Get Smart about Business Spending
- Related Stories
-
Contest pays off for XP on Mac
March 16, 2006 -
How the XP-on-Mac prize was won
March 16, 2006 -
Windows XP-on-Mac contest declares winner
March 16, 2006 -
Windows XP vs. Mac OS X
March 31, 2001
The software, which will be included in Mac OS X 10.5, called Leopard, is available for download now. Apple will also preview Boot Camp in August at its Worldwide Developers Conference, the company said.
"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," Philip Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, said in a statement. "We think Boot Camp makes the Mac even more appealing to Windows users considering making the switch."
Apple didn't specifically mention plans to support running Vista, the long-delayed update to the Windows operating system now expected early next year.
Microsoft wouldn't comment on whether the Apple software will work with Vista. The company issued a statement Wednesday afternoon: "We?re pleased that Apple customers are excited about running (Windows), and that Apple is responding to meet the demand," said Kevin Kutz, director of Microsoft Windows Client.
Also unclear is what the Mac maker's move will mean for sales of Windows-based PCs. Market researcher IDC has already scaled back PC sales forecasts for the year, due in part to the Vista delay. And some analysts expect Apple sales to rise as a result of the holdup of the new operating system's release.
With Boot Camp, Intel-based Mac users can choose between running Mac OS or Windows XP each time they boot their system.
The move in this direction began last June, when Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced that Apple was shifting to Intel-based computers. Apple also said it had been developing Mac OS X with the intention that it would be able to run on Intel chips and IBM's PowerPC chips, which were previously the sole processors used in Macs.
In January, Apple released the first Intel-based Macs with Intel's Duo dual-core chips. The new computers run two to three times faster than similar Macs with PowerPC chips, Apple said. Since then, speculation had grown about whether the company would enable Microsoft's ubiquitous operating system to run natively on its computers.
Video: Windows on the Mac
Apple releases software to run XP
While Apple has prohibited people from running Mac OS X on anything other than its own computers, it has never tried to prevent Mac owners from trying to run Windows on their machines. Still, the company has not been a large supporter of the idea. That's something Apple Senior Software Architect Cameron Esfahani made clear at the Intel Developer Forum in March.
Customers, however, have been clamoring to see it happen. There have even been XP-on-Mac contests in recent weeks.
"This solves a lot of potential holdups to Macintosh adoption. While a group of programmers already has demonstrated that this is entirely possible to do, that method for deployment is more of a clever hack that no sane end user would attempt," JupiterResearch analyst Michael Gartenberg wrote in a blog posting Wednesday.
"Overall, (this is) a nice tactical move by Apple that will make their platforms and systems much more attractive," Gartenberg wrote.
Mac fans might remember that this isn't the first time that Apple has supported Windows via a dual-boot option. In the mid 1990s, the company introduced--and soon discontinued--Macintosh models that supported a plug-in card, which included a separate x86 processor for running both DOS and Windows.
See more CNET content tagged:
Apple Boot Camp, Apple Computer, IBM PowerPC, Apple Macintosh, Intel
Watch and weep you doubters.
A year ago I said this?
teeheeeee
This is HUGE. Watch. Listen. Learn.
Overpriced hardware running arguably inferior operating system.
This isn't huge. This is anti-huge.
Huge would be OX side-by-side with Wista on a Dell.
Watch and weep you doubters.
A year ago I said this?
teeheeeee
This is HUGE. Watch. Listen. Learn.
Overpriced hardware running arguably inferior operating system.
This isn't huge. This is anti-huge.
Huge would be OX side-by-side with Wista on a Dell.
From the Apple website:
"Word to the Wise
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. So be sure to keep it updated with the latest Microsoft Windows security fixes."
Here's another shot at Windows for Apple's website:
"EFI and BIOS
Macs use an ultra-modern industry standard technology called EFI to handle booting. Sadly, Windows XP, and even the upcoming Vista, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS. But with Boot Camp, the Mac can operate smoothly in both centuries."
It's plain to see that Apple hasn't fallen in love with Windows. I think it's simply about selling more Macs and getting more Windows users to make the switch. Good move by Apple. I like it.
It is a good move, I bet this will lead to hardware market dominance, now that users can use both (and who doesn't LOVE OS X?)
From the Apple website:
"Word to the Wise
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. So be sure to keep it updated with the latest Microsoft Windows security fixes."
Here's another shot at Windows for Apple's website:
"EFI and BIOS
Macs use an ultra-modern industry standard technology called EFI to handle booting. Sadly, Windows XP, and even the upcoming Vista, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS. But with Boot Camp, the Mac can operate smoothly in both centuries."
