If you've been counting on being able to run Windows on those
new Intel-based Macs, Apple's not about to
make it easy for you -- at least not if you're attached to Windows XP. According to Apple SVP Phil Schiller, the new
Macs announced yesterday (those being the
Intel iMac and
MacBook Pro) may not
be able to run current versions of Windows due to the fact that the computers will boot using the Extensible Firmware
Interface (EFI), rather than a traditional BIOS (current Power PC Macs use Open Firmware). EFI was developed by Intel
and allows a number of advanced features, including the ability to connect to the Internet from a command shell before
the OS is loaded. Since EFI was developed after the rollout of Windows XP, it's not supported by the current or earlier
version of Windows (it is, however, supported by 64-bit versions, but the new Macs are 32-bit, so it's back to square
one). However, all is not lost: Windows Vista will support EFI, and Apple has said it has no plans to directly block
Windows from working on the new boxes. So, if you're a Vista beta tester and have ordered a new iMac or MacBookPro, get
those install CDs out; the rest of you will have to wait for the official Vista release, or find a way to hack XP to
boot using EFI (which we're sure is about to become a major priority of some of you at this very moment).
posted Jan 11th 2006 5:45PM
I want to run both Windows and Mac OSX on a Macbook Pro because current I have two machines, one of each operating system. I am an e-Learning developer, and use Apple products like FinalCut Pro, and Motion for editing video, and use Windows products like Lectora Publisher and Macromedia Captivate to publish. Also, since our users connect using both programs we have to test the final product on both platforms. Bottom line, a Macbook Pro running both operating system natively would save me from carrying two laptops!
As to those people who complain about the lack of two button mice (touchpad), here's something to think about. In Windows, the average user is almost REQUIRED to use the two button mouse, and ends up preferring it. In Mac OSX, the average user does not have to use the two button mouse, and tends to either prefer a two button mouse, OR prefer key combos with mouse. Bottom line here, Apple has simply designed the operating system to be as easy to use as possible, striving to keep it usable with a single button. The laptop design reflects that philosophy.
Personally, I must be in the minority for laptops as I would KILL for a speed demon, with top of the line video cards, sound cards, and connectivity, but I don't care if it even has a battery or trackpad (even built-in keyboard could be sacrified as I always plug in keyboard and mouse). What I'm really looking for is a powerful portable workstation that gives me two monitors (built-in and large flat panel external, full keyboard and mouse, and lets me take my machine (with large memory, my applications, and large hard drive) with me where I want. As it is, the small hard drives in most laptops (
Windows for gaming, OS X for everything else.
'nuff said
I ran Mac OS X on my P.C. not to long ago, then it all crash and died so I sticked with windows vista. I have a AMD 1.8 GHz with 512mb ram. Any questions?
I know this story originated in January upon the Intel Macs' release, but it's now almost 6 months later. Apple has devised a method to install WinXP on the Intels using a program called Boot Camp. It allows the safe reparitioning of your hard drive so you can install WinXP onto it. Go to http://apple.com/macosx/bootcamp to learn more. I think it's the right step in the right direction.
hell i dont really care i just want to have a peg leg
if it hasnt been mentioned already i will mention it now. os x has a mouse option to allow you to "right-click" by clicking the mouse button with 2 fingers on the trackpad. plus there are some other options you can fiddle with. its not that difficult people, just do a little bit of digging before you dismiss a macbook over a mouse button
I agree, Abomb. Apple mouses have left AND right buttons, 360 degree scrollong, AND side buttons. What windows compatible mouse could be better in ANY way? I ask you... And we'll see if Apple will allow Vista on mac when it comes out in Jan (well, in my country (Australia) anyway).
You can already run Windows XP on intel Macs...I have a intel gen5 imac core2duo 2.16ghz and all i use is Windows XP SP2...the people at this site must be idiots. i've been running Windows XP on it solid, no problems or hardware issued for 5 months now. what is engadget smokin?
People, Listen up.
