Check this out -- Use WinXP OS on your Mini Mac setup!...

[PC Engine Fan X!]

A guy over at USAToday.com managed to get his Mini Mac to work with WinXP. Plan on spending $200.00 for the full version of WinXP OS on your Mini Mac.

The article includes step by step instructions on how to do this. ^_~

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/2 ... htm?csp=27

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[Limbrooke]

Too bad this has been around much longer and makes far more sense.
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/v ... ualpc.aspx
Talk a about a waste.

[genetik]

Virtual PC is very different then Apple's "boot camp" solution.

VPC is doing it through emulation, which can be really really painfully slow and unusable if you're talking about playing games.

The boot camp option makes uses of the new intel processor Mac, so WinXp is running natively on the intel processor.

This basically makes it possible to own a real mac and somewhat real enough pc in one box.

A Mac mini or a Mac portable with both OS X and WinXP can be very useful. You got OS X and just by rebooting you can have access to WinXP and all this in a very small portable package.

[sethsez]

Too bad this has been around much longer and makes far more sense.
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/v ... ualpc.aspx
Talk a about a waste.

Um, I think you're missing the point.

This isn't emulation, it's full, 100% Windows support on Mac hardware. Emulation of Windows through VirtualPC isn't anywhere near actually using Windows for any reasonably demanding software (this includes just about all recent, and not so recent, games, and forget using something like AutoCAD).

It's the difference between playing SNES games on your Dreamcast and actually owning an SNES.

[extrarice]

Virtual PC is very different then Apple's "boot camp" solution.

VPC is doing it through emulation, which can be really really painfully slow and unusable if you're talking about playing games.

The boot camp option makes uses of the new intel processor Mac, so WinXp is running natively on the intel processor.

This basically makes it possible to own a real mac and somewhat real enough pc in one box.

Vid of HalfLife2 playing on an iMac via Boot Camp. I'm impressed by how well it runs!

[it290]

Running software written and compiled for the Intel platform on an Intel-based computer. Utterly stupendous.

[Turrican]

There's something like the shadow of a bad omen about this... now that Mac users will be able to install Windows and run its applications, who'll want to update Macintosh Magic Engine (we're still waiting an OS X release) or MacMAME and such? Isn't there the risk that less and less applications for mac will be created / supported?

just a thought.

[undamned]

Why?
-ud

[it290]

There's something like the shadow of a bad omen about this... now that Mac users will be able to install Windows and run its applications, who'll want to update Macintosh Magic Engine (we're still waiting an OS X release) or MacMAME and such? Isn't there the risk that less and less applications for mac will be created / supported?

just a thought.

On the other side of the coin, dual-boot support will surely sell more Macs, which means more market share for potential developers. For free apps, OS X has a pretty devoted hacker base already, and I don't see those people going anywhere.

[sethsez]

Running software written and compiled for the Intel platform on an Intel-based computer. Utterly stupendous.

With official help from Apple.

That's what makes this so interesting. The initial shock of Sega making games for Nintendo was nothing compared to Apple providing a tool that lets you easily install Windows on their hardware. It wasn't a particularly huge development when some people found an unofficial way to do this weeks ago.

[Turrican]

On the other side of the coin, dual-boot support will surely sell more Macs, which means more market share for potential developers. For free apps, OS X has a pretty devoted hacker base already, and I don't see those people going anywhere.

Yes, that sounds true. Let's hope so.

Say, to install windows XP means to be able to run even old PC games that ran on DOS? I'm talking pre-486 stuff here.

[sethsez]

Not natively. XP and DOS programs don't really get along too well sometimes. DOSbox pretty much solves this, though.

[Limbrooke]

Too bad this has been around much longer and makes far more sense.
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/v ... ualpc.aspx
Talk a about a waste.

Um, I think you're missing the point.

This isn't emulation, it's full, 100% Windows support on Mac hardware. Emulation of Windows through VirtualPC isn't anywhere near actually using Windows for any reasonably demanding software (this includes just about all recent, and not so recent, games, and forget using something like AutoCAD).

It's the difference between playing SNES games on your Dreamcast and actually owning an SNES.

Of course a SNES cannot run Dreamcast given that statement. You need a Dreamcast and a SNES seperately. What you'd need to refer to is a SNescast hybrid which doesn't exist, and gives for a poor example.

