[Oneota]

NOT an April Fool's Joke:

http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

Wow...never thought they'd do this!

[mindwaves]

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

[Big Mac]

Wow. Truly the beginning of the end of the Mac. Apple's even going to provide all the drivers for Windows to access Mactel hardware. Well guys, it's time. Let us usher in the era of the Apple Windows PC. . .

On the bright side, that April Fool's joke on the Mac OS forum wasn't so foolish after all!

[Lava Lamp Freak]

Wow. I had to do a double take at the date to be sure...

Now I have to buy another hard drive for my Mini. I don't think 2GB is gonna be enough free space.

[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.

[Andy8]

I love this:

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.

[Spliffdaddy]

Next up: BTO option for Windows / OSX dual boot.

Some folks might see this as a bad thing - but it's gonna send Apple's marketshare through the roof. And, who knows, maybe a lot of consumers will use OSX...which would only help the Mac developers.

I don't see how this is a bad thing, no matter how you look at it.

[Lava Lamp Freak]

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 think an official software from Apple to do this is VERY interesting, and it looks a lot easier to install.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by mindwaves

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

Yeah, with Apple doing all the heavy lifting for Microsoft - providing native drivers for Windows - Apple will be convincing more people to go over. It will convince Mac users to migrate over to Windows, that is. Mac users will give Microsoft many new Windows retail purchases, while those who are interested in OS X on the Wintel side will just pirate OS X on to their PCs. Microsoft, not Apple, wins in both cases.

[Dakar]

i never would have called this

[PurpleGiant]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

It will convince Mac users to migrate over to Windows, that is. Mac users will give Microsoft many new Windows retail purchases, while those who are interested in OS X on the Wintel side will just pirate OS X on to their PCs. Microsoft, not Apple, wins in both cases.

Why do you assume that people running Windows on a Mac will buy Windows, yet those running OS X on a PC will pirate it?

[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.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Yeah, with Apple doing all the heavy lifting for Microsoft - providing native drivers for Windows - Apple will be convincing more people to go over. It will convince Mac users to migrate over to Windows, that is. Mac users will give Microsoft many new Windows retail purchases, while those who are interested in OS X on the Wintel side will just pirate OS X on to their PCs. Microsoft, not Apple, wins in both cases.

I really have no idea why you'd see it that way. People use the Mac for two reasons, the OS and the product design.

If you needed to use XP for any reason you were buggered, up to now. Trying a Mac meant giving up all the software you knew and loved. Now you'll be able to just purchase the Mac you're lusting after and keep the stuff you're used to. It's a good thing for all concerned.

[Dakar]

Here's my big question: What's Adobe's motivation to create a CS product for OS X now?

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by PurpleGiant

Why do you assume that people running Windows on a Mac will buy Windows, yet those running OS X on a PC will pirate it?

Because, a) most Mac users are inexperienced with Windows and thus less likely to pirate b) Mac users are likely more honest on average c) OS X is not officially available for regular PCs, so the only way to run it is to pirate it.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Because, a) most Mac users are inexperienced with Windows and thus less likely to pirate b) Mac users are likely more honest on average c) OS X is not officially available for regular PCs, so the only way to run it is to pirate it.

Point a. is pure speculation and debatable.
Point b. is meh.
Point c. is true but forgets to mention that only a tiny percentage of geeks will go to the trouble of making OS X run on a PC. Especially now that all they have to do is buy a mini.

[Hugi]

IMHO this is a hugely positive move. This opens the doors at my 70+ workstation company to start buying Apple hardware, which will make the eventual switch from Windows to OS X a cakewalk.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Well damn!

I did not see this one coming. All I can say is "I've got a bad feeling about this".

cheers

W-Y

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by Dakar

Here's my big question: What's Adobe's motivation to create a CS product for OS X now?

Because the installed base of OS X won't magically disappear overnight. As long as there are people using OS X, and I see this number going up as a result of this decision by Apple, there's a economic reason to continue supporting OS X.

[starman]

Installing now.....

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Dakar

Here's my big question: What's Adobe's motivation to create a CS product for OS X now?

There will remain some incentive for Adobe to continue coding for OS X since Adobe gets a lot of revenue from Mac professionals. Eventually, though, OS X will likely be sufficiently marginalized by Apple's support for Windows to make even Adobe question the large, unnecessary drain on resources dual platform coding entails.

Of the major third parties, Adobe would probably be the last to exit the Mac market. But what about those companies that do not have nearly as strong a commitment to OS X? Here's the scenario Apple is working toward:

Customer: "Hi, I heard that your company discontinued its Mac software development, and I'm really angry."

Representative: "Our company did not discontinue Mac support. You can run all of our programs wonderfully on your Mac."

Customer: "How so? I thought you've axed Mac OS X development."

Representative "Oh, that's true, unfortunately. We just could not justify the substantial cost of coding for a marginalized platform. But you can still run all of our software on your Mac. You just need to run Windows on your Mac."

Customer: "I am a Mac user. Why would I want to run Windows?"

