[sray]

As most of you know by know, the Macbook Pro will be using EFI, instead of a BIOS. EFI is what interconnects the Firmware to the Bootloader.



A Microsoft Powerpoint presentation (page 3) makes it all pretty clear: While they will support EFI in Longhorn (Vista), this support will NOT be retrofitted into WinXP, Server 2003, etc.

That pretty much rules out any easy means of installing WinXP on a Macbook Pro.

For Linux, at least there is the EILO (EFI Linux Boot Loader). No experience in this myself.

[harrisjamieh]

Is this the same for the new imac?

[sray]

Originally Posted by harrisjamieh

Is this the same for the new imac?

yes. According to the Apple Universal Binaries PDF, all new intel macs will have EFI. While this is a blessing over having BIOS, it does mean waiting until Christmas (2006) for Vista to come out.

I should mention that this only affects people who are looking for a dual boot environment (for multiple OSs.

[Oneota]

Doesn't EFI have some kind of backward-compatibility mode? I thought I had read that somewhere...

[venom600]

This isn't a huge setback. A simple emulator (we still aren't free of them) that can emulate a BIOS (and nothing else) would likely be the best option. Perhaps even retrofitting that Linux solution.

[venom600]

This isn't a huge setback. A simple emulator (we still aren't free of them) that can emulate a BIOS (and nothing else) would likely be the best option. Perhaps even retrofitting that Linux solution. I think VMWare already does this...

[theolein]

Thank god I cancelled my order last night. I need the Intel Mac specifically because I thought it would be able to dual boot with Windows. Now, I'm going to wait until Vista is released or until someone makes a hack to boot XP.

[MAC-ALEX]

The EFI Framework defines the Compatibility Support Module (CSM), which provides the runtime interfaces necessary
for compatibility with existing PC operating systems. AMI's implementation of EFI & the CSM on IA32 platforms is
designed to facilitate the transition from BIOS runtime services. This allows users and system integrators to support
both firmware interfaces.

[tfamorim]

isnt the whole point in getting a mac to get away from windows?

[SirCastor]

Originally Posted by theolein

Thank god I cancelled my order last night. I need the Intel Mac specifically because I thought it would be able to dual boot with Windows. Now, I'm going to wait until Vista is released or until someone makes a hack to boot XP.

It's still likely going to take a hack to boot Vista, or at least a little bit of work. One shouldn't base buying decisions on hopefuly abilities.

[BENJMNS]

Originally Posted by tfamorim

isnt the whole point in getting a mac to get away from windows?

hard to get away from something that is a universe standard, no?

vista looks very promising.

[tfamorim]

looks more like a failure to me..

[uicandrew]

Originally Posted by BENJMNS

hard to get away from something that is a universe standard, no?

vista looks very promising.

agreed. when i sell things on ebay, using windows with IE allows me to put in a description as if it was "rich text format" bold, italics, colors, different fonts, bullet points, etc.

using IE for mac or firefox on pc forces me to write my own html (and i don't know all the "tags" off the top of my head.

also, running programs like google earth (before it came to mac)

as for vista looking promising..... ever since they started throwing away 2 out of the 3 main technologies that makes Vista special, i can't get that excited for it. It was supposed to have this revolutionary File System (not Fat32 or NFTS) and other stuff. Then again, Windows tends to have nice "giveaways" whenever a new version is released. (When XP came out, my friend got a free digital camera, memory card, and a littany of useful free software after rebates)

[Stecchino]

Originally Posted by BENJMNS

hard to get away from something that is a universe standard, no?

vista looks very promising.

Originally Posted by tfamorim

looks more like a failure to me..

Oh, stop it, you two or I'll make you both stand in the corner!

Ahem. The reason Mac users are even talking about the possibilites of dual-booting with Windows is because:

1. It's never been done.
2. Some tasks or applications still require Windows and we can't get away from it.
3. This ability would convert a lot of Windows users who hang on to reason #2 as their excuse for not buying a Mac.
4. Virtual PC, and other emulators, in their current state, are really slow.

Disclaimer: This list is not intended to be complete, interesting, or even remotely accurate.

[Helmling]

I'm with tfamorim, why would you sully a Mac by defiling its HD with Windows? It's bad enough we're going to have Intel chips.

Though, admittedly, once I get mine--which will be awhile because I can't spend that money now and my old G4 runs so well I have no real excuse to upgrade--I could probably be persuaded to jerryrig something wtih Windows to play games...

...maybe not.

[ciparis]

I expect VMWare to come to the rescue, letting us run Windows where it belongs: confined to the prison cell of a host computer's application window. And it should be pretty much native speed for general use. Virtual PC will likely not be far behind.

