Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

production_coordinator · Apr 5, 2006, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

Doubt it. If Apple wanted to ditch Mac OS X they wouldn't be releasing 10.5. My guess is they're trying to do the OS/2 thing in reverse (of course this would assume Apple is working on Dharma, which I still think is true, which I predicted was true along with Apple working on running Windows on a Mac.)

I'm also a Dharma believer.

Landos Mustache · Apr 5, 2006, 10:27 PM

The sad thing is that it will be faster to run photoshop in XP for the next year.

davesimondotcom · Apr 5, 2006, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

The sad thing is that it will be faster to run photoshop in XP for the next year.

Maybe so, but I'd still run it on the Mac side... just plain more "at home." And I worked in Windows (at work) for two years.

Windows just doesn't feel natural!

f1000 · Apr 5, 2006, 10:49 PM

Originally Posted by mindwaves

Whoah..... I hope this will bring more people over.

Whoa indeed! Thought this was some sort of spoof at first.

finboy · Apr 5, 2006, 11:07 PM

Originally Posted by moodymonster

this can go one of two ways, either more people use macs - or the mac is doomed. Doomed I tell you!

Most people I know who use Mac prefer it to Windows - even people who are lifelong Windows users. So hoping this is good.

Suppose for companies Macs are now on the radar because they can now run Windows and tentatively try OS X. Leopard had better really knock the spots off Vista.

I think it spells the eventual end of OS X. Macs may continue to be a "specialty" machine, but it will never be more -- why pay the big prices just to run OS X? Consumers won't keep doing it. When the iPod finishes its run, look out.

WJMoore · Apr 5, 2006, 11:11 PM

Originally Posted by mduell

Next stop, Vanderpool/VT enabled simultaneous dual booting; that's much more interesting than repeating the success of a 3rd party hacker weeks later.

I agree completely. The minute Intel Power Macs are available, there is a fast virtualisation solution for OS X that I can run Linux (no interested in Windows) in a window I'll have to upgrade.

CharlesS · Apr 5, 2006, 11:21 PM

Originally Posted by finboy

I think it spells the eventual end of OS X. Macs may continue to be a "specialty" machine, but it will never be more -- why pay the big prices just to run OS X?

As opposed to before, when the reason to pay the big prices was... to run OS X?

Chuckit · Apr 5, 2006, 11:26 PM

So now the only reason to buy a Mac is if you like the hardware and to run OS X…and the Mac will not get many game ports.

Sounds like business as usual.

goMac · Apr 5, 2006, 11:35 PM

Originally Posted by finboy

I think it spells the eventual end of OS X. Macs may continue to be a "specialty" machine, but it will never be more -- why pay the big prices just to run OS X? Consumers won't keep doing it. When the iPod finishes its run, look out.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but OS X isn't going anywhere. Anyone who already owns a Mac obviously prefers to use OS X. Worst that happens is all the OS X users stay using OS X, and anyone new on the platform just runs Windows. Same number of Mac and Windows users as before.

chabig · Apr 6, 2006, 12:01 AM

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

The sad thing is that it will be faster to run photoshop in XP for the next year.

And you'll be able to cut and paste your graphics to...?

Landos Mustache · Apr 6, 2006, 12:03 AM

Originally Posted by chabig

And you'll be able to cut and paste your graphics to...?

Huh?

greenamp · Apr 6, 2006, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by finboy

I think it spells the eventual end of OS X. Macs may continue to be a "specialty" machine, but it will never be more -- why pay the big prices just to run OS X? Consumers won't keep doing it. When the iPod finishes its run, look out.

Oh please. So what you're saying is, now that Macs can dual-boot Windows, people will quit buying Macs? Does that really make sense to you?

iLikebeer · Apr 6, 2006, 01:03 AM

Awesome! Apple just kept me as a customer.
I love OS X on my imac 800 iLamp and have been trying to decide between getting an intelMac or just getting a PC. I don't really need some of the nice things i love about OS X, but I would love to be able to play some battlefront 2 or similar games with friends/family around the country. I'd also like to be able to run microsoft flight simulator and some PC only flight planning software. I'm not the type that would buy 2 computers in one cycle just 2 have a mac and be able to do those things. Now I don't have to worry about the choice.

