Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows Drivers for Mac Rolling Out

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the only-a-matter-of-time dept.

522

OSXpert writes "Sure, we all know that Windows can now run on intel Apple Computers. Alas, the solution does not include drivers, and until now Mac users could still only hope to be able to use every application available to their Windows counterparts. However, with drivers now working 100% on the Mac Mini and drivers for the MacBook Pro only lacking video (which, by the looks of the 2nd link is only days away), Mac users now have a complete and working Windows solution."

cancel ×

522 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

fp (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971277)

Im sure the mac fan boys are happy

Re:fp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971546)

Im sure the mac fan boys are happy

Since I am a 100% pure Apple fanboy I can only ask the obvious questions:
Windows?!? What Windows? Does they have shatterproof glass?

Counterproductive? (-1, Troll)

TheComputerMutt.ca (907022) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971281)

Isn't this a step in the wrong direction? If you've already got Mac hardware, then you're trying to get away from Microsoft. Why use M$ software on more expensive Mac hardware? Why use M$ software at all?

Re:Counterproductive? (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971305)

Because you still have some documents in proprietary formats not available on Mac and you couldn't wait any longer to switch to Mac so you need some backwards compatibility until you managed to convert them?

Re:Counterproductive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971393)

Virtual PC would cost LESS and be a lot less trouble to get running too...

Of course, we're talking about an emulator running in an emulator (Virtual PC on Rosetta) but if it's only to convert files, it doesn't really matter.

Windows on Mac is really useful for games, which is a shame because some dumb software companies will now drop OS X support altogether (and I plan to never purchase anything Microsoft-related again, especially not Windows on my Macs).

Re:Counterproductive? (2, Informative)

xtracto (837672) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971565)

Virtual PC would cost LESS and be a lot less trouble to get running too...

$VirtualPC+$Windows license > $Windows License

Do you get it?

Re:Counterproductive? (1)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971333)

If you've already got Mac hardware, then you're trying to get away from Microsoft. Why use M$ software on more expensive Mac hardware? Why use M$ software at all?

In my case, Quicken. Whilst there's a version of Quicken out on the Mac, it's not as good as the Windows version. I've been using Virtual PC on a Power Mac for this, but at the moment there's no fully working PC emulator for Intel-based Macs so running Windows will be my only hope to carry on using this app.

I'm more interested in the progress that's being made on Qemu and the Q port of it, but for now running Windows on an Intel Mac is still attractive to me.

Cheers,
Ian

arrrg (5, Insightful)

Anubis350 (772791) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971335)

I see this comment on every thread dealing with this. Here are the answers:

1)Why not? It's geeky, it's fun, it's what being a nerd is all about.

2)Games. What if you want to be productive on OSX but want to reboot to play some win-only games every so often

3)tax software. This is a big one for this, why bother buying a win machine for something you do once a year when you can just install win on your nice mac.

4)Some people honestly like apple hardware but need to run windows. Try finding a non-apple box with as small a desk footprint as a mac mini.

5)Along the same lines, people who do all their work on laptops and dont want to carry 2 laptops around can now just carry a macbook pro.

6)Quick compatability checks for software. Yes, I realize that for major cross platform dev you might want 2 boxes, but for quick checks (see the laptop comment too) this is invaluable.

There are more of course, thats off the top of my coffee-depirved head right now.

~Anubis

Re:arrrg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971369)

That tax software comment is invalid. I did my taxes this year on my mac with TurboTax, it comes as a mac/pc hybrid CD.

Re:arrrg (1)

Anubis350 (772791) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971396)

perhaps. But are there hybrid tax packages for all countries out there. ALso, I seem to remember that turbo tax for mac is a bit more expensive than the win version (though I could be mistaken on that point)...

Re:arrrg (1)

generic-man (33649) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971440)

At least for the US version, TurboTax for Mac costs exactly the same as the Windows version. Every TurboTax disc includes the Windows and Mac versions. The only difference I've seen is that some of the bundled apps (like ItsDeductible) are only available in web-based form to TurboTax Mac users. The files are even compatible across platforms. I just wish I could say the same about Quicken. My Quicken for Windows file would be decimated if I were to convert it to Quicken for Mac.

