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!

Going To Boot Camp

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the sir-yes-sir dept.

531

An anonymous reader writes "PC World has first impressions of what it's like to run Windows with Boot Camp, the recently announced official dual-boot software for the Intel Macs." From the article: "Back in Windows, I got right down to business and installed a few games to put the graphics and sound support to the test. The quick and dirty verdict on performance? Most impressive. Doom 3 and Far Cry both ran smoothly with high-end graphics options turned on. In both cases, I had to tweak visual settings manually, since the games automatically set themselves to very low settings. Far Cry, for example, autodetected very low settings, but it ran without a hitch when I bumped the resolution up to 1280 by 720, with all visual quality options set to 'High.'"

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

Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (5, Informative)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076276)

This is truly a week of firsts.

Virtualization company Parallels [parallels.com] announced a public beta of its Parallels Workstation virtualization product to Intel-based Macs [parallels.com] (direct download [parallels.com] . Parallels is a quasi-hypervisor-based (with a kernel module) virtual machine solution already shipping for Windows and Linux, and is the first desktop virtualization product to support Intel VT/Vanderpool CPU "partitioning". Once out of beta, It will also be only $50. Parallels also has a long list of officially supported guest OSes [parallels.com] , and that's just the ones that are *officially* supported. It will likely run any x86-based OS you throw at it.

It's *very* fast, and has full support for Intel VT. Using Windows (or any other OS) inside of the environment is almost like using it natively on the hardware. Literally. It is quite amazing. (Here's a video someone made of it with SnapzPro [prodedgy.com] - that is not my site. )This is the solution many people are waiting for; not dual booting - with the exception of things that need native 3D graphics support, of course...but otherwise, Parallels absolutely screams. This won't be novel to people who have already used things like VMware Workstation on other platforms. But to someone like myself, who has been hoping for a virtualization solution since the very second Steve Jobs uttered that Apple was switching to Intel, this, when polished and in its final form, will be something of a holy grail.

Virtualization will still be a HUGE benefit to people versus the annoyance of dual-booting. There's some overlap, but both technologies have their places.

Also, for those concerned about running a Windows environment alongside Mac OS X, this is just like the old Virtual PC model (except not horribly slow ;-). It's much less likely to be problematic for the following reasons:

- The entire environment is "sandboxed", network-wise, within the host OS's networking. Most Windows XP installations will now be behind the integrated software firewall anyway, but this is just another layer of protection: it's essentially like being behind a NAT router.

- A virtual machine environment, being secondary to the primary environment, is typically only used for targeted tasks, not routinely used for things like web browsing, email, and downloading - the major vectors of infection for much spyware/malware

- Since the virtual machine's disk is just a file on the host OS's drive, it can be immediately trashed and restored from a known-good pristine backup in seconds

- If no filesystem sharing is done via the VM between the Windows environment and the host (Mac OS X) environment, there is no[1] way that even severe malware within the Windows environment can cause any damage to the Mac OS X environment

- If filesystems are shared, e.g., a folder on the Mac side is shared as a drive letter on the Windows side, any malware that alters filesystems could theoretically alter the shared filesystem. If a virus, for example, attempted to delete all files on drives other than C:, that would be affected. But, 1.) Most malware doesn't just arbitrarily delete files, because its goal is to spread itself, and 2.) ONLY files that are shared could even theoretically be affected. Also, Windows malware will typically target Windows OS features and filesystem elements. But if you really are paranoid and want to be safe, you probably wouldn't want to, say, share your entire Mac OS X volume as a drive letter into the PC environment.

The bottom line is that from a technical and practical usage standpoint, running Windows in a VM is probably the safest possible way to run Windows, and there aren't really any ways, except for very specific ways via the explicit filesystem sharing, that anything that happens in the Windows environment can even touch your Mac OS X installation. And even if something went horribly wrong in your Windows environment, you can just trash the file that represents it on the Mac side of things, and replace it with your most recent and/or pristine backup of that file.

You guys, and many, many others, are going to *love* virtualization on Mac OS X on Intel-based Macs: running other x86 OSes - Linux, Windows, FreeBSD, etc., at near-native speed of the hardware - right along side Mac OS X, instantly able to switch back and forth.

[1] Sure, you could argue that someone could make Windows malware that specifically also targets an unknown vulnerability in a particular piece of virtual machine software, thereby somehow gaining access to the host side. But that is *extremely* unlikely to the point that it's not even worth mentioning.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076331)

Id be happy if VMWare ESX simply supported EFI.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (5, Funny)

tpgp (48001) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076373)

This is truly a week of firsts.

It most certainly is!

Its the first time I've seen so many Macheads get so excited about running windows (or windows applications).

The biggest turnaround in groupthink since.... well... the switch to intel ;-)

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (5, Funny)

qiuxing (811756) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076646)

Not impressed, since even cockroaches make group decisions. ;-)

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

FatMacDaddy (878246) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076827)

I've been surprised by this, too, thought it seems like I'm seeing more Windows guys being excited for me, like "Wow, now you can finally run Windows." Yeah, like I ever wanted to in the first place (though I realize there are some who do). I admit getting access to all the PC games makes it tempting, but not tempting enough to have to use XP. Even if I put the games my Mac, I'd feel like I'd have to disconnect from the internet every time I played to keep my machine from getting owned the second it connected.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (5, Informative)

SeeMyNuts! (955740) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076386)


Virtualization is more significant in the long term, because it allows Windows to truly become a legacy system hosted on Mac OS, Linux, or Solaris. This way, the infrastructure can be UNIX based while people still using Outlook can avoid gutting and relearning their workflows. Another huge benefit is that the image files can be backed up easily, and malware attacks are mitigated simply by replacing the image!

