digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

BootCamp: Vista and OS X Dual Booting on MBP

blogs.msdn.com — Dual booting Vista and OS X is finally here. It looks like we were just one step short all along. (And please no "why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?" posts. If you aren't intelligent enough to figure out why, then don't bother reading the article.)

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • McGrude, on 10/12/2007, -111/+18Why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?

    Seriously what we need is a clean way to boot Linux on the MBP, without chain booting through the NT loader.
    • fraggle34, on 10/12/2007, -67/+22To dual boot Windows I can understand, but why Linux??
    • jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -55/+13Try Ubuntu and you'll understand "why Linux"
    • Indrek, on 10/12/2007, -52/+16Sorry, you fail for mentioning Linux in a Windows topic.
    • christianw, on 10/12/2007, -48/+9/me looks at the top of the screen and thinks, windows topic? then why does it say home >> apple at the top?

      oh yeah cause its an APPLE topic
    • Ramble, on 10/12/2007, -45/+15'Try Ubuntu and you'll understand "why Linux"'

      Try anything other than Ubuntu and you'll understand "why Linux".
    • lpcustom, on 10/12/2007, -32/+46Vista on a Mac?
      This is great.....Now Mac users can experience the bloat as well. The world is great!
    • burke, on 10/12/2007, -10/+27Holy Flames, Batman!
    • thenorwegian, on 10/12/2007, -33/+23holy ***** you guys are dumbasses. did you totally NOT read this part?

      (And please no "why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?" posts. If you aren't intelligent enough to figure out why, then don't bother reading the article.)



      SERIOUSLY.
    • 0x20boy, on 10/12/2007, -23/+9"Sorry, you fail for mentioning Linux in a Windows topic"

      Funny, the category says "Apple".
    • s0ny, on 10/12/2007, -6/+49And another thing. WHY EVERYTIME IS THERE AN OSX / WINDOWS ARTICLE ARE THE FIRST 6 ***** COMMENTS "BLAH BLAH....LINUX WOOWOOOO", "JUST GET LINUX ITS FREE!"

      God. This isn't the girl-scouts and your not selling cookies door to door. If people wanted to be running Linux they would. I dont open a "Windows Vista" or "Mac OS X" article on digg to read about how much better my life would be if only I ran Linux. You dont run photoshop, you dont run games, application installation isnt as smooth, and yes, Ive used MANY versions of Linux and Unix and the simple fact is OS X to ME, is a perfect blend of all the benefits of both operating systems in one.

      Everyone here runs their OS based on their preferences and needs. To each their own, Im just getting tired from every Windows, Mac, and Linux article I go to read I feel like Im at a car dealership being haggled to buy a new car. If you like Linux and hate Microsoft so much, then read the ***** Linux articles. If Mac users hate Windows so much then dont read the article!

      The only educated people who should actually voice their opinion on OS arguments are those who have used ALL of the operating systems IN DEPTH (for more than a year a piece). Because I would venture most Windows users who bash Macs/Linux have never used either in depth, and vice versa.
    • lpcustom, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20"Everyone here runs their OS based on their preferences and needs. To each their own, Im just getting tired from every Windows, Mac, and Linux article I go to read I feel like Im at a car dealership being haggled to buy a new car. If you like Linux and hate Microsoft so much, then read the ***** Linux articles. If Mac users hate Windows so much then dont read the article"

      AMEN! This goes for every Linux article I've tried to read. There are Windows users voicing their opinion. I have used all three extensively and I know most fanboi's who post here haven't don't have a clue.
      Like the man said....if you're a linux lover...read the linux articles and comment there....if you are a windows lover.....read the windows articles.........mac mac...........otherwise you are just being annoying....just stay off digg if thats what your goal is.
    • Kirti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4What I don't understand is, If you guys don't like Vista, Linux, OSX, whatever other OS - why are you wasting yours and everyone else's time commenting here? If you don't like OSX/Linux/Windows, good for you - keep it to yourself.

      If you insist on converting the rest of the world with your 'profound' comments, at least try to include a coherent reason as to why.

      - Kirti
    • Pujan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've been looking into buying a MacBook Pro for a while. One of the 3 drawbacks that were holding me back was the need to dual boot Windows with OS X, so this is great news for me.

