Leoff said:
Exactly. NOBODY will buy a Mac to boot Windows in the first place, just make a decent emulation engine, it's more than enough...
Windows outside, please...there is NO need for such crap in a Mac.
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 XP Booting on Intel Macs?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly. NOBODY will buy a Mac to boot Windows in the first place, just make a decent emulation engine, it's more than enough...
Windows outside, please...there is NO need for such crap in a Mac.
If a Mac could boot Windows easily I'd 100% buy a Mac just to be able to dual boot. No need for two machines that way.BRLawyer said:
And a decent emulation engine (e.g. QEmu, Bochs, etc) doesn't work unless you don't want to play ANY 3D games as there's no support for them. Sometimes you need the real thing.
Application Availability
Really? I would agree with you, except that there are hundreds of great applications that are simply not available and have no comparable product available on a mac, and I'll give you four rock solid examples: Games, AutoCAD, Revit, and multi-user QuickBooks.
Sure, I could load these into a VM, but I'm going to want 100% of my CPU if I'm using an architectural program. Being able to boot XP on my mac SAVES ME MONEY by not having to buy an entirely new machine.
You can live in your fairytale world of unicorns and smooth white plastic, but until the marketshare of the mac goes up enough to have just a few more professional applications, people, and developers, will want to boot Windows if at all possible.
And if you're the type of person that will use an obviously inferior program (like ArchiCAD instead of Revit) just so you can be in an OS X environment, I pray for anyone who does business with you. How does that old saying go? If all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail?
BRLawyer said:
Really? I would agree with you, except that there are hundreds of great applications that are simply not available and have no comparable product available on a mac, and I'll give you four rock solid examples: Games, AutoCAD, Revit, and multi-user QuickBooks.
Sure, I could load these into a VM, but I'm going to want 100% of my CPU if I'm using an architectural program. Being able to boot XP on my mac SAVES ME MONEY by not having to buy an entirely new machine.
You can live in your fairytale world of unicorns and smooth white plastic, but until the marketshare of the mac goes up enough to have just a few more professional applications, people, and developers, will want to boot Windows if at all possible.
And if you're the type of person that will use an obviously inferior program (like ArchiCAD instead of Revit) just so you can be in an OS X environment, I pray for anyone who does business with you. How does that old saying go? If all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail?
NO-ONE will buy a mac merely to run Windows on it. They're buying a mac for the hardware and OS X, the fact that they can run Windows on it is simply a bonus. And it may well just be the thing that made up their mind to actually succumb and buy one in the first place.
To a would be switcher, the idea of moving to a new platform with no kind of safetly net is kinda daunting. It's much more confortable knowing that if you don't like OS X, or if you can't find that Windows equivilent app you can always boot up Windows.
To a would be switcher, the idea of moving to a new platform with no kind of safetly net is kinda daunting. It's much more confortable knowing that if you don't like OS X, or if you can't find that Windows equivilent app you can always boot up Windows.
Pics
Not sure if this has been posted yet...but interesting to say the least
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32436196@N00
Not sure if this has been posted yet...but interesting to say the least
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32436196@N00
Amen, I have two colleagues waiting on the fence to switch (one actually already owns an iMac, but wants to replace his notebook with an MBP), but they both want to know that a few key apps they have will be able to be run, if only occcasionally on the machines.mark88 said:
We are now at the point where there are three possibilities, each with their pros and cons. Each has their place for particular uses/needs.
- Wine, kinda like X11, just allows other kinds of apps to coexist in OSX. (fast, but limited compatibility)
- Virtualization. Q more like Classic, presents a full environment to run legacy apps in. (slower, but fuller compatibility)
- Dual booting. For when you need full performance (as fast and compatible as you can get).
What I find funny about MS not supporting EFI in Vista, is that no current OS for x86 actually keeps the BIOS around for anything after boot, inclusing Win 2K and XP. All the BIOS routines are quickly supplanted with faster/better/expanded routines. BIOS is both a boat anchor and a kludge.
B
mark88 said:
Wrong in so many different ways!! They will, I would. I bought a Mac a couple of years ago. I had no idea what OSX was like. I thought it would be similar to windows (good enough). I had no idea that it was so much better.
PC users are looking at the nice hardware and saying let me have that. Its only then do they realise that the insides are nice too.