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

SeeMyNuts! (955740) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076419)


One more point: on some systems, the image files grow as the virtual disk usage grows, so those backups don't need to be the size of the entire virtual file system. Even if that isn't the case, the image files compress pretty well, especially if the virtual file system was initialized to all zeros in the data blocks.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

xtracto (837672) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076645)

I know this may sound stupid but, one thing I have been expecting from virtualization applications it the ability of "throtling" (spell?) the internal system, something like the [`] key in ZSNES or the [TAB] in SNES9x, I know they are different things in principle but it would be nice to have a similar capability.

Other capabilites I am waiting for are:
- Ability to scale the image (something similar to what TightVNC does) so that I can have a 800x600 VM scaled to 2/3
- High integration with the host OS (copy paste and things like that).
- Multiple screen emulation

Anyway, it is great to see that there are lots of players on the virtualization game! Although for my needs I believe something like WINE is better as I do not need total platform emulation to run some applications (of course other people need it to debug/test or other issues).

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076859)

The problem is virtualization vs. emulation. With virtualization, the vast majority of the code is simply executed directly by the CPU, with an extra process that traps (most of) the system calls to ensure they're handled safely. With emulation, the code is interpreted by the emulator, which then does what the code was intended to do. With the latter, you can control speed by changing the speed of the interpreter, with virtualization, the best you can do is either actually slow down the processor, or interrupt the processor as often as possible (back in the DOS days, there was a program called "slomo" that did exactly this, useful for playing old games that expected to run on a 33mhz 386 on a 200mhz pentium ;)

Retard (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076407)

What the FUCK is your problem.

Is Apple paying you to spew this garbage?

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076414)

Eh, you've been pimping that software too much. Buy a slashvertisement like everybody else.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076425)

I don't work for, or have anything do do with, Parallels.

It's really just quite good.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

AaronLawrence (600990) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076542)

But have you used Virtual PC or VMWare? It seems like exactly the same thing, except cheaper and available on Mac. That's interesting, but those are well established products with good performance vs this new one that is new and untested. So your post looks a lot like advertising because you fail to compare it to the obvious competition.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076608)

Yes, I have used Virtual PC under Windows (and Mac), VMware Workstaion on Windows and Linux.

Indeed, I even said this won't be novel or interesting to people who have used VMware before.

But yes, the keys are that it's available on Mac - which is huge - cheap, and is the first desktop virtualization solution to support Intel VT. In general, it's comparable with things like VMware and VPC (Win), albeit in beta and, as such, less polished.

But that something like this is finally available for Mac OS X on an Apple platform, well, I guess I just see it as a really big deal.

500 Internal Server Error (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076436)

Hope they're not virtualizing their web server.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (-1, Redundant)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076468)

Sure, you could argue that someone could make Windows malware that specifically also targets an unknown vulnerability in a particular piece of virtual machine software, thereby somehow gaining access to the host side. But that is *extremely* unlikely to the point that it's not even worth mentioning.

Ah ah ah ah ah !!!!! AH AH AH ah aha ha ha ha ha !!! *cough* *cough* AH AH AH AH AH AH AH AH !!!!

That's probably the funniest approach about security I have seen yet!!!!!

Ah ah ah ah ah ah ah ah !!! Dude!! Ah ah ah ah !!!!!! ah ah ah ah !!!! *cough* *cough* *cough* *cough*

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076531)

Are you actually suggesting that this is even REMOTELY probable?

That someone will write *Windows malware* that specifically targets a vulnerability that itself would have to be discovered, AND be attackable from within the virtual environment?

I mean, you actually consider this a security risk that actually has merit? I only even mentioned it because someone else would bring up something ridiculous like that.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

Khuffie (818093) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076683)

And at the time it was thought that the attack on Pearl Harbor was impossible. The point is: expect the unexpected. Try to account for everything, even if it seems improbable.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1)

Poltras (680608) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076565)

Even more when a couple of vulns have been pointed out by fuzzers for VMware since fall 2005, which is less than 6 months ago :) Long live virtualization, but still don't forget that sandbox is good till it gets out of the sandbox. VM should never ever be considered a security, but much like a barrier with many advantages... and as it gets more popular it will be even more true.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (5, Interesting)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076538)

I'm running it now - install is very fast, runtime very fast. Couple of notes though:
  • Can't access the physical CD
  • No sound

Other than that though, it's an excellent product. I've been running the Q front-end for Qemu, and used Virtual PC 7 on PPC. This blows them both away. But please can I have a sound card? Pretty please?

Usenet thread containing my walkthrough comments whilst I was performing the install is here [google.co.uk] (scroll down the thread a little).