      The main reason I need to boot windows is photoshop CS2. I'm a pretty avid graphic designer, and I don't think I'd be able to take the lag times of CS2 on an Intel mac. CS3 should fix that, but till then, I'll be reliant on windows for my graphic designing - and for a program that I use at work that isn't compatible with Macs. Granted, BootCamp solved the issue a couple of months ago but I was holding out in hopes for dual booting, which makes it a lot faster and easier, so thank you for that. Apple have just gained another sale.

      (The other 2 reasons, in case you were wondering, are/were the heating issues and the price. The 15.4', 2.0Ghz MacBook Pro costs 10,000 Dhs here in the UAE, which is close to 3,000USD. That's a 50% increase from the price in the states. And no, the Apple Store doesn't ship here)
    • bmobile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ Pujan: from the way you said it, it sounds like you think that BootCamp makes Windows run inside the Mac OS. BootCamp is a true dual boot supported by Apple. it works GREAT btw.
  • Composer, on 10/12/2007, -32/+8Neat. I still don't know why you'd want to boot instead of using virtualization.
    • Enitime, on 10/12/2007, -14/+22Because virtualisation doesn't work anywhere near as well?
    • Greyarea, on 10/12/2007, -2/+39Direct hardware access for things like accelerated graphics.
    • s0ny, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Yeah. Parallels ROCKS, and virtualization for Windows/Linux is perfect 99% of the time when I use it. It doesnt use alot of processor and if you have enough RAM I would say its about 95% the speed of a native windows install.

      But direct hardware access is the only thing that suffers in a virtualized enviroment. If you want to play most games or if you need exclusive access to any computer hardware (Personally I dual boot just to run netstumbler because OSX latches onto my USB Wifi card when I plug it in) then just having a native install of windows only taking up 5GB of space is nice to have.

      And again. All you people who complain "why the hell would you want to run Windows on a Mac?" Just shut the ***** up already. Its not that I want to run windows, its that I HAVE TO! In OSX, I do everything. Email, Web, video editing, photo manipulation, basically everything I do for personal use is in OSX. Unfortunately, CAD software, Business accounting software, Access database applications, and our POS system are all things that I must use EVERYDAY for work. If I had it my way I would upgrade all those windows products to OSX apps, but there are just still some software categories where windows software is the only viable option.

      Im not saying Im running WinXP or Vista on my Mac because I believe its a superior OS, Im running it because on my MacBook Pro, I have the ability to run every single peice of software out there, for OS X, Windows, Linux, Unix, etc... So if the best Accounting software out there only runs on Windows, Id rather run that than simply use a inferior OS X app just because its written for my mac.

      Open your damn mind and think about other peoples essential needs for computing, not just the ignorant myopic needs of yourself.
    • djhash, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2@s0ny ++++++++digg for the usage of the word myopic :-D..
    • tds5016, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0you've all seemed to throw this person's comments away, but at the same time it makes sense. If you need a windows app, or a mac app you don't have to leave your environemnt. The reality is at some point you are going to need something form the other partition that you don't have on the current one. The beauty of virtualization is that you don't have to reboot, then grab what you need, and boot back in. That's a lot of wasted time.

      This is NOT to say that there aren't advantages to running both opperating systems, just that if virtualization would run as fast, there'd be no reason to use a dual boot. So why not put the funding into virualization aside from it's not as good of a marketing tool as dual booting.
  • kuchdawg, on 10/12/2007, -15/+10Because Booting is much faster
  • loveme4iamjesus, on 10/12/2007, -17/+5This is cool, but it doesn't go in depth. No information on performance, stability, nothing. And what a fool, downloaded the 64bit version... No digg.
  • wstrucke, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6http://www.duggmirror.com/apple/BootCamp:_Vista_and_OS_X_Dual_Booting_on_MBP/
  • popularme, on 10/12/2007, -44/+5i don't get it...why would you want to run Windows on a Mac? why not run a mac on windows? or Linux on a windows?
    • Indrek, on 10/12/2007, -6/+26A Mac is a computer. Windows is an operating system. You can't run a computer on an OS. What you're thinking of, most likely, is running Mac OS X on a PC. Which has been done.

      Also, "Linux on a windows"? I think you're confusing virtualisation and dual-booting here.
    • lowbatt, on 10/12/2007, -25/+4I think you mean mac on windows on a plane!