[mduell]

If someone buys one and sends it to me I'll try the current build of Vista (5270) on it.

(No, I am not a software pirate. I'm legitimately in the beta program and using Vista full time.)

[wilsonng]

For video games, get a PC....
For real work, get a Mac...

I'd buy a crappy $400 PC to run those specific Windoze-only programs.

For real work and internet, I'd get a Mac....

I don't know how many times I've heard my PC friends reformatting their hard drives and re-installing windows because of trojans/viruses.

I don't think I'd like the hassle of dual booting Windoze.

[inkhead]

Maybe because with windows you're going to get viiv, and media center meaning a whole world of HD Content you can buy online and games to play on your tv, not to meantion any game worth playing is much better in windows. And don't forget those apps that come out first "windows only" that you want to try, but can't.

Being able to boot windows mean IT departments won't have a problem with approving your mac notebook purchase anymore.

Originally Posted by Helmling

I'm with tfamorim, why would you sully a Mac by defiling its HD with Windows? It's bad enough we're going to have Intel chips.

Though, admittedly, once I get mine--which will be awhile because I can't spend that money now and my old G4 runs so well I have no real excuse to upgrade--I could probably be persuaded to jerryrig something wtih Windows to play games...

...maybe not.

[inkhead]

By "real" work do you mean what 90% of corporations do? Access advanced functions of exchange server, work on .net code, and use windows only apps, and develop for IE for windows?

Originally Posted by wilsonng

For video games, get a PC....
For real work, get a Mac...

I'd buy a crappy $400 PC to run those specific Windoze-only programs.

For real work and internet, I'd get a Mac....

I don't know how many times I've heard my PC friends reformatting their hard drives and re-installing windows because of trojans/viruses.

I don't think I'd like the hassle of dual booting Windoze.

[smitty825]

Originally Posted by Stecchino

Ahem. The reason Mac users are even talking about the possibilites of dual-booting with Windows is because:

1. It's never been done.

I don't know how true it is or not, but I vaguely remember _way_ back in the day, that people were able to get their PowerPC Macs to boot the PowerPC version of Windows NT 4.0 (I think it was like a 7500/100 machine that did it)

...so maybe it has been done :-) (however, my memory often fails me!)

[MAC-ALEX]

Originally Posted by smitty825

I don't know how true it is or not, but I vaguely remember _way_ back in the day, that people were able to get their PowerPC Macs to boot the PowerPC version of Windows NT 4.0 (I think it was like a 7500/100 machine that did it)

...so maybe it has been done :-) (however, my memory often fails me!)

Looks like you all forgot that actually Mac already had Intel chips inside in 1995 PowerMac 6100 had a 486DX/2 66Mhz processor card inside.

[uicandrew]

according to ClassicMac (a member here) EFI has already been used on a windows pc. he even found proof.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/chi...9118819,00.htm

so if someone could get the backup cd/dvd for those computers........

[CaptainHaddock]

EFI is highly customizable. Even once EFI-capable Vista is out (whenever the heck that'll be), Macs might not boot Vista discs. And if they do, Windows might lack hardware drivers for the custom motherboards. And even if that works, I wouldn't expect Windows to play nicely with a second OS or present useful dual-boot options on installation. XP sure doesn't.

[macintologist]

How do Linux users run a dual boot system? When they are in WinXP what do they do to boot back into Linux?

[CaptainHaddock]

Originally Posted by macintologist

How do Linux users run a dual boot system? When they are in WinXP what do they do to boot back into Linux?

To run a Linux-Windows dual-boot system, you have to:

1. Install Windows first (or you're in for a headache).
2. Partition the drive, preferably with a nice tool like Partition Magic, although some Linux installers can do it too. Linux will need its own volume with a non-Microsoft file system.
3. Install your Linux distribution of choice.
4. Configure your bootloader, which is actually a mini-OS that gives you a boot menu every time you restart the computer.

If you do Linux first and then Windows, Windows will over-write the boot record and make itself the only booting OS.

[Felix]

Very interesting to read. Maybe it is better to anticipate the PS3 instead of Vista.

Felix

[wilsonng]

Originally Posted by inkhead

By "real" work do you mean what 90% of corporations do? Access advanced functions of exchange server, work on .net code, and use windows only apps, and develop for IE for windows?

That's why you buy cheap PCs.... Work on Exchange server, .net code, and windows only apps.

My department has PCs for connecting to scientific equipment and it runs only those things. But for the majority of our work (preparing research publications in InDesign, memos in MS Word, Excel spreadsheets, e-mail, internet), we use a mix of iBooks and iMacs in our office. Alot of programs that are available for Windows is also available for the Mac.

not sure how many people would like to dual-boot into Windows just to run a program and then switch back to OS X. May as well just buy a cheap PC and a larger desk to keep both running.