Cheers,

WILL SOMEBODY MOD THAT COCKSUCKER DOWN?! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076548)

Goddamn I'm fucking tired of you marketing whores

Re:WILL SOMEBODY MOD THAT COCKSUCKER DOWN?! (2, Interesting)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076637)

I have nothing whatsoever to do with Parallels in any way, shape, or form. What, I talk up a product that I (and many, many others) have been waiting for for YEARS, and now all of a sudden it's marketing?

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (1, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076641)

Jeez, dude, get a life. This is second time you've made a lengthy, breathless post on this subject, and both of them covered pretty much the same ground. I appreciate some of the information you've provided, but you need to get a grip — this is a new product from a semi-major hardware company, not the return of Jesus.

Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076863)

Yes, VT is really nice for certain applications but it is simply not an answer for games or anything else that requires direct access to hardware. Dual booting is.

How many mac users? (4, Insightful)

tpgp (48001) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076282)

How many mac users felt dirty reading the following comments?
....preferences page that Boot Camp installs to ensure that XP was set as the default OS.....
and
I'd think I was working on a standard Windows PC with a wide-screen monitor. And that's exactly what you'd want from a usable dual-boot system.

Re:How many mac users? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076473)

Windows is the standard. I'd rather have the GUI of Windows than the Mac. On the Mac you can resize windows by dragging only one corner; if a (non-brushed-metal) window's title bar is off the screen you can't move it at all; there's no way to tab through windows in all applications without a shareware program; and even if you have three monitors you can have the menu bar on ONE of them. That's right, you have to move your mouse 3,840 pixels to the left to choose something in the Edit menu.

Oh, sorry. Where are my manners? OMG EXPOSE IS RULES AND SPLASHY EFFECTS ARE THE BESTEST

Re:How many mac users? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076706)

there's no way to tab through windows in all applications without a shareware program

Alt-TAB tabs between programs
Alt-~ tabs between windows within a program
CTRL-F4 tabs between all windows

Personally, I've just mapped CTRL-F4 and Expose to the thumb buttons on my Logitech MX500 mouse, and application switching is simpler than in any other system I've used.

That's right, you have to move your mouse 3,840 pixels to the left to choose something in the Edit menu.

Since the menu is at the edge of the screen, there is no chance of "overshooting" the menu (this adheres to "Fitt's Law [xvsxp.com] " - the size of a target on the edge of the screen is essentially infinite). Using pixels to measure mouse distances is useless anyway, since the amount of movement actually required to move the length of the screen should be the same regardless of resolution.

Re:How many mac users? (1)

ronanbear (924575) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076564)

I had a shudder but really its not a big deal. Adding this option will suit some people especially when they are using Windows a lot. Most people won't ever use it but its nice to know that its there if for some reason you need to move to Windows on a semi-permanent basis. Making Windows default always leaves the option of ditching OSX (say if company policy required it or you sold the computer secondhand to someone with an allergy to Apples)

I was really impressed by the way they added an option in the Windows control panel. Its very thorough and shows that they've planned this all along. Gives users control of their options for Linux, OSX, Windows etc. Shame Windows doesn't include it because would be great for Linux users.

Re:How many mac users? (2, Informative)

Otter (3800) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076569)

I don't understand why people are so excited about booting Windows on Macs. To the degree that one is kept off Macs by the need for Windows-only software, isn't emulation (or better yet, a WINE-like translator) much more useful? If you want to run Windows to the exclusion of MacOS, why buy the Mac at all?

Or is this just about gaming?

Yes. (2, Insightful)

ProfessionalCookie (673314) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076869)

This is just about gaming.

Re:How many mac users? (3, Funny)

Queer Boy (451309) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076873)

I have a friend who uses PCs that went and bought a Mac mini last night just to run Windows on it. The reasoning? Why buy a stank Dell when you can get a fetch Mac.

Let me guess... (4, Insightful)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076285)

...it's just like running Windows XP on any other x86 hardware, but in a bright white box?

Re:Let me guess... (2, Funny)

michaeldot (751590) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076431)

My MacBook Pro is a bright shiny box, you insensitive clod!

Let me guess... bling! (-1, Troll)

Mulletproof (513805) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076483)

Let's not forget... an overpriced bright white box.

Re:Let me guess... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076679)

As someone who was use to just upgrading cheap PCs to do my bidding, when it came time that I wanted to buy a new computer I looked around for a while. I thought about PC's but my girlfriend and I both love film editing so after some time and research I decided to invest in a iMac G5. Why? They had neat 'personal' features and from my testing and reviews were good at performing with Photoshop Final cut etc etc... I bought it in early December. 32 days later, Apples web site was back up and what did it show? After I made the leap from PC to MAC, MAC make the leap to PC. I'm bitter. Really bitter. This should only now be coming out (The Intel MACs). Because my investment went to almost nothing within a month. Fuck you Jobs. [J]

Re:Let me guess... (3, Insightful)

base_chakra (230686) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076735)

Yeah, Boot Camp is exciting and great, but this article is total fluff. "Firefox downloaded and installed flawlessly." Just the kind of unrelenting journalism I expect from PC World.

Now we can see... (1)

bodester17 (892112) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076848)

Now we can see if there is any benifit to playing a game in windows or OSX. I would like to see the same game played on one of these dual-boot macs and see if one plays better under windows or OSX. The game will be running on identical hardware.