      Feel free to digg it down I know its dumb but I had the urge to say it!
    • Yoshi39, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I think he is refering to a pc as windows
    • djdole, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4I was neither surprised nor confused by your misunderstanding of hardware vs operating system (Mac vs OSX, PC vs Windows, PC vs Linux). I've always noticed that Apple tries to blur the line between their operating system and the hardware they run it on. I comes as no surprise that anyone would be so confused. :-/
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Blurred huh? MacOS X the only one that has 'OS' in its name. Do you find that confusing?
    • perryge, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4To be fair, Apple's the only one out of the three that sells (well, obviously many Linux distros, like Ubuntu, don't 'sell' anything) both the hardware and the OS - and they're very clear that they only want you to run Mac OS X on a Mac. So whilst it's true that Mac OS X clearly has 'OS' in its name, by having both the computers and the operating system have 'Mac' in their name, Apple is deliberately tying their OS to their hardware. 'Blurring' the lines, so to speak.
    • djhash, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@perryge: so i guess someone tripped when they made bootcamp??
    • marksy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@popularme, ***** numbskull
  • ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -24/+7How is this news?

    No digg
    • Indrek, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12This isn't about running Windows XP on a Mac, which is indeed old news already. This is about running Windows Vista on a Mac. Y'know, Vista, the OS that was just yesterday released as a public beta?
  • chadu, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12I think virtualization is where it's at unless you want to play games... but can vista play games at the moment?
    • Greyarea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13It comes with a seriously good Mah Jong game.
    • TruForm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Sure it can, i had serveral of my games working on it perfectly, both using openGL and DirectX. And they actually added some games in vista, like a cool Chess game. its full 3D, single/multi player. i dunno i might be a big geek, but i was impressed
    • schlongmeister, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I'll bet that Vista has a MEAN game of Solitaire...
    • drw2583, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5At least it has a ***** paint program. That is my major beef with OS X (pretty petty, huh?). Image Preview is nice, but why is there no generic paint program?
    • Jjcd7, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Doesn't come with OS X, but google "Rita" and youu'll find something cool.
    • djhash, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2:-( they got rid of smiley on Minesweeper...
    • lowmagnet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Funny, the only reason I've ever used mspaint is to paste and save screenshots.
  • dommickey, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2It is really cool that you can have windows on your mac, and eventually it will make me into a mac user but for now the games i play would look to ***** on any mac with a intel chip. Once the power mac gets the intel chip in the near future then i could see why you would want windows on your mac too.
    • DaffyDuck, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Both the iMac and MacBook Pro have an ATI Radeon X1600 graphics chip.
    • UxPx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It is really cool that you can have windows on your mac, and eventually it will make me into a mac user but for now the games i play would look to ***** on any mac with a intel chip. Once the power mac gets the intel chip in the near future then i could see why you would want windows on your mac too.

      @dommickey

      are you stupid. a power mac is called a power mac cause it has a PowerPC chip inside. when they take out the PPC chip and put in an intel, you have a IntelMac. moron.
  • mapster, on 10/12/2007, -44/+4Why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?
    • Indrek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Why would you want to litter Digg with your ignorant and narrow-minded ramblings?

      I don't get it... what on Earth possesses these people to post this exact same question in every single article about running Windows on a Mac? Maybe there should be an FAQ section here that includes the answer to that, because that's what it is - a Frequently Asked Question.
    • dommickey, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7for all the pc games macs dont play and reason why alot of people stand by their pc's
    • DaffyDuck, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Actually, this should go into a mnfaq (mind numbingly frequently asked question).
    • djdole, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@mapster - "Why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?"

      Have you ever done ANY software or web development?
      If you expect your software/web-page to be multi-platform or well supported, you need to test it on multiple operating systems to be sure they are supported.

      Want a good example? You create a web-page that supports dynamic content with css, Ajax, and JavaScript (redundant, I know). How do you ensure it works on IE, Windows version of Firefox, Linux's Firefox, Opera, AND Safari? Do you waste $6,000 dollars and buy three different computers,
      OR do you buy a Mac, buy a Windows OEM disk (cheaper than the alternative), install Boot-camp for free, and download and burn a Knoppix CD?
    • Tiemmothi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Im switching to a mac now after an entire lifetime of running windows at home and working, at work, of all places on a mac. Bootcamp and parallels will alllow me to use my copy of windows for when I absolutly need it.. (e.g., EQ2 for me). The new Macbook pros are more than fast enough to run WoW and EQ2.