IBM-PC in a Mac Mini format (1)

DragonHawk (21256) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971439)

"Try finding a non-apple box with as small a desk footprint as a mac mini."

Okay: http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS8464432110.html [linuxdevices.com]

Sure, it's a blatant rip-off of the Mac Mini design, but you did ask. :)

Sure, it's got IBM-PC insides, not Mac insides, but that's what you asked for. :)

it's missing 2 USB ports and bluetooth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971534)

and it's only a Pentium M rather than the Core Duo available in the Mini.

Re:arrrg (1)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971463)

It's more #1 and #2 as I see it. The rest can be done with Virtual PC.

Re:arrrg (1)

Jerom (96338) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971504)

good points,

but wat is stopping you from running all that in a virtual pc box? (the universal binary of Q is actually quite speedy). I understand this does not work for games (it is slower), but for the others?

furthermore I fear this could become another reason not to develop games and other software for the mac. "Just install windows" as step 1 for the install on mac. That is FUCKING not why I bought a MAC.

On a personal note, I would award more geekpoints to someone making a (or monifying an existing) fast virtual machine emulator that allows quick access to the videocard.

J.

Re:arrrg (1)

Luscious868 (679143) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971552)

Amen brother. It's probably the same idiot in every thread. Why run Windows on a Mac? Oh, I don't know, perhaps it's because the vast majority of desktops are running Windows and thus the vast majority of applications available run on Windows and there simply are some applications that aren't available on a Mac that you may need to run and for some of those applicaitons (and games) running them via some kind of emulation software just doesn't cut it. What a bunch of tools.

Aesthetics (0)

RPI Geek (640282) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971358)

Some people prefer how Mac hardware looks. There's also a "cool" or "wtf" factor involved; I'd imagine you could get some really interesting reactions from people.

Re:Counterproductive? (2, Insightful)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971361)

Because Microsoft have done their very best to prevent operating systems other than Windows from being compatible with Windows. MS Office won't even be out on Mac for months yet! (maybe years, considering Vista delays)

DirectX ensures that no operating system will ever run games quite as well as Windows will, unless game developers drop DirectX. (which they should do, considering that OpenGL + SDL can mean that almost no code changes would be necessary to compile a game for almost any platform)

Re:Counterproductive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971432)

DirectX was probably the best thing to ever happen for gaming. Sure it lead to lock in but really the power of it and simplicity were a huge step forward. No longer did game designers have to worry about every detail of the hardware, just let the abstracted layer handle everything, and if the hardware didn't support the feature it would do it manually for you so you always had what you needed.

As well DirectX also encapsulated audio, networking, input devices and gave a consistent interface to everything. In your own example you need multiple libraries to do the same as the one MS program.

Re:Counterproductive? (1)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971459)

So, tell me, why exactly is more than one library a problem? It's not as if it's some huge number (two), and DirectX doesn't have a single, unified way of doing everything. It's just a bunch of libraries rolled into one.

Re:Counterproductive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971380)

You may not be the only one using the computer. I bet kids rather have windows than Mac OS.

Re:Counterproductive? (1)

Trigun (685027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971407)

Because Mac hardware is nicer than say, Dell? Or that you could eventually write drivers for the mac which might aid in a virtual PC? Or because it's there?

Re:Counterproductive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971415)

Isn't this a step in the wrong direction? If you've already got Mac hardware, then you're trying to get away from Microsoft. Why use M$ software on more expensive Mac hardware? Why use M$ software at all?

Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.

Re:Counterproductive? (4, Insightful)

ebooher (187230) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971434)

The problem with being an Alternate OS user, regardless of preferred OS, is that Microsoft is still the 2 ton Gorilla in the professional sector. I have worked in companies as a UNIX Admin that expected me to do my entire set of job functions from an NT Workstation with Putty. I'm sorry, that just seems wrong to me. Their excuse? "We need to be able to have a singular desktop for the entire company that has the ability to roll out updates and security fixes from the Administrator."