It's plain to see that Apple hasn't fallen in love with Windows. I think it's simply about selling more Macs and getting more Windows users to make the switch. Good move by Apple. I like it.
It is a good move, I bet this will lead to hardware market dominance, now that users can use both (and who doesn't LOVE OS X?)
platform. This is going to be huge!!!
If Boot Camp (like the name btw) is going to be released as part
of Leopard, which I recall is going to be realased around the
same time as Vista originally was (ie this year) I'm assuming that
it will be able to run Vista as well? I mean who wants to use XP
when Vista becomes available (assuming of course it is better
and does actually get released at this rate!!!).
Also, breaking news just in...yep we are getting confirmed
reports that Hell has indeed frozen over!!
platform. This is going to be huge!!!
If Boot Camp (like the name btw) is going to be released as part
of Leopard, which I recall is going to be realased around the
same time as Vista originally was (ie this year) I'm assuming that
it will be able to run Vista as well? I mean who wants to use XP
when Vista becomes available (assuming of course it is better
and does actually get released at this rate!!!).
Also, breaking news just in...yep we are getting confirmed
reports that Hell has indeed frozen over!!
It's called Red Box and has been around for years.
Leopard will effectively be this solution ultimately.
It's called Red Box and has been around for years.
Leopard will effectively be this solution ultimately.
Instead it'll have a foul-mouthed drill instructor. :-D
Instead it'll have a foul-mouthed drill instructor. :-D
getting the stability and power of Mac OS X and, really, the ubiquity
of Windows. Apple's even managed to write all the drivers so
everything your Mac computer has, even the eject key, work on
Windows.
It's a 2 for 1 deal. Apple's sealed it for me.
That would be a HUGE reason for the majority of home PC users. This isn't going to make anyone switch to the Apple hardware unless XP was installed at purchase and the price was comparable to a straight XP machine (ie OSX for free to boost hardware sales).
Mom and Pop purchaser out there is attracted to price not gee whiz I can boot two different OS.
So, although I think this is great for the geeks among us, its going to have little impact due to cost issues for the majority of people that just want a basic PC to get on the net etc etc.
Those must be planned for the next release.
As of today, I see no reason, barring cost, for me not to buy a 140ft yacht and sail to Tahiti.
Truth is, if one's not already a Mac luva, there's no reason to spend all that extra money for the computer and TWO operating systems when you can get a Windows machine for less. Yeah, so the mac has an eject button. Yippie. Thats not justifying to me the extra cost. My $800 clone-of-the-week can use virtually any part off the shelf if I need to fix it.
getting the stability and power of Mac OS X and, really, the ubiquity
of Windows. Apple's even managed to write all the drivers so
everything your Mac computer has, even the eject key, work on
Windows.
It's a 2 for 1 deal. Apple's sealed it for me.
That would be a HUGE reason for the majority of home PC users. This isn't going to make anyone switch to the Apple hardware unless XP was installed at purchase and the price was comparable to a straight XP machine (ie OSX for free to boost hardware sales).
Mom and Pop purchaser out there is attracted to price not gee whiz I can boot two different OS.
So, although I think this is great for the geeks among us, its going to have little impact due to cost issues for the majority of people that just want a basic PC to get on the net etc etc.
Those must be planned for the next release.
As of today, I see no reason, barring cost, for me not to buy a 140ft yacht and sail to Tahiti.
Truth is, if one's not already a Mac luva, there's no reason to spend all that extra money for the computer and TWO operating systems when you can get a Windows machine for less. Yeah, so the mac has an eject button. Yippie. Thats not justifying to me the extra cost. My $800 clone-of-the-week can use virtually any part off the shelf if I need to fix it.
like now we will have both one one machine.
And so ends the mac vs. pc debate "have your cake and eat it"
then go get antivirus for mac, what! a new business venture you
heard it here first!!
like now we will have both one one machine.
And so ends the mac vs. pc debate "have your cake and eat it"
then go get antivirus for mac, what! a new business venture you
heard it here first!!
Saying Apple's hardware is superior is like Chrysler claiming the Pacifica is superior. Sure, it's a fine car (I guess) and it is truly superior to other cars ... but NOT ALL CARS.
better deal here not because the hardware is better, or even
cheaper, but because you are buying the ability to run two vastly
different operating systems at once. If there's an attack on your
PC side, just switch back to the Mac and rescue your files. If
there's a PC game you really want to play, it's not a problem. You
can switch back to your Mac once you're done.
Most people aren't concerned enough about the hardware specs
to notice that difference (it's pretty small in the end anyway). The
Mac has become the final solution for a computer.