  • datagod, on 10/12/2007, -29/+4Seriously, what is tha advantage of running Windows on a Mac? Pretty hardware? pffff....lame....no digg, especially for the inlamatory remark "your stupid if you ask a question"...

    lamer
    • ElectricKetchup, on 10/12/2007, -15/+10"your stupid if you ask a question" sounds like something the current USA government would say.
    • ejstacey, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2I actually think Mac fanboys and the US Government are a lot alike right now...
    • djdole, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7(You're not stupid, just either ignorent or shortsighted.)
      I said it above for mapster, and I'll say it again for you...

      Have you ever done ANY software or web development?
      If you expect your software/web-page to be multi-platform or well supported, you need to test it on multiple operating systems to be sure they are supported.
    • datagod, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Oh...ok...you mean you do your primary development on a Mac and you want to see if everything works ok on a Windows OS/Browser....

      Makes sense....I suppose....

      I just don't know that many people who do their primary development on a Mac. It is usually the other way around.....
    • angelp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2What's the advantage?? I swear some of you are borderline retarded. You do realize that there are software packages (especially those for businesses) that are only Windows, don't you?
    • djdole, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@datagod
      Actually I do my software development at work on Win2k, and at home on XP and Linux.
      If I were to use bootcamp (which I won't until it's out of beta and displayed in Apple stores to test out)
      I'd do development in Windows or Linux (possibly tri-boot all three) and just test it on OSX & Safari.
  • exhale, on 10/12/2007, -18/+6Too bad mac hardware is overpriced.
    • Indrek, on 10/12/2007, -17/+1Edit: sorry, replied to wrong comment.
    • christianw, on 10/12/2007, -7/+24mac hardware is overpriced huh?
      ok lets compare here.

      we'll start w/ the mac mini. an aopen mini configured with about the same specs at directron(with core solo processor, atm you cant order a pc w/ a centrino duo in the same form factor, nobody makes one) runs 776.00 before shipping and tax. a similar speced mac mini from apple 599.99. mac mini is cheaper than a pc equivallent here by 177.00.

      next lets move to the imac. the only thing in the pc world thats close to the imac is the dell xps m2010. configured with a 2ghz processor, dell's runs 3925.00. now yes the xps has an x1800 and the imac an x1600 and according to newegg pricing thats about 100-150 dollar difference in cards. But the imac runs for 1799.00 with 1 gig ram making the imac a whopping 2126.00 cheaper before shipping.

      now lets look at small notebooks. again we'll loook at dell's XPS M1210. configured the same as the macbook, including integrated webcam. dell comes in at 1443.00. the macbook of the same specs comes in at 1199.00 which makes the macbook cheaper by 244.00 for essentially the same computer.

      finally we'll look at the macbook pro. the mbp comes in at 2799.00. the XPS M1710 from dell comes in at $3,375. now mind you theres a big huge monster difference in graphics chips in this comparison. the dell has a 7900 class nvidia chip. massive improvement over the x1600 in the macbook pro. while the macbook pro is 576.00 cheaper in this example as well. Honestly I think the difference in video card alone make the value here dead even.

      Sorry to go on such a tyrade here. But people keep saying macs are overpriced and it always drives me nuts because as you can see here. Thats just flat out, not true nor accurate. Pc's if anything are way overpriced. Open your eyes guys. Theres a great value here you can run windows on if you want to and STILL SAVE MONEY for the SAME HARDWARE.

      thanks for humoring me on this one, i just thiink you guys dont think things thru when you make uninformed statements like that.
    • JonGretar, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3Check your prices man... It's the same price.
    • djdole, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2@exhale & christianw
      Arguing over which is overpriced or which is cheaper is pointless.

