PDA

View Full Version : Boot Camp...


Carl Stawicki
04-05-2006, 07:46 AM
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

This worries me. :confused:

yellow
04-05-2006, 08:29 AM
This worries me. :confused:

Why? I don't see anything to be worried about.

Carl Stawicki
04-05-2006, 08:32 AM
Because if it performs well enough, a developer might not see a point to developing OSX software. We'll have to wait and see though.

lostduck
04-05-2006, 08:33 AM
Neither do I, this will be a major factor for a lot of people who were shy about switching, for gamers, for people who need certain Windows-only applications.
It's pretty cool actually, and it says that Apple wants to grow, and how in a way.

yellow
04-05-2006, 08:35 AM
Because if it performs well enough, a developer might not see a point to developing OSX software.

Oh no.. not that one again. :)

deslock
04-05-2006, 08:37 AM
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

This worries me. :confused:
Being able to run Windows is *excellent* news for Apple and for OS X. It means more people will buy Macs because many need to run Windows for specific applications but would rather use OS X for everything else.

I'd prefer to run the OSs concurrently (http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?newsID=5712) - like Virtual PC but without the performance hit and software compatibility issues (Thayer's excellent guide to birds of North America (http://www.thayerbirding.com/) doesn't run under VPC, for example).

tlarkin
04-05-2006, 08:42 AM
I think it may also be the first step having someone having OS X on a non apple hardware system.

bnj
04-05-2006, 09:56 AM
What if this is the first step to Apple becoming just another Wintel vendor? :o

yellow
04-05-2006, 10:08 AM
Oh come on.. you don't believe that.

They've poured millions into developing OS X and they'd just give up and switch to Windows? Because their hardware is so great? How could they compete with Dell?

No, I think they want to stay in business. ;)

The reason for this boot camp.. Apple knows people will install WIndows on the MacTel. Why not help control how it happens to minimize hacks to your OS?

bedouin
04-05-2006, 10:40 AM
The reason for this boot camp.. Apple knows people will install WIndows on the MacTel. Why not help control how it happens to minimize hacks to your OS?

Yeah, they've probably already had calls from people wanting to know how to run Windows on their Mac, or had to deal with people who attempted installing Windows on their Mac but botched OS X or the whole machine.

People, whether or not they were adept, were going to try this, so Apple might as well release a method of doing it that should minimize problems.

On the other hand, the Steve Jobs quote from '96 or so saying, "If I were in charge of Apple I would milk the Mac for all it's worth and move on to the next big thing" always haunts me, alongside the "It's over. Windows won" type quotes of the same era.

I wonder about the statement on the page regarding upcoming Windows integration in Leopard. Is this an early glimpse into possible OS X-native virutalization of Windows? Maybe this is why VMWare and MS don't seem to be in any hurry to release their software, when they've had almost a year to prepare.

ArcticStones
04-05-2006, 11:04 AM
.
This is great news! :) And, no, not because I want to run Windows. (I kissed that goodbye in 95.)

But I just moved up my predicted date of Apple reaching a 15-20% market share. Id say 18 months. Tops!

:D

tlarkin
04-05-2006, 11:16 AM
.
This is great news! :) And, no, not because I want to run Windows. (I kissed that goodbye in 95.)

But I just moved up my predicted date of Apple reaching a 15-20% market share. Id say 18 months. Tops!

:D


I'll take that bet, because it is going to take a lot longer than 18 months. Apple still is not really that appealing on an enterprise level, where most of the market share is.

fat elvis
04-05-2006, 12:26 PM
reminds me of the Pepsi Challenge. Brilliant. Switchers may choose to use the Apple hardware only...at first. The day their PC gets a virus, or crashes they'll be booting into OS X. I think from there the elegance of the system will win many of them over.

This is also a huge bonus for Mac people in a PC environment. If they have one database they need to access, or an HR website, they will no longer need to justify a Windows Terminal Server, 2nd PC...or any other expensive/bulky solution.

styrafome
04-05-2006, 12:41 PM
Yeah, I think this is really a confident ploy to get Windows users to buy a Mac, run Windows on it, see how bad it is compared to OS X, and leave Windows behind.

biovizier
04-05-2006, 12:43 PM
It's one thing for a few geeky, tech savvy types (who know how to secure Windows) to put WIndows on their Macs, but I'm not sure if letting anyone do it (ie. standard in 10.5) is a good idea - if Windows vulnerabilities can be exploited to modify files, wouldn't this make it easier for someone to exploit a Mac while booted in Windows to modify OS X system files to install rootkits, spyware, etc.?