I just hope apple can make internet browsing as fast on a mac as it is on a pc or a lot of people might start spending a lot more time in windows. In the end though, I think this is great for apple.

aristotles · Apr 6, 2006, 02:27 AM

I've installed it and it works for the most part except for the builtin isight and the fancy keyboard features.

Darwine is more of a threat to OS X apps than dual booting. The latter is inconvienient but the former would make OS X an OS/2 in some developer's eyes.

Windows compatibility within OS/2 killed OS/2, not dual booting.

OB1 · Apr 6, 2006, 04:05 AM

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

I just hope apple can make internet browsing as fast on a mac as it is on a pc or a lot of people might start spending a lot more time in windows.

Mac users don't seem to like talking about this.

I haven't a lot of experience using windows; other than to notice that web browsing seems faster with every windows machine I've ever come into contact with.

A lot of people are saying "wahoo!, I don't need two machines anymore" Isn't all that rebooting going to be a hassle?

Still, no windows for me, sounds like a bloody nightmare.

Good luck everyone.

Chuckit · Apr 6, 2006, 04:25 AM

Originally Posted by OB1

Mac users don't seem to like talking about this.

I haven't a lot of experience using windows; other than to notice that web browsing seems faster with every windows machine I've ever come into contact with.

Enough people say that's the case that I assume it must be, but I have honestly never noticed it in all my years of jumping back and forth between platforms.

Originally Posted by OB1

A lot of people are saying "wahoo!, I don't need two machines anymore" Isn't all that rebooting going to be a hassle?

If you don't use Windows a whole lot, there won't be "all that rebooting," I guess.

eddie8t · Apr 6, 2006, 06:10 AM

Is there any way to upgrade to 10.4.6 then install a new intel chip on my year old iMac G5? I am 99% sure it's impossible due to mobo differences but this new news piques my interest.

Super Mario · 04:26 PM

Guys I have some good news.

The final version of Boot Camp included with Leopard will support Intel VT virtualization technology. Mac OS X users will be able to switch between their favorite operating system and Windows (any x86 OS) at the flick of a switch, er press of a key

When we asked them what about Mac Intel's without VT the reply was

They will have to reboot into Windows

Also the minimum recommended memory is 1 GB. No other info at present even though we asked what will the performance of VT be like compared with rebooting.

Gee4orce · Apr 6, 2006, 06:26 AM

Super Mario: what's the source of those quotes ? And what chips support VT - not the Core Duos ?

Super Mario · 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by Gee4orce

Super Mario: what's the source of those quotes ? And what chips support VT - not the Core Duos ?

Core Duo has no VT. Merom and Conroe do.

The quotes are from Jules who used to be a member here for a long time and is now starting his own site. I'll post a link soon.

ksloan2 · Apr 6, 2006, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

The sad thing is that it will be faster to run photoshop in XP for the next year.

Not sad. A life saver for me, and a big THANK YOU to Apple for releasing this!

dav · Apr 6, 2006, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by goMac

Correct me if I'm wrong, but OS X isn't going anywhere. Anyone who already owns a Mac obviously prefers to use OS X. Worst that happens is all the OS X users stay using OS X, and anyone new on the platform just runs Windows. Same number of Mac and Windows users as before.

that's up to apple. they could stop supporting os x and put everything behind the ipod and hardware. maybe avie saw the writing on the wall.

in the near term i think sales will go up and people will try the mac os, but i think eventually people will migrate to one or the other os. the next five to ten years should be interesting.

Super Mario · 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by dav

that's up to apple. they could stop supporting os x and put everything behind the ipod and hardware. maybe avie saw the writing on the wall.

in the near term i think sales will go up and people will try the mac os, but i think eventually people will migrate to one or the other os. the next five to ten years should be interesting.

