digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Macbook Pro: Openfirmware's new face

developer.apple.com — This just in. The new Macbooks have been confirmed to run Intel's EFI Bios replacement. EFI can apparently emulate a BIOS using a compatibility layer; presumably this is how the Macbooks boot (blah) Windows.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jan 11, 2006

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

65 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Obvioustroll, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23-4 years ago I was tasked with getting a prototype Itanium server booted into Linux. During this process I learned a lot about EFI and I came away fairly impressed. Like Open Firmware it has a command line shell that is quite powerful. The downside is the shell is the bastard child of DOS and BASH - it mixes DOS and BASH syntax in a way that leaves you constantly typing the wrong command.

    Still, straight from ROM I was able to probe the hardware, identify drives, partition them (IIRC) and ultimately weasel a Linux boot image onto one. (The machine didn't have a CD ROM!)
  • yaroze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ryokurin

    you need to get your facts straight, Windows XP x64 is Windows XP with 64 bit memory extensions, and does nto currently support EFI (google: windows Xp and EFI) which brings up Windows XP "64 Bit Edition" which is for Itianium, which has been EFI since it got out the gate.

    there is a Major diffrence beetween Windows XP x64 (AMD64 EM64T) and Windows ZP 64 Bit (Itanium)
  • dognose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1wiki: "Designed for use with trusted computing, it allows vendors to create drivers which cannot be reverse engineered."

    Not a fan of "trusted computing"... I also don't believe that it'll be impossible to reverse engineer drivers, just more difficult.
  • jonshipman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why do you need to hide anything? DRM isn't about peeking into your computer, it's about not being able to run a piece of soft/hardware without the proper license. I see what you're saying though. I myself don't steal music or movies so I won't have a problem.

    The only DRM in Macintoshes are from iTunes purchased media and if Apple didn't do that you think the recording companies would let Apple sell their content? If you want to learn anything about DRM, Apple's OS DVDs lack copy-protection, DRM and even lack Serial Numbers. That's how much Apple personally cares about DRM.
  • HackWithRamzi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"Why use a mac anyway they just copy Linux.
    How many times have you read Mac has taken some source code and added a few different features and give it a new name? TOO MANY. Mac needs to be inovative and stop stealing."

    Mac OSX's interface and applications are much better than Linux's. Hey - if open source authors don't want their code to be used like that, they should use the appropriate license! Apple does give back to the community anyway (they sometimes add code to KHTML). Darwin is open source too.

    90% of the anti-OSX people have never spent much time on an OSX machine.
  • jdong, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1topper24hours:

    The BIOS is what controls the bootup sequence, and the OS's boot loader needs to be compliant with the hardware. As a result, unless there is an EFI compliant bootloader for the OS, the OS will not load.

    This also means that most x86 Linux distros will not install on Macbooks out-of-the-box, though distro manufacturers will soon catch on and start shipping a EFI-compatible loader.
  • williamp0044, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thank goodness for the folks at Apple
  • ventro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Would this BIOS emulation slow down the PC considerably? Or does BIOS not matter once you're in the OS?
  • FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1DRM is bad because the media on your machine is no longer in your control. The company you bought it from wishes to disable your access? Done, and you have no say in the matter.

    So you can trust the RIAA and MPAA to do the right thing (as if!), or you can look at DRM as a bad thing that basically takes your computer out of your control. It has nothing to do with hiding wrongdoing on your part, and everything to do with who gets to control the machine you paid for.
  • Ryokurin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://www.digg.com/apple/XP_Won_t_Run_on_Intel_MacBook,_iMac

    XP x64 edition does, but OSX is 32-bit at the moment on Intel. Even on the G5 most of it was 32-bit, so not to vista.
  • coldcoffee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0From the Wikipedia article..."EFI mandates the FAT filesystem, a familiar standard." If that's true, isn't Apple infringing on M$'s recently upheld FAT patent? Trouble ahead?
  • topper24hours, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"XP does not support EFI. Vista does"

    Please cite your source. A Bios (or in this case:Extensible Firmware Interface) has to do w/ pretting the machine for boot by running a quick hardware test (called POST on BIOS... I don't know what the EFI equivalent is). At any rate this has jack to do w/ the OS.... I mean I've heard of Linux for example having trouble running certain hardware for lack of driver support, but never because of BIOS. This is because OS installs are not dependent on any certain BIOS so why would this be different for EFI?????
  • ibis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0XP might not support it, but someone will have it working within the month.
  • BlueStarr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"wtf the blurb is longer than the linked text."

    LOL Don't you love it when that happens!?
  • stimpack, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yes you will be able to run XP on it, I expect thats how they got MS to make office for another 5 years.
  • archer75, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"Guys! Theyve already tested to see if windows works on the new macs and it does!!
    http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0506intelmac.html

    Check it out."

