Bought a Mac: What a mistake

[Timepass]

Ummm it would be entirely unecessary for Apple to support two OSes on it's own computers, the entire point of which is to NOT run one of the OSes. A waste of their time. Honestly, I really don't think Steve Jobs wants people running Windows on his products, and am quite glad to see that they seem to be pushing Parallels now more than boot camp.

Either that or they have other plans. I wouldnt put it pass apple to screw over another company with the release of OS 10.5. Put somethign like Parallels built in and add yet another 3rd party delevoper they kill off by taking there idea and putting it in there OS. They just add to a rather long list. It a very apple move to do.

 

[Electro Funk]

did you uninstall Windows (Delete the partition with bootccamp)?

if you just reinstall osx the windows partition will still be there, even if you run disk utility to wipe the hard drive it will not touch the xp partition.

i know because i did this. so if you are jusr reinstalling osx everytime you are still going to have your xp partition there.... open the bootcamp program and delete the xp partition and then reinstall osx...

 

[aristobrat]

Either that or they have other plans. I wouldnt put it pass apple to screw over another company with the release of OS 10.5. Put somethign like Parallels built in and add yet another 3rd party delevoper they kill off by taking there idea and putting it in there OS. They just add to a rather long list. It a very apple move to do.

Do they buy the companies like Microsoft does, or just develop the software themselves and put the other company out of business?

 

[Timepass]

Do they buy the companies like Microsoft does, or just develop the software themselves and put the other company out of business?

More they "steal" the idea make it themselves and kill the other company. And then not giving any real credit to the people who came up with the idea and did the orgianl ground work.

M$ buys out the the company and works with it from there. Quite off using the orginal people who made the product just giving them more resorces and better access to the OS to work with. Game companies M$ owns for the most part they leave them to there own devices just backing them with money so the orginal delevpors still have a lot of free room to work with and M$ not putting insane demands on them.

Apple on the other hand steals it ideas. Dashboard is a Konfab rip off. There no way that they didnt bring back the idea because of konfab. It way to simlure.
Or Apple script, iTunes (yes the mighty iTunes started with some else making it. THey like it made there own. Watson/Sherlock stealing. Those are among the larger ones. I can see just being another one added to the list. None of those people got the credit or money from apple for the idea and work they created.

 

[balamw]

None of those people got the credit or money from apple for the idea and work they created.

Not entirely correct, Apple has often bought and/or hired the programmers responsible for some of the software that has been incorporated in OS X or iLife, case in point is iTunes, which began life as SoundJam MP and whose programmers were key developers of iTunes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoundJam_MP

B

 

[Chundles]

More they "steal" the idea make it themselves and kill the other company. And then not giving any real credit to the people who came up with the idea and did the orgianl ground work.

M$ buys out the the company and works with it from there. Quite off using the orginal people who made the product just giving them more resorces and better access to the OS to work with. Game companies M$ owns for the most part they leave them to there own devices just backing them with money so the orginal delevpors still have a lot of free room to work with and M$ not putting insane demands on them.

Apple on the other hand steals it ideas. Dashboard is a Konfab rip off. There no way that they didnt bring back the idea because of konfab. It way to simlure.
Or Apple script, iTunes (yes the mighty iTunes started with some else making it. THey like it made there own. Watson/Sherlock stealing. Those are among the larger ones. I can see just being another one added to the list. None of those people got the credit or money from apple for the idea and work they created.

They hired the SoundJam MP developers to make iTunes, Dashboard is an evolution of Desktop Accessories from the very early days of the Mac, it was brought back because if the popularity of Konfabulator but Apple had the idea originally.

 

[dpaanlka]

Apple on the other hand steals it ideas. Dashboard is a Konfab rip off. There no way that they didnt bring back the idea because of konfab. It way to simlure.
Or Apple script, iTunes (yes the mighty iTunes started with some else making it. THey like it made there own. Watson/Sherlock stealing. Those are among the larger ones. I can see just being another one added to the list. None of those people got the credit or money from apple for the idea and work they created.

Dude Konfab was nothing special we had stuff just like that in the 80s and early 90s called desk accessories. Maybe they brought it back because Konfab re-popularized it... or maybe Apple is just claiming their proper fame. But either way, Konfab was not amazing revolutionary software.

I'd like you to elaborate on AppleScript.

iTunes was bought from Cassidy & Greene. It was called SoundJam MP back then. Instead of Apple suing C&G for using a very obvious rip-off of Apple's brushed metal QuickTime 4 skin, Apple just went ahead and bought it.

Watson vs Sherlock you must be joking. Sherlock was around for years before Watson, and not only that, Sherlock was a rather obvious evolution of the Find File program from System 7.