I don't really see how a 'large' Mac base can benefit from this. There's already plenty of cross-over support from PC's onto Macs, and really how this idea wasn't implimented years ago when support would've been in higher demand I really have no clue. Don't give me some hogwash about how Apple now felt it was ideal due to this Intel chip innovation. If anything Mac/OSX should be popular enough to warrant integrated support rather than some 'lets add Windows support' gimmick.
Also, if you only own a Mac and feel as if now you want to run heavy PC apps (hmm, maybe graphic design based programs) or PC games, get real. You decide now is the time to engage 'Project PC GO'. I wonder really how long you've been using a Mac. Just my two cents.

[Limbrooke]

Oh yes, just so bad blood isn't spilled in this discussion I'd like to refer to exhibit A:
http://tinyurl.com/rkozj

[sethsez]

Of course a SNES cannot run Dreamcast given that statement. You need a Dreamcast and a SNES seperately. What you'd need to refer to is a SNescast hybrid which doesn't exist, and gives for a poor example.

Um... you linked to an emulater that'll run some Windows programs okay, but certainly not at the level of real hardware. Likewise, a Dreamcast can run SNES games through emulation and some will be functional but it's hardly an ideal setup.

I don't really see how a 'large' Mac base can benefit from this.

Because now they can run all their OS X apps, and any Windows apps they might want, on a single machine without any isses with sluggish performance that emulation brings. And since the Mac gaming scene absolutely sucks compared to the Windows gaming scene, now Mac users can play Half-Life 2, Oblivion and whatever else without waiting for ports that might never happen or spending stupid amounts to build a seperate PC just for gaming.

how this idea wasn't implimented years ago when support would've been in higher demand I really have no clue.

The processors had completely different architecture years ago.

Don't give me some hogwash about how Apple now felt it was ideal due to this Intel chip innovation.

It has nothing to do with innovation and everything to do with feasibility. Windows XP doesn't support PPC architechture.

Also, if you only own a Mac and feel as if now you want to run heavy PC apps (hmm, maybe graphic design based programs) or PC games, get real. You decide now is the time to engage 'Project PC GO'. I wonder really how long you've been using a Mac. Just my two cents.

I don't own a Mac currently, though I'm considering getting one now that I know I won't have to sacrifice PC gaming and everything else will run on a better OS. However, my hardcore Mac-using friends (anyone who knows a lot of graphic designers knows a lot of Mac nuts) are all over this, since it allows them to finally play PC games without giving up anything. I don't see how you see this as anything approaching a bad thing. Mac hardware is now a hell of a lot more versatile, and is still the only hardware that'll run OS X.

[Limbrooke]

Of course a SNES cannot run Dreamcast given that statement. You need a Dreamcast and a SNES seperately. What you'd need to refer to is a SNescast hybrid which doesn't exist, and gives for a poor example.

Um... you linked to an emulater that'll run some Windows programs okay, but certainly not at the level of real hardware. Likewise, a Dreamcast can run SNES games through emulation and some will be functional but it's hardly an ideal setup.

The fact you state it runs Windows programs and Windows 'ok', leaves me out of any further comment.

In addition, I never said it was a bad thing. My original comment was 'useless' which doesn't necessarily mean bad last time I checked.

[sethsez]

Of course a SNES cannot run Dreamcast given that statement. You need a Dreamcast and a SNES seperately. What you'd need to refer to is a SNescast hybrid which doesn't exist, and gives for a poor example.

Um... you linked to an emulater that'll run some Windows programs okay, but certainly not at the level of real hardware. Likewise, a Dreamcast can run SNES games through emulation and some will be functional but it's hardly an ideal setup.

The fact you state it runs Windows programs and Windows 'ok', leaves me out of any further comment.

Try running Oblivion with it.

Hell, try running Gothic with it.

It's fine for basic apps. You'll note that nobody, anywhere, on the entire internet has listed "basic Windows apps" as the main reason for being excited about dual-booting. Games, and other software with heavy requirements, are the big draw.

Many mac fans are very excited about this, and I certainly doubt they're all unaware of VirtualPC. Do you know something they don't? Or could it be that being able to run Windows software at full speed is a big deal for mac gamers everywhere?

There is nothing useless about being given access to a wider range of software without the hinderences of emulation, and I really don't see how anybody could claim otherwise.