For you Mac freaks, Apple paired up with intel because Apple is failing poorly in the market. Michael Dell (Owner of Dell Computers Inc.) Said that apple should be put out of buisiness. As for the Intel Macs, THEY SUCK!
Apple wants to pust Windows out of the market. You can run windows on an Intel Mac but you cannot run Mac on any normal PC. Apple and intel are now bringing out their new EFI. That is just going to send mac users into a spiraling slide to hell.
Intel's processors plain out suck, AMD only makes 64 bit processors and support 32 and 64 bit software.
As for Microsoft, the reason why Windows can get so many viruses is because Windows is used WORLDWIDE!
about 87% of buisiness worldwide depend on Windows.
MAC IS ONLY VIRUS FREE AS LONG AS WINDOWS DOMINATES THE MARKET.
Linux, on the other hand is on of the most crappiest OS I have ever used, or seen at that.
Linux boots from the damn command prompt.
99.9% of software used today is designed for windows, and 63.4% of the internet depends on windows machines. (though most sites are developed from windows notepad)
Don't even talk about damn Sony. You can't write crap for PSP or PS3.
Microsoft encourages you to write software & games for 360, Windows, and Xbox.
EFI will be the new USB (as in "cool new Intel technology popularized by Apple").
It says here that Gateway used EFI in a media center PC not so long ago. That's XP isn't it?
http://news.com.com/2100-1008-5131787.html
It says here that Gateway used EFI in a media center PC not so long ago. That's XP isn't it?
http://news.com.com/2100-1008-5131787.html
I don't suppose these nifty EFI thingers are going to sport hardware DRM?
*starts searching about the matter*
I actually see a VMWare / Virtual PC solution as far more interesting.
With dual-booting, you have to split your operations between two OSes, whereas with 100% virtualization you can run programs from the two systems more or less alongside each other.
Eg, playing Windows Solitaire while editing in OS X iMovie.
Also, the Virtual PC approach partitions the Windows OS away from critical OS directories, so if a virus / worm / spyware hits Windows, it's less likely to take out your data.
i'd rather have a peg leg than use a one button mouse for windows.
The new mouses do have right click, scrool ball, and side buttons that work better than any 2 click mouses
I thought vendors (Apple) had the option to enable some sort of legacy portion of EFI that would allow it to emulate a BIOS so legacy OSes could boot (Windows pre Vista).
yeah, but how crappy would windows be with only one button... I really wish the new Mac Notebooks had two damn buttons.
I am still MUCH more interested in someone getting OSX (real OSX, like the whole kit and kaboodle, not just the underlying OS sans the interface) to run easily on a PC.
Unless I'm late to the party and someone has allready done so, in which case....link please! :)
Awesome! Vista and Mac Dual Boot? nice...
Suprising they changed them that much. I'm typing this on an Apple Intel Developer box (not the ones released yesterday, the first Intel one that went to developers only) and I've run XP on it from day one (running XP now). Suprising the big change...
Then again that's OS level boot stuff, not stuff we need for dev work... I'm guessing someone will make it work...
"It says here that Gateway used EFI in a media center PC not so long ago. That's XP isn't it?"
It's probably XP MCE, which I believe is based on XP Pro. If XP MCE supports EFI, expect sales to increase...
Can someone at Macworld go to Microsoft's booth and ask if/when Virtual PC for Macs with Intel is coming out? Are they developing it? Are we looking at 1 year? More? Less? Thanks!
Does Linux have EFI support?
Also, "EFI was developed by Intel and allows a number of advanced features, including the ability to connect to the Internet from a command shell before the OS is loaded"
..huh?
#8, I agree. Who in their right mind would cripple something like this with Windows? It looks like a nice machine and the BSD-based O/S only makes it more attractive as far as I'm concerned.
Gooman is right, EFI can emulate BIOS and legacy OSs should boot. None of this is known for the new intel Macs until someone tries and all the stories being posted LIKE FACT, ie. "it CAN use Windows XP" or "it CAN'T use Windows XP" are misguided and below the editoral level of sites like Engadget.
I agree with number 8.
I think that people should try to get OSX on the PC. That way I can have all of the Mac goodness on a home-built computer, and not pay alot for only the Mac OS.
There is a BIOS backwards compatibility layer for EFI, but I guess Apple didn't include it.
Virtual PC may protect your Mac data from getting wiped out by spyware, but anything inside the Windows environment is still screwed. Thatt's why I don't see virtualization as a big help for desktop security.
People got the full OS X to run on generic PCs months ago; it shouldn't be too hard to Google it.
Come on VMware, at least give us an announcement...
I think a dual-boot option would be great. I mean, a good percentage of Mac users already use Virtual PC to get by with software missing on their platform. I think virtualization continues to make sense if you need it for solitaire. If you need want a MacBook that runs the latest 3D games (and like pretty much everything else, they come out on PC first), virtualization isn't a solution. I like the idea of a machine that does well for work, games and fun.
"Who in their right mind would cripple something like this with Windows?"
So I can play Half-Life 2 on my Mac. =) I'd be fine with dual-boot if it meant being able to rock some HL2 or CS...
For fucks sake if you need a two button mouse on your laptop buy a USB mouse.
Whether you like it or not, OS X uses one button, that's why the laptop has one button.
actually OSX can make use of a 2+ button mouse very nicely. i use scroll wheel mice on all my macs. i dont know why there is so much of an obsession with the one-button mouse in the windows fanboy camp...
#8, I agree. Who in their right mind would cripple something like this with Windows? It looks like a nice machine and the BSD-based O/S only makes it more attractive as far as I'm concerned.
...its the same goddamn thing as any pc now so its not crippling it.. nice try
and its still a shame they dont put two buttons on the macbookpro who wants to plug in a mouse when your using it on your lap
OSX has very intuitive 2 button functionality. I wish more people would realize that.
That being said I prefer 1 button on a notebook.
Urr, me not like single button mouse idea, me never use one with OS X & me not want think about one button + ctrl key.
yeah, that's a pretty stupid thing to say, you can plug about any multibutton mouse into a mac, the iMac ships by default with a wired multi as well.
I get by just fine with my one button bluetooth mouse, ctrl click is the same as right click for those who don't know, my hand is on the keyboard for key commands anyway.
For the complainers about one button mice...please get over yourself. You must have never used a mac or you would know that you can use a modifier key to bring up the contextual menu OR you can use the SAME two button mouse you use on your PC. Most people have no idea what the other button is for anyway! Its just so lame to hear that complaint over and over...
then how come the Mighty Mouse has two buttons ?!?
For the record, EFI did come out before Windows XP, it was on a few IBM eServer xSeries 380 Itanium servers I worked on back in '99 I think it was. Windows 2000 on IA64 and Windows 2003 on IA64 use it and work just fine. I think Windows XP Chose not to support it on the IA32 and EM64T/AMD64 revisions
Because it's Mighty.
As a Mac lover, yet gamer, this is my dream, especially since my brother somehow got a beta test copy of vista. I can't wait to get my hands on an iMac, since it's specs seem to be great as per gaming, but...where am I going to get over $1,300 dollars(for the one i would want)?? I guess I'll try even harder to find a job...Until then, I'll have to make more fun desktops ---> http://home.comcast.net/~xmaskitty/Intel_iMac.jpg
Vista beta 2 is rumored to come out late this month or next month which I cannot wait for!
Apple / Mac has been taking their sweet time improving on some things and even though OS X is the greatest OS right now on the market, they will ultimately lose against linux and vista.
Sorry Apple, but the fact is Microsoft is getting off their butt and doing something and just because you got Intel to work with your new machines it probobly wont save you.
I really want to get a macbook to replace my currant laptop, but won't do so until they make one with 2 buttons. It is a breaking point with me. All new macs come with the mighty mouse making it the new mac standard anyway; why have differant configurations for portable and desktop models? It just makes it harder going from your desktop to your laptop because you can't use them in the same way.
