homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.197.189.108
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / The Macintosh Webmaster
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: travelin cat

The Macintosh Webmaster Forum

This 67 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 67 ( 1 [2] 3 > >     
Apple releases software to let Macs run Windows
engine




msg:977549
 1:16 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

Apple Computer Inc., the maker of the Macintosh computer and iPod music devices, on Wednesday rolled out a software patch under its plan to move its computers over to Intel Corp. microprocessors.

Apple said that the new software, called "Boot Camp", enables Intel-based Macs to install and run Microsoft Corp.'s Windows XP operating system software. Boot Camp is available as a download beginning today.

Apple releases software to let Macs run Windows [today.reuters.com]

 

andy_boyd




msg:977579
 8:15 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

That's what I'm thinking -- is there any benefit?

I've heard on various Mac forums that it will allow you to boot into Mac OS X and restore your files once Windows gets corrupted. ;)

whoisgregg




msg:977580
 8:15 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

Nothing technically wrong with a Mac that a right mouse button and in-situ right mouse menus won't cure.

I'm confused, are you saying the Mac is lacking in the right mouse button and right mouse contextual menu area? If so, times have changed...

Most Macs (in other words, not laptops and not the Mini) ship with the Mighty Mouse [apple.com] now and they all support darn near every right button mouse you can plug into one (even a Microsoft mouse.)

whoisgregg




msg:977581
 8:21 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

is there any benefit?

I think it's clear that people who want Windows and exclusively run Windows-only apps are not going to see any reason to buy a Mac to run Windows.

However, it seems equally clear to me that this feature is for "on the fence" switchers who want the security of knowing they can always just boot into Windows if so ever they choose.

The next person who walks into an Apple store who wants to switch to a Mac will no longer have any reservations...

And all the anti-Mac folks no longer have that "but you can't run Windows apps" ace in their pocket...

sun818




msg:977582
 8:24 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

Macs are more stylish than most branded Pcs and definitely better than any generic case you can buy. Anyone with an aesthetic sense does not have to sacrifice style just to run Windows. My next computer will be a Mac mini.

bedlam




msg:977583
 8:40 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

Nothing technically wrong with a Mac that a right mouse button and in-situ right mouse menus won't cure.

It's been so long since this was true that it's difficult for me to think anything but 'troll' when I hear it...

-b

sun818




msg:977584
 8:45 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

> but 'troll' when I hear it...

To be fair, there are a lot of Mac hardware out that still use the rinky-dink mouse (e.g. iMac bondi-blue) with the one click button. If Apple wanted to support left click & right click properly, they would have included the right hardware by default.

[edited by: sun818 at 8:59 pm (utc) on April 5, 2006]

bedlam




msg:977585
 8:58 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

To be fair...

Maybe you're right, but OS9 had contextual menus and worked with two-button mice too...so did OS8...

-b

whoisgregg




msg:977586
 9:01 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

not so long ago that Mac OS 9.x was the prevalent OS

5 years ago. In computer terms that's a long time ago.

tstaheli




msg:977587
 9:22 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

Does anybody know if this means that applications--such as some games--that want particular hardware configurations will now run (since they can't on VirtualPC...)?

I don't have any "games" but I've installed Adobe CS and Studio MX along with Office 2003 and had zero issues.

The specs on my mini are 1.66ghz duocore 1 gig 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM and a 64 mb vram. I think you'll need more video ram if you are running games, but I'm not a gamer.

Boot time is around 30 seconds for each OS.

I wish XP and OSX had the same keyboard shortcuts.

While I'm going to use OS X 95% of the time, this gives Windows users an opportunity to keep their beloved "day-time apps" and use iLife and FrontRow for entertainment.

glitterball




msg:977588
 9:30 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

I'm no Mac zealot (quite the opposite in fact).
But I still think that this is great news for the Mac platform. It will probably sway a lot of people who have thought about buying a Mac, but decided against it for practical reasons or because they wanted to play a certain game etc.

As for dual booting, as many have said, it's not practical or efficient. I have 3 machines here - 2 running Windows and a 3rd running Linux.

2by4




msg:977589
 10:40 pm on Apr 5, 2006 (gmt 0)

ncreegan, I can't speak for photoshop 7, but photoshop 6 runs almost perfectly in wine, I only found one single issue, which was easy to work around.

wine/crossover office have put a lot of work into photoshop support, disney uses linux with photoshop, that's a big crossover office client, or was at the time.

I currently am finding no reasons to use windows anymore. Fireworks 4 also works fine in wine, by the way, with one glitch, that is also easy to work around.

Just one question, how does dell keep convincing people that it sells good hardware? HP, yes, that's pretty good, but dell? give me a break, has any dell fan actually ever looked inside their boxes? Mac stuff is way better, quality is much higher, for laptops you have to go to something like ibm quality to match it.