It's a better upgrade path for existing Windows users. Instead of buying an ugly machine with Vista they can buy a Mac with Leopard and still use their old copy of XP, Windows apps and games. They get the best of all worlds.

Why wouldn't they upgrade to Vista? Because it's an ugly messy sin.

MaxPower2k3 · Apr 6, 2006, 08:30 AM

http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/

well, it looks like we may not have to wait for Leopard or bother with Boot Camp for Windows on a Mac... native virtualized windows in tiger on current Intel Macs.

- - e r i k - - · Apr 6, 2006, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

So now the only reason to buy a Mac is if you like the hardware and to run OS X…and the Mac will not get many game ports.

Sounds like business as usual.

… and this is different from yesterday's situation how now exactly …?

mintcake · 10:54 AM

Boot Camp question - do we know how easy it is to remove the XP partition once created? I can see myself needing those ten gigs back.

edit - OK, sorry, I hadn't read the installation guide. I see you can use Boot Camp to remove it.

Y3a · Apr 6, 2006, 10:44 AM

LINUX, UNIX and Mac OS X will be around as long as MS keeps delivering a security horror of an OS. They haven't done it in 15 years so I think they are incapable of that task. MS management has had it's collective head in the dark for over a decade and they lack the basic requirements to actually innovate so nothing exciting will happen with it.

Chuckit · Apr 6, 2006, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by jrstack3

Is there any way to upgrade to 10.4.6 then install a new intel chip on my year old iMac G5? I am 99% sure it's impossible due to mobo differences but this new news piques my interest.

Nope.

Big Mac · Apr 6, 2006, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

Guys I have some good news.

Oh yeah, just friggin wonderful.

"And in an unexpected turn of events, Mac users rejoice and Apple stock rockets over the prospect of running Windows!"

Super Mario · 04:06 PM

What is there not to rejoice about? Now Windows users have a strong reason to buy a Mac and make a direct comparison with OS X. Are you scared they will say Windows is better

Dakar · Apr 6, 2006, 11:39 AM

Seriously, it's not like this is going to convert and Mac users. God, I'm excited, yet I can barely think of 2 or 3 things I'll be needing XP for.

greenamp · Apr 6, 2006, 11:50 AM

Early reports from WoW Mac users indicate that WoW runs as much as 20-40% faster under Windows than it does under OS X on their Intel Macs.

WTF is up with that Apple?

Dark Helmet · Apr 6, 2006, 11:51 AM

Question.

when you boot back into the Mac OS is there a folder that has a bunch of scattered windows files in it or is the whole windows partition a disk image like in VPC?

wallinbl · Apr 6, 2006, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

What is there not to rejoice about? Now Windows users have a strong reason to buy a Mac and make a direct comparison with OS X. Are you scared they will say Windows is better

For some, Windows is better. It's better for games. My bank supports Quicken, but not Quicken for Mac. You can get MS Office for pretty cheap when buying a PC. Office for Mac is really damned expensive.

When they can get it to where I don't have to reboot in order to run a Windows app, then I'll go back to OS X. Until then, I'm stuck. I'm willing to quit playing games and to manually download & import for Quicken, but $400 for MS Office pisses me off.

Super Mario · 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by greenamp

Early reports from WoW Mac users indicate that WoW runs as much as 20-40% faster under Windows than it does under OS X on their Intel Macs.

WTF is up with that Apple?

1 The drivers translate Windows ROM calls to Mac ROM calls

2. Who are these people making reports who have dual core Macs and Windows with the same GPUs. Where are these benchmarks online?

3 It's ****ing fast enough anyway

torsoboy · Apr 6, 2006, 12:03 PM

For those of you who don't want to reboot, and don't want the emulation of VPC slowing you down, here is a new option that looks like it may be good. http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/06/p...rtual-machine/

No reboot, no emulation. But you do need enough resources (RAM mainly) to handle running both at the same time.

