Without trying to sound cynical here...you can buy an apple with an intel chip & load it with windows.
Wouldnt it just be a whole lot easier simply to buy a PC in the first instance
You know Gus, I was with you until I sat down and really made note of a few applications I run for my research that are PC only. Now I only need one machine - boot MacOS for personal stuff and WinXP for research.
Even aside from my specific case, the whole point is that this is the first piece of consumer available hardware that can natively run both MacOS AND Windows. That's a pretty big deal. Ain't no PC that could boot up MacOS.
Without trying to sound cynical here...you can buy an apple with an intel chip & load it with windows.
Wouldnt it just be a whole lot easier simply to buy a PC in the first instance
This is appealing for a few reasons:
1) You're an IT guy and you want to be able to use both OSes for tech reasons.
2) You want to make the switch, but you're unsure if you can live without windows and want to wean yourself from it.
3) You really want to use OSX, but there's an app or two that you need windows for.
4) You just like to play with stuff like that.
Like you, Gus, I'd never do it. You have no need to confuse things with OSX, and I have no need or interest in running Windows. But a lot of geeks will love the fact that they can run Windows, Linux and OSX all on the same box.
The big downside is that if you have any problems with your Windows install, don't go crying to Apple, they don't want to hear about it and won't support it. So it's really, IMO, just for the technorati.
Why I think it is a good thing
Apple being able to dual boot increases the freedom of the end user. This is a very good thing, and movement in the right direction. I am glad to see they officially back this.
As a side note, I am now about 80% converted to linux. I am only using windows for three business applications I can't yet replicate outside windows.
I am assuming that Mac can now or has always been able to dual boot with a linux distribution?
The one thing I really still need Windows for, is for maintaining, and upgrading Garmin GPS devices. There is NO MAC ability to do this. And I strongly prefer Garmin's GPS devices. I may have to price an iMAC late this fall.
This helps declutter your life also, because you won't keep that 2nd box sitting around. Just boot up the MAC in Win as needed.
Now, will Boot Camp allow Vista the same option when it is released??
My day job is using Autocad. So for me - it's been 6 years waiting for Autocad to run Native on Mac OS (6 Years since I converted to mac). Full Hardware support for my day job??? That means Quad G5, or a 17" MacBook Pro... if only the later was purchasable. - Causes me a serious Identity Crisis. I've got a Powerbook, and a Dell XPS Gen 2 - Sounds like I'll be selling my Gen 2 and my powerbook, getting a macbook pro... Finally!!!
Mine: Canon 20D, 50 f1.8 II, 28-105 II, 70-200 f2.8L, T 70-300 Macro, T 2X expander, 12-24 Sigma Hers: Sony SR10, (Soon Canon 5D MKII), 85 f1.8, 28-135 USM, Stroboframe, Manfrotto NeoTec Ours: Pair of 580 EX, Lensbaby, Studio Alien Bees, Son & TWO Daughters
Now, will Boot Camp allow Vista the same option when it is released??
Nothing has been announced, but if you have a second partition... and support for windows OS.... Sounds like It either is possible, or will be possible with a subsequent patch/update.
Mine: Canon 20D, 50 f1.8 II, 28-105 II, 70-200 f2.8L, T 70-300 Macro, T 2X expander, 12-24 Sigma Hers: Sony SR10, (Soon Canon 5D MKII), 85 f1.8, 28-135 USM, Stroboframe, Manfrotto NeoTec Ours: Pair of 580 EX, Lensbaby, Studio Alien Bees, Son & TWO Daughters
Why do you think it's better? I guess I'm just coming from the Mac-user GPS camp. To date, virtualPC has been useless for just that reason - it's virtual, not a true OS. As in, it didn't communicate with the hardware, so even though it could run the PC-only GPS mapping software, it wouldn't communicate via USB to the GPS unit for data transfer.
As I read the article, this piece of software is claiming that windows does communicate with the hardware, the only exception being some 3D graphics which they are working on solving. To me, why would I want to reboot my Mac and lose all my Mac apps just so I can run one dedicated Win program? That sucks. But if it runs at the same time, with only a 10% performance hit (as claimed), then it's more viable.
VirtualPC sucks. To me this sounds like it has more of a chance of working since the hardware architecture is the same now.
This is a huge win for Bill. There's probably a few hundred people with Mac hardware that might just go out and buy Windows OS to run it in a dual boot.
OTOH, what about this case in reverse? How to install the full OSX onto Wintel hardware? Is there something like that out there?
.
.
.
.
.
Related: I just read this blog with a 4/06 entry about BootCamp, and as always, a big .
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
And David_S85...I'm still going back and re-reading that blog, laughing, waiting, going back, re-reading. Funny stuff.