      Prices change and are entirely relative.
      Buy a PC with a bunch of bundled software, and it'll be cheaper than the same PC without the software because the PC manufacturer gets paid by the software companies to have their software preinstalled. This payment will often be passed along to the customer in the form of a smaller price-tag.
      Additionally different retailers will have different deals on hardware. Maybe the store manager or regional manager over-ordered on a certain computer model, and can't return them. They'll need to slightly lower prices to liquidate the stock. Or maybe they over anticipated the public demand for that hardware. Or maybe they just want to draw in new customers with promotional deals.
      Even online you can see the different prices the SAME hardware can go for.
      The price argument is moot.
    • isamu, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0The way you've priced things out, apparently you are the one that either appears to be uninformed or doesn't know how to shop around (a luxury with pc's).
    • christianw, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3using dell as a comparison is totally relevant for very obvious reasons. features.

      Right off, when comparing the imac, the dell m2010 is the ONLY thing in the world even remotely close to it in form factor and features. for over 2 thousand dollars more mind you. With regard to the mini, the aopen is the only thing even remote close again to the same form factor. When it came to notebooks, you have to think about things like which batteries are being used, processor is a big one as well. there arent a ton of duo centrino's out there sans a few major companies and when you consider packaging and 24 hour a day support, integrated webcam etc.. the laptops i used in my comparisons are literally the only close comparison to what apple is offering on the market today. Now the story might be different with the mac pro, but I didn't want to speculate on fairy tales of products we have no idea of what specs will be included. I wanted to focus on whats real today. This isnt the days of the overpriced Power PC machines. To quote one of Mr. Jobs' personal heroes. "The times they are a changin.."
    • brainache, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Problem with Mac hardware is not that it's over priced - its good value for what you get (see comment by "christianw" for an example)

      The problem with the price of Mac hardware is that apple are really not very good at providing a good selection and price range for the low end of the consumer market.

      MacBook is a prime example. If i'm on a tight budget, i'd rather opt out of the built in camera and bluetooth, as well as get a slower chip inside and no Wifi card and knock $200 off the price. Same argument goes for Mac Mini.

      Oh, you can get rid of the remote as well, that ought to save a few bucks. Seriously, for what you get Mac hardware is really very well priced, but sometimes i just don't want all the extras, i just want to save a few bucks.
  • iAlex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Nice, will this work with iMac and 32 bit version of Windows Vista?
    Will it work with the MacBook?
    • im12env, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2In australia they are allmost double the price of a PC... :-( try $4000au for the cheapest macbook pro...
    • NicP, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2The cheapest macbook pro is $3199 on my australian site? do you have a special apple australia site with over-inflated prices?
    • kram, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It's not Apple's fault that Aussies get a ***** exchange rate againt the U.S. dollar...
    • MatthewWilkes, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Dollars, get your dollars here! Free with every lollipop! Worth the paper they're printed on, honestly!
    • abdulla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1More than the exchange rate, I believe it's actually the GST, that 10% bum-cherry on top.
  • GreenLantern33, on 10/12/2007, -9/+20MBP - Man Bear Pig.

    He'll get you. I'm super serial.
    • ungamedplayer, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1In australia they are allmost double the price of a PC... :-( try $4000au for the cheapest macbook pro...

      A$ 3,199.00
  • Shivetya, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2to justify the fact you overpaid for a computer? :)

    I kid, but only a little.

    First the submitter specifically asked for your type of posts to not occur but I suppose some people just can't take a hint. Second is that many of us have requirements which cannot be fulfilled under OS/X. Face it, the market penetration is not good enough to get a lot of vendors on board.
    • ElectricKetchup, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3I guess I'm stupid for being curious, but what requirements do you think Mac OS/X does not fulfill? I've tried it a few times, and the only thing that really bothered me was its interface (which everyone else seems to love). The main problem for me is its lack of virtual desktops (which some say is easily fixed by downloading and installing some third party application, but I believe an OS should be usable out of the box). Also, having the menus at the top of the screen seems really insame for me. I guess people get used to it, but for multitasking, it seems like a pain in the ass for me.
    • keithzd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@ElectricKetchup

      OSX is actually really great for multi tasking. Actually, the Mac OS had a menu bar before windows had a start menu (correct me if I'm wrong people), and it has been there ever since. As far as getting used to it, try it out for one week, after you do, it will be very easy to use.