If malware on the Mac in OS X proliferates amongst switchers, that would negate one of perceived benefits of switching in the first place, and tarnish Apple's image (not that they have much to be proud about with the recently exposed "visit a website and get rooted" vulnerability that was present through the entire lifespan of Panther).

fat elvis
04-05-2006, 12:48 PM
It's one thing for a few geeky, tech savvy types (who know how to secure Windows) to put WIndows on their Macs, but I'm not sure if letting anyone do it (ie. standard in 10.5) is a good idea - if Windows vulnerabilities can be exploited to modify files, wouldn't this make it easier for someone to exploit a Mac while booted in Windows to modify OS X system files to install rootkits, spyware, etc.?

If malware on the Mac in OS X proliferates amongst switchers, that would negate one of perceived benefits of switching in the first place, and tarnish Apple's image (not that they have much to be proud about with the recently exposed "visit a website and get rooted" vulnerability that was present through the entire lifespan of Panther).

I *hope* that the OS X engineers took this into consideration. Perhaps the file permissions aren't wide open, as they are on mounted disks normally.

biovizier
04-05-2006, 01:02 PM
That's what worries me though - I doubt have any expertise in this area, but the issue as I see it is that the Mac would be booting in Windows - it isn't like Virtual PC or Classic where OS X is actually handling file access.

Booting in Windows would seem to be more analogous to booting in System 9, where messed up permissions were often the least of the problems - with inexperienced users, suddenly visible files, folders or symbolic links would be deleted, but at least System 9 didn't seem to have the profusion of known unpatched vulnerabilities that Windows seems to have...

If the system is actually booted in Windows, can the firmware somehow restrict the access that a potentially insecurely configured Windows installation would get?

Sharkus
04-05-2006, 01:07 PM
Afternoon all,
Well, we should all be aware of the rather nice public beta of Apple's Boot Camp (http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/) dual boot system.

I have couple of questions I need quick answers to:

1) Can you install boot camp on a machine with multiple partitions, or does it have to be a machine with a single macintosh partition. As you can guess, my mac is currently paritioned (it's a development machine so I have a dev system on one of the partitions). For obvious reasons I don't want to just try it. Yes, I could backup and then try it, but if I fails then I'm left with restoring my machine, something I'd rather avoid if at all possible. Yes, I'm lazy :D

2) Does the Windows XP SP2 CD need to be bootable? I know with winonmac it did not, but there's nothing I can see in the Apple notes that states if it needs to be bootable. My current XP SP2 CD, which I used with winonmac is not bootable, it was created using slipstreaming and I didn't have the boot.img file from the original XP SP0 cd to hand, hence it not being bootable. If the answer to question 1 is that I can install on a partitioned machine then I can at least try the bootable cd side of things, as if it does not work, I'll remove the windows partition.

Thanks in advance.

tlarkin
04-05-2006, 01:09 PM
yes but at the same time, if apple gets that 20% market share there will be more exploits and more viruses out for them.

So, there is a duality to this conversation. On one hand putting windows on a mac might tempt more switchers but perhaps make it more vulnerable. On the other hand it might boost the market share of apple computers, which in turn will make hacks and exploits more available. If they get that market share then everyone will have to learn how to secure your mac on your own.

Everyone hates MS for making a bad product, but in reality MS is making what the people want. Easier software updates, fast user switching, backwards compatability, system and driver roll backs, digitally signed drivers (guaranteed to work), vast third party support, built in remote desktop, multimedia apps and I/O support natively built into the OS, so on and so forth.

It can even be said that Apple emulates these nifty features in OS X, because originally OS X did not have these and windows xp did.

The truth of the matter is, no one knows what is going to happen. I am excited to see what happens and I am curious if this will make or break apple. I was all for the intel switch like a lot of people were against, and now everyone seems to be coming around. I just want one PC i can build that will run linux, mac os x, and windows. that is what I want, to me it is all about the freedom of choice and if that ever happens I will be content with it. I really like OS X, but when it comes to apple hardware I don't buy into it. However, the x86 based macs are too new for me to have an opinion yet, who knows they may win me over.

lostduck
04-05-2006, 01:22 PM
The truth of the matter is, no one knows what is going to happen. I am excited to see what happens and I am curious if this will make or break apple.