    Those are the old developer kits you dill hole.
  • yaroze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ryokurin

    From the Horses Mouth
    http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/storage/GPT-on-x64.mspx
    in the notes section
    "Because the x64 and x86 architectures do not provide support for an EFI boot partition"

    The article you read, has misleading information.
  • hifiDesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"XP x64 edition does, but OSX is 32-bit at the moment on Intel. Even on the G5 most of it was 32-bit, so not to vista."

    ???
  • lowededwookie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1usergentoo: "Why use a mac anyway they just copy Linux.
    How many times have you read Mac has taken some source code and added a few different features and give it a new name? TOO MANY. Mac needs to be inovative and stop stealing."

    WRONG. MacOS X does not copy Linux because MacOS X is based on FreeBSD UNIX which is a different kernel and also came out BEFORE Linux therefore technically Linux copied MacOS X.

    There are features in MacOS X that aren't on any platform so how can you say that MacOS X is not innovative and is instead stealing?

    Besides how is what Apple doing any different to what the OpenSource community does? Your arguments suck.
  • ScottishCaptain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wikipedia has already updated EFI's page.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface

    Its about time someone canned the PC's BIOS. Its bad enough when I boot my Pentium 4 and see a screen similar to that of my 286.
  • bloodylip, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"How many times have you read Mac has taken some source code and added a few different features and give it a new name? TOO MANY. Mac needs to be inovative and stop stealing."

    I don't know exactly what you're referring to. I know they used KHTML source in order to develop parts of Safari. Then they submitted their source to be merged back into the KHTML tree. I really don't see a problem there. They've learned how to coexist with open source. It seems pretty reasonable to me.
  • eclectro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Yup. This is the first step into DRM prison. I'd rather have the old 286 crappy bios than be shackled when I try to load a program that's "not trusted".

    Mac fanboys are going to be oblivious to this.
  • Ryokurin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0the x64 version of windows XP supports booting from EFI, not the 32-bit version. It wont officially come to windows until Vista. You cannot run the x64 version on a mac because the mac is still 32-bit, not 64-bit as most people think. On the G5 it was only partially 64-bit as well. Even if EFI can emulate a bios, why would Apple use it? Is that really not that hard to understand.
  • Ryokurin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@yaroze

    this is my source. http://www.betanews.com/article/XP_Wont_Run_on_Intel_MacBook_iMac/1137003330
  • eltoozero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Phil Schiller already stated apple wouldn't lock people out from running other OS's, we'll have to wait and see if this means the community can provide an EFI Windows XP boot loader (somehow), or Microsoft does, we'll just have to wait and see.

    Presumably this is based on an upcoming Intel reference platform, which will eventually make its way to the PC...and if Apple has it now, it will likely be available in some form in your world BEFORE 2007 when Vista ships, unless you really think EFI will be held back for a year and a half now that it is ready and being pushed.

    Honestly, I'm more worried about the logistics of dual-booting and how to choose the boot partition than the logistics of the "BIOS" mechanism.

    I'll be really happy to see VirutalPC updated to run native Intel code, and maybe some hardware 3D accel so I can play Worms World Party. :P
  • suppazone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1XP does not support EFI. Vista does. So unless Apple has left the legacy support in there (BIOS)you wont be able to boot Windows XP on the new MacTels
  • robbh66, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ironic...apple is beating wintel machines to the punch with the next generation bios.
  • mrbro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wtf the blurb is longer than the linked text.
  • topper24hours, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0OK. Just so everybody knows: EFI is NOT made to let Apples boot Windows of anything like that. It is to decrease boot times, hopefully eventually to the "instant-on" of Palms, PocketPCs, or iPods.
  • master_of_fm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0then how come Gateway has been running XP on systems with an EFI bios for over 2 years?

    http://news.com.com/2100-1008-5131787.html


    Writing an end to the bio of BIO

    Published: December 30, 2003, 4:00 AM PST

    "The first EFI computer, a Gateway PC, went on sale in November. Others are expected to appear in 2004, with ever greater numbers coming in the following years. But not everyone is jumping on the EFI bandwagon. PC makers have been historically reluctant to change as their customers, especially businesses, often prefer stability. Hence the resilience of the floppy drive, despite many efforts to kill it off."
  • WackyT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Just for you totally ignorant fools. Microsoft has nothing to do with PCs having the old fashioned BIOS. Microsoft has OSs that run on the Intel platform, they didn't design the hardware. Might as well blame LINUX and the rest of the Intel platform OSs if you think that way.
  • jmholloway, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I dont know what a dill hole is?
  • webcrumb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"I dont know what a dill hole is?"