      Oh and as far as being ready to go out of the box, well Macs are the only computers I know of that come out of the box ready for anyone to create a DVD, a new song, a web page, or a photo slide show without installing anything else.
    • pornel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5OS X has menu on top, because top of the screen is the easiest thing to hit with a mouse. See Fitz's Law.
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Windows doesn't come with virtual desktops out of the box either. Desktop Manager and Virtue Desktops both work very nicely on OS X, but I find that virtual desktops are mainly useful when the host OS has a crap application layering model, a.k.a. MDI.
  • rockmusicnerd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1... but sadly NO ONE will say what effect "deleting the 200 meg EFI partition" (which is the missing step) will have on the MBP....

    As soon as someone will tell me what I'm deleting, I'll install Vista2.
  • thatsiebguy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Games, gps mapping software, usb hardware, windows only apps, VB coding, ease the transition.. I've switched to a mac a while ago, but there are still things I can do faster in Windows.
    • sablazo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Mapping software is THE REASON I haven't switched to Mac - small(ish) analytical software vendors need to get their act together on that, but they're hesitant to support three or four operating systems (i.e., windows, solaris, linux, and OS/X).

      As soon as they do that my desktop will switch, but for now only my laptop will be a mac.
  • rockthethird, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1This is great I can't wait to get my hands on first OS Vista MBP! One can only hope the install is just that easy.
  • Ramble, on 10/12/2007, -19/+2Why would you want a Mac?
    • jerrygofixit, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4Good Question!

      Better question: Why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?

      Nooooooobody knows.... they just digg ya down and leave it a mystery!
    • cseasy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5They digg you down because you're one of many fcuking morons who asks the same question over and over again. Please, for the love of God, don't bother wasting my bandwidth unless you have something constructive to say.

      C.

      Go England!
    • jonshipman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Because our image setter + drivers don't work well under Windows. Which is oddly run by a Win2000 workstation o_O
  • trakais, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3At this stage, games on Vista is the same as games on MacOS.
  • milamberdob, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4This is great, getting Vista on Mac's will certainly allow people to slowly merge to OSX. For anyone who has ever used OS10 or any Linux based OS, you will know that windows is nothing in comparison. But then again, tell that to a gamer :( ..
  • iAlex, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2Are you kidding? Vista is more featurerich than both OSX and Linux.
    • shmatt, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5yes, bloated with hundreds of useless, home-phoning resource-sucking fetaures.
    • Greyarea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5No, it isn't (more feature rich, that is).

      I've used all three.
    • JonGretar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Yay.... Vista that comes out in 2007 has more features that Mac Os 10.4 that came out early 2005. No news on how usable these features are.
      And 10.5 comes out late this year. And THAT is the version you have to compare to. Gossip on 10.5 can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.5#Speculation
  • WaLk3r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The real question is, can you triple boot?
  • TheMack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7This article is completely useless, check out the guide at OSx86 Project for a detailed install guide.

    http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=14448
  • rufo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Sorry to burst your bubble submitter, but I had Vista running weeks ago.

    All you have to do is delete the 200MB EFI partition (the very first one in the Vista installer) and it installs fine. Mac OS X will continue to run, but some future updates (most likely firmware-related) will not install in the future. It is possible to recreate the partition later.
    • ungamedplayer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Rufo and others reading.

      Here is how I would do it.

      1) backup the partition table with dd (i'd say, dd the first 512 bytes ? dd if=/dev/rdisk# of=/Users/username/mbr-backup.bin bs=512 count=1 ) ( see http://forum.onmac.net/showthread.php?t=136 )

      2) delete the partition using the built in OS X tools.

      3) Install Vista

      4) Restore the partition table ( dd if=/Users/username/pmbr-rescue.bin of=/dev/rdisk# bs=512 count=1 )

      This will probably work, as I dont have an intel mac near me to test it, be brave, someone give it a go and report back.

      I'll probably get modded down for providing actual information on digg.com comments, you dont put *real* information in comments do you ?

    • rufo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Interesting suggestion, but I don't think it'll work - the problem is that Vista is capable of reading the GPT partition table that Mac OS X uses, but the bootloader isn't, instead relying on the legacy MBR partition map that the Boot Camp Assistant creates. The legacy MBR partition map doesn't include the EFI partition (which is fine for XP, which shouldn't be able to see or touch it), which means that the partitions are numbered differently and causing Vista to not load.