Qosmio laptop, one of the better reviewed PC laptop lines out
there (a flagship model w/ an excellent screen and Media Center
2005 support A/V hardware). There's no comparison between it
and my PowerBook, however, when it comes to total look/feel/
materials and attention to detail per dollar spent...it's the
qualitative difference between a Jeep Wrangler and a Lexus
RX330, and I paid roughly the same price for the two. It's not
hype, it's not imagined...I've experienced it. Have you sat down
w/ a Mac and really worked one over--if so, you'd know they
build great hardware.
I truly didn't understand what the real tangible difference was
until having them both side-by-side these last few days.
http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871,s=1565&iid=127601,00.asp
And I am a computer agnostic as well, I am writing this on an HP laptop right now...running windows XP pro...though I would rather run it on my mac at home as I have had more issues with XP then OS X, and don't go telling me I don't know how to manage my XP systems. I do this for a living
http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871,s=1565&iid=127601,00.asp
Saying Apple's hardware is superior is like Chrysler claiming the Pacifica is superior. Sure, it's a fine car (I guess) and it is truly superior to other cars ... but NOT ALL CARS.
better deal here not because the hardware is better, or even
cheaper, but because you are buying the ability to run two vastly
different operating systems at once. If there's an attack on your
PC side, just switch back to the Mac and rescue your files. If
there's a PC game you really want to play, it's not a problem. You
can switch back to your Mac once you're done.
Most people aren't concerned enough about the hardware specs
to notice that difference (it's pretty small in the end anyway). The
Mac has become the final solution for a computer.
Qosmio laptop, one of the better reviewed PC laptop lines out
there (a flagship model w/ an excellent screen and Media Center
2005 support A/V hardware). There's no comparison between it
and my PowerBook, however, when it comes to total look/feel/
materials and attention to detail per dollar spent...it's the
qualitative difference between a Jeep Wrangler and a Lexus
RX330, and I paid roughly the same price for the two. It's not
hype, it's not imagined...I've experienced it. Have you sat down
w/ a Mac and really worked one over--if so, you'd know they
build great hardware.
I truly didn't understand what the real tangible difference was
until having them both side-by-side these last few days.
http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871,s=1565&iid=127601,00.asp
And I am a computer agnostic as well, I am writing this on an HP laptop right now...running windows XP pro...though I would rather run it on my mac at home as I have had more issues with XP then OS X, and don't go telling me I don't know how to manage my XP systems. I do this for a living
http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871,s=1565&iid=127601,00.asp
lol
maybe you can tell me why the crappy apple hardware bested the competition running windows if the mac stuff is so bad
Stability, heat, and many other issues are more important then speed. My old AMD 2500 custom built rig can easily outperform Intel processors with comparable equipment up to 3 GHz and my rig run at ~1.9 GHz. And it does it at far cooler tempertures, using stock fat/heatsink.
The fact is that the numbers may appear to be in favor of PC's, but the hardware on a Mac runs smoother and more efficiently. That is why it is better hardware.
This is leaving out the solid argument that all processor designs are poor.
- They're so full of it
- by Christopher Hall April 5, 2006 7:00 AM PDT
- "Superior hardware"? Gimme a break. Nothing in a Mac I could build on their website comes anywhere close to the hardware I slapped in my gaming rig in late 2004.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- aww diddums
- by TyTyson April 5, 2006 7:06 AM PDT
- peecee users running scared already. Damn this is fun!
- Like this View all 3 replies
Processing -
- Dont you mean...
- by SystemsJunky April 5, 2006 7:42 AM PDT
- like 2001?
- Like this
-
- again read and learn before you speak
- by grossph April 5, 2006 8:21 AM PDT
- http://www.pcmag.com/image_popup/0,1871,s=1565&iid=127601,00.asp
- Like this View all 3 replies
Processing -
- You are comparing numbers on a side of a box
- by Bill Dautrive April 6, 2006 6:05 PM PDT
- They are meaningless, and anyone who truly knows computers knows that speed numbers are extremely misleading.
- Like this View reply
Processing -
Showing 1 of 9 pages (627 Comments)lol
maybe you can tell me why the crappy apple hardware bested the competition running windows if the mac stuff is so bad
Stability, heat, and many other issues are more important then speed. My old AMD 2500 custom built rig can easily outperform Intel processors with comparable equipment up to 3 GHz and my rig run at ~1.9 GHz. And it does it at far cooler tempertures, using stock fat/heatsink.
The fact is that the numbers may appear to be in favor of PC's, but the hardware on a Mac runs smoother and more efficiently. That is why it is better hardware.
This is leaving out the solid argument that all processor designs are poor.