Representative: "Well, Apple Computer now officially supports Windows on its hardware. You can still run OS X for other things, but for our software you'll need to run Windows instead. We're clearly not doing anything that Apple disapproves of."

[k squared]

Thank you, Apple. I have to use Windows at work (AutoCad) and have a need to access Windows only applications at home from time to time -- this saves me from buying a cheap PC laptop!

The joys of processor independance.

[dawho9]

This is the best quote from the Boot Camp web site.

***
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.
***

As for the discussion, I am really tossed by this. It could increase Apple Hardware Share, but will it increase Mac OS share?

dw9

[Tyre MacAdmin]

Good thinking. That makes it easy to switch!

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

T
Customer: "Hi, I heard that your company discontinued its Mac software development, and I'm really angry."

Representative: "Our company did not discontinue Mac support. You can run all of our programs wonderfully on your Mac."

Customer: "How so? I thought you've axed Mac OS X development."

Representative "Oh, that's true, unfortunately. We just could not justify the substantial cost of coding for a marginalized platform. But you can still run all of our software on your Mac. You just need to run Windows on your Mac."

Customer: "I am a Mac user. Why would I want to run Windows?"

Representative: "Well, Apple Computer now officially supports Windows on its hardware. You can still run OS X for other things, but for our software you'll need to run Windows instead. We're clearly not doing anything that Apple disapproves of."

What is far more likely to happen is that software companies will see a jump in Macs sold. Every single Mac sells with OSX as the default OS, so the vast majority of people using Windows will be exposed to OS X.

Of these, a fair number can be expected to like OS X to such a degree that they'll make it their preferred OS. Which gives an incetive to the software company to port programs to OS X.

[Mithras]

Holy smokin' moley. And it includes a dynamic hard drive partitioning tool too? Amazing.

[Arty50]

Originally Posted by dawho9

This is the best quote from the Boot Camp web site.

***
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.
***

Actually, I prefer this one:

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.

[Nebagakid]

There is still a small amount of terrain people have to cross getting Windows, so maybe people may stick with it, now they can switch back and forth.

what i mean to say is, people can switch back and forth, they won't be scared to get a Mac,

[dawho9]

Originally Posted by Arty50

Actually, I prefer this one:

Oh, how did I miss that one. That's not a bad one either...

dw9

[Dakar]

Ok, next question: How much will Apple extract from windows switchers for the luxury of having windows on their new Mac?

[chris v]

I'm all, like, wow. No idea how to take, it really. OS 10.5 is already stomping Longh..., er Vista, as it is, though by mere virtue of the fact that it's not in total disarray and will actually be released in the next year.

Apple, I'm sure, sees this as a trojan horse. Where they're gambling a bit is with dual-platform developers, but it's all about units sold. Adobe will make OS X versions of their software as long as customers are buying it.

[discotronic]

It has been confirmed. The first true, in the wild, virus on a modern Mac!!!

[Big Mac]

Well, the Street definitely likes Apple's suicide note, at least at the moment - AAPL gapped up $3 and was up as high as +4.

[TheIceMan]

I never thought this would happen officially. I think it's a positive move for Apple.

[IceEnclosure]

chalk me up for a "wow"

[MallyMal]

I think this is a positive thing.

1. Apple store sales people can use this as a sales tool.
2. Switchers won't have to buy all of their software again immediately
3. Games
4. No need to have a computer for each platform

Ask yourself, why did you buy a Mac in the first place. Me, I bought because of the OS. I think more will buy into this to use Windows as a secondary OS instead of using Windows as their primary OS.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by MallyMal

2. Switchers won't have to buy all of their software again immediately

And that was the biggest single reason for people not to switch. Which is now eliminated.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Dakar

Ok, next question: How much will Apple extract from windows switchers for the luxury of having windows on their new Mac?

$599 - $3299

[Timetheus]

The primary reason to buy a Mac is Mac OS X, I don't think that's in question. Why else would pay the premium we do - the quality is better on the whole, but the OS is still the only good reason to pay more.

That won't change so long as Mac OS X is with us - and I don't think it's going anywhere (at least not until 10.9, when they have no choice but to start into OS 11 or whatever they call it then).

This just opens the door to the potential switchers still mired in the Windows World. It's not that they'll want to run Windows exclusively - otherwise why would they pay more for a Mac, instead of buying a cheaper Dell, HP, etc? This just allows them to make the transition without losing software, or use Windows at work while using Mac OS X at home, or any number of possible combinations.

I'm less sure what this means for the Mac gaming world - but I, for one, will still want Mac OS games so I don't have to use Windows (I, thankfully, have no other reason to). And If it opens the door for Switchers, who in turn use OS X in one of the above scenarios, it might even be benficial to Aspyr and the like.

My vote: It's a good thing.

[vmarks]

Knew it back in November when Apple patented this.