I know some people that would probably think about buying a Mac if it could run Windows on it. To say no one would buy a Mac to run Windows is wrong in my opinion. Sure they'll be buying a Mac for OS X and a better computer experience, but being able to dual-boot into Windows could be a huge plus for a lot of people. Two computers in one... sounds like a good deal to me.
Glassbathroom said:
It's not wrong at all.....
The only people are who likely to install Windows on a Mac are techy people. Techy people have probably already been building their own PCs for years.
If you think *all* PC users live in a world of dull grey boxes and that they spend all their time drooling over Mac Hardware? I think you're way off the mark.
Only a tiny tiny tiny amount of people would be willing to buy an Imac JUST TO RUN windows and not bother with OS X at all.
The attraction of the mac platform is a number of things, the hardware, the os, the apps, everything.
What I'm saying is, if people have no desire to change from Windows, or even bother trying OS X then 99% of these people will not be buying macs to run windows. The 1% that do are rich people that want a glorified case to house a windows machine.
It sounds like you're saying there's gonna be a rush of windows users all buying macs just because they want the pretty cases. I'm saying the Windows users buying macs are the would be switchers, the curious ones who never had the balls to make the switch before now have an easiesr decision to make.
deanklear said:
Agreed, I think it's funny how you can instantly tell from the naysayers (always questioning "WHY?" even after valid reasons) that they haven't dealt with the sad truth of being a Mac user in the working world
On top of your examples, I'm going to give one more software example that really necessitates my need to run Windows apps in some manner on my Mac - MICROSOFT Visual Studio.Net. (Good luck getting THAT ported to Mac.)
At my work, they're running under an MS developer environment for web applications / sites / etc. I wish they weren't, and I'd far rather do everything under the Mac OS using Mac applications, and better yet, more open standards. But that's the reality of the situation, and while I do have a PC, I disconnected it and put it off to the side when I got my Intel iMac (as I live in a small place and simply have no room for a second computer station right now). So having a two-in-one computer is very attractive for me.
Heck, even if it was a situation where you'd run the Windows environment contained under OS X (ala Virtual PC), I'd be fine with that...I'd rather stay in the Mac OS with all my other native Mac software anyway. But unlike the PowerPC Virtual PC software, it better be running a near to native speeds.
As far as the worry about discontinuing Mac platform development ("...if it can run Windows anyway..."), this only applies if Apple is advertising that they officially support Windows. Otherwise, the whole "Windows on Mac" thing is an underground / hobbiest situation at best, and that argument is not going to fly. Especially the ones who have no idea how to partition for / boot from / install Windows, etc. A lot of time, people think that every computer owner knows how to tinker with their computer and build it from scratch (especially those who cite that people can build PC Windows boxes cheaper than buying a Mac), and that's not true.
So long as Apple isn't officially supporting the installation of the Windows OS (but not hindering it).....and there are computer savvy people out there who'd like to switch/try Mac but is hindered by a few Windows-only applications holding them back, I see no bad in the situation.
The topic of Windows games harming Mac ports I have another view on, but that's another topic for another time
Glassbathroom said:
I agree with this too, and I'm proof. Back in college when I was a PC zealot studying for graphic design, I got an iMac as a gift to help me out with a Mac environment. "I was only going to use ithis silly Mac for schoolwork.." I said to myself. A few months later, I was on Mac OS 9 far more than I was on Windows and wanted to do everything in that instead.
Last year when they announced the Intel Macs, I sold off my Mac Mini to wait for the new machines. I still had my PC (the one currently disconnected), so I thought I could get by on that. Ugh....wrong, I couldn't stand going back (exclusively) to XP, and I badly, badly missed my apps such as iLife and Final Cut Studio, along with the OS.
I was so happy when I got my Intel iMac a month or two ago, it was like coming home. Even if I gotta boot over to Windows to run the applications I have to use at work, it's comforting to know that when I'm done, "home" is just a boot away. (And if Windows can run while Mac is booted ala Virtual PC, even better.)
mark88 said:
I think it is many more than a tiny amount. Even a tiny amount cannot be considered to be "no-one".
By the way, I agree that there are many more reasons to buy a Mac than the nice box. That said, I still think there would be a rush of windows users buying because of the pretty case (and the apple reputation - ipod experiences etc). I really hope they then discover how great OSX and ditch the windows part, but they may need to be reassured thats all.
deanklear said:
if you really want to save money get a cheap PC. Doesn't seem very "professional" to have to use a single machine to do your high class work
Glassbathroom said:
I would have probably agreed with you IF all PC cases were like those from Dell, but they aren't. I have two PC cases, the coolermaster wavemaster and the Lian Li V1000. Both of which I'd take over the G5 case any day of the week.