As of now, Apple's stock is up more than 8%. I guess you and I are not the only one excited about this. I am going to demand that my company install their XP build on my MaC for once, can you believe how incredibly useful would that be for people like me who do a lot of business travel? No more sitting in an hotel room thinking "if only I had my MaC with me I could do..."

biovizier
04-05-2006, 01:39 PM
Ahh, it seems "Boot Camp" repartitions the hard drive (without a reformat), and Windows runs on its own presumably NTFS partition. Initially, I thought it was just allowing an install on the same partition since the promo page mentioned that Windows could be installed "without moving any of your Mac files around". So since Windows can't by default read HFS+, the OS X system should be safe.

Whew!

So maybe just set up a third FAT32 partition for sharing files back and forth and you're all set.
Edit: The Windows partition can be either NTFS or FAT32.
I guess I should read the documentation before freaking out...
http://images.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/pdf/Boot_Camp_Beta_Setup_Guide.pdf

tlarkin
04-05-2006, 01:43 PM
I am sure there will be an NTFS/HFS+ mounting tool out soon since you can now put OS X and winxp on the same system. In Linux I can mount my NTFS partitions and read/write to them and vice versa, and I think it is very handy.

biovizier
04-05-2006, 02:00 PM
I haven't stumbled on anything about about the "bootable" question, but re partitioning, there's this: Boot Camp Assistant only works with an Intel-based Mac that has one hard disk partition.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303572

biovizier
04-05-2006, 02:02 PM
Heh heh, maybe I should have been worried about an insecurely configured OS X compromising security of the Windows installation on an Intel Mac...

Sharkus
04-05-2006, 02:46 PM
Proof positive that I cannot read :D

Thanks for that. I might repartition my machine, though I think I'll let one of the other chaps here give it a try on their machines.

Thanks :)

hayne
04-05-2006, 03:01 PM
Sharkus:
I merged your thread "Boot Camp Questions" (post #18 above) into this thread in order to keep things tidy for the moment.

cwtnospam
04-05-2006, 03:15 PM
Oh no.. not that one again. :)
It is pretty much what happened to OS/2. Very little software was written for it, since most developers figured OS/2 users could run their software in its Windows compatibility mode.

If you can easily get your customers to boot in Windows to run your software, why bother writing for another platform?

hayne
04-05-2006, 03:30 PM
If you can easily get your customers to boot in Windows to run your software, why bother writing for another platform?

You are begging the question (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question). Most Mac users will not boot into Windows unless they have to. They will much prefer to use some other vendor's program (even if it is inferior) as long as it runs natively on OS X.

cwtnospam
04-05-2006, 03:44 PM
I know that I won't boot into it unless absolutely necessary, but there are lots of new Mac users that would like to make the Mac more like Windows. Here's a couple of recent threads to illustrate the point:

http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=53995
http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=48984

I doubt they'd have any qualms about booting into Windows for a developer that doesn't support the Mac.

ChrisG5
04-05-2006, 06:01 PM
If you can easily get your customers to boot in Windows to run your software, why bother writing for another platform?

The way I see it is some developers may take that (short sighted) attitude, but as long as the Mac platform keeps growing and gains a bigger market share developers will keep supporting it. Anyway whatever hardware you choose to run windows on you still have to contend with its dubious security and virus problems, maybe some of these will be fix with Vista but who knows.

Also slightly off topic, I think a lot of customers are going to be unimpressed with the version of Windows Vista they get with any new PC they buy as I think a lot of new systems will come pre-installed with the Home Basic Edition (http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_editions_final.asp) which is very limited and then will be forced to buy one of the more feature rich editions, where as with MacOS you get everything as standard.

At the end of the day this will give Mac users the best of both worlds.

ThreeDee
04-05-2006, 07:04 PM
This worries me. :confused:

If you can easily get your customers to boot in Windows to run your software, why bother writing for another platform?

Well, people will still need to buy Windows XP (or pirate it...), and the default OS is still OS X.

solipsism
04-05-2006, 07:06 PM
Wow! I'm shocked Apple released this. Not that it won't help them sell Macs but Apple isn't know for it's ability to share. I wonder if this is a sign Redbox will be a reality or in light of the dualboot competition they finally said "if you can't beat em, join em," as it is only a Beta. Has Apple really only been developing Boot Camp for only a month? They seem to have the same driver issues as onmac.net has. Coincidence?