There are alot of us who don't work in the corporate world......

[Macola]

And what about people who need mobility? This is, after all, the PowerBook/MacBook Pro forum.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaddock

EFI is highly customizable. Even once EFI-capable Vista is out (whenever the heck that'll be), Macs might not boot Vista discs. And if they do, Windows might lack hardware drivers for the custom motherboards. And even if that works, I wouldn't expect Windows to play nicely with a second OS or present useful dual-boot options on installation. XP sure doesn't.

From all reports Apple is using standard Intel chipsets with nothing special on them. I think Vista will work out of the box; XP may even work (EFI can emulate a BIOS, but support is unknown).

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by inkhead

Maybe because with windows you're going to get viiv, and media center meaning a whole world of HD Content you can buy online and games to play on your tv

Yeah that's what we need. More support for a single monolithic and exclusionary DRM platform. Competition is good, people.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by mduell

From all reports Apple is using standard Intel chipsets with nothing special on them. I think Vista will work out of the box; XP may even work (EFI can emulate a BIOS, but support is unknown).

I think his point might be that because intentionally running Windows isn't a necessary design constraint for Apple, it's possible that Intel will use the Mac as a testbed for new technologies and formats that Microsoft hasn't incorporated yet. If that is the case, Windows compatibility could always be sporadic depending on what Mac product you buy and what version of Windows you try to run.

[SEkker]

By Oct of 2006, the US government is forcing me to have to use some form of windows for my work (submission of grants to the NIH). I have several choices: 1) VPC, which is VERY slow 2) buy a mac AND a windows machine 3) figure out how to dual-boot a mactel machine 4) completely switch over to windows

I ordered a macbook pro and customized it with the 120 GB hard drive to allow room for a second windows partition for dual-boot options. I find the comments on this forum on how 'evil' windows is just as annoying as I find the negative comments for 'macheads' on other computer forums. For some of us, the dual- (or even triple-) boot option is the best of both worlds, maximum compatibility AND maximum choice.

[macintologist]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaddock

To run a Linux-Windows dual-boot system, you have to:

1. Install Windows first (or you're in for a headache).
2. Partition the drive, preferably with a nice tool like Partition Magic, although some Linux installers can do it too. Linux will need its own volume with a non-Microsoft file system.
3. Install your Linux distribution of choice.
4. Configure your bootloader, which is actually a mini-OS that gives you a boot menu every time you restart the computer.

If you do Linux first and then Windows, Windows will over-write the boot record and make itself the only booting OS.

How is that any different from installing YDL on a Mac?

[uicandrew]

Originally Posted by SEkker

I find the comments on this forum on how 'evil' windows is just as annoying as I find the negative comments for 'macheads' on other computer forums. For some of us, the dual- (or even triple-) boot option is the best of both worlds, maximum compatibility AND maximum choice.

i have to say i agree whole heartedly with you. I think a lot of the automatic scorn comes from having to defend themselves constantly from the other 90%. Maybe kind of like a Napolean complex.

I recently partially switched from PC to mac (meaning i use both) just 5 months ago. I bought my first mac (mac mini) from these forums from a guy who was switching back to pc. I just sold that mac mini 1 day before MacExpo because I believed (along with all the rumor sites) that the mac mini was going to be "intel-ized" first and i wanted to sell it before it plummeted in resale value.

so now i have no mac at all (i'm ordering a macbook because my first choice was a 15" intel powerbook) and i am using my very capable compaq x1000 laptop until i can get my macbook. If you look at the specs on my laptop, you have to admit it is VERY impressive for a $1200 brand new laptop for 1.3" thick. The dells all are 1.5" at least and are no where as quiet as my compaq, whose fan rarely turns on.

[Eriamjh]

Originally Posted by theolein

Thank god I cancelled my order last night. I need the Intel Mac specifically because I thought it would be able to dual boot with Windows.

That's The funniest thing I've ever seen! Not buying a Mac because it won't run windows!

[uicandrew]

xp is still possible on a macbook, according to intel's austrailian branch.

read here

http://www.engadget.com/2006/01/13/w...acs-after-all/

[Stecchino]

Originally Posted by uicandrew

xp is still possible on a macbook, according to intel's austrailian branch.

(blows gently on the fragile flame of hope)

[mattsgotredhair]

It really surprises me that there isn't more of an abundance of music people here speaking of the blessings of being able to boot into windows. I myself loath windows, but because a few music programs run solely on the widows kernel I have no choice but to use it. Programs like Tascam's Gigastudio, Fruity Loops and a few others simply are not made for Mac, and would not run effectively in VPC.
I myself am very excited that I'll be able to run these programs on the new macs. But I'm very disappointed that the new ones will be using a different file formating, which makes me have to yet again repartition my firewire boot drive.