Liquidity X · Apr 6, 2006, 12:05 PM

I have been benching it all morning on my MBP. With all max setting exect for smooth mouse I average 35fps-55fps. I would get like 10fps on the mac version. I have a thread going on the focal wow mac tech support forums with some fps averages.

greenamp · Apr 6, 2006, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

1 The drivers translate Windows ROM calls to Mac ROM calls

2. Who are these people making reports who have dual core Macs and Windows with the same GPUs. Where are these benchmarks online?

3 It's ****ing fast enough anyway

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/bo...c-tech-support
Actually Mac WoW players reporting their framerates using Windows and OS X on Intel Macs.

PS, I specifically mentioned WoW only.

olePigeon · Apr 6, 2006, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by Liquidity X

I have been benching it all morning on my MBP. With all max setting exect for smooth mouse I average 35fps-55fps. I would get like 10fps on the mac version. I have a thread going on the focal wow mac tech support forums with some fps averages.

Then maybe this will be an incentive for Apple to write better drivers.

Super Mario · 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by greenamp

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/bo...c-tech-support
Actually Mac WoW players reporting their framerates using Windows and OS X on Intel Macs.

PS, I specifically mentioned WoW only.

WTF are you guys doing drugs or what?

Gaming is faster in XP than OSX because their GPUs aren't busy sharing resources with Quartz Extreme too. The post on this page said XP gaming on the Mac is MUCH slower than XP gaming on another Intel machine. Not true

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/th...mp=1#post22328

greenamp · Apr 6, 2006, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

WTF are you guys doing drugs or what?

Gaming is faster in XP than OSX because their GPUs aren't busy sharing resources with Quartz Extreme too. The post on this page said XP gaming on the Mac is MUCH slower than XP gaming on another Intel machine. Not true

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/th...mp=1#post22328

Geezus man calm the **** down. I was just reporting what some people are experiencing running WoW in Windows on Intel Macs. Whatever reason they are getting better performance in Windows is no excuse.

I'm not saying these are scientific benchmarks. To be most accurate they would need to play WoW on fresh Installs of both OS X and Windows.

Big Mac · Apr 6, 2006, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

1 The drivers translate Windows ROM calls to Mac ROM calls

Chuckit · Apr 6, 2006, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

Gaming is faster in XP than OSX because their GPUs aren't busy sharing resources with Quartz Extreme too.

Source? 'Cause I ain't buying it.

Obi Wan's Ghost · Apr 6, 2006, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Source? 'Cause I ain't buying it.

That has been discussed to death since 10.0 came out. It's true I am afraid.

I'm playing Galaxies.

Big Mac · Apr 6, 2006, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost

That has been discussed to death since 10.0 came out. It's true I am afraid.

Quartz Extreme wasn't around until Jaguar.

production_coordinator · Apr 6, 2006, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

WTF are you guys doing drugs or what?

Gaming is faster in XP than OSX because their GPUs aren't busy sharing resources with Quartz Extreme too.

That statement simply isn't true... there are a number of reasons why Mac games are slower... but there isn't a quick fix. Some of the issues are below the surface of OpenGL... between the framework/drivers and hardware... but again, just fixing that wouldn't make the game faster.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050315-4704.html

vmarks · Apr 6, 2006, 01:51 PM

The point of Quartz Extreme and Core Image is that it offloads the GUI to the graphics chipset.

DirectX offloads the GUI and game graphics where, exactly? Also the GPU.

Person Man · Apr 6, 2006, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

goMac · Apr 6, 2006, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by Super Mario

WTF are you guys doing drugs or what?

Gaming is faster in XP than OSX because their GPUs aren't busy sharing resources with Quartz Extreme too. The post on this page said XP gaming on the Mac is MUCH slower than XP gaming on another Intel machine. Not true

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/th...mp=1#post22328

Wrong. When a game goes full screen all the fancy interface rendering stuff shuts off.

There are issues with speed in the kernel however.

angelmb · Apr 6, 2006, 02:03 PM

These words about Boot Camp from a MS representative are kinda hilarious:

"Windows is a great operating system. We're pleased that Apple customers are excited about running it, and that Apple is responding to meet the demand."

Yes dude, we are giving up on Mac OS X… LOL