CAlvarez
04-05-2006, 07:28 PM
At WWDC, Steve will announce that 10.5 can run Windows apps. Then MS will announce that it's giving up on Longhorn as a consumer OS and Apple will announce OS X for generic hardware. You heard it here first.

cwtnospam
04-05-2006, 07:52 PM
...and Apple will announce OS X for generic hardware. You heard it here first.Umm...
http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=44940
Post #7.
It's looking more and more likely.
:D

mkoreiwo
04-05-2006, 09:39 PM
At WWDC, Steve will announce that 10.5 can run Windows apps. Then MS will announce that it's giving up on Longhorn as a consumer OS and Apple will announce OS X for generic hardware. You heard it here first.

Ahhhh..... If this only would turn out to be true!

Finally there would be the ideal solution.....

nmeadow
04-06-2006, 01:03 AM
Thought there would be more threads with user experiences. I installed xp to dual boot on my macbook pro today. It was much easier than i thought it would be. Although you can tell it's kind of buggy. The screen flickers a bit. Also the clock in windows is wrong and if you change it, you then have to change it when you go back to os x. Anyone know a fix for this? Also i can't figure out a keyboard shortcut to right click. Windows is almost useless w/o right click.

solipsism
04-06-2006, 02:04 AM
John Dvorak is right after all...

Apple hardware supports WinXP.
Apple dumps OSX for Windows.
Jobs becomes CEO of Disney.
MS buys Apple.
Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies.
Rivers and seas boiling.
Forty years of darkness, earthquakes & volcanoes.
The dead rising from the grave.
Human sacrifice.
Dogs and cats living together.
Mass hysteria.

voldenuit
04-06-2006, 07:44 AM
Fishing for some extra info here:

1
Is there an easy way to access/boot the XP volume from within OS X via VPC ?
Has anybody tried that yet ?
It would make a lot of sense in contexts where a reboot would be cumbersome, but the machine at times runs XP and all the up-to-date-data are on that partition.

2
Has anybody already had the occasion to check out this product:

http://www.parallels.com/

3
I'm also very interested in more Boot Camp stability reports - compared to regular PC hardware.
One of my clients reluctantly has to run one XP app and would be happy to buy a Mac again but can't afford less than reliable operation (like in he's already fed up with XP and can't take any extra problems).

tlarkin
04-06-2006, 08:50 AM
John Dvorak is right after all...

Apple hardware supports WinXP.
Apple dumps OSX for Windows.
Jobs becomes CEO of Disney.
MS buys Apple.
Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies.
Rivers and seas boiling.
Forty years of darkness, earthquakes & volcanoes.
The dead rising from the grave.
Human sacrifice.
Dogs and cats living together.
Mass hysteria.

behold our new icon

tlarkin
04-06-2006, 09:46 AM
boot camp also now boots linux....


source: http://theweeklyrant.com/article/8/news-apple-bootcamp-boots-linux

DarkSaint
04-06-2006, 10:05 AM
So much for Microsoft's "Where do you want to go today?", the *Mac* is the place to be if you want everything! I'm kind of excited about how much oomph the new PowerMacs are going to have, I'd like to see Alienware sweat some bullets when you can buy a similarly priced Mac with the same performance as one AND you can boot into any OS you want.

CAlvarez
04-06-2006, 10:11 AM
I'm posting this with Opera in Windows on my MacBook Pro. Stability is just fine, as is speed and most operation. There are a couple oddities like the ALT key being the OPT key, not CMD, and you can't use some features like auto screen brightness, scrolling, etc (all this is noted in the Boot Camp FAQs). Basic operation is perfect, no issues at all with anything I've tried.

I don't intend to use Windows, but now that I've lost VPC, it lets me do a couple things I need to. For one, get GPS maps to load while traveling (Windows only), and also be able to work with users on troubleshooting step by step in Windows (amazing how quickly you forget some Windows usage details).

tlarkin
04-06-2006, 10:17 AM
So much for Microsoft's "Where do you want to go today?", the *Mac* is the place to be if you want everything! I'm kind of excited about how much oomph the new PowerMacs are going to have, I'd like to see Alienware sweat some bullets when you can buy a similarly priced Mac with the same performance as one AND you can boot into any OS you want.

alienware has always been ridiculously over priced. I can build the exact machine off newegg.com for way cheaper everytime, and not have that ugly ass alienware case.