The point is, if you are working for a company where computers are in daily use, chances are Windows is there. Many corporations use Exchange for their email / calendar / project planning systems. There is no easy way to access these stores on a Mac. Even Microsoft's own Entourage doesn't come ready equipped to talk to Exchange, and needs fixes, and even a third party adapter. So Outlook needs to be run. Virtual PC has been in use for a while for just this reason. Because, let's face it, VPC didn't ever really do games well. It was to gain access to certain corp apps that "your" boss tells you that you must use.

As a disclaimer, I must tell you that I am an Apple share holder. I have only Macs in my home. However, at work, I must use an XP machine. No ifs, no ands, and certainly no buts. Though my management would not listen to this plea, there are those that can now go to their boss and say "I need a new laptop, this laptop comes in high in all marks and respects, is competitively priced and I can pick one up today that will let me even check our web page / graphics / whatever for Mac users." That can be an important sale point to a manager that only has the stipulation of "It must run Windows to interoperate."

Re:Counterproductive? (5, Insightful)

nutznboltz2003 (832752) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971472)

For me, this would be the perfect solution. I am the lone hardware tech for a College (not counting student work study). I have to support both Windows and Mac OS. For me, having a laptop that will let me dual boot means I don't have to worry about grabbing the right bag, or having the right software on hand when I head out and make service calls. It also means that support for either OS is just a reboot away.

Yes, a geeky part of me wants to dual boot just because I can, but in my field, having a dual boot machine just makes sense. I can run the Mac for my day to day stuff, and launch Windows when we need to troubleshoot some odd scientific software package designed for DOS that they are still using (happens a lot more then people realize), or when I need to run specialized software like Datatel locally; as remote desktop has made that need even less of a need.

It also means that I have trimmed my office computer budget. One Mac Book Pro, although a little pricey, is much cheaper then an iBook and a Windows laptop ($1000 for the iBook, $1300 for the PC laptop we have stanardized on). $2300 total compared to the $1800 for my MBP.

Honestly, I think there are 3 camps of people.
1. Geeks who want to try this out
2. People like me, who could actually benefit from it
3. People who want the PC games

Of the above list, I think group 1 will tire of it quickly. Group 2 has the most to gain from this. Group 3 should really wait for DarWine or Qemu, but for the short term, this will work for them.

Just my $0.02

--nutz

Really? (-1, Flamebait)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971283)

And this is a good thing?

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971416)

I agree with you. What morons will buy a Mac, which is a software-Hardware unit designed to just work, and then have to try to get an overbloated unstable operating system, that they have to buy if they aren't stealing it(breaking their agreement in the EULA), and try to get that stinker to work on their nice coherent system that already does most if not all the things they will ever get the stinker to do? What a waste of time, money and intellect. Sheesh.

Linux (2, Funny)

Gax (196168) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971285)

But can it run.... never mind.

The development community is fantastic. I have no urge to buy a Mac at the moment, but I may reconsider. Most companies would stumble when making a major platform jump, but Apple are going strong.

Re:Linux (1)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971327)

The reason they're going strong is because they're going from a less common architecture to THE MOST common architecture.

Re:Linux (1)

kegon (766647) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971572)

But can it run....

AmigaOS 4 [hyperion-e...inment.com] ?!!

Hmmm... (1)

scythe000 (564836) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971287)

Yes, but will it play Solitaire, man!?

Re:Hmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971384)

"Mac users now have a complete and working Windows solution."

Working Windows solution? Now there's a phrase I thought I'd never hear on /. (or by anyone else who has acually used Windows.....)

first first post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971291)

First ever first post!

Hurray! (-1, Troll)

brxndxn (461473) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971292)

We've figured out how to put an inferior OS on more expensive hardware! That way, we can have both the frustrations of Windows and pay out of the ass for Mac. Everybody wins!

Next, how to mod your Porsche into a Toyota Camry.