Anyone considering buying any Mac just for the case gotta think to themselves 'hmm, look at all that money I'm wasting on software I don't even plan to use' and to me this means hardly anyone will be doing it.
I'm another one that that is excited about this news and tired of people crying about such a possibility. I have the need to run specific CAD programs; currently, I have 2 computers in my house (PC and Mac) and my MacbookPro. I would really like to run my MBP with windows, on ocassion, for using these programs. Face it, they are not, and will not, be available for OSX any time soon. Programs, such as AutoCAD, are industry standard, and some mac-semi-equivalent isnt going to cut it.
Current emulation will not cut it. 95% of the people who have a need for Windows on a Mac need full hardware acceleration, INCLUDING VIDEO! Dual-boot offers this. Ideally, I would love to have VPC will full access to resources, and keep windows where it belongs, in a mac-controlled windows. Until this day, I applaud the efforts of Narf and others.
Honestly, if Apple hobbles the windows use on their machines (perhaps a firmware to disable what narf and others figure out) Ill sell all my apple equipment, buy some decent ASUS hardware, and run hacked OSX on it. Hell, THAT solution came out before the intel machines! (And, just to be legit, ill go buy a copy of OSX so I have "license")
OSX is a great OS and I would love to work in it exclusively, but that is just not reality. Ive used windows for most of my life, and while it rips off apple left and right, and has 2 million issues and vulernabilities, it runs what I need it to run. Its the right tool for the job. Its like owning a Ferrari and living in the woods with no roads. You need a POS truck, no matter how great the Ferrari is.
***EDIT***
on.mac (the contest site) account has been suspended. Wonder if they simply exceeded bandwidth or something else is going on?
Current emulation will not cut it. 95% of the people who have a need for Windows on a Mac need full hardware acceleration, INCLUDING VIDEO! Dual-boot offers this. Ideally, I would love to have VPC will full access to resources, and keep windows where it belongs, in a mac-controlled windows. Until this day, I applaud the efforts of Narf and others.
Honestly, if Apple hobbles the windows use on their machines (perhaps a firmware to disable what narf and others figure out) Ill sell all my apple equipment, buy some decent ASUS hardware, and run hacked OSX on it. Hell, THAT solution came out before the intel machines! (And, just to be legit, ill go buy a copy of OSX so I have "license")
OSX is a great OS and I would love to work in it exclusively, but that is just not reality. Ive used windows for most of my life, and while it rips off apple left and right, and has 2 million issues and vulernabilities, it runs what I need it to run. Its the right tool for the job. Its like owning a Ferrari and living in the woods with no roads. You need a POS truck, no matter how great the Ferrari is.
***EDIT***
on.mac (the contest site) account has been suspended. Wonder if they simply exceeded bandwidth or something else is going on?
There is no other side of the story. Those who are complaining about XP running on Macs are simply being ignorant. There are people out there who NEED the programs that run on windows, programs for which there is no alternative in OSX. Grow up.
I just want to play RollerCoaster Tycoon 2 and Counter Strike again without having to fuss with lugging around/buying a PC...
Problem? Deal with it.
Problem? Deal with it.
pictures?
I thought there were flickr pics too? Can someone paste them to the forum, i'm at work and flickr is blocked. Thanks!
I thought there were flickr pics too? Can someone paste them to the forum, i'm at work and flickr is blocked. Thanks!
ctachme said:
No, it's there for 64-bit Vista. It's right there on the CTPs available now for beta members.
Why must people insist that their opinion is the only opinion????
Its obvious from this thread that there is an interest for dual booting.
If you dont want to dual boot then dont. Why must you push your opinion on others?
I have no interest in a dual boot but if others want to then go right ahead. Whats the harm? No skin off my back.
I will say that having the option to do so makes life a little more interesting.
Its obvious from this thread that there is an interest for dual booting.
If you dont want to dual boot then dont. Why must you push your opinion on others?
I have no interest in a dual boot but if others want to then go right ahead. Whats the harm? No skin off my back.
I will say that having the option to do so makes life a little more interesting.
AlbinoPigeon said:
Will images work directly?
I hope that works... if not, I could always host them for you.