(amazing how quickly you forget some Windows usage details)

heck, I forget lots of basic things unless I am down in front of a mac or pc. That is why i like novell's adaptive cert tests. They have a mock gui and tell you to do something and you do it, in the gui. A lot of times I forget how to set something up when explaining it, but if you put me in front of the computer I will just do it in a few seconds. Not to mention, there is always more than one answer to a problem when it comes to a computer.

Phil St. Romain
04-06-2006, 01:29 PM
I know it's been said, but I think this is good -- very good! -- for Apple. Pretty much everyone who's been buying Macs and preferred OS X will continue to do so, and will now have little reason to switch the other way even if tempted. People committed to Windows can now buy a Mac and have the option of checking out OS X. Lots of switchers coming down the road, I'd guess.

CAlvarez
04-06-2006, 02:24 PM
Yeah, it certainly removes the one-app barrier. Lots of people I know have just one app they really need and doesn't run on Mac OS.

tlarkin
04-06-2006, 03:17 PM
boot camp is nothing new, this could have been done on a PC for years before boot camp. GRUB can load Unix, Linux, and Windows on a PC, and you can get a unix shell that looks just like OS X....

However, boot camp is getting a large reaction in many markets of the computer world. one that caught my eye is this..

http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/story.php?ID=13177

hayne
04-06-2006, 03:29 PM
boot camp is nothing new, this could have been done on a PC for years before boot camp
Yeah - but the point is that this is on Apple hardware.
Windows has been running on PCs for quite some time too - but it's news (as of 3 weeks ago) to have it running on Macs.
The enormous news of yesterday is that Apple is now officially supporting dual-booting and providing Windows drivers for most of the hardware components.

Percentage of Intel Mac owners that might boot Windows (as needed) when it's a hack and a lot of drivers are missing: 0.1 %
Percentage of Intel Mac owners that might boot Windows (as needed) when officially supported by Apple and Windows drivers for almost all hardware are supplied: 10-30%
(percentages completely made up - but likely accurate enough to make the point)

tlarkin
04-06-2006, 03:40 PM
Yes, it is totally cool but to give apple credit like they invented boot loaders like some sites are is kind of ridiculous in my mind.

Now if this would have happened years ago when apple was introducing the newest PPC based hardware it would be more innovative. Considering that you can buy a mac mini base model and then go buy a intel dual core processor retail and put it in since it is a socket processor, (or so I have read) means that they are the same exact hardware as other PC manufacturers. Asus is contracted out to build some parts for the new apple laptops I read somewhere online. Asus makes some dang good parts, so they should be good machines.

The most innovative thing that Apple has done IMHO, is take unix to the consumer and end user. Unix is no longer for the computer savy people, it is for the end user. That is the biggest difference apple has made in my mind and I agree with you that some people will switch, but I don't see it becoming a HUGE landslide market change. I think it will be gradual.

What I hope this accomplishes is that it whips MS back in shape so they can make a decent OS with out the delays, updates, and obvious crappy management they have at their corporate offices. The developers at MS are talented and creative, but the company is obviously having problems.

hayne
04-06-2006, 03:47 PM
but to give apple credit like they invented boot loaders like some sites are is kind of ridiculous in my mind
Lots of ridiculous stuff is said on the web - especially by news sites eager to get something out even if they don't really understand it.

Now if this would have happened years ago when apple was introducing the newest PPC based hardware it would be more innovative.
You mean running Windows on PPC? That would of course have been revolutionary - but just slightly more technically challenging!

Considering that you can buy a mac mini base model and then go buy a intel dual core processor retail and put it in since it is a socket processor, (or so I have read) means that they are the same exact hardware as other PC manufacturers.

No it doesn't. It means that the hardware is compatible - at least as far as the CPU socket goes. It obviously isn't exactly the same hardware since there are lots of things on the logic board that aren't on PC motherboards.

cwtnospam
04-06-2006, 03:56 PM
...boot camp is getting a large reaction in many markets of the computer world. one that caught my eye is this..

http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/story.php?ID=13177
If you read what these developers say, there's already some thought about dropping their Mac development if dual booting catches on. It may turn out to be good news, but dual booting definitely has a dark side.

tlarkin
04-06-2006, 03:57 PM
Lots of ridiculous stuff is said on the web - especially by news sites eager to get something out even if they don't really understand it.