Re:Hurray! (5, Funny)

Ravenscall (12240) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971365)

Unpimp my Mac?

MS representing on the Apple tip ya'll.

It's not the frustration, or the cost... (-1, Flamebait)

TgmBxA!X8(TNDWr_,+xv (962259) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971495)

Software written for Windows isn't usually anything a Mac user would want to use, anyway. Windows software is software aimed at the fratboy demographic, essentially, and Macs have never been for fratboys. The best applications in arts, design, music, and other creative pursuits always come out for Macs first, and Windows later, if ever.

Tired argument. (5, Insightful)

ntxb229 (542609) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971541)

I'm getting so tired of this argument and I'm not sure why it's been modded funny. There are plenty of reasons putting windows on your mac is worthwhile. For work purposes you may want have to run some windows only applications which won't work under virtualization. For play you may want to boot up some games that are windows only. In academic settings you can buy one machine and tripple boot it (Windows/OSX/Linux). I know my school a lot of the labs already dual boot windows and linux.

I can just see the TV adds (1, Funny)

GundamFan (848341) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971294)

New Mac BookPro: $1999

2 days of leave: free

Ticking off the Mac Fanboys: priceless

Re:I can just see the TV adds (2, Insightful)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971505)

Who said this was ticking us off... Most of us WANT to run windows on our Intel macs simply so we can use what by all standards is a much superior operating system, but still run products made by companys who cant get their head out of their asses and make OS X builds. Same thing Linux users have been doing for ages.

win apps on osx (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971295)

i'm not really interested in running windows per-se... but wouldn't it be great to run windows apps within osx, much like running them in WINE under linux? then I could skim the cream from the windows world and leave the swill behind!

Yes, but why? (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971299)

I could see running a Mac OS on a cheap PC box, but why should I run Mr. Gate's Fine Software on my pricey Mac box?

For Linux partisans, doesn't the latest Mac OS offering give them their Unix scionfix?

The answer (2, Insightful)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971444)

To prove that you can. A lot of Slashdot is about that. "Because you can" answers a lot of Slashdot questions. Why modify your case to look like a Borg cube? Why port Linux to your PDA?

Hacking is about curiosity, first and foremost. And there was a question out there...how much like a PC are the new x86 Macs? And running Windows on it answers the question with authority.

Re:Yes, but why? (2, Insightful)

Some Guy (21271) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971528)

How about "because I need to do development on both Mac OS X and Windows and I don't want to lug around two laptops"?

Virus (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971301)

if windows run on Mac, Viruses will affect Mac.

complete and working windows solution? (-1, Troll)

steinnes (774991) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971304)

Why would you want to buy a mac to run windows on it?

Besides, last time I checked windows was more of a problem than a solution.

Re:complete and working windows solution? (-1, Troll)

MrChom (609572) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971500)

That first sentence sums up my thoughts exactly. The point of buying a Mac is that you are getting a hardware and software package that is tailored so as to increase stability, and also crafted to be aesthetically pleasing.

Installing Windows on a Mac, no matter how Intel based it might be is like ripping out the all leather seats in your brand new Porsche and replacing them with $2 seatcovers and some of those beaded back massagers you find in stores that sell nothing but crap.

All you need to do then is start installing some spyware filled apps and you just added the furry dice and magnetic flame decorations.

Re:complete and working windows solution? (1)

eMartin (210973) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971562)

I guess the same could then be said for running Linux on a Mac, right?

Heck, what about Linux on a PC? Oh wait. That one was about CHOICE, right?

Re:complete and working windows solution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971547)

If you already have a Mac, why NOT run Windows on it?

There are other possible advantages: For one thing, with a known hardware platform to run on, Microsoft might actually be able to provide a version of Windows as stable and crash free as your average open source OS.

Re:complete and working windows solution? (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971576)

Oh shit. The next "Why run Windows on a Mac" question I read, I don't know what I'll do, but I'll do it!

This says it all really (4, Funny)

Kangburra (911213) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971316)

TUAW [tuaw.com]

Re:This says it all really (5, Funny)

matgorb (562145) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971340)

You mean this [joyoftech.com] .