 

[gekko513]

And Parallels could really not have hoped for better marketing than what they're getting from Apple right now. If Apple improves their own virtualisation solution when time comes with Leopard, Parallels would still already have made a ****load of money thanks to Apple's product placement. I wouldn't feel sorry for them.

 

[milo]

So I took it to the apple store and they tell me they don't have an opening for four hours. So now I get to wait, hopefully they'll just replace this thing. I really don't think I'm going to be cool with them replacing parts on a 5 day old laptop that's had problems from day one...

So insist that they replace it instead of repairing. Sounds like your machine was DOA, you have a right to a replacement instead of a repair.

Anyhow. It may be native in the sense that Windows runs on an intel processor. However, Windows running inside OS X will be slower than Windows running on its own. You can't deny that.

Also. The fact that you need a special application to run Windows(Parallels) implies that it is not native, otherwise you could install Windows right on the Mac as if it were any other program. So I would lean toward saying it is not native. The Parallels website says nothing about native, it says it is virutalization, which obviously would mean Windows needs a virtual enviroment and therefore is NOT natively running inside OS X.

Parallels will be slower than boot camp, but only slightly for most apps (3d being a big exception). In those cases, the difference in speed from running in boot camp is minimal, in contrast to the absolutely huge slowdown found with emulation (virtual PC). Parallels IS native, meaning it's not emulated. Virtualization doesn't mean it's not native, it just means it's running at the same time as another OS in a contained area. But it is running natively on the hardware. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Thank you, it would appear I'm not crazy after all...

Someone else having the same wrong idea as you doesn't make either of you right.

You are deluding you self if you think is EVER going to be as fast as computer booting into it.

It just not possible software wise.

Paralles is noughting more than emulating another computer. Yeah it running native on the hardware but it is still emulating a computer. Just look at those virtaul computers in the PC world and you noticed they are always slower and they struggle with the 3d stuff still.

So why does Parallells beat boot camp on some benchmarks then? Real world use shows Parallels to be completely usable for many things. And Parallels doesn't emulate hardware, it just creates a virtual environment in which XP can run natively (non-emulated). Why do you keep insisting on using the term "native" incorrectly? So you don't think it's fast enough. So you don't like it. But why do you have to insist "it's not native" when it is?

Other wise apple is to blame for the slower speeds.

If the XP drivers in bootcamp are so bad, then why do the macs running it beat most comparable PC's on benchmarks?



So back on topic, what was the end result of the OP's situation? Has the machine crashed and burned running OSX only with no XP or macdrive installed?

 

[Timepass]

my only guess on the last reason is the hardware is the issue. Something is still wrong when a virtilized computer is being an unvirlized OS running on the same computer. I can guess mean reason why that is the cause. Could be because the computer is virtilzed they can opimize everything XP see to match the best. Instead of having to make XP have better drivers. It easier to set up the "fake computer" to be opimized to the OS instead of opimized the OS to the PC.

Apple has advatages in that case with OSX OS only have to be opitimiz for a very limited range of hardware. Lot easier to do what parralla did.

Also it does not get past the sability issue. XP in Parallas will not be a stable as one booting right into it. Just because you are running an OS on top of another program on top of another OS. Even if OSX is hugely stable it still effects XP stableitly a lot more.

It was like windows 95 was unstable because it ran on top of DOS. DOS is one of the most stable OS out there (makes OSX looks like complete crap in stablitily) but because it was on top of another OS it caused it to become unstable. It just more layers be built up causing a problem. Modern OS are insanely complex and complected program which leads to them being unstable. Now you are running on unstable program on top of another unstable program. A glitch any where in the line can cause the top one to crash and burn. And that glitch might not effect the lower layers but by the time it gets to the top it been manifide to be to big to handle.

Plus ram issues and verything. I am curous how Pallara will handle Vista. We will just have to wait and see. I would like to see Apple starting to offer M$ windows preinstalled on the mac with Parallels or boot camp. It would make a lot of people happier in making it simple for some one who needs both but it be to confusing for them to do it themselves


As for the OP best of luck to you. Sorry this thread driffet so far off topic.

 

[jaxstate]

What test was this?

So why does Parallells beat boot camp on some benchmarks then? Real world use shows Parallels to be completely usable for many things. And Parallels doesn't emulate hardware, it just creates a virtual environment in which XP can run natively (non-emulated). Why do you keep insisting on using the term "native" incorrectly? So you don't think it's fast enough. So you don't like it. But why do you have to insist "it's not native" when it is?

Link please.

 

[balamw]

What test was this?

Link please.

See post #92 by aristobrat.

Here are some Parallels vs. Boot Camp benchmarks:
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2740&p=14

For several of them, Windows XP in Parallels was *faster* than in Boot Camp.

B

 

[gloss]

What test was this?

Link please.

Here.