      The true fix is for Microsoft to fix their bootloader to read GPT partition tables properly; I believe a temporary fix would be to make the EFI partition viewable in the MBR partition map.
  • holmes101, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2I love apple
  • MrViklund, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I can see the good in running Both Windows and OS X on the best computer you can get out there!
    Do the world realy need PCs anymore? I think they have becom obsolete.

    Death to the PC, Hail the Mac!
    • Indrek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Obsolete ey? Show me a Mac laptop that has built-in infrared, media card reader, fingerprint reader, modem, PCMCIA slot, and has add-ons like a travel battery and a docking station. Until you do, I'm sticking with my PC laptop, thank you very much.
    • SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3You think that PCs have become obsolete? It is more like the other way around. Macs have become obsolete. The "Macs" they sell today are just standard Intel powered PCs with some software modifications allowing them to run a proprietary OS. Whether you like apple or not, that isn't what this comment is about, common sense should tell you that the so called Macs that are currently being produced are more like what you call "PCs" than what you call "Macs", in terms of hardware that is. Sure it comes in a fancier case that causes people to go on and on about the amazing design, but inside it is an Intel chipset with an Intel processor and an ATI graphics card. Just like any other standard PC. The next step is an easy way to run OSX on any PC, not just PCs made by Apple. When this happens, the difference between the so called "PCs" and "Macs" will cease to exist. Unfortunately Apple will probably not let this happen because that would crush a large portion of their sales. They seem to rely on forcing users to use Apple hardware if they want to use Apple software. You want to run apple OSX? You need to buy a PC made by Apple. You want to listen to songs purchased on Apple Itunes? You need to buy an mp3 player made by Apple. As closed and restrictive as this is, people seem to love them anyways, so I guess they will stick with what is working for them, at least as long as it continues working for them.
    • coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1OK, get all those things and STILL be cheaper, lighter and thinner than a MacBook, and I think you might have something. What do you need the PCMCIA slot for, bearing in mind that we already have an infra-red remote, USB2, firewire, bluetooth, wifi, external graphics and gigabit ethernet built-in? The only thing I use infra-red for is phone to phone transfers, everything else is bluetooth. It strikes me as one of those things that people say they can't do without, but in reality don't actually use, like those 5 PCI slots in desktop machines...
    • wardboro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2But a certain contingent of Mac users will tell you. "You don't need these things, If it didn't come packaged with a Mac, it must not need it."

      I like OS X, but I don't think it's going to replace every other operating system. Additionally, Mac has a niche market and a limited product line. They don't want seem to want to expand into the business market with infrared, media card readers, fingerprint readers, etc. As long as that is the case, a significant part of the population will be using Windows. If you need any of these things, then it would be difficult to choose a Mac.

      I don't need a docking station or infrared, but I use a number of programs that are Windows only, and there is no good substitute for them on the Mac platform. Maybe someday I would switch to Mac, but that day isn't today
    • Indrek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"OK, get all those things and STILL be cheaper, lighter and thinner than a MacBook, and I think you might have something. What do you need the PCMCIA slot for, bearing in mind that we already have an infra-red remote, USB2, firewire, bluetooth, wifi, external graphics and gigabit ethernet built-in? The only thing I use infra-red for is phone to phone transfers, everything else is bluetooth. It strikes me as one of those things that people say they can't do without, but in reality don't actually use, like those 5 PCI slots in desktop machines..."
      -MrViklund

      PCMCIA slot - sound card
      infrared - phone-PC transfers (not everything is Bluetooth-capable yet)
      media card reader - self-explanatory
      fingerprint reader - granted, more of a convenience feature, but still something I've grown used to
      travel battery - sometimes 4 hours isn't going to cut it
      docking station - with this the laptop can basically double as a desktop (with external monitor, keyboard and mouse, of course)

      Just because you or Steve Jobs lack the imagination doesn't mean no one ever needs this stuff. As it is, with any Mac laptop I'd have to carry around half a kilo of USB dongles to get the functionality that my PC laptop (HP NX6125) offers out of the box. It's also cheaper than a MacBook, and I couldn't care less if it weighed 2.7 kilos instead of 2.2 or whatever the MB's weight is. Oh, and it also has everything else you mentioned.

      For a hardware company, Apple sure offers a limited product range.
  • FlakPyro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I would like to see this done on a regular Macbook and see how well the on board 950G graphics do in Aero.
  • Wavey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is nice, but I don't want to run OS X and Windows on Apple hardware. I want to be able to build my own machines, as I've always done, to my own specifications and likings -- and then run OS X, Windows, Ubuntu Linux and whatever else I want on that box.