Re:This says it all really (1)

BodhiCat (925309) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971452)

Or in the original Sanskrit: "Mrtuh sarva haras ca aham." Literal translation: "And I am death the destroyer of all." Oppenheimer had a bad translation of the Bhagavad-Gita.

If you're not part of the Windows Solution (5, Funny)

LiftOp (637065) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971323)

...you're part of the Windows Problem, I guess.

iBook user says... (4, Insightful)

Lave (958216) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971326)

Disclaimer - I use an Mac OS X 10.4, and Linux Scientific Linux distro's daily. I haven't used Windows for almost 2 years.

And I know this thread will just consist of - "why would you want to do that?" "Whats the point, when your running OS X? It's so much better..."

Shut up. This is a good thing. Many people need to use Windows for work, and this lets do that. Whilst giving them the good stuff at home. Many people like to play computer games that aren't photshop.

Don't be stupid. Please.

Please!

Re:iBook user says... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971386)

agreed. A lot of Windows users would like to buy a Mac and try OS X but are afraid that they won't be able do run some necessary program. If you can run windows natively on a Mac maybe they'll be less afraid. So it's kind of like an insurance program for switchers.

Re:iBook user says... (1)

TgmBxA!X8(TNDWr_,+xv (962259) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971387)

Why would you want to run Windows on a Mac?

Answer: Some people just have no taste.

Re:iBook user says... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971475)

Isn't it wonderfull how the Mac cummunity is full of "quickes" instead of real arguments.

Isn't it even more wonderfull how Apple manages to sell computers based on those arguments.

Re:iBook user says... (2, Insightful)

gentlemen_loser (817960) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971486)

Shut up. This is a good thing. Many people need to use Windows for work, and this lets do that. Whilst giving them the good stuff at home. Many people like to play computer games that aren't photshop.

I see your point and can appreciate where you are comming from. However, in this case, semantics are important. People do not need to use Windows at work, they are required to. The longer you allow someone to use a crutch, the longer they will use it - even if it is not really necessary anymore.

My problem with this is the same problem that other people (and myself) have with the Wine project on Linux (I have nothing but good stuff to say about Wine in terms of its technical merit - my problem with it is social).

Re:iBook user says... (1)

steinnes (774991) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971488)

This let's them do that? Use windows? Unlike say, a Dell would? People aren't being stupid, they're just wondering why someone would buy a mac, and use another OS on it.. Especially if using that OS was easier, and cheaper if they'd bought a regular PC.

Re:iBook user says... (4, Informative)

darkmeridian (119044) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971510)

My firm reimburses only for Windows-compatible laptop purchases. Until now, I was stuck with a Thinkpad T60 with the CoreDuo but now I can argue that I can get a MacBook Pro. See?

Re:iBook user says... (0, Troll)

slavemowgli (585321) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971553)

You're missing the point. The question is not "why would anyone want to run windows?", but rather "why would anyone want to run windows ON A MAC?". If you do want to run windows, why not just get a regular PC, which is gonna be cheaper and which will (generally) have less compatibility issues?

Re:iBook user says... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971580)

"Many people need to use Windows for work, and this lets do that."

Many people _think_ they _need_ Windows for work, while free alternatives (like OOorg) let them do the same work.

Don't be stupid. Please.

Because you *can*. (4, Insightful)

Sierran (155611) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971328)

You can use Mac OS X with proper drivers (i.e. written by Apple, as they intended) and now (if you want to) you can use any 'Windows Only' applications that may be foisted upon you by, say, your job. Come on, people, it's not rocket science. Plus, when Linux is fully up, you'll have a completely triple-boot machine. All of which makes it even harder for the beancounters in your enterprise job(tm) to say "No, you can't have one of those because it can't run Approved Software(tm)".

Asking "Why would you?" is aking to shoving your head in the sand and asking "Why would you run a Mac?" Sure, go ahead and limit your choices. I'll be taking one from *every* column, thanks.