And the saying that ctrl key is cood enough is like saying virus and spyware are not problems on PCs because there are programs to prevent them. It may be true but it is still a problem and a major paain in the ass!
Hell just wait for the Merom Intel chips that are 64 bits and support virtualization. You'll be able to run both XP and Os X at the same time and switch between the two. There would be NO speed delay like a Virtual PC solution.
I find two-buttons on a trackpad to be annoying. I use a two button mouse when my AI Book is docked and I am using a large screen, but don't miss the two buttons when only using the track pad.
So Apple has resorted to making it easy for Windows to be ran on their machines to try and bauild their measly 4% market share.
Hmmmm Dual core processors, Intel chips, two button mice standard (maybe). It's beging to show more and more the only big difference between mac and pc is software.
It's a good thing they've got the iPod or they would barely even exist today.
this dumbed down TravelMate 8200(read macbook pro) is PC notebook with one mouse button. If it had two, what would there be to differentiate it? besides price higher. we're talking hardware folks.
when will the full version of vista be out anyway!? approx!?
I hear that vista only works with one button.
Seriously... Who cares about getting the blue screen of death an a brand new MacBook Pro?! The reason Apple isn't blocking Windows on their new computers is because barely anyone would want some nice viruses, poor memory management, and constant End Process dialogs on their new Macs...
Forget this, lets hear about running OS X on the PC!
wtf?! why the f&*k would you buy a an Intel iMac or MacBook Pro to put windows on it?! sad sad ppl......
#30, funny that you think that Vista is going to be the death of all other OS's, why is it funny? because many of the features in Vista have been in OS X for YEARS, sorry, but nice try MS.
#13
I believe there is a version of the LILO boot loader (ELILO) available for Linux, but haven't checked into it.
#13
I believe there is a version of the LILO boot loader that supports EFI available for Linux called ELILO, but haven't checked into it.
http://freshmeat.net/projects/elilo/
Forget the mouse issue. Just get a BT 2 button mouse.
*I* would like to know... when running on this laptop, will windows recognize the Command & Option keys as Control and Alt keys in the windows world?
Also, will there be a key that can be recognized as the "Window" key? I use the Window key all the time.
If not, is there software out there that can map keys or key combinations specifically to the window key? Like instead of Window+E could some software translate Ctrl+Alt+Shift+E to the same thing (errr, command+option+shift+E)?
#17
Those previous people only got it to run by using PearPC, which is an emulator.
I don't want an emulator, I want native support.
I mean it runs natively on x86, obviously, so whats keeping it? The best I could figure is the whole EFI boot crap, I guess if they didn't intend it to be used ona system without EFI they wouldn't bother making it capable of booting from a sytem with a normal BIOS.
But the heavy lifting, i.e. porting OSX and all the untouchable by mere mortals code that comes with it, has allready been done by Apple.
I can only imagine it's just a matter of time before MS actually has some competition in the OS market.
I'm still not sure I'd USE OSX, lack of software is still killer and honestly theres alot of things about OSX I don't like. But it would be nice to have the option.
hey...
i was wondering if windows programs would work w/ the new intel macs.. if anyone knows the 100% TRUE answer tothis questoin, please email me at basketballdude76@hotmail.com
thank you so much.
-PJ
Uh...yeah...and ?
I thought the hype and hoopla around macs these days was their "awesome" and stable unix like OS (which I am in no way knocking...). So what would be the point of running Msoft stuff on a Mac ? PARTICULARLY now that they're gonna have intel guts. It will be virtually the same thing as running Vista on a plain PC but cost more...
WHY?!?!?!?
(aside of course from the ubiquitous "Because I/We can!" factor...)
Apple / Mac has been taking their sweet time improving on some things and even though OS X is the greatest OS right now on the market, they will ultimately lose against linux and vista.