You mean running Windows on PPC? That would of course have been revolutionary - but just slightly more technically challenging!



No it doesn't. It means that the hardware is compatible - at least as far as the CPU socket goes. It obviously isn't exactly the same hardware since there are lots of things on the logic board that aren't on PC motherboards.

Yeah I agree, however I am not sure exactly how different a logic board is over a motherboard besides bios and firmware.

That is something I would be very interested to read about, if someone actually takes each down to its bare minimum and compares the both of them side by side.

hayne
04-06-2006, 04:19 PM
I am not sure exactly how different a logic board is over a motherboard besides bios and firmware.
Apple calls them "logic boards".
But the main thing you seem to be missing somehow is that these boards are designed by Apple (in collaboration with Intel) and are not directly comparable to PC motherboards.
There are lots of articles on the web showing take-aparts of Intel iMacs and Intel Mac Minis - but many of them are in Japanese or Chinese. The photos are still good though.

tlarkin
04-06-2006, 05:02 PM
cool

you got any specific links you already know of? I will do a GIS later when I have more time, and see if I can't babblefish translate the page.

hayne
04-06-2006, 07:56 PM
you got any specific links you already know of?
No - I just did a google image search for something like:
"mac mini" intel

mclbruce
04-06-2006, 10:57 PM
I do think this is a good move for Apple.
One business associate of mine made a sort of "bait and switch" analogy where people are sold on a Mac by the existence this capability even though they may never use it.

The virtualization product announced today is another move that makes it easier for Windows users to choose a Mac:
http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=54040

And the "prediction" of running Windows apps in OS X as easily and transparently as running a java app would certainly be helpful for those who have one or two Windows apps they just can't get rid of.

But I don't think this is a good move for me. I work on Macs. I try to make the people using them happy and productive with their computers. So far I've been able to ignore the Windows world in my work. With the release of Boot Camp, Apple is sending me and every other independent Mac consultant a message: "Learn Windows or Die."

The logic goes something like this: Apple says it's OK to boot in Windows. If I want to make a Mac user that does so happy I'd better be able to solve their Windows problems. If I can't then I'm not doing a good job.

GavinBKK
04-07-2006, 05:46 AM
Would getting Windows apps to run in 10.5 just be another version of Rosetta then?
Gavin

tlarkin
04-07-2006, 08:32 AM
mclbruce-

I understand your frustration and concerns. I do sub contract work on the side for an onsite computer company. they do not have a mac guy on their staff and their onsite techs do not want to learn mac. They are stricktly windows, cisco, and x86 based hardware. Which is why I get all the macintosh work orders, in fact I have one tonight to set up a wifi network...

Here is the thing that I don't get in the IT world. Why be an elitist on any side? For me, it is way more beneficial to know both mac os x, mac hardware, PC OSes, PC hardware, etc.

It looks better on my resume, makes me more flexible and more competent. I know windows, novell, linux, mac os x, and hardware repair. When I go for a job interview the fact that I have both a strong mac and PC background makes me more valuable. Let's face it, Apple still has a less market share and if it grows to a more even one, then people like me with the skills on both sides are the ones that are going to get all the jobs.

In reality, windows and mac os x are really not that different. If you know how to use one of them very well, you can pretty much figure the other one out just by playing around in the OS. There are features that both lack and that both excel in. I think that if you are going to work in the IT/Technology field you might as well learn and use both. It is just more beneficial.

Still, I understand how frustrating it is on both sides. I know that some of the only consultants around town have had to dump work on me because their client wanted a mixed enviroment, and they only knew mac stuff, and vice versa.

Boot camp seems to almost suggest the fact that people should start getting used to a mixed enviroment. All most all of my onsite mac customers use macs for very specific things, mostly arts and digital media. At the school district I work for full time, our mac labs are very very specific and small in comparison to our PC labs. They use PCs for office work, databases, and developement. Now, I know that any of these things can be done on both the PC and the Mac platform, but this is the trend I see in the work world. I think that you will start to see companies with mixed enviroments, because some people will just never switch either way. However, some people may use both.

costasppc
04-07-2006, 10:19 AM
The day their PC gets a virus, or crashes they'll be booting into OS X. I think from there the elegance of the system will win many of them over.

This is also a huge bonus for Mac people in a PC environment. If they have one database they need to access, or an HR website, they will no longer need to justify a Windows Terminal Server, 2nd PC...or any other expensive/bulky solution.

The day that EFI will become unusable due to a virus attack is near. The point of this thing is that we do not need Microsoft OS into the Mac! PCs are PCs and Macs are Macs! I dont understand the purpose of this marketing from Apple.

Kostas Backas
Athens, Greece

tlarkin
04-07-2006, 11:17 AM
The day that EFI will become unusable due to a virus attack is near. The point of this thing is that we do not need Microsoft OS into the Mac! PCs are PCs and Macs are Macs! I dont understand the purpose of this marketing from Apple.

Kostas Backas
Athens, Greece


Well, now basically a mac is a PC from a hardware stand point. It is all x86 based and there are some minor differences here and there, and MOST viruses are written for application or OS specific things. Macro viruses are some of the most common and they are written for applications like MS office, and the likes of.

I have never in my whole 7 years as an IT worker seen an anti-cmos virus actually destroy hardware. EFI was developed by IBM, but intel has taken that technology into the x86 based world of consumer products. EFI (extensible firmware interface) is a new way to interface the basic level of operation from hardware to software. Basically the BIOS on most of the x86 based system is old and resistricted to 16bit programming, where as EFI is faster, cuts out a lot of the junk in the trunk so to speak and is basically a low level firmware that goes right to a boot loader. So any boot loader can actually interface with EFI, and in fact LILO and GRUB already work with boot camp, since it is based off of an IBM/Intel technology. Which makes total sense after I read up on it.

Microsoft is reluctant to make a total switch over to EFI at the moment because they want to support their current customers, where apple made the jump and in the near future will force everyone to upgrade. It is the same old argument of how apple and MS do business. Just like the jump from OS 9 to OS X, lots of forced upgrades there. Apple did leave in classic support just like MS leaves legacy support.

EFI, may not even be the real future, at least not for a while. It does allow developers to write more robust firmware apps though, it even supports visual basic and C++, which means you can have lots of firmware and boot driven apps, which is a dual edged sword. It will be great for certain things, you can optimize boot times and longer have that 10 minute period when you reboot a huge server running a billion processes. You can write custom boot loader apps or something of the sort. I am not a developer so I could be wrong but that is the "jest" I got from reading up on it. On the other side, that means that it just opened to the door to a lot of exploitive apps, people could very possibly write more complex viruses and malitious apps given the expansion of EFI technology. EFI also allows the OS to have complete control over hardware.

Vista will support EFI, but winXP will not. It is kind of a legacy thing that MS claims that they want to support their current customer with windows xp and with the roll out of vista they will then support it. So, for now Apple does seem to be on the cutting edge, however if EFI were so revolutionary I think it would be in full effect now.

One interesting thing I was reading about on intel's webpage about EFI was that developers could encode drivers in the firmware of devices, meaning that the OS did not have to have then natively. Which could lower the size of an OS install, make the OS install faster, and ensure more plug N play. A cool concept but it has obvious draw backs.

**EDIT** sorry the documents I read were a bit out dated, vista will not support EFI upon release but will later on with an update apparently

mclbruce
04-07-2006, 04:00 PM
Here is the thing that I don't get in the IT world. Why be an elitist on any side? For me, it is way more beneficial to know both mac os x, mac hardware, PC OSes, PC hardware, etc. I guess I'm just getting bored with learning stuff about how computers work. I'd rather learn things in other areas.

Beneficial is a relative term. Certainly it's beneficial to the people you are trying to help. It also means that as a tech you devote more time to keeping up to date and potentially less time working with clients. Right now I don't see that as a benefit. It looks like a major raise in the overhead of my business and my life. But for some people it could be a source of enjoyment, that wold be considered a benefit.

CAlvarez
04-07-2006, 04:47 PM
Yeah, there's a balance to be found there. I like this stuff, that's why I'm in the business, but sometimes you need to just be billable not be at school.

cwtnospam
04-07-2006, 07:52 PM
Another take on Bootcamp:
http://macenstein.com/default/archives/280

:D :D :D