Bootcamp is so yesterday... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076287)

Virtualisation is where it's at!

http://www.parallels.com/en/download/mac/ [parallels.com]

Slow (-1, Offtopic)

harl (84412) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076297)

It's sad when a web comic beats /. with news about this. Penny Arcade had this up yesterday.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/ [penny-arcade.com]

Re:Slow (0)

MagicM (85041) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076353)

So did Slashdot [slashdot.org] . See the "Related Stories" section up there?

Re:Slow (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076354)

So did Slashdot [slashdot.org] . This is about the review, not the release of Boot Camp.

comments from a non-gamer... awesome (0, Troll)

macadamia_harold (947445) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076321)

In both cases, I had to tweak visual settings manually, since the games automatically set themselves to very low settings. Far Cry, for example, autodetected very low settings, but it ran without a hitch when I bumped the resolution up to 1280 by 720

Has this idiot never played FarCry before? Of course it starts out at a default, low resolution. And of course you can set it higher, if you want.

I mean, if the game had started out at 1600x1200, he'd be making the inverse of this same "complaint". What a moron.

Re:comments from a non-gamer... awesome (3, Insightful)

Lave (958216) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076557)

Has this idiot never played FarCry before? Of course it starts out at a default, low resolution. And of course you can set it higher, if you want.

Whilst this has nothing to do with the whole windows/os x debate, I didn't want to let this slide.

I gave up on PC games because of this. I want to sit down and play a game. Not sit down and spend hours fiddling with graphic settings. I hated it when I thought I had got Morrowind running fine, then I would hit a "busy" place, or scene or battle, and it would slow right down, and I would have to go back to the settings page.

It's a constant nag in your head. "Is this giving me the optimum experience, should I reduce the quality in exchange for frame rate". And it's not fun for me.

I know people like to tinker. Hell I use Linux daily, and I understand that joy. But fiddling with settings kill's the "imersion" for me. Imagine what Ocarina of Time would have been like if the first time you walked out onto the field of Hyrule, instead of thoughts on the wonderful possibilites stretching out infront of you, the first thing that popped into your head was "Frame rate's taken a hit, lets reduce settings again."

If a game company can't automatically work out what settings your game should be running at - then they've failed at their job.

(P.S. If anybody replies that I just need a better computer, then well done, you have a massive e-penis.)

Re:comments from a non-gamer... awesome (4, Insightful)

GauteL (29207) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076627)

"Has this idiot never played FarCry before?"

Precious.

First, quite a lot of non-idiots have never played Far Cry.

Second, most modern games, can (and should) automatically detect graphics settings according to the computer hardware. You are free to change the settings afterwards. The importance of this is easily seen with most modern shooters (or Oblivion), which have obscene amounts of graphics settings. I'm sure Oblivion has around 20 different levers with at least ten options each. Giving a massive 10^20 number of combinations. Some help from the game designers in finding an optimal setting automatically is much appreciated.

If I wasn't so diplomatic, I'd be tempted to call anyone wanting to waste time testing all combinations a moron.

Re:comments from a non-gamer... awesome (1)

The New Stan Price (909151) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076715)

Why stoop to name calling just because you disagree with someone? Games want to give the player a good first impression. Many games try to detect what your computer is capable of whenever they are first run or installed. These games base their default settings on the results they get from their benchmarking. If a game is unable to do this for some reason, it should probably set the settings too low than too high. Since this hardware is Mac hardware, it is possible that this could throw off the detection mechanism used by these games.

Nothing to say... (-1, Troll)

tetabiate (55848) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076328)

I use Linux.

Re:Nothing to say... (2, Funny)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076410)

And yet, you still said it.

Windows? How about Beos? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076332)

I'm waiting...

Anxiously awaiting the new towers... (4, Interesting)

MustardMan (52102) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076336)

You know, I wasn't really planning to replace my dual G5 powermac for quite some time, but this might be enough to motivate me to put it up on ebay and get an intel machine when they come out. Every once in a while I get the "hey you gotta try this awesome game" IM from a friend, and being able to fire up windows and give it a shot would sure be nice. I still have no desire to waste space with a second windows box that would only be booted once in a while, but being able to dual boot would be pretty sweet. Plus, with virtualization coming soon (beta already out) [macobserver.com] , there's suddenly a whole lot more reason to upgrade to intel macs.

Re:Anxiously awaiting the new towers... (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076392)

You're gonna hafta wait until this Fall/Winter for Intel to release their Conroe processors.

Re:Anxiously awaiting the new towers... (1)

MustardMan (52102) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076422)

That's fine, I'll be eligible for another federal student loan by then *G*

Re:Anxiously awaiting the new towers... (1)

Black-Man (198831) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076829)

December is more like it. There is even rumour of a speed bump in the current powermac's. With no Adobe UB, Apple is in no rush with the powermac line.

don't hold your breath.... (4, Interesting)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076858)

You know, I wasn't really planning to replace my dual G5 powermac for quite some time, but this might be enough to motivate me to put it up on ebay and get an intel machine when they come out.

Don't hold your breath. Adobe is busy digging itself out of the huge mess that is "we never got off Codewarrior", and won't go Universal-Binary until the next release. Microsoft isn't in quite as bad a position, but is desperate to get people to upgrade to verion N+1 in office, so don't count on a free UB version there.

Mark my words: you won't see a pro intel tower until Adobe (and possibly MS) are Universal Binary.

While the "cottage industry" is mostly embracing UB and virtually everything I use has been UB for at least one or two minor revision numbers- the big boys are dragging their feet. Even Diskwarrior (from the vaporware kings, Alsoft- DiskExpress for OSX anyone?) isn't UB yet.

I'm not exactly thrilled about Bootcamp. Why? 1)I don't want to dedicate 20-30GB to a disk partition for a host OS I'm not going to use except for gaming and 1-2 Windows-only apps I need. I much prefer an emulator-based solution like Qemu, or WINE aka "darwine". I'm also not thrilled because this just largely removed the "necessity" fire from under the pants of darwine and Qemu developers, and both projects desperately need more work.

Unfortunately, Qemu/Q is buggy enough that Windows Update doesn't run on an installed guest OS and it doesn't import VPC7 systems cleanly like it claims. Darwine can't handle anything more complex than Minesweeper; half the installers I try don't run, and what does install never works. One error I saw in the WINE log said "JPEG support not builtin". Just loooovely.

Oh yeah- and if you use Mono on OSX, there's an intel-only build, but it's missing a lot of standard important libraries, and the devs have refused to release a proper build. Oh yeah- and setting up a system to actually build mono is a goddamn pain and two thirds.

Oblivion? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076337)

I want to know how it runs oblivion. That is my last switch barrier.

Re:Oblivion? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076571)

Re:Oblivion? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076625)

Video settings and FPS? I can't watch that video (at work), if that video tells any of that, could someone write it here?

More info on Boot Camp (3, Informative)

gihan_ripper (785510) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076387)

As the summary states, Boot Camp is there to enable Windows / Mac OS dual booting on an Intel based Mac. It includes a non-destructive partition tool plus the device drivers Windows XP needs to run on the Mac hardware. More info and the download [apple.com] are available from Apple. Though it's not yet officially supported by Apple, a release version should be included in Mac OS X v10.5, "Leopard".

Re:More info on Boot Camp (0, Troll)

fm6 (162816) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076583)

KW!

What!? No screenshots? (0)

CockMonster (886033) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076393)

Dear god!

*sigh* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076412)

Yay, i bet microsoft is just loving this.

so much for their main competition.

That reminds me... (3, Funny)

clevershark (130296) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076426)

About 10 years ago I showed a friend my computer (a Mac, at the time) and told him about how, with VirtualPC, I could run Windows on Mac. He didn't know much about tech at the time, so his comment was "so what you're telling me is that you can 'dumb down' your computer so you can use Windows programs?"

I smirked a little and replied, "Precisely!"

Re:That reminds me... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076525)

OMG!!! LOLOLOLOL!!! That's the funniest thing i've ever read!!! Don't worry, you're fitting in just fine a Slashdot... YOU FUCKING STUPID FAG!

Re:That reminds me... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076601)

... said the Apple users with a superiority complex.

Dual Booting is a Far Cry from Doom (-1, Redundant)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076430)

It's not all that bad see? I dual booted my PC yesterday and now I need to go out and buy a new one - since it is in pieces.

Seriously, this does look good for Apple, I think I will be going out to buy their latest so I can finally get my Windows games to run properly!

Re:Dual Booting is a Far Cry from Doom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076462)

Seriously, this does look good for Apple, I think I will be going out to buy their latest so I can finally get my Windows games to run properly!

This is simultaneously the scariest and most awesome thing I've read all day.

Computer Boot Camp (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076439)

Dear Mr. Dvorak:
Ann Landers wouldn't print this. I have nowhere else to turn. Have to get the word out. Warn other parents. I must be rambling on. Let me try and explain. It's about my son, Billy. He's always been a good, normal ten year old boy. Well, last spring we sat down after dinner to select summer camp for Billy. We sorted through the camp brochures. There were the usual camps with swimming, canoeing, games, singing by the campfire you know. There were sports camps and specialty camps for weight reduction, music, military camps and camps that specialized in Tibetan knot tying. I tried to talk him into Camp Winnepoopoo. It's where he went last year. (He made an adorable picture out of painted pinto beans and macaroni). Billy would have none of it. Billy pulled a brochure out of his pocket. It was for a COMPUTER CAMP| We should have put our foot down right there, if only we had known. He left three weeks ago. I don't know what's happened. He's changed. I can't explain it. See for yourself. These are some of my little Billy's letters.

Dear Mom,
The kids are dorky nerds. The food stinks. The computers are the only good part. We're learning how to program. Late at night is the best time to program, so they let us stay up.
Love, Billy.

Dear Mom,
Camp is O.K. Last night we had pizza in the middle of the night. We all get to choose what we want to drink. I drink Classic Coke. By the way, can you make Szechwan food? I'm getting used to it now. Gotta go, it's time for the flowchart class.
Love, Billy.

P.S. This is written on a word processor. Pretty swell, huh? It's spell checked too.