[Limbrooke]

Um... you linked to an emulater that'll run some Windows programs okay, but certainly not at the level of real hardware. Likewise, a Dreamcast can run SNES games through emulation and some will be functional but it's hardly an ideal setup.

The fact you state it runs Windows programs and Windows 'ok', leaves me out of any further comment.

Try running Oblivion with it.

Hell, try running Gothic with it.

It's fine for basic apps. You'll note that nobody, anywhere, on the entire internet has listed "basic Windows apps" as the main reason for being excited about dual-booting. Games, and other software with heavy requirements, are the big draw.

Many mac fans are very excited about this, and I certainly doubt they're all unaware of VirtualPC. Do you know something they don't? Or could it be that being able to run Windows software at full speed is a big deal for mac gamers everywhere?

There is nothing useless about being given access to a wider range of software without the hinderences of emulation, and I really don't see how anybody could claim otherwise.

The fact that Mac made exclusive from PC isn't anyones fault. Had this been implimented years ago it would've helped market share much better. At a point in time where Mac users (or anyone for that matter) chooses to use only one platform is nonsense. Even if I used a Mac for my profession, I'd still have enough sense to get a PC to use applications or play games like the ones you mentioned rather than shutting myself out of a whole market because, 1. I only want to use a Mac & 2. Mac didn't use to support dualboot of Windows. I look at this development, again, not as a bad thing, but it's a bit late in the game and really isn't anything that wouldn't have been as useful 10 years ago which as I feel would've made more sense.

[it290]

Only 10 years ago, Apple didn't have nearly the mindshare or 'cool appeal' that they do now. Nor would it have made sense for them to switch to Intel back then, as they had just done the move to PowerPC. If you're saying they should have switched to Intel instead of PowerPC, that makes a little more sense, but I doubt the Intel processors from back then would have been able to emulate 680x0 nearly as well as the PowerPC chips did.

[Turrican]

Not only ten years ago there weren't intel macs. There was no XP either...

[Limbrooke]

Only 10 years ago, Apple didn't have nearly the mindshare or 'cool appeal' that they do now. Nor would it have made sense for them to switch to Intel back then, as they had just done the move to PowerPC. If you're saying they should have switched to Intel instead of PowerPC, that makes a little more sense, but I doubt the Intel processors from back then would have been able to emulate 680x0 nearly as well as the PowerPC chips did.

That's what I'm saying. With respects to Apple they've had a lot of ups and downs, but strides could've been done a while ago to make this advent possible. It doesn't help in terms of timeline when Apple goes exclusive with low market share.

Bottom line I never said it was a bad thing. I stated opinion in my initial reply to this topic and that's it. I was interested in Mac's a while back but my support has dwindled and this event is basically like a slap in the face to me for when I was curious for better support back then.

[sethsez]

But now it does support dual-boot, so people don't have to buy multiple systems or risk being shut out of anything. In fact, since Boot Camp will install other operating systems as well (though it only officially supports XP), Mac hardware now has more operating systems to choose from than your average Dell box. And it's a hell of a lot cheaper than buying a seperate powerful PC for a few games.

Would it have been awesome 10 years ago? Sure. Hindsight is 20/20 and all that, but they didn't have the architechture to support it anyway so it wasn't possible. And with Apple's mindshare being the biggest it's been in an extremely long time (thanks to the iPod and iTunes), this is one hell of a way for Apple to get more people who've been eyeing Macs but don't want to give up their favorite Windows stuff either. Apple used to be the butt of jokes and now they're one of the trendiest tech companies around, so this is one of the best times to try and snag people.

Edit:

That's what I'm saying. With respects to Apple they've had a lot of ups and downs, but strides could've been done a while ago to make this advent possible.

But they did it now. Why is it useless because it wasn't done ten years ago, when it would have been interpreted by everyone as them rolling over and playing dead? A move this drastic relies heavily on peoples' view of the company, because if people already have a skeptical view of the company then they'd lose customers who would view it as a sinking ship.

And Apple's market share was no better 10 years ago than it is now. In fact, today Apple is much, much more financially secure, has maintained about the same marketshare as always, and has a far larger mindshare than they ever had in the history of the company. You're acting as if Apple's market share has dwindled in the past decade, when nothing could be further from the truth. It's probably been the best 10 years of the company's history, all things considered.