Personally, to me the new mac line is all just laptops in different forms, but marketed in a clever way, laptop in a little box = mac mini, and so on, except for the coming 4 core intel g5 or whatever they will be, those will be very good, albeit extremely overpriced for what you get. But that's mac.

whoisgregg




msg:977590
 1:03 am on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

Here's the actual page on Apple's site about boot camp [apple.com].

Some funny (to me at least) statements about the Boot Camp software:

Next, insert your Windows installation disc, restart and follow the Windows installation process. The only tricky part is selecting the C: drive manually. Be sure to get this right, or you could erase your Mac files accidentally. Remember, Apple Computer does not sell or support Microsoft Windows.

Don't call us if you fuxxor your drive.

Windows running on a Mac is like Windows running on a PC. That means itíll be subject to the same attacks that plague the Windows world. So be sure to keep it updated with the latest Microsoft Windows security fixes.

Sadly, Windows XP, and even the upcoming Vista, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS.

We just want to let you know that we don't particularly care for Windows. In case you couldn't guess.

rominosj




msg:977591
 1:58 am on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

Now, we only need Google to come up with its own Linux version , so we can download it from its site, and let Windows become an antique...

incrediBILL




msg:977592
 3:25 am on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

it's difficult for me to think anything but 'troll' when I hear it

Think whatever you want, or don't if it causes pain, but I once owned a Mac for a week.

Being a programmer, finding out the OS had a Pascal stack was all it took for me to get rid of the damn thing.

BTW, I hear OS X has fixed a lot of stuff.

Hope it can sway the 95% of the software market to develop for the Mac.

To be honest, I've always wanted to see someone give MS a run for their money and IBM almost came close with the last release of OS/2 and then chickened out and let it die on the vine.

Macs are more stylish

The rest of us run software, not style, enjoy.

pontifex




msg:977593
 1:03 pm on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

Great, like the old Amiga./.Atari wars! :-)

IMHO: a MacBook with a UN*X like environment and a Windows for the IE layout checks is nice for you folks, who travel a lot, not more, not less. Guess we will see some in Boston with that setup... anyone preparing his MacBook like that and willing to do a little demo?

P!

tstaheli




msg:977594
 4:21 pm on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

Today Parallels was released, I'm installing now.

[parallels.com...]

tstaheli




msg:977595
 5:08 pm on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

Installed really quick. But the drivers aren't working "out of the box" Had to configure the MAC address in the Parallel software.

I'm posting from I.E. in XP Pro.

Screenshot can be found at:

[pineview.org...]

Questions?

whoisgregg




msg:977596
 6:08 pm on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

BTW, I hear OS X has fixed a lot of stuff.

So your posts are all based on experience with OS 9 and earlier?

That's roughly equivalent to me using my Windows 3.1 experience as a basis for judging Windows XP.

sun818




msg:977597
 6:43 pm on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

> The rest of us run software, not style, enjoy.

Many of us run our own business so I do appreciate having the flexibility of choosing what hardware I have to look at day in and day out. Aesthetics matter.

So, if these rumours of being able to run OS X and XP simulataneously are true, what kind of hardware would we need for business use? I'm not talking PhotoShop or video editing, but Office and web browsing (being to view Flash & video playback). Would a Mac Mini be sufficient? Or do I need one of these dual-core processors?

Jon_King




msg:977598
 6:49 pm on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

I'm thinking that there are some cases where I own a program on one platform or the other. That is no longer a problem - one program for both - does not matter which OS is native. Totally possible to cut costs in an agency type of software environment.

tstaheli




msg:977599
 7:13 pm on Apr 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

sun818

So, if these rumours of being able to run OS X and XP simulataneously are true, what kind of hardware would we need for business use? I'm not talking PhotoShop or video editing, but Office and web browsing (being to view Flash & video playback). Would a Mac Mini be sufficient? Or do I need one of these dual-core processors?

We are running office suites just fine in the "Virtualized" environment and Photoshop etc. very fast in the "duo-boot" environment.

timster




msg:977600
 2:06 pm on Apr 7, 2006 (gmt 0)

Would a Mac Mini be sufficient [to run OS X and Windows simultaneously]? Or do I need one of these dual-core processors?

That's not an either/or, since there are Core Duo Mac Minis. Just be aware the Mini is not the system for a hard-core gamer.

Since we're talking about software that hasn't been released yet, this is speculation, but I reckon plenty of RAM and hard drive space might be even more important than the processor here.

txbakers




msg:977601
 3:13 pm on Apr 7, 2006 (gmt 0)

aesthetics? looking at nice hardware?

My CPU sits on the floor under the desk. The monitor is mounted on the wall. I look at the screen, not the box.

And what is Parallel? The screen shot was interesting.

travelin cat




msg:977602
 4:27 pm on Apr 7, 2006 (gmt 0)

This news can only be good for Apple. I have been a die hard user of Mac's since I got my first one in '84.