Sorry Apple, but the fact is Microsoft is getting off their butt and doing something and just because you got Intel to work with your new machines it probobly wont save you.
-----
That was vague.. so.. a more agile Apple has to worry about MS catching up to .. Jaguar.. in.. Dec 2006.. and.. Apple just reported $5.7B quarter.. best ever.. and you warn that, Intel can't save them...
Dude...where do I start?
How about you list ONE THING Apple has to worry about with Vista
Virtual PC for Mac running natively without emulation would be mighty nice. I'm sure someone is working on it.
5: "i'd rather have a peg leg than use a one button mouse for windows."
I'd rather have a peg leg than use Windows.
I wonder how hard it would be for apple to make that 1 button on the MacBook Pro to work like mighty mouse, i.e. put some kinda sensor(s) underneath to determine if you wanted to do a left/right click.
Did EFI come before or after WinXP? I think the engadget post says it came after, but a reader said it came before...
Oh and wasn't there this thing called WINE that lets you run Windows programs on x86 machines with a UNIX-based OS? If that works just fine, why bother with dual booting Windows on your intel Macs?
This is a win win situation for microsoft because if someone wants to run windows on thier macbook pro (probably because of lack of qaulity gaming on macs) they would have to buy a fresh copy of vista, which means more money for microsoft.
Apple will loose money if 0SX was to run on generic pcs and laptops because they rely on hardware sales from the macs.
If OSX get hacked to run on pcs other than macs this would see a drop in mac sales because if someone had the option to have OSX to run on hardware to thier own specification other than the highly inflated prices apple charge for thier macs, they would not choose the latter.
Personally i dont see why people buy macs, if it's for perfomance then i beg to differ, for the same price you can personalise a top end pc or laptop at alienware and most people think they are a ripoff. Macs do not make economical sense, they can't ran most programs for instance which limits productivity, I would say most people by macs for the novelty and nothing else.
And yes i dont own a mac even thou i have used one before, this is mainly because i am not stupid enough to spend my money on something that has so many limitations. I must admit the intrface of OSX is appealing, but that does not justify spending 1000+ on something which has limited expandability.
OH good lord people there is soo much bickering about wanting windows on a mac and how its pointless.... What the heck? What if i want to be able to run both OS's, not just one. Why you ask? What if i want to video edit in my Mac OS, but i want to play a newly released game that is out for windows, but not mac? Or even released for it, but not optomized for it? How about all the little shareware programs we've come to know and love that are pc programs? What does it MATTER if we want both os's? Apple is in no danger allowing Windows on the mac, i doubt most people will buy the new laptop and NOT run the mac OS anyway. It's like buying a car and not using it's extra features. If you want a laptop that runs windows, then buy a dell or ibm, or asus, but for those of us that want both? Macbook is our first shot at it in a native (non virtualized) environment. That said, if they brought out the 13 inch widescreen version, i'd probably give the single mouse button a shot, but not before then.
My 2 cents.
I love the Windows fanboys arguements against OS X...one button mouse...how the hell does that work!?!
Ha Ha
Mighty Mouse has four buttons and a scroll ball for 360degrees scrolling. Apple's first attempt at a multi-button mouse and it actually works better than most third party/microsoft developed mice.
I use iscoll2 on my 1.67ghz PB to add right-click functionality by putting two fingers on the scroll pad and hitting the mouse button. "Problem" solved.
Can you imagine me using the same arguement against windows? "Like OMGZ, windows has two buttons...it must be a crap OS."
OS X, although it doesnt carry as many native apps and games (many of which I'll never use of have even heard of) as windows, offers a much better experience for the average user straight out of the box, which to many people is much more important than being able to run random bits of software.
The *other* issue is that the Intel Macs use a non-standard partition table as well as EFI; they use a GPT ("GUID Partition Table") instead of a legacy MBR. Like EFI, this is an Intel idea that's already in use on Itanium, so the Linux community should have very little trouble in porting the EFI/GPT code from IA64 to IA32 in order to let Linux dual boot on Intel-Macs.
The problem is going to be Windows; only Itanium Windows 2000/XP supports EFI/GPT, and Itanium's a completely different architecture. I suspect that VMWare/Virtual PC (when OSX-Intel versions turn up) will be the main solutions for Windows dual booting until Vista comes out, which should hopefully solve the problem.
eventhough it is half illegal, OSX can run PCs nowadays
http://osxonpc.com/
Back to the topic: Can you run Windows XP on an Intel Mac. It looks promising. It also seems that they boot using EFI. Well, the MacBook's cousin, Acer's TravelMate 8200 comes preloaded with WinXP Pro. Therefore, Intel Macs should be able to boot WinXP. Right?
Who's picked up a Intel iMac and tried installing WinXP Pro?
#39 and #49...Amen to that.
#56 - the problem with this is that you are essentially running the whole OS within a Rosetta environment. At least that's what I gather from the link.
You'll see a performance hit, and many apps that require realtime stuff, like Final Cut Pro, etc. will not run under Rosetta. So, you are running what amounts to a crippled version of OSX. It is a good start, however.
My question is how will it react to a video card or other hardware that Mac has no native support for? Or drivers that just don't behave properly when running the whole OS under Rosetta?
I would like to see the guys that hacked this do it with 10.4.4 and post results. You wouldn't have to run the whole OS under Rosetta.
I was thinking about getting a TabletPC next month. THen the MacBook came out, and for only $300 more I can get a faster CPU & run both OSX & Vista natively, wich outweighs the negative of not being able to use tablet functionality.
Now, if there were a Dual-Core TabletPC priced in the same range (or less) than the MacBook, AND it could run OSX 10.4.4 natively w/o problems (dual-booted OSX & XP), well that would just be phenominal!
Either way, I am waiting till at least the MacBooks are arriving and I can see confirmation that Vista can run flawlessly on a MacBook (can't think of any reason why it shouldn't). Hopefully by then someone will have at least attempted to run OSX on a non-macbook dual-core PC laptop. I'll make my final descision then...
The guys at thinksecret .com claim Along with running Mac OS X, Windows XP installs without hitch on the Intel-based Mac, just as it would on any other PC.
Link http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0506intelmac.html
Disregard previous post... old link
Seems to me Intel's the one that should be doing the gloating, seeing as how Apple has finally given up pretending and adopted the superior technology.
"i'd rather have a peg leg than use a one button mouse for windows."
You know... sometimes I wonder if people are really that stupid.... Macs have been able to use any PC 2 (or more) button mouse since before time with full right click functionality. You will not have to use an Apple one-button mouse when you run Windows, let alone when you run OS X! Right click works just fine on a Mac in either OS!
Hitting ctrl+click (or ctrl+tap if you've got tap to click turned on) is no more difficult than clicking a separate button. The only situation I could see where it would matter is gaming, and who games with a trackpad anyway?
The Acer Travelmate 8200 IS very similar in spec, but it's the same price OR MORE according to the pricing guidelines I've seen. I'd hardly call the Mac Book Pro a "dumbed down cousin" of it. (It's also worth noting that they were developed completely independently of each other; their announcement dates were within a week of each other, so it's not like one really trumped the other, even.)
The OS bigotry on both sides is simply overwhelming. Both sides need to get over themselves: use what you like and realize that your preferences aren't the preferences of everyone else. If it successfully dual boots (which I'm banking on), awesome. If not, I bought it as a Mac, if it boots Windows (Vista or XP), that's just gravy. If you're really so concerned over whether or not it'll dual boot, then WAIT UNTIL THEY SHIP. It's all just speculation until then.
#50 and all you one-button mouse haters: You don't need two buttons--the one button will work as two. There is a great utility called "One Finger Snap" (like $10) that gives you a control panel to control how long a single click on the single mouse becomes a "right click". For example, you hit the mouse once and let go and it acts like a left click. You click and hold for .25 seconds (or whatever you define in the control panel) and it acts like the right click and you get the contextual menu usually associated with right clicks. I've been using this for a long time now and it's slick. And yes, when I plug a mouse in or use my desktop Mac, I use a two-button mouse (any USB mouse will work, you don't need a Mighty Mouse).