    I know that Apple will most likely never open up OS X so that it runs on non-Apple hardware. But nevertheless...that is what I want. OS X is a great OS, and Apple's hardware *looks* outwardly good and has a design aesthetic that I can appreciate -- but under the hood, I want my own choices of hardware, not Apple's.
  • ratzfatz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've looked this thread but couldn' find anything about Vista running with the Parallels virtualisation tool. Has anyone tried to install Vista in Parallels? I'm thinking about Paralles slow tending development towards the final version is due to the fact that they will include Vista support. Can anyone confirm? They've sent me the "final" key for the 1st to be realeased version yesterday - what a coincidence - on that same day as MS is offering free download of Vista to the public. I've failed to download it though - otherwise I would have tried to install by myself.
  • babyeatingjesus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I can't speak for everyone, but to answer "why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?" for me it would be because my work requires the use of both operating systems, so it's cheaper and more convenient to have it all on one box, and in the case of the MBP, all with me when I'm on the go.

    If you hate mac then there's no reason to buy a mac to run windows, if that's what you're asking.
    But if you're asking why anyone would want to run windows on a mac, then the answer is, for me at least, it's like two thousand dollars cheaper than buying two laptops so I can take my work home with me.

    The real question is "why do I have to work at home?"
  • Happy_Phantom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I love all these OSs. I want a Mac and I want to run Windows and Linux on it in a virtual machine system like Parallels.

    I like to view all the comments on digg, too. Is there any way to disable the "dugg down" feature on a per-user basis?
    • wardboro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, at the top of the comments page on the left side there is a pull-down menu that will let you adjust the settings.
  • sanza, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm digging this especially for the line:

    "And please no "why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?" posts. If you aren't intelligent enough to figure out why, then don't bother reading the article."

    BRAVO! But still the Linux posts persist...
  • jragon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I need to write an extension that makes a div invisible if it contains the following phrases/words:

    "fanboy"
    "micro$oft"
    "I don't get it, why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?"
    "what I really want is to run OS X on my PC"

    But then I'm afraid there wouldn't be anything left to read.
  • trongod05, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The equations as I see them:

    PC Hardware = Mac Hardware
    PC Ease of Upgradeability > Mac Ease of Upgradeability
    PC Software (Windows) User Friendliness < Mac Software (OSX) User Friendliness
    PC (Windows) Viruses and Spyware > Mac (OSX) Viruses and Spyware
    PC Sofware (Windows) Cost + Updates < Mac Software (OSX) Cost + Updates
    PC Software (Windows) Out of the box features < Mac Software (OSX) Out of the box features

    So they both have good and bad. I am getting tired of these Mac commercials of late. Not all of them. I just don't like the ones that claim a Mac is better because of the hardware. To me they are identical except you don't have the freedom of more configurations with the Mac. The one thing that sets them apart now is the SOFTWARE. I am not a Mac fanboy nor have I owned a Mac. But I have tried them out and think Mac has the better, easier to use, solid, virus free, software. And you get more of it out of the box.
  • xshaisu, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?
  • jerrygofixit, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1dunno
  • bi0metric, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I know I know I know! Yes I am going to say it even though it says not to! Why in the hell are you stupid apple humpers wanting to run windows on your mac. God you guys are a bunch of Apple Humpers. Yes and I am sure if us windows users decide to run os x on our machines you will be like the same way. Besided windows vista will run slow on an apple. At least I can put os x on my machine and it runs blazing faaaaaast :P
  • c0pperhead, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Let this crap die.
    OMFG.
    Bootcamp is the lamest thing on Digg, and frankly, I am fed up with all the wasted posts about it. WOWzers we have like 100 total users interested in this crap.

    Lets all post about something interesting. Not this tired old story about dual booting operating systems on 1 pc.

    Here is what I gather from you morons. DUAL BOOTING DOESN'T DO ANYTHING FOR YOU AND YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT.

    Go back to bed, before your lackluster brains explode from trying to code rediculous crap that has no impact on anything. If it was a challenge to do it, great, been done, been there, already happened. MOVE ON already losers.

    christ!
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.