Besides the obvious differences in OS's and the flames going in both directions, the main difference between Macs and Pcs is that Apple controls the manufacturing of ALL of their products.

Because we develop web sites, we have always had to have a wintel machine around to test our work. Every, and I mean this without exception, pc we have ever owned has been not only an ugly box ( I know, who cares) but has been so poorly constructed as to be laughable. You can press on any part of the brand new HP sitting on my desk and here the parts creaking, they are noisy and you feel that they will stop working at any time.

I can't wait to shut it down every day so that I can enjoy the silence. The Mac boxes are works of art that reflect the pride that comes with making every part of the product, not just the OS.

I can't wait to get my hands on the new Mac's when all Adobe products will have been ported to it, then I can use my HP for what it deserves to be used for, an ugly doorstop.

incrediBILL




msg:977603
 6:15 pm on Apr 7, 2006 (gmt 0)

Aesthetics matter

You care how pretty a hidden box is?

The only thing I see is a screen, keyboard and mouse, how the box looks is irrelevant.

That's roughly equivalent to me using my Windows 3.1 experience as a basis for judging Windows XP.

Way off comparison if you knew anything about Windows internals.

Had my hands on one of the new Mac laptops last weekend and I must say the latest Mac OS sure looks cute if nothing else.

sun818




msg:977604
 6:23 pm on Apr 7, 2006 (gmt 0)

> You care how pretty a hidden box is?

You hide your box because its ugly! LOL

whoisgregg




msg:977605
 8:55 pm on Apr 7, 2006 (gmt 0)

That's roughly equivalent to me using my Windows 3.1 experience as a basis for judging Windows XP.

Way off comparison if you knew anything about Windows internals.

That's right (see my "roughly?"). The comparison is off because there is no equivalent break in underlying structure in different versions of Windows like there is between OS 9.x and OS X 10.x.

Of course, you could only tell how off the comparison is "if you knew anything" about the internals of both OS 9.x and OS X 10.x.

Is this new found knowledge? Or have you just been trolling this entire thread?

incrediBILL




msg:977606
 10:06 pm on Apr 7, 2006 (gmt 0)

Is this new found knowledge? Or have you just been trolling this entire thread?

Moi? Troll?

I used to work in OS internals and device drivers and I can tell you what Windows still has in common with DOS that's identical to CP/M almost 25 years later, draw your own conclusions ;)

I could tell you horror stories of cross-platform Mac development in the 90s too but I digress.

However, it looks like Mac has gotten it's act together and it most likely the computer become of interest due to iTunes than vice versa these days.

deliriumtremens




msg:977607
 3:33 am on Apr 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

The debate can really go on forever, and I can't really blame pc people for not being informed about macs. Why would they be if they don't use them? The only thing I really know about pcs is what I hear from friends who are constantly complaining about their pc crashing or getting yet another virus, I'm sure that can't be the whole story though.

I fire up my pc for a few hours at the end of a project to check my layout and then gratefully turn it off again, so I wouldn't know.

Can anyone blame pc users for comments about one/two button mice, software compatibility problems etc when they don't use macs at all? I once overheard a salesman telling a friend that she wouldn't want a mac because you can't run Word on it.

If that's the level of information people are given, then of course they won't know about the difference between os9 and osX. (Or that you can in fact get full functionality out of two button mice ;p)

I'd say that for me Boot Camp will encourage me to do more bug hunting throughout the project instead of leaving it all for the end to fix, but I suspect that this will have a larger impact on the gaming community than the webmaster community.

StupidScript




msg:977608
 7:15 pm on Apr 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

I apologize to the Mac users out there, but this isn't exactly new technology, contrary to what the Mac spin doctors are putting out.

a) We've been able to load OSX onto Intel-powered PCs for quite some time and use them in dual-boot scenarios with whatever other operating systems we want (Linux, BSD, Windows, BeOS, etc.)

b) Oh ... small point ... OSX running on a "normal" Intel-powered PC is measurably faster than the same OS being run on Mac's famous proprietary hardware.

c) "Boot Camp" is simply a dual-boot facilitator .. it ain't Jobs' gift to mankind.

d) Dual-booting into a 'Nix distribution allows you to mount the OSX drive just like any other drive.

To sum up: I think it's great that Mac users are finally getting a dumbed-down tool to help them accomplish this basic task, but don't get all high and mighty about it. Mac HAD to release Boot Camp, because if THEY didn't do it word would get out about how easy it is to do with Linux, and they would start to hemorrhage market share ... what little of that they have left. Now we have the last two dinosaurs of the operating system wars playing nice with each other for their very survival. That's fun.

How many of you Mac holdouts are running free 'Nix software on your OSX boxes? Didja know you could, or are you waiting for a new tool from Apple to explain it to you?

travelin cat




msg:977609
 8:53 pm on Apr 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

StupidScript...

You MUST be trolling with an inane post like that...

This 67 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 67 ( 1 [2] 3 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / The Macintosh Webmaster
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved