I think TMO would be better off looking at Digg.com for their mac stories. Everything is posted there well in advance of making it to TMO. I enjoy TMO's spin on things, but it shouldn't take days for this kind of information to get out.

first Katie leaves the Today show and now this...a sad Wednesday in April.

How much did Bill have to pay for this one? Does he even KNOW about it? Also, I wonder how Apple will handle the support calls. Even though it states very strongly throughout the pages on their website that they do NOT support it, don't you all imagine that people will call them ANYWAY? They may not get very far w/ that, but just curious.

Quote

Guest wrote:
I enjoy TMO's spin on things, but it shouldn't take days for this kind of information to get out.

I just found this news on Digg. It says it was posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago.

So yeah, that's earlier...but come on..."days?" Just a LITTLE bit of an exaggeration, don't you think?

As for the software...WHOA. I didn't expect Apple to come out with something like this so soon! I guess those rumors about virtualization in Leopard are true...they're just testing the waters up front to see how people use this. That could help them decide how, exactly, Leopard should work.

Picked this up off the PR Wire at 8:30 this AM. On my way to Apple Store this afternoon to pick up an Intel Mac.

My impression from comments in the past was that Macs running Windows was one of the signs of the Apocalypse. Now people are saying it's a great thing...
Well, some of them.
I can't figure out whether this is good for Apple or not. I can certainly see some benefit for the corporate world, but really, I would think the cost of Apple machines is still going to be a hurdle. (Oh, Ok , mac mini might be an answer there...)
But what about developers? What are they going to think of this?

That's right, now you can enjoy the same "fun" all of your Windows-using friends have been enjoying all this time- Buying and updating Antivirus software! Sifting through your registry to eliminate spyware and adware! And MY alltime favorite, the "when all else fails" Nuke and pave! But wait, act now and you may be lucky enough to experience a new breed of malware! That's right, a nifty little piece of code that finds its way onto your Mac via your Windows partition but successfully manages to locate and FUBAR your OS X partition as well! How can I get in on this you ask? Simple. Point your browser (Preferably IE to get the FULL feel of this new experience) to www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/ and be the FIRST person on your block to stick it in and break it off in your new intel-based Mac.

Ok, now that I got that out of my system...I am glad to see that Apple is taking the lead on this. I sincerely hope that in its final iteration that Apple will include some safeguards to prevent a scenario like what I described above, from happening. Personally, I don't have a dog in this fight. I have no intention of EVER dual-booting my Mac. I escaped from Windows for a reason and I sure as hell won't subject myself to it again willingly, unless Microsoft does something truly revolutionary with its OS. I wonder if this precludes or pre-dates integrated virtualization technology that has been getting all the talk around the net.

The Boot Camp page says:

Quote

Mac OS X Leopard
Developers can learn all about the sixth major release of Mac OS X this century at Apple’s Worldwide Developer Conference, to be held August 7-11 in San Francisco.

Where does it say that Boot Camp will be part of Leopard?

"More and more people are buying and loving Macs. To make this choice simply irresistible, Apple will include technology in the next major release of Mac OS X, Leopard, that lets you install and run the Windows XP operating system on your Mac. Called Boot Camp (for now), you can download a public beta today."

Top of the Boot Camp page. First paragraph.

I made the first post and I was wrong. I misread the information. My apologies. I used to read TMO everyday and loved it, but it seems like their support base is gone. I remember a time where you would find 90 comments on an article like this, but you'll be lucky to get 25. It's sad.

On the plus side, this is the only place to get articles from Vern Seward who I love reading. Gotta love it.

AB

Quote

Small White Car wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
I enjoy TMO's spin on things, but it shouldn't take days for this kind of information to get out.

I just found this news on Digg. It says it was posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago.

So yeah, that's earlier...but come on..."days?" Just a LITTLE bit of an exaggeration, don't you think?

As for the software...WHOA. I didn't expect Apple to come out with something like this so soon! I guess those rumors about virtualization in Leopard are true...they're just testing the waters up front to see how people use this. That could help them decide how, exactly, Leopard should work.

I will be very interested to see some reports on the performance of BootCamp Windows. In particular, one segment of the market that Macs currently underserve is gamers, and if BootCamp allows decent performance, it could lead to some purchases from people who really like the Mac OS, but want the ability to boot into Windows to play their library of games.

Quote

acdc1174 wrote:
Top of the Boot Camp page. First paragraph.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Quote

Guest wrote:
I used to read TMO everyday and loved it, but it seems like their support base is gone. I remember a time where you would find 90 comments on an article like this, but you'll be lucky to get 25. It's sad.

I agree, but you know what's interesting?

Most stories get a few posts, some less than that. But when a story like this came up there were nearly a dozen posts almost instantly.

That means that there are still lots of people checking the site out constantly, they just don't post as much as they used to.

I just thought it was interesting...I sometimes assume post-counts = readership but that's clearly a bad assumption.

If you can't beat 'em...

I think this was the "something special" that Steve referred to in the event in Feb, regarding Apple's 30th Anniversary. But then he realized that if it was released on April 1, everyone would think it was an April Fool's prank.

I doubt I'd ever install Windows on my Mac, but I am glad there's now support for those who do. This can only mean good things for Apple (despite my natural revulsion to Windows).

Quote

Fliedermaus wrote:
I will be very interested to see some reports on the performance of BootCamp Windows. In particular, one segment of the market that Macs currently underserve is gamers, and if BootCamp allows decent performance, it could lead to some purchases from people who really like the Mac OS, but want the ability to boot into Windows to play their library of games.

I'm not gonna try this but if I did THIS would be the reason. My games aren't online multiplayer things so I could pretty much shut down Window's communication with the net, thus making me feel a lot safer.

At any rate, if this is really a dual-boot system like I'm used to, any "Windows problems" could be totally erased by wiping that half of the drive. I doubt I'll EVER do this to my desktop, but if I end up buying a laptop for travel I'll probably give it a try. I wouldn't be keeping any data on the laptop that can't be copied from the desktop again later so the risk would be low for me.

EDIT: I don't do many dual-boot systems...is the ability to make one WITHOUT erasing what's currently on the computer a new thing? That wasn't possible the last time I did something like this. It's news to me!

Blech!

Virtualization would be almost tolerable, but putting Windows on my Mac? That must be to resolve corporate employers and to sho Windows users what they're really missing when they switch from mac to PC to Mac.

I develop websites and keep a pokey Windows computer around just to make sure nothing changes dramatically in Windows. In my case it was donation ware, so it was cheaper than any alternative.

When I upgrade my iBook, being able to boot in Windows would be helpful.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Blech!

Virtualization would be almost tolerable, but putting Windows on my Mac? That must be to resolve corporate employers and to sho Windows users what they're really missing when they switch from mac to PC to Mac.

EXACTLY. This is a strong statement from Apple. They are now ready to actually stand up and PROVE what they've been saying all these years: OS X is better than Windows.

They MUST be convinced that Windows users will try this out...maybe they just want to use iLife...but eventually they'll find they like OS X better and start using Windows less and less and less. Over the course of a year many of the "I'll just use OS X sometimes" people will find that they've actually become "switchers!"

Apple must be convinced that this will work or they wouldn't even THINK of doing this.

Don't be confused...this is not Apple making friends with Windows...this is Apple declaring war on Windows!

Quote

Guest wrote:
How much did Bill have to pay for this one? Does he even KNOW about it? Also, I wonder how Apple will handle the support calls. Even though it states very strongly throughout the pages on their website that they do NOT support it, don't you all imagine that people will call them ANYWAY? They may not get very far w/ that, but just curious.

Once they see what Apple charges for support calls, they'll think twice about it...or not...

What the hell. It's more cash for Apple.

Quote

Small White Car wrote:

Quote

Fliedermaus wrote:
I will be very interested to see some reports on the performance of BootCamp Windows. In particular, one segment of the market that Macs currently underserve is gamers, and if BootCamp allows decent performance, it could lead to some purchases from people who really like the Mac OS, but want the ability to boot into Windows to play their library of games.

I'm not gonna try this but if I did THIS would be the reason. My games aren't online multiplayer things so I could pretty much shut down Window's communication with the net, thus making me feel a lot safer.

Yes, I was thinking much the same thing. But you know, I suspect for people who are really compelled by a Mac that can run Windows, this isn't much of an issue. After all, the market that we're talking about (people with a large library of Windows games) have *already* spent most of their computing life dealing with a lot of the garbage on the 'net that you and I routinely ignore.

From our Mac-centric perspective, running Windows and OS X side-by-side is a risk. From a Windows-gamer perspective, it's a security upgrade, if anything.

*blinks*

I must need another cup of coffee this morning. I'm seeing things...

Quote

Fliedermaus wrote:

From our Mac-centric perspective, running Windows and OS X side-by-side is a risk. From a Windows-gamer perspective, it's a security upgrade, if anything.

Oh yeah, I can't think of many Mac-people that I know who will be excited but I can think of MORE than one person who was thinking about buying a Windows-laptop soon that will be VERY excited to hear this.

This is purely to attract windows switchers.
Why buy a Dell, Hp etc that only runs windows? Buy a Mac that does both!
Now buying a Mac is okay for users using windows only software for work etc.
They can do their work and then switch over to OS X for everything else.
Once the windows users start using OS X which is far more stable and secure they will leave windows behind, just wait and see..

Not great for web developers; at least not this one. As a webmonkey myself, I prefer Windows running in a window via VirtualPC so I can switch back and forth much faster than any dual-boot machine.

The vast majority of people don't want to dual-boot. Anyone getting a Mac to run Windows will likely stay in Windows. They won't boot into Windows to run a couple things then switch back to Mac to run Safari and Mail. They'll just stay with what they are comfortable with, which means they don't need to buy a Mac to do that.

This will satisfy a subset of people who were whining for it. May not hear from them for a while

As for games, all the popular games made it to the Mac. I can count on one hand the games that didn't, and I didn't die when those didn't make it. I never had the time and money to make my way through the huge list of junk on the Windows side to get to the good stuff, anyway. Now, bring dual-boot into the equation: it didn't take but maybe a year of Mac OS X use that games I had that required me rebooting into Mac OS 9 (they didn't run in Classic) went up on the collector's item shelf to await emulation that could run them, like I play some Atari and C64 games in emulators to this day. If a techie like me can get to the point of refusing to dual-boot, the general public isn't going to want to do it at all.

I do wonder how many developers might now tell us to just boot into Windows to use their software. Luckily we have enough shareware and open source software at our disposal to offset much of that.

Concerning businesses: there are a lot more barriers to Mac OS in many workplaces than just not running Windows.

I don't consider this big news one way or the other. However it should provide a lot of fodder for news media and Mac bashers, as well as prove a little more confusing for the normal consumer. That confusion has helped in some ways, so I don't entirely knock it.

Quote

Guest wrote:
I develop websites and keep a pokey Windows computer around just to make sure nothing changes dramatically in Windows. In my case it was donation ware, so it was cheaper than any alternative.

When I upgrade my iBook, being able to boot in Windows would be helpful.

I have an old Compaq laptop, with a small screen, that I use to check page designs.

I wonder if Boot Camp will run Vista, ere it arrives.

I have been saying this for months. Apple will let windows run on their mactel machines because they will sell more hardware. Simple business decision really. Do you think they care if you run OS X or not. It is still a sale. What do you think will happen when they notice that over 50% of their customers are not running OS X? Yeah developers will be able to check out how their .NET apps will run on OS X and whether their sites work good in Safari, but thats about it. If apple was interested in proliferating OS , they would allow other hardware vendors to offer it as an option.
I have always wanted to hack around with os x and now I will be able to. Good job apple. I knew I should have bought stock when I heard they were going to do this last month at a conference.

Now they just need to support windows drm on the ipod and I will buy one of those. I like my subscription music.

I love this. As a Mac user I think it will do nothing but increase our market share and allow many Windows users who dont think they could part with Windows to do so, little bit at a time.

Great day!!! And just look at Apple's stock value right now!! Up almost $5.oo a share as of right now!!!!

Quote

Guest wrote:

Now they just need to support windows drm on the ipod and I will buy one of those. I like my subscription music.

WARNING:Moron alert!!!!

This is not aimed at getting mac users to use windows instead of OS X. It's aimed at people like me who need to use both windows and choose to use a mac with os x and would prefer to maintain one computer system for both. However, I'd prefer virtualization rather than dual booting proper, given the fact I tend to switch between my computers throughout the day. However it might help me get my work done if I have to reboot to use the mac.

For those naysayers and those who think this is a step in the wrong direction, this capability is not aimed at you. And it's not going to move people from OS X to windows. That should be obvious given the two operating systems.

Quote

Guest wrote:
WARNING:Moron alert!!!!

Thanks for giving us your background info.

Will it go the other way too? Will they write the software to dual boot OS X on a Windows machine - there is after all public demand for that too. If so how long until they do it?

Quote

Guest wrote:
Will it go the other way too? Will they write the software to dual boot OS X on a Windows machine - there is after all public demand for that too. If so how long until they do it?

Before being able to boot Windows on an Intel Mac, it would have been suicide to let Mac OS X onto PCs, because they could then do both OSes but now Macs and PCs can do both it might not be such a bad move. The choice to buy a Mac isn't purely about the OS, it's about computers that look good and are built to last.

Can anyone say "INCREASED MARKETSHARE"

Consumers now have a reason to make the switch. They can have a system that runs both OS X and Windows. My views have now been validated by Apple

http://switchtoamac.com

Some points to consider:
• A Windows XP Home Edition (or Professional Edition, oddly) costs $249 at FutureShop (this is Canadian pricing). That's a lot of money.
• Will Leopard allow you to be logged into both, and switch via fast-user switching? What kind of memory overheard would this cause?
• This makes waiting longer to get an Intel Mac make even more sense: if I wait until they work out some of the kinks (DL DVD burner on the Macbook, for one), I can get Leopard included (and presumably iLife '07) and also have proper (not beta) Windows support. Moreover, I can buy Vista when it ships in January (I know, I know, but let's suppose it does). If you rush out and get this now, you have to pay for Leopard, iLife '07, XP now and Vista later, and also deal with the headaches of the first generation of Intel Macs, as some Macbook owners have been finding.
• From a portable perspective, being able to run Windows is nice for being on the road. Let's keep in mind we're going to want huge hard drives to run this stuff, and RAM also if one will be able to boot both at the same time and use fast user switching. Very, very cool.
• From my perspective, most of my family is spread out over three continents, and mostly use Macs, but my brother uses a PC. If he now buys a mini and installs Windows on it, we can all use iChat together, etc. And then I'll be able to play ICQ pool against him on my usual machine.
• Will this cause issues with the Intel Mac version of Office? If I were Apple, I'd have waited till that first version came out. Also, where does this leave VirtualPC? Maybe Microsoft could sell a bundle of Windows and Office for Mac users.
• This means we're shelling out cash to both Intel (processor/chip set) and Microsoft (again that $249 Cdn. for a proper stand-alone copy of Windows), to say nothing of the annual iLife and OS X upgrades. Other than the consumer pocketbook, nobody loses here.
• Is any business likely to pay the premium associated with a Mac (no GarageBand/consumer comparisons here, please; I'm talking about a business), and on top of that pay $249 to install a copy of Windows on each machine? I don't think so. But, if you are supplying your own laptop for both business/home use, it makes it easier to justify a Mac in the future once it's out of beta.
• If you really care about games on a Microsoft platform, use that $249 toward a used Xbox or a new Xbox 360.

Overall I think this is an excellent move for Mac users such as me, but we do need to keep in mind the costs (financially, and with possible retaliation with a buggy/delayed version of Intel Mac Office from Microsoft) that this may entail.

That said, bravo Apple!

the end of the world is near.

