11 Comments

Summary:

“Apple has no desire or plan to sell or support Windows, but many customers have expressed their interest to run Windows on Apple’s superior hardware now that we use Intel processors,” said Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing. “We think Boot Camp […]

“Apple has no desire or plan to sell or support Windows, but many customers have expressed their interest to run Windows on Apple’s superior hardware now that we use Intel processors,” said Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing. “We think Boot Camp makes the Mac even more appealing to Windows users considering making the switch.”

For those of you who haven’t seen it yet, dual-booting Windows XP and OS X on an Intel Mac is now (tentatively) supported by Apple on 10.4 with the Boot Camp public beta and looks like it’s planned to be part of 10.5.

Wow. Did not see this coming. More later as I give it a try.

  1. It also supports all of the hardware running on the OS, as they’ve included the required drivers. This also means that you could possibly play Windows games. Do you have any that you could test with? I’d like to see that working.

    Everything is supported, down to the wireless cards.

    Share
  2. I don’t understand the desire to run Windows XP on a Mac computer. If I wanted to play games or run programs that are released solely for XP, I would buy a computer that runs Windows. Running Windows on a Mac does not make it any more stable or any less prone to the several virus’ that are out there. On the Boot Camp website it states,

    Windows running on a Mac is like Windows running on a PC. That means it’ll be subject to the same attacks that plague the Windows world.

    Call me a mac purist but I see little point in even trying to run Windows on a Mac. I didn’t pay over $1000 for hardware just to have to crash on me while using an OS it was not designed to use. I’ve seen it compared to buying a Ferrari and putting a Fiat engine in it. I know that it may spell added profits for Apple in Windows users buying Macs to run Windows on, but at some point, you have to sacrifice profits for the sake of the people who got you where you are.

    Just my opinion.

    Share
  3. It sounds like it will work fairly well, except for a few things noted on their site: http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303572

    It won’t support iSight, backlit keyboards, USB modems, Apple’s bluetooth keyboard and mouse, and the Apple Remote.

    And, Dave, people may want to do this to avoid having to buy two computers to run two different OSes for different purposes. All of us Apple fans are happy, because this will allow people to purchase the MacBook Pro or other Macs where they previously wouldn’t have, and they will find that the Mac OS is much nicer, so Windows will slowly be pushed out of the game. As Apple’s hardware profits increase, this will also allow them to fight back a bit more.

    Share
  4. I suppose the thing that I am worried about is the uneducated user (the windows user (haha)) who will buy a Macbook Pro and install Windows on it, then when Windows continually crashes and gets loaded up with virus’ they will get a negative view of Apple and its products even though Apple has nothing to do with it. This could curb the number of people who were thinking about switching to Mac. I am all for Apple fighting back but I think they should do it with their own products… not their competitor’s.

    Share
  5. Nah the danger is overestimated.

    Boot Camp divides the disk into windows and mac partitions. Windows is unable to access the Mac filesystem: the partition used for the mac will likely be invisible from within windows.

    Furthermore, should malware infect the windows partition, the infection will not present problems when files on that partition are accessed from the OS X installation unless specifically designed to do so.

    So the risk remains the same as ever: that someone will design mac-specific malware.

    Share
  6. “I’ve seen it compared to buying a Ferrari and putting a Fiat engine in it.”

    Umm…I’m pretty certain that Fiat owns Ferrari, along with quite a few other companies (although Ferrari is pretty much allowed its autonomy) so perhaps that wasn’t the best analogy. But I do agree with the thought behind the comment. We have to remember though that there are currently more fools than intellectuals in this world (especially on this side of the pond or so it seems) and since the ministry of common sense has been closed for quite some can we really be surprised that more than few folks are excited to install windows on mac hardware? True, a few will see real benefits (small businesses, people with niche software, etc) with a dual doot config, but the majority of flag wavers for this feature I would suggest are in the “because its there” camp-nothing more, and nothing less. Real gamers are zealots for modification and overclocking, and Macs have never been the way to go for customization, and they won’t start to be now even with intel inside, so they don’t need this. As for me, I wouldn’t install Windows on my worst enemies’ pc, so I certainly wouldn’t put it on my mac. I just sent my powerbook into Apple for service so I’m writing this on my Athlon 64 desktop that runs a Linux/Windows 2K pro dual boot set up (because I only know enough about linux currently to be dangerous, so I still have 2k) and I’m thoroughly non-plussed about how much time is lost to negotiations with windows to just let me alone to get my bloody work done. Microsoft and its buggy creations can sod off, and until I don’t need a CS degree for linux OSX is my huckleberry.

    Share
  7. “Umm…I’m pretty certain that Fiat owns Ferrari, along with quite a few other companies”

    I was merely repeating what I read somewhere else. I am not an authority on fine, Italian automobiles. But I think you understood my point. Why would anybody want to take what could be considered the buggiest, most virus laden OS on the market and install it on hardware that was built to run OSX. I think thats another thing that we are forgetting… Apple built OSX to run on it’s hardware. Microsoft built Windows to run on virtually anything. Windows is the whore of the operating system world while Apple’s OSX is involved in a loving, monogamous relationship. I think you get my point.

    Share
  8. Being a software developer it is convenient to have a decent-speed windows installation to play with sometimes. Especially in school type settings when in the first week of classes the prof goes on and on about making sure to “#include ” and so on. Virtual PC is ok but it’s pretty slow on my 12″ powerbook.

    Maybe with a Macbook it would be quite swift, but then, you can also argue that Half-life 2 looks even nicer when it’s surrounded by silver and you have your hands on the pure beauty which is the powerbook’s keyboard (imho anyway).

    In short, I can picture myself booting up windows when I’m real bored to play half-life 2 or spore when it comes out, give windows it’s 10gb and keep it off the net except to do updates to games / get new software or whatever and you should be fine. Also, people who scoff “pfft, a mac?” you say “yep, oh and it runs windows better than your pos dell too, fool” :D

    Share
  9. damn angle brackets, should be “#include “windows.h”” anyways i guess. whatever, who cares about windows header files? :p

    Share
  10. How is Windows/OSX going to handle viruses. I hope Boot Camp has a bult in Firewall between Windows and OSX or who knows what will happen…

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post