Connecting to Internet before the OS boots? Can you say getting rooted before you're first cup of coffee? Maybe I'm paranoid but, I don't want anything connecting to the internet that is that low level. A hacked OS can be formatted off the HD, a hacked and rooted FIRMWARE? Beware my friends. Especially if it shares the same platform as Windows anything; that means that all of a sudden, the other 99.9% of hackers who weren't interested in Apple hardware all of a sudden can clump us in to their virii target base with an all new form of horribly contagious and horribly destructive form of malware.
I bit negative, yes. I'd like to watch DVDs and Play iTunes (locally and over the network) without the OS and all of the battery drain that would come with it as much as the next man but, connecting the low levels of the machine logic with internet is just a bad idea.
You know what they do to machines that hold the highest level of government secrets? Never connect them to any outside network at all. Everything is still too unsecure. Call me paranoid but, my BIOS is like Pentagon. There shouldn't be many people coming in and out (relatively speaking) and I should know who they all are.
That said, I'm as eager to get an Intel Powerbook when they come out with the 17' model. Once you go 17, it's hard to go back... Maybe for that fabled 13' widescreen that been rumored.
"*I* would like to know... when running on this laptop, will windows recognize the Command & Option keys as Control and Alt keys in the windows world?"
Yes, Command = Windows and Option = Alt, which switches their expected positions. At least that's how it works when you plug an apple USB keyboard in to a windows box.
Some clarifications here:
1) Only a virus that had the ability to modify the partition table (or other partitions directly on the disk) would affect OS X, as Windows doesn't understand HFS, the filesystem used on OS X.
2) The mac can use multi-button and wheeled mice/trackballs. (Especially if windows was running it, as it'd just be an issue of talking to the USB port) However, I doubt windows will recognize command+click, which should be the primary concern.
3) There are a couple of utilities to make apple keyboards work on Windows, I imagine they would work here. One is called 'AppleKeys', although I don't have a link available.
4) Someone is working on a stable WINE port for OS X, although at this time I can't remember what it's called.. It's mentioned on the OS X x86 wiki.
5) As any Free UNIX user knows, you'll most likely have to install Vista first, then install OS X. Windows is notorious about it's lack of recognizing and catering to other operating systems.
I hope that helps clear some things up.
Sun machines have had network-accessible firmware for well over 10 years now.
I have come across what appears to be instructions on how to dualboot MacOSX and Windows on a PC:
http://www.profit42.com/guides.php?id=1
The most stupid thing that Apple has done is allow two buttons in the operating system but putting one button on the touchpad.
It's like having a 7 seats SUV with one door.
Three reasons why Windows won't run on Macs yet: EFI, driver support and GPT. I wrote about these problems (and solutions) at:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/Jan06.IntelMacsWin1.html
> 50
That's the most intelligent answer to the two-button malarky you windows fanboys spout about. The Mighty Mouse isn't actually a multi-button mouse, it's one button with three "zones." Having one button that has two zones would shut the fanboys up yet still let me set both zones to primary click and not worry about accidentally popping up a contextual menu when I'm typing.
Oh, and for those of you that use Photoshop, if you're not already adjusted to keyboard modifiers, you're not being a very efficient user. Shift, option, control and command, and combinations of all four make each tool in CS2 do different things. It's like having a six button mouse.
Oh, and one of the great parts about OSX is being able to have 80% functionality without even touching the mouse. Learn to use the keyboard, it's soooo much faster. Unless you're using windows. Then it's just dodgy and more confusing.