Dear Mom,
Don't worry. We do regular camp stuff. We told ghost stories by the glow of the green computer screens. It was real neat. I don't have much of a tan 'cause we don't go outside very often. You can't see the computer screen in the sunlight anyway. That wimp camp I went to last year fed us weird food too. Lay off, Mom. I'm okay, really.
Love, Billy.

Dear Mom,
I'm fine. I'm sleeping enough. I'm eating enough. This is the best camp ever. We scared the counselor with some phony worm code. It was real funny. He got mad and yelled. Frederick says it's okay. Can you send more money? I spent mine on a pocket protector and a box of blank diskettes. I've got to chip in on the phone bill. Did you know that you can talk to people on a computer? Give my regards to Dad.
Love, Billy.

Dear Mother,
Forget the money for the telephone. We've got a way to not pay. Sorry I haven't written. I've been learning a lot. I'm real good at getting onto any computer in the country. It's really easy! I got into the university's in less than fifteen minutes. Frederick did it in five, he's going to show me how. Frederick is my bunk partner. He's really smart. He says that I shouldn't call myself Billy anymore. So, I'm not.
Signed, William.

Dear Mother,
How nice of you to come up on Parents Day. Why'd you get so upset? I haven't gained that much weight. The glasses aren't real. Everybody wears them. I was trying to fit in. Believe me, the tape on them is cool. I thought that you'd be proud of my program. After all, I've made some money on it. A publisher is sending a check for $30,000. Anyway, I've paid for the next six weeks of camp. I won't be home until late August.
Regards, William.

Mother,
Stop treating me like a child. True -- physically I am only ten years old. It was silly of you to try to kidnap me. Do not try again. Remember, I can make your life miserable (i.e. - the bank, credit bureau, and government computers). I am not kidding. O.K.? I won't write again and this is your only warning. The emotions of this interpersonal communication drain me.
Sincerely, William.

See what I mean? It's been two weeks since I've heard from my little boy. What can I do, Mr. Dvorak? I know that it's probably too late to save my little Billy. But, if by printing these letters you can save JUST ONE...CHILD from a life of programming, please, I beg of you to do so. Thank you very much.

Sally Gates, Concerned Parent

Question (1)

nickmue (905710) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076461)

I know this sounds like a troll, but would this be able to run Linux, *BSD, or any other x86 OS instead of windows? Just wondering...

Re:Question (1)

BongoBen (776302) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076553)

I was actually wondering this myself. I read that Apple actually updated their firmware to allow WinXP to boot properly. Does this mean that it will be easier to boot linux as well?

Linux Also Runs Through Boot Camp (5, Interesting)

WombatControl (74685) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076572)

Given the desire for Linux to run on everything, it's not surprising that someone's already tried running Linux with Boot Camp [theweeklyrant.com] , which apparently does seem to work. Granted, there's still the issue of Linux drivers for the hardware, but it is a start.

Re:Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076605)

Linux can already boot natively on x86 Macs.

That's Just Great!!!!!!!!!! (3, Funny)

pedalman (958492) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076471)

Now we can own a Mac that can display a Sad Mac on a blue background.

What's next? DLL Hell?

Apple is going to make a killing... (4, Insightful)

avalys (221114) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076507)

To everyone who thinks this is going to be Apple's demise, you are completely wrong. No one buys a Mac for the hardware. Apple blathers on and on about how they're a hardware company, but that's bull. They're a software company, and they make the best desktop operating system on the planet.

No one is going to buy a Mac now to run Windows on it. They're going to buy a Mac because they've always wanted to try OS X, but they have a few stubborn applications that they need to run on Windows, and until now couldn't justify the risk of switching and losing access to them. People on here would say "Just keep a second computer!", but most people aren't interested in that.

It is absurd to suggest that Apple is going to die now that people can run Windows on their Mac. The whole point of a Mac is NOT to run Windows. That's why people pay Apple's high prices - for the ability to run OS X. Companies are not going to stop making OS X software just because Apples can run Windows - if people wanted Windows, they would've bought a freaking Dell!

What this does is make it possible, not convenient, for people to run any Windows applications that they still depend on. I don't understand why people think this means companies will stop porting applications to OS X - no one is going to tolerate dual-booting between OS X and Windows to use any major desktop application.

The only things that will be affected are utility programs from small companies that don't primarily make software - for instance, I have a GPS unit and Meade Telescope that can both only be updated from Windows. I'd imagine any plans for Mac ports of those utilities are going to be put on hold (I doubt they even existed). That's a little bit annoying, but you have to take the bad with good.

As for games, Mac gaming is not in an especially robust state at the moment anyway. I really don't care to see it die, I've never played a game on my Mac.

Take my dad, for instance. He loves to play chess against Fritz 8 and over the net with Playchess.com, which I bought him a few years ago. But it only runs on Windows. He's been wanting to get a Mac when his current computer dies, but until now he wouldn't be able to run his favorite software. He doesn't mind the hassle of dual-booting.

This will entice a huge population of people who have been teetering on the edge to make the switch. And now every time they reboot into OS X from Windows, or into Windows from OS X, the superiority of OS X will become clear. Even more so as time goes on, when the Windows installation becomes a spyware-infested, bloated piece of crap with fifteen different taskbar icons taking up 30MB of RAM each that starts to pause mysteriously after common tasks, and OS X just keeps humming along.