Patrick O'Grady is a mean old SOB. But a funny mean old SOB. And a damn good writer, despite his views. He is a feature columnist for Velo News, Bike Retailer & Industry News (trade mag) and a decent cartoonist. He holds all politicians and large company executives as enemies of the state, and is as paranoid as anyone still allowed to walk (or ride) the streets.
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
It's unfair to give Apple a lot of credit for this. Apple has specifically designed technical and legal fail-safes into OSX so that it cannot run on non Apple hardware. (Of course the technical failsafes have been hacked!) There is no technical reason why my pile of 'commodity' hardware couldn't dual-boot both OS's if Apple were to green light it.. But most say they won't!
I've said it before, I'd love to buy a ~$150 copy of OSX and run it on my cheap clone hardware. I'd do it in a heartbeat!
And this is a big reason I won't use Apple until they add a little more freedom for the user. My day's of being locked in by a single vendor are over. And Apple has been particularly odious in the this respect. Though by allowing dual booting, I hope that position will start to soften.
Creator of Dgrin's "Last Photographer Standing" contest
"Failure is feedback. And feedback is the breakfast of champions." - fortune cookie
And this is a big reason I won't use Apple until they add a little more freedom for the user. My day's of being locked in by a single vendor are over. And Apple has been particularly odious in the this respect. Though by allowing dual booting, I hope that position will start to soften.
PCs (Intel machines) were capable of multi-boot for decades. The modern software (like VMWare) makes hosting multiple OSes on a single PC and switching between them a snap - provided the client OS allows it. Windows, Linux, Unix - you name it. Thus far the only OS that didnt allow that was, khum-khum, from Apple. So now they kinda make a half-a$$ step towards multi-boot, by allowing some limited versions of one particular OS to coexist alongside with their precious OSX. Good for them. Somebody may actually see there is a life outside a greenhouse..:D
And this is a big reason I won't use Apple until they add a little more freedom for the user. My day's of being locked in by a single vendor are over. And Apple has been particularly odious in the this respect. Though by allowing dual booting, I hope that position will start to soften.
That vertical integration has been a strength of theirs, IMO. Software and hardware designed to work together. Not that it's the only or right way to do things...but it has been one of their strengths as well, is all I'm saying.
1) You're an IT guy and you want to be able to use both OSes for tech reasons.
2) You want to make the switch, but you're unsure if you can live without windows and want to wean yourself from it.
3) You really want to use OSX, but there's an app or two that you need windows for.
4) You just like to play with stuff like that.
Like you, Gus, I'd never do it. You have no need to confuse things with OSX, and I have no need or interest in running Windows. But a lot of geeks will love the fact that they can run Windows, Linux and OSX all on the same box.
The big downside is that if you have any problems with your Windows install, don't go crying to Apple, they don't want to hear about it and won't support it. So it's really, IMO, just for the technorati.
If the hardware and this software had been available when I upgraded my Windows box (bought a Dell) I would've bought a Mac. I
I really wanted a Mac and OSX, but couldn't afford the additional hardware cost AND the software.
With this option I would've been able to get the hardware, use windows with the apps I already have and replace them at my leisure or when the next version came out that was worth upgrading to.
And then the other biggie, I would still be able to play my games as well.
I think this is great and can't wait to see the Intel desktop Macs with Conroe or Memron or whatever the next Intel dual core chip is called.
Preliminary testing has it outperforming AMDs "current" fastest offerings. At least this will get Intel within striking distance of AMD for the short term at least.
Comments
Even aside from my specific case, the whole point is that this is the first piece of consumer available hardware that can natively run both MacOS AND Windows. That's a pretty big deal. Ain't no PC that could boot up MacOS.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
This is appealing for a few reasons:
1) You're an IT guy and you want to be able to use both OSes for tech reasons.
2) You want to make the switch, but you're unsure if you can live without windows and want to wean yourself from it.
3) You really want to use OSX, but there's an app or two that you need windows for.
4) You just like to play with stuff like that.
Like you, Gus, I'd never do it. You have no need to confuse things with OSX, and I have no need or interest in running Windows. But a lot of geeks will love the fact that they can run Windows, Linux and OSX all on the same box.
The big downside is that if you have any problems with your Windows install, don't go crying to Apple, they don't want to hear about it and won't support it. So it's really, IMO, just for the technorati.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Apple being able to dual boot increases the freedom of the end user. This is a very good thing, and movement in the right direction. I am glad to see they officially back this.
As a side note, I am now about 80% converted to linux. I am only using windows for three business applications I can't yet replicate outside windows.
I am assuming that Mac can now or has always been able to dual boot with a linux distribution?
"Failure is feedback. And feedback is the breakfast of champions." - fortune cookie
This helps declutter your life also, because you won't keep that 2nd box sitting around. Just boot up the MAC in Win as needed.