[Eriamjh]

Originally Posted by uicandrew

xp is still possible on a macbook, according to intel's austrailian branch.

read here

http://www.engadget.com/2006/01/13/w...acs-after-all/

Yeah.. Uh...

Of course, all this rampant speculation can be solved pretty quickly soon enough once the Intel Macs start shipping and users simply stick their XP install discs into the CD slot. That's when the real fun begins.

Still not confirmed.

[wilsonng]

Take a peek at http://www.macwindows.com/

There is supposedly an iEmulator program that will emulate the PC BIOS, video hardware, and Ethernet card. There is no longer any need to convert Intel code to PowerPC code.

Sounds more interesting than dual booting....

[mduell]

Dual booting and software virtualization are both relatively unattractive compared to hardware virtualization. Core Duo supports Vanderpool, but I don't know if Apple has enabled or disabled it.

[wilsonng]

mduell, you're right that nothing would beat hardware virtualization. But at least the software virtualization option is available if Apple mysteriously opts to disable VanderPool.

One of my IT friends seems to poo-poo the idea of hardware virtualization on a consumer computer but then again he poo-poos everything so I took his comment with a grain of salt.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by sray

For Linux, at least there is the EILO (EFI Linux Boot Loader). No experience in this myself.

LILO can also be used to boot Windows. This would be the best way at this point to boot Windows on an Intel Mac.

[tigas]

Originally Posted by mattsgotredhair

I myself am very excited that I'll be able to run these programs on the new macs. But I'm very disappointed that the new ones will be using a different file formating, which makes me have to yet again repartition my firewire boot drive.

They use the same file system (HFS+), but different partitioning. Don't worry, iCBMs can use disks with the PowerPC partitioning scheme, but not as a system volumes (i.e., can't boot from them).

Oh, and you can't partition a drive in the iMacOSX system (GPT) on a ppcMacOSX (tested it) - it only offers Apple Partitions and PC partitions (Fdisk). Also, I am not sure if ppcMacOSX can get to volumes in GPT disks.

Too many questions. Is there still time for someone at Macworld to partition a Pendrive in GPT to see if it works at home in 10.4.4?

[SEkker]

You know, Apple is really missing a big opportunity to take advantage of the halo effect of iPods. Just make the machines dual-boot capable from the outset, show off a few machines running windows right next to the mac os x running machines. There just isn't anything like the iLife suite in the windows world, and they would address the backward compatibility issue of the switcher up front.

[uicandrew]

Originally Posted by SEkker

You know, Apple is really missing a big opportunity to take advantage of the halo effect of iPods. Just make the machines dual-boot capable from the outset, show off a few machines running windows right next to the mac os x running machines. There just isn't anything like the iLife suite in the windows world, and they would address the backward compatibility issue of the switcher up front.

although i definitely see where the logic is, i think that would be a big mistake.

The mac mini was supposed to be the machine that caused people to switch over because of the low cost. (Hey, that's why I switched less than 6 months ago) All you accomplish with having them both run windows is saying that the new $2000 intel books can run the same software as a $600 hp from best buy.

OS 10 should stand on its own. You don't want to give the new users a crutch to fall back on, because if they get frustrated by the Mac because they can't figure out how to do something, they'll boot right back into Windows and then they'll wonder why they spent the extra $1400 just to use windows (yes, i know the money is for innovation and design, but they're missing out on OS 10)

I don't think this should be touted for switchers. i think the 13.3 ibook is going to do that. the macbook was to whet the appetites of everyone who wanted a G5 powerbook. (whether or not it did is a discussion for the 10 page thread next door)

But I think it is dual boot out of the box. EFI was designed to be dual booted (if i remember correctly). I predict (in my infinite+8 wisdom) that people will find a way to make it dual boot within a week of its release to the wild. The only reason this thread is still alive is because the macbooks aren't out yet. once they're out, people will find a way, and new threads of people asking for help about dual booting will pop up, not threads asking if it is possible. ...... But those threads might be absorbed into the aforementioned megathread.

[tikki]

Originally Posted by wilsonng

Take a peek at http://www.macwindows.com/

There is supposedly an iEmulator program that will emulate the PC BIOS, video hardware, and Ethernet card. There is no longer any need to convert Intel code to PowerPC code.

Sounds more interesting than dual booting....

From the iEmulator front page:

We recommend the use of Windows 98 or Windows 2000 for the best iEmulator experience.

Maybe if they solve that issue. :-\