Everyone here is talking about convergence and its inevitabilty. Perhaps you are right, but the inevitable is not necessarily good, and there is no reason in particular to think it will be good in the long run for the Mac. I want a stable, consistent, elegant, well-supported platform with good native applications.

I'll tell you what is going on, here. Apple is getting rid of the Mac-as-platform and replacing it with the Mac-as-designer-machine. Apple will win over a lot geeks, and they will lose a lot of pratically-minded loyal users who find it easier to use Word XP on Windows XP.

 

[BillyShears]

I just sent you a private message with my email. Send me yours and I'll keep you posted on this issue when I get my Mac Book next week. That goes for anyone else who wants to know more about the whole networking situation between Parallels and OS X.

I'll post here too.

I didn't receive a PM from you, but I just sent you one.

Then it occurred to me that something is probably wrong with the PM system.

So, if you want to email me, try letmeintroducetoyou@yahoo.com -- I'll also be checking the forums for any news.

Thanks!

 

[dylansm]

Argh, yes that answers it... in the negative. Maybe I will hold off until I hear some confirmation of it working.

(You are trying to ping the Windows IP address from the OS X terminal right?)

You cannot currently "see" host using WiFi interface, but it should work using ethernet cable.

From an admin at Parallels's support forum:

This is known issue, guest can't "see" host via WiFi interface. This will be fixed in future versions.​

When asked for a time frame, the same person said "This problem should be fixed in next beta-version."

This will be very, very cool.

 

[BillyShears]

You cannot currently "see" host using WiFi interface, but it should work using ethernet cable.

From an admin at Parallels's support forum:

This is known issue, guest can't "see" host via WiFi interface. This will be fixed in future versions.​

When asked for a time frame, the same person said "This problem should be fixed in next beta-version."

This will be very, very cool.

Ha, I didn't even think to check the support forum. Thanks for that. That's a weird bug, because this thread seems to suggest they can share files, but this thread (which you were referencing) says they can't ping.

 

[letsGoOn2]

One fatal flaw with Virtual PC was that you couldn't view the host's Apache sites because it used the same IP address as the host.

You can do this with Virtual PC, in fact I'm doing exactly what you describe. You just need to go into the PC Settings panel in VPC and select the "Virtual Switch" option under the Networking settings. If you aren't running a DNS server then you'll probably want to add your Mac's IP address and hostname to C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts (assuming your Mac has a static IP).

I also happen to have XP configured to use a static IP address, but this isn't required.