Why bring viruses to Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971343)

It is a futile effort. Why not install an Apple like multimedia linux OS, such as Tomahawk desktop [tomahawkcomputers.com] . There is a good article [desktoplinux.com] to learn more about it.

Cool (4, Insightful)

Hektor_Troy (262592) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971355)

Lots of people griping about the use of it, but who cares about that? It's like asking about why you'd dual boot Linux and Windows.

I like the idea - the hardware is nice, I like the OS, but I'm not 100% certain that the programs I use some of the time has been ported to OS X or if it has a usable counterpart on OS X. Lack of something like WINE makes this a viable option, should I choose to get a Mac (looking dreamily at the MacBook Pro).

I'd get nice hardware, an excelent OS and the option of still using the old and busted OS and irreplacable programs if I need them. Best of all parts I think.

Great News! (2, Interesting)

NutMan (614868) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971360)

My daughter will be entering Univ. of Cincinnati's DAAP (Design, Art, Architecture & Planning) school next fall. The college uses almost all Macs EXCEPT for the Industrial Design program, which requires a PC running Windows. She much prefers a Mac, and was probably going to buy a Mac for her own use and a PC for any school requirements. However now she could just get an Intel MacBook and a copy of XP.

First "Why" post (-1, Redundant)

CrazyTalk (662055) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971367)

OK, I know this is an academic exercise - but why? Personally, I would rather see someone find a way to run Mac OS on cheap PC hardware, not the other way around.

Re:First "Why" post (2, Funny)

hunterx11 (778171) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971462)

Academic exercise? I would hope an academic would have a better grasp on the meaning of the word "first."

Re:First "Why" post (1)

pneumatus (936254) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971511)

OSX86 on a PC [slashdot.org] was done over a month ago.

Re:First "Why" post (1)

Zemrec (158984) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971579)

It's been done. [osx86project.org] Where have you been, friend?

Seriously, though, the OS X on PC is a lot further behind Windows on Mac, even though the former has been available in the wild since last summer. Lots and lots of driver issues, limited hardware support. But, my own PC is this close to being my new Mac, though. Just waiting for some enterprising programmers/hackers to come up with fully working NVidia drivers, have working digital output of audio, and it'd be nice to be able to use my mobo's built-in NIC, and my Sony DVD-DL drive too.

But that said, it's pretty amazing they've already got a game working here. Nice.

Re:First "Why" post (1)

eMartin (210973) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971584)

Funny.

You're not even the first to ask this TODAY.

for the last time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971370)

For the last time. Some people are tied to the Windows platform because of work/business-needs and therefore, until now, the Mac has not been an option for their home computer, laptop, whatever. Now that they can buy one piece of hardware that can run both Windows and MacOS, they have the option to buy a Mac for fun, personal use, OS-preference, Mac-fanboyism, etc, but still use that machine for those work-related purposes where using Windows may not be optional. Get it? People who may not have been able to switch before now have a viable option to get the best of both worlds without any sacrifice.

Good for Developers? (3, Insightful)

gurutc (613652) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971371)

I would think that application developers would benefit from having a single, dual-boot system to develop in two flavors. Maybe this will benefit the Mac community by making it easier for resource-strapped app innovators to buy a macintel box that lets them server OSX and Windows app consumer markets.

Lord of the... (5, Funny)

maillemaker (924053) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971377)

"Do you know how the orcs came to be? They were elves once." :)

Steve

Nice reference (1)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971501)

It's a shame if you don't get modded up. Damn funny stuff.

"Your ancient kin are troubling us once again..."

Contradiction in terms... (2, Funny)

djupedal (584558) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971379)

"...Mac users now have a complete and working Windows solution."

You really do have a very different view of 'complete', 'working' & 'solution' from most people I know.

Re:Contradiction in terms... (1)

Detritus (11846) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971557)

I couldn't help thinking of the "final solution" to the Windows problem. My subconscious must want revenge for decades of dealing with Microsoft's drek.

Complete and Working Windows (2, Funny)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971389)

Mac users now have a complete and working Windows solution.