It's not going to be "virtualization in Leopard" it actually boots on the hardware. You choose when you start up which OS to boot into.

Quote

Small White Car wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
I enjoy TMO's spin on things, but it shouldn't take days for this kind of information to get out.

I just found this news on Digg. It says it was posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago.

So yeah, that's earlier...but come on..."days?" Just a LITTLE bit of an exaggeration, don't you think?

As for the software...WHOA. I didn't expect Apple to come out with something like this so soon! I guess those rumors about virtualization in Leopard are true...they're just testing the waters up front to see how people use this. That could help them decide how, exactly, Leopard should work.

Yeah for anyone who apparently missed this sentance at the very beginning of the Boot Camp page:

"Apple will include technology in the next major release of Mac OS X, Leopard, that lets you install and run the Windows XP operating system on your Mac. Called Boot Camp (for now), you can download a public beta today."

I confess, I came to read TMO solely to feel superior. After all, this is old news (two hours at least!!!
I was expecting comments like "why on earth run Windows on my beautiful mac?" to wash away the occasional nice post.

I am most humbled by the nice and largely intelligent comments though ...

I am a Elementary School Board member and we havea lab of aging Bondi iMacs, when I discussed our options to modernize the lab with our Supt. he said he was planning on suggesting the lab be upgraded with Dells. His argument aside from the fact he does not know anything about Macs is that Dells are cheap and everybody is using windows anyway. After I picked my jaw up off the floor I gave him a bit of education on the Mac and OSX and how wintel boxes are cheap but more expensive in the long haul. This was back just after Apple announced the Intel switch and I had told him, based on speculation that new new computers will be able to dual boot OSX and Windows or even run side by side. He was interested in what I had to say and we are looking into outfitting our new lab with Macs based upon this speculation. Now I can sleep better at night knowing the dual boot option is now a reality.

I feel the option to run both operating systems in a school system is a must. Outside the fact that having exposure to both operating systems is a benefit for the students, too many schools are going the Wintel route because the initial cost is much less. BUT when schools were all mac based there was never a full time IT position on the staff. A local HS in my area has managed to switch almost completely to Dell because the IT guy on staff doesnt like Macs (Because he knows nothing about them) and hes been certified in the Windows world. The HS now calls on me to keep their last mac lab in working order because he made it plenty clear that he will not extend any inside support for this lab of eMacs. When you visit his office you are greeted with a wall of wintel boxes that are in to be fixed due to hardware failure or windows viruses, and the pile outside the door to be disposed of is larger everytime I visit. Now I see why he wants to keep the school Wintel. This guy would be out of a job if the current labs were Macs.

Sorry to go off on a tangent, but I feel this is a great opportunity for Apple to get back into the education market.


Oh and yes the boost in stock value is a real treat this morning!

I'm not sure which way this will break - and it's possible that it could be good for Apple, while being bad for OSX.

On the plus side, there is the switcher potential, plus places like universities who currently maintain separate labs of PCs and Macs. All of a sudden, they can just buy Macs in all of them.

On the minus side, this could shrink software development for OSX. Games would be the most obvious casualty. At the very least, we can expect that games whose commerical viability for porting is only marginal will not now be ported to OSX. But this could happen to other software too: suppose Microsoft decided that Mac Office would become Windows Office, plus a Windows XP install disc (and possibly minus Access).

However, if Apple could stay in business through its hardware sales, why would they care about the gradual death of OSX? That is an extreme possibility, but I don't think that it can be easily dismissed.

While it's nice to see Apple providing the code for dual booting (avoiding problems with independent hacks) the fact is that you'll still have to live with dual booting. I doubt if there will be fast user switching. If fast user switching does come out of Apple's labs don't be surprised to see it include Linux along with Windows.

What would be impressive wold be a version of VPC that tuns at 95% of native speed or higher. This allows the user to bring up Win without shutting down OSX and also allows for drag & drop between the desktops. It also allows the user to isolate Win from the internet, which is a rather wise option. I have to use VPC to demo one small app for the service I sell and the virtual approach is far better for an OS X user that needs periodic access to a Win app. I would bet that Apple is working with MS on a new version of VPC (just like they did when the G5 came out) and this version will be the real PC killer if it funs FAST.