    It's a part of the anatomy. And I'd have to agree... the ADPs aren't anywhere near Macs. They run Marklar, not x86 Mac OS.
  • SectorNation, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So what does the new power / boot up on the Intel Macs LOOK / SOUND like?
  • valkraider, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0jmholloway:"Guys! Theyve already tested to see if windows works on the new macs and it does!!"

    Those machines ran BIOS.

    The new Mac laptops use EFI.

    Windows XP (officially) does not work with EFI.

    However, some one will hack something (Either the EFI or the Windows XP) to make it work.
  • Obvioustroll, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Such a shame that instead of going with a standard (Openbios: http://www.openbios.org ) we get a brand new (yawn) Intel-oriented answer to the situation."

    What an ignorant comment. EFI has been around for years - and Intel has been trying to get the PC makers to adopt it for years - it's the firmware in Itanium systems, for example.
  • dhughes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Translated "trusted computing" means they don't trust us the consumer. Can't stop P2P? Then stick it to them at the most basic hardware level.
  • saleens281, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0*prays it's not as ugly as the Itanic EFI*
  • alittlemelty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thank god we don't have to sit and watch that retarded BIOS bootup sequence with these new Macs.

    Also, for all you DRM haters out there. Name one SINGLE DRM technology that hasn't been hacked.
  • Uriah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0WOW! Two contradicting stories, one after the other, which one is true!?!?
  • topper24hours, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Why do you need to hide anything? DRM isn't about peeking into your computer, it's about not being able to run a piece of soft/hardware without the proper license. I see what you're saying though. I myself don't steal music or movies so I won't have a problem."

    Gotta feel sorry for ppl like this. So is this your view as well: What's wrong with them wiretapping me I'm not breaking the law? What's wrong w/ cameras on every street corner I'm not breaking the law? What's wrong w/ in house audio/video surveilance I'm not breaking the law? What's wrong w/ subcutaneous rfid I'm not breaking the law?

    Where do you draw your line? Mine is drawn where my BIOS checks to see if my OS has a valid keycode and if not doesn't boot. LAME!!! I hope the 1st week you're using yours a hacker uses your keycode and your PC won't boot. Then we'll see how grateful for this intrusive technology you are!
  • matt.rubin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0to put windows on a mac and dual boot ummmmmmmmmm i bet u in like 3 weeks someone will have replaced the EFI to support windows. Watch its gonna be funny :)
  • adinb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@alittlemelty:

    "Also, for all you DRM haters out there. Name one SINGLE DRM technology that hasn't been hacked."



    Apple's new Fairplay. Much to the regret of all HYMN users out there. They're working on it, but they haven't gotten it yet.
  • trogdoor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Untill now I really wanted a macbook but now I am not so sure. Half of the technology - using EFI - will not support the old XP and the other half - not being 64 bit - will not allow newer technology, so you will be stuck with an intel mac that still will only support the mac OS ( although most linux distros will probably also continue support because linux runs on everything). I bought my 17 inch powerbook when it was new and am now regretting it somewhat and I don't want to make the same mistake twice. For some it may not be worth the wate but for me i'll settle for no less than 64 bit.
  • Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't care just as long as one of the two happens in the next couple of months:
    1) Someone manages to get Windows applications to run on OS X... well, that is, and not emulated.
    2) Someone releases a driver package for Windows, so Windows will work with all the Apple hardware.
  • chevyorange, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Yes you will be able to run XP on it, I expect thats how they got MS to make office for another 5 years."

    I'd assume it was the opposite, XP locked out and Vista being compatible enough to get hacked on if someone works at it. Sells MSs new OS. Actually pirates it more..hahahah...
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Me, I want to Buy the new iMac, and install XP and OSX on it. Why you ask? because, I want to have to say a media machine and my gaming machine. my current PC being the gaming one, and the iMac being the media because I can put it in a easy viewable spot and use frontrow to see all my vids. and XP for those days when OSX maybe will stop working with divX at random so I can still see what I want.
  • JetTredmont, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"If that's true, isn't Apple infringing on M$'s recently upheld FAT patent?"

    Not sure about the FAT requirement, but Microsoft and Apple have a universal cross-licensing agreement in place (and have for the last several years). So long as it's a Microsoft patent, Apple is automatically licensed for it.
  • Druc3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What I am more interested in, now that Apple has released a "Gold" version of Tiger, can we install that on other PCs/Laptops (with the normal hacking involved), or have they locked it out. Forget running XP on the MacBook, I don't see paying that kind of money for a XP laptop.
  • ghartwig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Such a shame that instead of going with a standard (Openbios: http://www.openbios.org ) we get a brand new (yawn) Intel-oriented answer to the situation.

    Sad day.

    Can also check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Firmware
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
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.