Cool! Now maybe they can sell it to Microsoft to get their Windows solution to work too?

Don't run your car on railroads.......... (-1, Troll)

rakamaka (858522) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971394)

So far MAC users were proud of their closed door OS which runs on specific hardware, is bullet proof and user friendly.. Why now MAC user want to even try to run windows on their highly expensive hardware? What happend once average MAC user gets addicted to supereasy but insecure windows? Will MAC loose or increase their marketshare? Interesting question

Re:Don't run your car on railroads.......... (5, Insightful)

feijai (898706) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971442)

So far MAC users were proud of their closed door OS which runs on specific hardware, is bullet proof and user friendly.. Why now MAC user want to even try to run windows on their highly expensive hardware? What happend once average MAC user gets addicted to supereasy but insecure windows? Will MAC loose or increase their marketshare? Interesting question
Another interesting question: Will Slashdot ever learn that "Mac" isn't an acronym? It's short for "Macintosh".

The first clue that someone doesn't know shit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971581)

...about Macs is when they offer opinions on the platform while referring to the company that produces them as "Mac" (which you didn't do) or to the computer itself as a "MAC".

The company is "Apple". The machine is a "Mac". It is an abbreviation of "Macintosh", not an acronym.

Why not a Good O/S? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971398)

Why not run a good O/S like centos or Open BSD on you new iNTEL MAC.
Support Open BSD They need your help!!!
Keep diversity and chioce alive.

You've forgotten the killer looks... (1)

psykl0n3 (759848) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971413)

heh, I don't know if I'm worng or what, but I know not of a PC as elegantly designed as a Mac... so I guess that's something of a factor. You know it's nice to have a killer looking machine with whatever you're used to running on it.

Ball in Microsoft's court... (3, Interesting)

SRCShelton (9180) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971417)


If Microsoft has any sense, they'll make damn sure that Vista supports all of the hardware that Apple uses. Any additional retail Windows sales they might get from this have got to be good (because how many people buy Windows off the shelf nowadays?) - and isn't 5% of the market a lot to ignore?

They'll never do a "Windows for Apple" - it'd be too easy for Apple to pull the rug from under them - but I wouldn't be surprised if Vista quietly gains support for the non-working components and 32bit EFI, and that this quickly becomes the worst kept secret in computing...

Re:Ball in Microsoft's court... (1)

NutscrapeSucks (446616) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971499)

Retail sales for Windows are almost irrelvant compared to OEM sales. I don't see Microsoft making any special modifications for a vendor that is not a Windows OEM.

> 5% of the market a lot to ignore?

More like 2%, and they don't ignore it, they make software for it. (Including VirtualPC, which is likely more profitable per copy than a OEM Windows license).

Geez Guys (4, Insightful)

thefirelane (586885) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971422)

Everyone, please ... repeat after me:

Options are never bad!

one more time...

Options are never bad

Just like I know I shouldn't put regular gas in a porche... I want the thing to run on it in case of an emergency.

Re:Geez Guys (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971453)

Options are never bad

Unless they are the only form of bonus or payment you will be receiving from your employer...

Worse. Idea. Ever. (-1, Flamebait)

gentlemen_loser (817960) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971428)

(which, by the looks of the 2nd link is only days away). Mac users now have a complete and working Windows solution."

Just what OS X users always wanted...

Still waiting for "Classic mode" Windows (2, Interesting)

phillymjs (234426) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971448)

Great! Now we just need the final piece of the puzzle: something that will let me run that same installation of Windows as an OS X application, the same way OS X runs OS 9 on PPC Macs.

Because I need to run Windows apps occasionally during the day, but having to boot back and forth to do it would seriously suck.

I'm sure someone's working on it, and that someone is going to take a lot of sales from any future version of VirtualPC that will run on the MacIntels. (And that'll be what you deserve for dragging your feet, Microsoft.)

~Philly

Re:Still waiting for "Classic mode" Windows (1)

Hollinger (16202) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971585)

Someone might be working on a Wine-style wrapper. However, until that becomes available (if it ever does) you can use Virtual PC (http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/virtualpc/v irtualpc.aspx?pid=virtualpc [microsoft.com] ) to do what you want. It boots Windows as an app within Mac OS X, and even integrates things like the clipboards, drag-n-drop functionality, and shared folders between the two operating systems. I'm not 100% sure, but I think they even integrate the start menu into the OS X dock.

~ Mike

WinXP on a Mac -- Fuck Ya! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971470)

So I'm sitting here looking at my StinkPad, and I'm thinking, what in the fuck, there's five fucking buttons on this thing. FIVE FUCKING BUTTONS! I ain't got the fucking time to deal with five fucking buttons. And on top of that there's both a scrollypad and a fuckin clit! Like I don't got better things to deal with this any of this shit. All those Chinese fuckos at IBM really need to get with Steve Jobs and get on the motherfucking plan. ONE FUCKING BUTTON. A BIG one! So, $2500 for a Windows laptop with ONE BIG FUCKING BUTTON? FUCK YEA! Fuckin sign me up! For the all the fucking time I spend remembering what fucking button and clit and shit to push, it's worth at least 10 fucking grand.

Yay for them....... (1)

z-kungfu (255628) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971484)

but what we really need is a way to launch windows programs from within OSX, not another OS running on the hardware. I anxiously await a virtual PC for Intel, it should be able to run much better as it doesn't have to emulate the processor merely the OS....

Re:Yay for them....... (1)

soapvox (573037) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971531)

I agree that is going to be great but then you will have 2 OS' running at the same so you are still going to lose some performance. I am dual booting and it is great!

Can things really be that different. (3, Insightful)

matgorb (562145) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971489)

First, dual boot is a myth, it is damn annoying and so counterproductive. Most people dont realise that until they actually experiment it, it's hype now, but all Linux users know it's a pain, and I know from experience that a dual boot Windows/Linux means one thing... Windows 90% of the time. Vmware and others solutions are the way to go for people who need Windows professionaly for a given application, I can't wait for a Mac OS X version. Second, some people try to makes us believe that companies will buy Apple PC to their employees now that they can run Windows, yeah right, serious manager will buy more expensive hardware, plus a Windows licence, so that their employees can have an Apple design and the joy of using Mac OS X out of the office... Lastly, Gamers, Well Windows users will probably not switch to Apple hardware to play, it's more expensive, and you'll get a better gaming PC for the price, hardcore gamers don't really care for Apple design, last time I checked it was more neon and see through glass panel...Seriously, You already have to be freaking rich to play seriously on laptop, do you think people will pay even more for an Apple on the back screen... I see this all thing as one big geek experiment, because it is what it is, mostly geek will do it, just because it is fun, but Apple geek will at the end stay under OS X, and Windows geek will soon realise they over paid their Windows laptop...

I am dual booting and it is amazing! (3, Interesting)

soapvox (573037) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971497)

For someone like me who uses 75% mac and have to do a few PC things for work this is great. I travel a lot and I am about to go on my first roadshow in a week where I wont have to lug around 2 computers as I have been for the past 3 years. I have tried Virtual PC, Qemu and even remote desktop and nothing was ever a complete solution, this is. So all those asking why, thats why!

its a win-win situation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14971513)

oops!

Heh. (1)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971521)

This is nice for them, but I really want to know how long it will be before we have the wine-equivalent of OSX... I need to be able to run Safari on my slackware laptop, so that I can test my website.

VMWare (1)

Shawn is an Asshole (845769) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971523)

When will VMWare support the new Intel Macs? Dual booting gets old very fast. I need a few Windows apps but now I use VMWare to run them, which works great. It would be awesome if I could also do that on my Macs instad of just my Linux machines.

BTW, I'm primarily a Linux user, but I prefer Macs for laptops, sound editing, and graphic work.

Excuse me? (2, Informative)

diamondsw (685967) | more than 8 years ago | (#14971526)

Doesn't look like all of these drivers are working from here [onmac.net] .
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>