I would assume that with the introduction of OS 10.5 both windows and OSX will run side by side. I think Apple is just getting this out there to please the masses, I've seen the instructions for the Windows hack that was currently developed and its not for the average user. My gut tells me that once the Powermac line is switched over to Intel we will see virtualization between the dual OS.

I have also thought about how this will cause some software developers to reconsider porting, but seeing how not everybody will install XP or even consider using dual boot and the large base of PPC based macs on the market the need for OSX universal software will be needed for some time to come.

Now I have a reason to consider a Macbook Pro, I hate my gatway laptop I use for work to communicate with proprietary phone systems and satellite telemetry systems. Buying a windows laptop for 2 small tasks is just a waste of money, not to mention toting 2 laptops around is just a bear.

Quote

Dean Lewis wrote:
Not great for web developers; at least not this one. As a webmonkey myself, I prefer Windows running in a window via VirtualPC so I can switch back and forth much faster than any dual-boot machine.

The vast majority of people don't want to dual-boot. Anyone getting a Mac to run Windows will likely stay in Windows. They won't boot into Windows to run a couple things then switch back to Mac to run Safari and Mail. They'll just stay with what they are comfortable with, which means they don't need to buy a Mac to do that.

I'm wondering how long it will be before Fast User Switching allows the instant switch from OS X to XP/Vista. That would REALLY make MSFT's purchase of VPC look questionable, at least from the Mac perspective. That also answers the question of "How much did Bill pay?" as well.

Question: is it really very important if games no longer are ported to Mac? After all, if we (eventually) all have dual-booting Macs, which we will, what is the difference to us? If you want to play (personally I don't), boot into Windows. Makes the whole game problem go away. More worrisome would be if something like Office ends up no longer ported to Mac. (Apple could help solve that by buying and including in the software one of the current Office-like clones, or by making Appleworks look and behave just like Office.)

I've talked to 3 PC guys here at the office and all three are now interested in getting a Mac to do this. Two will probably buy in the next month or so.

This is a great way to lower the bar for those wanting to switch. There have been ways to run Windows on the Mac for many years (back to the 68040's and 030's from what I remember) though slow software emulation or expensive hardware cards. And these did not spell the end of the Mac. As a matter of fact, they mostly went unnoticed because of expense and/or speed issues.

But this is a great opportunity for places like my corporation that have some Macs and many PC's and more importantly, a site license for Windows OS. This means with any Intel Mac purchase, they now get the function of two OS's for FREE. It's like having two computers for the price of one high end computer.

I don't see the MS Office jockeys switching to Mac hardware any time soon, but this will bring more Mac users into the corporate environment and cause some very puzzling looks from helpdesk guys for a while...

In my geek circle, the Macs are cool and droolworthy "but I can't run xxxxxx on the Mac, or I'd get one". *POOF* argument nullified. Sale greased. Now we just have to get the sales folks up to speed on the Macs being able to do this...

Dang - does this mean I have to support Windows now?

To legally purchase XP Home or XP Pro! Yes, a few will do it if they really need to, but not me. For just a few bucks more than the cost of the OS, I can buy a machine with XP installed.

Quote

Dean Lewis wrote:


...As for games, all the popular games made it to the Mac. I can count on one hand the games that didn't,...

Seriously? I can get through all of my fingers and toes (and all yours). It's been years since the optimistic times of UT QIII and Deus Ex coming out within months of the PC release.

The notion that the Mac gets the cream of the crop in PC titles has been false for a long, long time.

Drivers permitting, if this help to facilitate my exit from the delayed, poorly supported, slow, and expensive world of the Mac porting industry, then I'm gone quicker than you can say steampowered.com.

< OK, now that I have your attention...>

The only people that are gonna be buying macs to run widows are those that already own macs, and a few other 'switchers'.

This isn't gonna make Apple the "platform of choice" to run Windows.

<did I mention VISTA was running on a Mac? ooops!>