In fact, we talked about it in the MacNN Podcast

http://www4.macnn.com/macnn/reviews/...605podcast.mp3

[Weyland-Yutani]

The only thing that I like about this Boot Camp is the chaos element it throws in. Before the Intel switch the road was clear and we knew what we had in our hands. Now we know nothing. The furure of the Mac has become fuzzy. Apple can, if they wish, become a hardware-only company now or this can help many people switch.

It doesn't change the issue, which is that people only run one system at a time and re-booting is an annoyance. People will have to choose either OS X or Windows on their Macs now and they'll stick to it.

In the future we will see Mac machines running Windows all the time. I wait for the time when I see a person with an Intel Mac for running Windows exclusively. It will happen. It will be creepy.

I think OS X is so much better than Windows - just the multitasking is lightyears ahead of XP - but Windows is dominant and people will have to conciously choose OS X over Windows. I will and so will many people, at least for a while. Then it is up to how things develop and how software developers take this.

Linux can be dual-booted with Windows as well and it has an installed user base just about equal to OS X, and yet developers aren't embracing Linux. Before developers were forced to write for OS X to approach people who had chosen Macs but now.. perhaps not. Developers are lazy by nature and they'd rather just write for one platform.

So from the Linux precedence the future of OS X doesn't look all that shiny, but perhaps it will fare different. Mac users are different people from Linux/Windows users in one aspect at least. They *want* to be different and they seem to have money

cheers

W-Y

[Andy8]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Well, the Street definitely likes Apple's suicide note, at least at the moment - AAPL gapped up $3 and was up as high as +4.

The street likes it very much ~ up 5.51% now

[jersey]

It's the end of the world.

[DigitalEl]

I don't see how this is a bad thing, no matter how you look at it.

Why develop for two platforms when you can just develop for Windows and now most everyone can run it? Bad for future Mac OS development.

Suppose for companies Macs are now on the radar because they can now run Windows and tentatively try OS X.

Enterprise buyers look at price above most everything else. They don't care about the beauty of Apple hardware. They can still get a black plastic Dell or Gateway box for $399 each. For the networked workstation, Wintel machines are likely to remain cheaper.

It'd probably be unwise to question His Steveness, but as a commoner, it's really hard for me to see this as a positive yet. It will be interesting to see how they spin it.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by DigitalEl

[/b]Why develop for two platforms when you can just develop for Windows and now most everyone can run it? Bad for future Mac OS development.

Because the demand from customers is there and that demand is unlikely to go away any day soon.

[Big Mac]

The funny thing is, Apple just used the Nuclear Option. But, in its stupidity, it nuked itself. Would an Apple fan boy come forward to explain how Apple's official support for dual-booting won't have a sizably negative impact on third party OS X software base?

[davesimondotcom]

I like this move. And I don't think it's a bad thing for the Mac OS. I think it's a very good thing.

Here's why:

First, we knew that SOMEONE would figure out how to boot Windows on Intel Macs. So this sort of takes the "hack" aspect out of it, makes it easier for users and puts the "Apple Approved" stamp on it.

Second, someone can spend $600 and get themselves a machine that runs both Windows and Mac OS X. Why is that a good thing, you say?

Those of us who already are sold on Mac OS X and love it can still dual boot for testing of websites, running games, running certain apps that aren't available on Mac.

Those from the Windows world will have the opportunity to "play with" Mac OS X, on the same hardware, and notice that it is fast, "snappy", fun to use, easy and overall better than Windows.

This is also a reason for me to consider an Intel Mac, despite Adobe dragging their feet.

[AppleCello]

For most people, its just a toy. either that or an excuse to get a mac when windows is otherwise required by the job/school. Amazing move.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

The funny thing is, Apple just used the Nuclear Option. But, in its stupidity, it nuked itself. Would an Apple fan boy come forward to explain how Apple's official support for dual-booting won't have a sizably negative impact on third party OS X software base?

OK, I'll take a shot.

Developer A has a history of Windows development, but never Mac development. (There are lots of them out there!)

Developer B has a history of Mac AND Windows development.

Developer C has a history of Mac development.

Developer C already supports the Mac and won't just drop support for it. Same with Developer B.

Developer C buys an Intel Mac out of curiousity, figures, "heck, I'll try out development in XCode." He trys it out and realizes how elegant it is, compared to Windows development.

He decides to continue developing for both platforms.

Purely speculation, of course, but I don't see how it's any more of a bad thing than Unix developers coming to the Mac with the NeXT transition. (Omni, for one!)

[Lordx_]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Yeah, with Apple doing all the heavy lifting for Microsoft - providing native drivers for Windows - Apple will be convincing more people to go over. It will convince Mac users to migrate over to Windows, that is. Mac users will give Microsoft many new Windows retail purchases, while those who are interested in OS X on the Wintel side will just pirate OS X on to their PCs. Microsoft, not Apple, wins in both cases.

If Microsoft releases a VirtualPC for mactels that ran at near native speeds, that would still count a windows license sale providing that the user doesn't already own a copy of XP or Vista.. I don't see how that situation would be any different from a user buying an XP license to use with Boot Camp.



As for your OS X comment, I tend to agree. It seems more windows/PC using folk pirate more than Mac users.