Who would want to put Windows XP on a Mac anyways, it would be a sin. XP is the worst, worn ridden, virus prone, pile of 0's and 1's I have ever seen. Case in point I gave away a four year old laptop PC to a relative running XP version 1; resurecting an old Compaq running XP from a four year hiatus reminded me how awfull XP really was. After wiping the drive with the original restore disc and pop up hell to update XP to usable standards (might I mention several update session... where is the automatic in "automatic updates!") I then had to run virus scan that pulled out spyware galore, and a few ill viruses. Lukily I'm giving the laptop away as a dial up stick in the mud to non computer users, but the thought of having that relic of a virus magnet piece of trash in my office just made me ill to the bone. By the way Windows Pro wasn't any better. Thank God I no longer need to use such awfull OS's for work. Not only did it make my job a living hell, but I had to bring hell home in the form of a laptop.
"And then there was light." So comes Apple's line of low power consuming, Intel chip, Mag connect, laptop computers. Oh glory be, I do see a light at the end of Windows hell. It comes in the form of Mac OS and Vista all in one neat little package, a new day has dawned.
#32 SAY WHAT??? Explain this?
# 49
/stand up
/clap
thank you for saying what we all have been thinking...
#51: I bet your car is a Ford Mondeo and all of your clothes are from C&A. There's a little something called industrial design which Apple happen to be very good at, and there are many people who prefer a more satisfying experience when using computer. At the risk of sounding snobbish (which I am), there are only 2 reasons NOT to buy a mac: (1) Financial reasons (2) Ignorance. Taking (1), I'd rather buy an older, 2nd hand Mac than own a PC. However, I'd say that in many cases, it's a case of 'won't' rather than 'can't', which really directs that back to (2). You suggest that people only buy Macs for 'novelty', stating that 'Macs can't run most programs'. I'd beg to differ. I work in scientific research and I'd concede that many commercial programs are written specifically for wintel boxes running bits of kit in our labs. However, OS X has the legacy software of UNIX machines which goes back decades, and a lot of OpenSource and shareware material, as well as a lot of quality commercial solutions. Often my colleagues are jealous because the OpenSource and shareware packages I use supersede the versions they have on their PCs, no doubt due to the fact that Mac owners are more likely to financially support such projects (PC owners being misers, as you proved in your earlier statement). You then go on to state that this limits productivity...
HAHAHAHAHAHA YOU ABSOLUTE F***ING MORON. Why is it that most of my colleagues, and my mates (I also do a lot of design work, writing etc.) always come to me to sort stuff out...could it be the fact that most mac versions of programs can load and save in a wider variety of formats? Yes, I believe it could.
I've never heard anything as retarded in my life. Do us all a favour and electrocute yourself on your pathetic, scrubber-machine.
#34 regurgitates the same old "measly 4%" statistic. Is this in fact, a true represetation of a mac user-base? Well, many independent websites report the proprtion of people logging on using macs somewhere around the 20% mark. This is because these people are not being restrained by limited or blocked access to the internet by the call-centres, offices and other institutions that block-buy large numbers of wintel machines. That's right, folks, the 90% or higher market share of machines running Windows is largely comprised of those that will be used by people who had the choice thrust upon them. At least the people using macs actually want them. So: large faceless multinationals buy PCs, idiots buy PCs, sheep buy PCs, people buy...Macs?
The success of the iPod reflects this as well. Most people who own iPods own PCs, and I'd hazard that most of them didn't even bother to consider the alternatives.
F***ing Nazis.
I've had a mac since 1984 but I'm a windows developer by day. Right now I need a windows machine AND a Mac and have lots of software for both. If the new intel macs would boot XP I'd have already ordered one. I need intel VPN clients and Visual Studio and certrainly VS is never likely to be running on OSX anytime soon.
Plus I have a feeling we might get more switchers to Mac if they knew they could still run their Windows programs when they needed to.
Lastly as I run XP and OSX every day, there's a lot to like about XP pro. I like OSX too, but I'd LOVE to make the dock work like the application bar on the bottom of the XP screen (to make windows not overlap it). So I'll have to wait for Vista before I buy my new Intel Mac so I can be certain it will work.