I didn't have any plans to upgrade my PowerBook before this, but I'm going to pick up a MacBook Pro this weekend.

Re:Apple is going to make a killing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076719)

I bought my 20" imac and my p4 powerbook for the hardware. please don't think you speak for everyone

Re:Apple is going to make a killing... (2, Insightful)

BoRegardless (721219) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076731)

You noted "That's why people pay Apple's high prices - for the ability to run OS X".

I was going to buy a Dell M90 loaded = $3500 or so

MacBook Pro with all options = $3400

There are memories, false memories & damnable lies...and I think we know which

Mod parent!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076749)

-1 Delusional

Re:Apple is going to make a killing... (1)

binary paladin (684759) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076756)

I dunno why I haven't seen anyone comment on this but, I think many of us Mac using web developers should be loving this. Not so much the dual boot, but the virtualization end of this. The ONE app that I've been lacking on a Mac (and when I was running Linux) is IE 6 and soon enough IE 7 (whenever they decide to release it).

When I was running Linux, CrossOver Office actually did a pretty good job of running IE 6 so long as there was no JavaScript involved. Now I can have IE 6 (as well as the Windows versions of FireFox and Opera) to test. Hell, if this virtualization stuff lets me run Ubuntu or something in another window, I can test all the most common (and not so common) browers from one machine. That's just sweet.

As soon as a 12" Intel PowerBook is available, I'm buying!

Re:Apple is going to make a killing... (1)

nemomty (344308) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076812)

I am sorry, but I disagree. Being an Digital Electronics Engineer, I love apple hardware. And if you could (wich Im not sure) I would buy it just to have Windows XP and Linux dual booting on the gorgeous apple hardware.
Anyway. I have tried OS X and I just dont like it. I feel it's to dumbed down to appeal to newbies and other non-technical people.
Being able to use Linux and Windows, has now given me a powerful reason to think about buying a MacBook.

OS X games (5, Insightful)

suzerain (245705) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076524)

One sad thing about this, as a Mac user and Mac gamer, is that this probably puts a big fat nail in the coffin for AAA OS X-native game titles. Or maybe it's less of a nail, and more like sticky tape, meaning the coffin can be reopened if OS X attains a bigger critical mass.

Another interesting side-effect is the stats. Apple is always fond of calling people 'switchers', as if when the person buys a Mac for his home, his Windows box suddenly disappears. Well, now, we've got a machine that can run anything....so...er...what is it? Makes me feel like the only real way to track platform penetration will be browser stats.

Strange new developments, indeed, even though we all knew it would happen when Apple went Intel.

Re:OS X games (1)

neersign (956437) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076840)

along the same lines, I'd really like to see benchmarks not just comparing Apple hardware running Windows to PC hardware running windows, but I think it would be interesting to see which OS utilizes the Apple Hardware better. It might be too early to do so, but I think it would definitely be worth knowing which hardware type really is better (obviously it will depend on application, just like intel vs amd)

That's funny (5, Insightful)

punkr0x (945364) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076526)

Firefox downloaded and installed flawlessly, and iTunes streamed songs easily from other PCs on the network.

So he installed a better browser, because IE is crap... and ran iTunes. Why is he even doing these things in XP, he has OS X on the damn machine!!

Obviously the big reason is games, but I think this is going to be bad for gaming on macs in the long run. Not many developers released their games on mac before, but why bother now? Just install XP!

Re:That's funny (1)

rakkasan (444517) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076582)

Maybe this is too simplistic, but what about just making games with all the required libraries, fsck the dll files, and have the system reboot to start the game. Worked for DOS didn't it?

Re:That's funny (1)

punkr0x (945364) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076698)

Operating systems have got a wee bit more complicated since the DOS days...

Re:That's funny (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076705)

Why run a mac anyway? They're huge pieces of expensive shit. And OS X is the most overrated OS since Linux. So... what's your point?

Re:That's funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076841)

Maybe he hates the inconsistent window maximize/minimize behavior in OSX, the asinine "let's have the menu toolbar at the top of the screen rather than in the individual windows" logic of Macs (makes it real fun on a dual monitor setup... hmm lets see window is open on monitor 'B', where the @#$@E@ is the menu?)

As someone who uses OSX (forced to by work), XP and Gnome under Debian, I can honestly say that
OSX just ain't all that, especially when you turn off the useless eye candy. My old 1.2GHz Athlon with 512MB smoked my crappy 1.2GHz G4 work iBook with 768MB in terms of bootup time and application launch times.

boot camp made me buy a mac (5, Funny)

boxlight (928484) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076579)

ok -- i did it.

after years of grumbling about windows, drooling over macs, and making all sort of excuses, i finally opened my wallet and bought a mac. (i have literally been thinking about doing this since the tangerine iMac)

it's the 20" intel iMac. bought it last night and should be here any day.

for the record, it was the support for dual booting OS X and XP that did it for me: (a) i need a windows machine for software development purposes; (b) i had uncertainly about the availability of mac alternatives to some of my most used windows utilities (ex. dvdshrink, nero ... call of duty ;)

looks like i'm officially a mac guy now -- going to have to put that white apple sticker on my rear bumper -- Yikes!

boxlight

No Interest For Me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076611)

I don't play games anymore and I don't use Windows anymore. Nothing for me to see, I'll move along.