Now, will Boot Camp allow Vista the same option when it is released??
Been good for Apple's stock price too:):
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Yes, you can boot Linux. Don't count on me for details, though. It's not something I'm interested in or have been following.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
PF, did you see my post in Andy's Unsolicited Advice thread?
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
I read that the firmware update solved the noise problem for some on the MacBook Pros...have you tried it?
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
My day job is using Autocad. So for me - it's been 6 years waiting for Autocad to run Native on Mac OS (6 Years since I converted to mac). Full Hardware support for my day job??? That means Quad G5, or a 17" MacBook Pro... if only the later was purchasable. - Causes me a serious Identity Crisis. I've got a Powerbook, and a Dell XPS Gen 2 - Sounds like I'll be selling my Gen 2 and my powerbook, getting a macbook pro... Finally!!!
Hers: Sony SR10, (Soon Canon 5D MKII), 85 f1.8, 28-135 USM, Stroboframe, Manfrotto NeoTec
Ours: Pair of 580 EX, Lensbaby, Studio Alien Bees, Son & TWO Daughters
Nothing has been announced, but if you have a second partition... and support for windows OS.... Sounds like It either is possible, or will be possible with a subsequent patch/update.
Hers: Sony SR10, (Soon Canon 5D MKII), 85 f1.8, 28-135 USM, Stroboframe, Manfrotto NeoTec
Ours: Pair of 580 EX, Lensbaby, Studio Alien Bees, Son & TWO Daughters
As I read the article, this piece of software is claiming that windows does communicate with the hardware, the only exception being some 3D graphics which they are working on solving. To me, why would I want to reboot my Mac and lose all my Mac apps just so I can run one dedicated Win program? That sucks. But if it runs at the same time, with only a 10% performance hit (as claimed), then it's more viable.
VirtualPC sucks. To me this sounds like it has more of a chance of working since the hardware architecture is the same now.
In the future, virtualization will be more like it:
New software lets Intel Macs run Windows sans rebooting
You have forgotten The Most Important Reason Of All:
now everybody will be able to use Star*Explorer !
OTOH, what about this case in reverse? How to install the full OSX onto Wintel hardware? Is there something like that out there?
.
.
.
.
.
Related: I just read this blog with a 4/06 entry about BootCamp, and as always, a big
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Perfect!
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Well, that was #3 in my list.
But I'm sorry to say, Nik, as much as I want to use your app, I'm not about to start using Windows. Nu-uh.
And David_S85...I'm still going back and re-reading that blog, laughing, waiting, going back, re-reading. Funny stuff.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Patrick O'Grady is a mean old SOB. But a funny mean old SOB. And a damn good writer, despite his views. He is a feature columnist for Velo News, Bike Retailer & Industry News (trade mag) and a decent cartoonist. He holds all politicians and large company executives as enemies of the state, and is as paranoid as anyone still allowed to walk (or ride) the streets.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
I've said it before, I'd love to buy a ~$150 copy of OSX and run it on my cheap clone hardware. I'd do it in a heartbeat!
And this is a big reason I won't use Apple until they add a little more freedom for the user. My day's of being locked in by a single vendor are over. And Apple has been particularly odious in the this respect. Though by allowing dual booting, I hope that position will start to soften.
"Failure is feedback. And feedback is the breakfast of champions." - fortune cookie
PCs (Intel machines) were capable of multi-boot for decades. The modern software (like VMWare) makes hosting multiple OSes on a single PC and switching between them a snap - provided the client OS allows it. Windows, Linux, Unix - you name it. Thus far the only OS that didnt allow that was, khum-khum, from Apple. So now they kinda make a half-a$$ step towards multi-boot, by allowing some limited versions of one particular OS to coexist alongside with their precious OSX. Good for them. Somebody may actually see there is a life outside a greenhouse..:D
Strictly MHO, no pun, etc..
That vertical integration has been a strength of theirs, IMO. Software and hardware designed to work together. Not that it's the only or right way to do things...but it has been one of their strengths as well, is all I'm saying.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
If the hardware and this software had been available when I upgraded my Windows box (bought a Dell) I would've bought a Mac. I
I really wanted a Mac and OSX, but couldn't afford the additional hardware cost AND the software.
With this option I would've been able to get the hardware, use windows with the apps I already have and replace them at my leisure or when the next version came out that was worth upgrading to.
And then the other biggie, I would still be able to play my games as well.
I think this is great and can't wait to see the Intel desktop Macs with Conroe or Memron or whatever the next Intel dual core chip is called.
Preliminary testing has it outperforming AMDs "current" fastest offerings. At least this will get Intel within striking distance of AMD for the short term at least.
Gene