Amazing for research (3, Interesting)

VendingMenace (613279) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076615)

Speaking from the scientific research community perspective, i gotta say this is amazing. In the lab that I work in we have both macs and windows machines -- and a linux box. We really have more computers than we need, simply because we need programs that are availible soley on mac or windows for linux. Well, that is all about to change. Seriously, if a researcher can buy a single machine that will run linux, mac and windows programs, he will be all over it. Desktop space is somewhat a premium and having all you programs and data on a single machine is excellent.

I personally see no reason why macs will not completely dominate the research world now. I know I cannot wait for my own. SWEET!

What's Apple up to? (1, Interesting)

alexwcovington (855979) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076624)

I find it hard to believe that Apple would willingly shoot itself in the foot by making Windows run on their computers. They must be up to something.

I recall all the propaganda on how "Apple is a hardware company" and that its software is secondary to its business model... but how far is that going to get them as their computers progress ever further to being a beige box in a magnesium case?

What's really going on here? It's obvious: Apple has decided that the first salvos in the war between OSX and Windows will be fought on their home turf. We may only be months away from a general x86 release of OSX. It's going to be a fun decade!

An interesting side effect... (4, Interesting)

AugstWest (79042) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076689)

It's kinda cool that Apple can essentially release ONE drivers disk and be done with it. A lot has been said over the years about Apple's benefits of having known hardware...

This is how it works out with Windows. Here, have one installer. It will work on all our machines, and support everything in it. One Installshield script. It was the fastest WinXP or ANY Windows installs I've ever done.

Thank you for playing, have a nice day.

and a video too! (5, Informative)

Uneasysilence (784183) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076693)

For those of you who actually want to see the entire install/configuration process... http://features.uneasysilence.com/mactel [uneasysilence.com]

Bullshit (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076696)

This is bullshit. First the macs switch over to using intel chips. What's the matter? Your PPC processors slow or something? It's obvious with the switch to intel chips that mac is inferior to x86. Now your mac can boot into windows? What's the difference between Mac and PC's? NOTHING. You mac zealot fuckers are lame. Howabout you macintosh retards take your mac and shove it up your ass along with your pride.

Re:Bullshit (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076759)

Howabout you macintosh retards take your mac and shove it up your ass along with your pride.

They would shove it up their ass but it's too stuffed with cock as it is.

Can bootcamp boot from an external hardrive? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076727)

I would just like to know if it's possible for Bootcamp to boot Windows (or any other OS for that matter, i.e. linux) from an external (USB or firewire) hard drive. That way you could make a clean delineation between your Mac system and everything else. And you wouldn't have to lug around the extra hard drive if you don't need it.

This is just so.....WRONG (2, Funny)

DrVomact (726065) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076744)

Why would I want to run the worst possible OS on the most expensive hardware? What a perversity! I want to put together my PC myself out of stock parts, then boot MacOS X...with Windows emulation until the software developers catch on and drop Windows. It would feel so good to pay for MacOS rather than the world's biggest software turd. Heck I'd pay twice as much for a good OS...I just don't want to be locked into Apple's hardware.

Microsoft now has 100% of the desktop market (5, Funny)

lyonsden (543685) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076778)

I'm just waiting for Microsoft to come out with a press release saying that now that Mac's can boot Windows XP they now own 100% of the desktop marketplace.

That will be followed shortly by a law suit against apple for not including XP on every Mac sold.

1280x720? (0, Troll)

Xichekolas (908635) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076802)

Far Cry, for example, autodetected very low settings, but it ran without a hitch when I bumped the resolution up to 1280 by 720, with all visual quality options set to 'High.'

*stares at 2048x1536*

People still run 1280? No wonder all these websites are tiny...

Virtual Reality (4, Interesting)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076817)

Since Mac virtualization looks pretty strong [slashdot.org] , Windows Vista will include virtualization, and virtualization is becoming standard fare on Linux, Boot Camp might just be the "entry level" method for running both Mac and Windows apps "on the same computer". Simultaneous execution in multiple windows under virtualization is a much bigger step, but dual-booting is much easier for the normals to understand. And it gets us down the road to a bigger technical step, but a nearly seamless migration (and great relief) for the normals: Mac/Windows apps running in the same desktop, with IPC/clipboard integration across "OS" boundaries as tight as across mere app boundaries.

How long before the OS is just another app, along with any other OS'es required to run other apps? Just a library collection, running on a "nanokernel": the virtualization SW? And which OS will best run the virtualization: Windows, Linux, or some RTOS?

Encourages to switch from MacOS to Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15076856)

Everyone talks about how this will entice Windows users to switch to Macs.
But what about the reverse... won't this also entice MacOS users to switch to Windows?
Haw! Just kidding...

---
This anonymous post was brought to you by the image-obfuscated passphrase: "fallible"

Microsoft Tax? (1, Troll)

rubberbando (784342) | more than 8 years ago | (#15076876)

Does that mean that now that it's possible to run Windows on a Mac that Microsoft will expect everyone who buys a Mac to pay their tax reguardless of whether the buyer actually plans on using Windows on it?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?