 

[aristobrat]

Also it does not get past the sability issue. XP in Parallas will not be a stable as one booting right into it. Just because you are running an OS on top of another program on top of another OS. Even if OSX is hugely stable it still effects XP stableitly a lot more.

Although I agree with your thoughts in theory, I can tell you that from working an hour or two a day in XP (Parallels) that I've had no stability issues since the later betas. The RCs and the final product have been rock solid for me.

I also use Parallels to run Fedora Core 5 on a Mac mini (as a web/email server) and the Fedora servers uptime is 63 days.

I know that everyones mileage will vary, but just wanted to voice that Parallels hasn't given me any stability issues.

 

[gloss]

In my experience, Parallels is completely stable. Moreso than my PC upstairs, even.

 

[regre7]

I'm not going to have to worry about Parallels or Boot Camp. I'm converting all the way!

Sorry for the random off-topic post.

 

[gekko513]

There's at least one simple explanation why an OS running in Parallels can beat the same OS running as the main OS on some I/O intensive benchmarks, and that's disk I/O. The main OS writes to a real disk, but Parallels' main disk is a virtual disk that only exists as a file in OS X, right? That means it can work more like a RAM disk and thereby improve the performance of things like document opening, convertions that include file I/O and Photoshop tests that use the scratch space.

Notice that Parallels loses out on the MMCC Winstone 2004 benchmark, so Parallels doesn't make Windows better for everything.

 

[dpaanlka]

Also it does not get past the sability issue. XP in Parallas will not be a stable as one booting right into it. Just because you are running an OS on top of another program on top of another OS. Even if OSX is hugely stable it still effects XP stableitly a lot more.

Even with you're theory, Parallels *might* possibly maybe theoretically be less stable. But according to everyone's reports, it isn't less stable. Just because it's running on top of another OS doesn't automatically mean it's unstable. And lets say that it is less stable, by how much? 1%??? How does that completely rule out Parallels? Parallels has so m any pros to it that it more than outweighs the possible theory of being 1% less stable. Like for example, let's say you have to use Windows XP for some job related thing on your Mac. Then a month later you're promoted (or fired) and no longer have to use Windows at all. With Parallels, all you have to do is delete the hard drive image. With BootCamp, you have to go and reformat you're entire computer to get rid of Windows.

None of your reasoning makes any sense. And all of it has nothing to do with Parallels being native, which it is.

I'm not going to have to worry about Parallels or Boot Camp. I'm converting all the way!

I already did that 6 years ago!

 

[Rower_CPU]

[...]
With BootCamp, you have to go and reformat you're entire computer to get rid of Windows.
[...]

Not quite - Boot Camp let's you non-destructively add/remove the Windows partition:

The software also helps you set aside hard drive space for the Windows installation, without moving any of your Mac files around. Just drag the intuitive slider to choose the size that’s right for you. Boot Camp also helps you remove the Windows partition, should you so desire.

I should know. I added the partition and then had to resize it before installing XP and it went smooth as butter.

 

[dpaanlka]

Not quite - Boot Camp let's you non-destructively add/remove the Windows partition

Hmm interesting. I dunno how much I'd trust that. I'm old skool - changing partition sizes in real time sounds scary. I think I'd probably still format my entire drive to feel totally safe.

 

[pseudobrit]

Let me get this troubleshooting chronology straight:

0: get new MBP. Yay!
1: install Bootcamp/XP
2: install and run MacDrive
3: OS X kernel panics repeatedly and the drive seems to take a dump
4: erase drive, reinstall OS X
5: MBP runs okay again. Yay!
6: reinstall Bootcamp/XP/MacDrive
7: OS X kernel panics again


I don't care if you layered your installs and re-checked the drive after a little tinkering and it looked okay at the time.

It's there and it's obviously causing a problem that randomly manifests itself. I mean, right there is the sort of troubleshooting timeline you'd give to your company helpdesk guy right before he told you to stop installing the problem software (probably MacDrive), hung up on you and told his co-workers how oblivious he thought you were in no-so-polite terminology.

Anyway, I don't see why waiting a day or two without installing Windows and/or MacDrive to properly troubleshoot the problem is such a burden.

BTW, could you give me the serial# of your MBP? I want to request yours specifically when it shows up on Apple refurbished deals page so I can snag a perfectly fine specimen for $500 off retail.

 

[doublem9876]

The sensible thing to do -
Drop Boot Camp until it's officially released in Leopard. Then you can blame Apple. Until then, it's only beta software, and can screw up your computer (It already screwed up mine). Use Parallels in the meantime. It should work just fine.

 

[dmurray14]

Let me get this troubleshooting chronology straight:

0: get new MBP. Yay!
1: install Bootcamp/XP
2: install and run MacDrive
3: OS X kernel panics repeatedly and the drive seems to take a dump
4: erase drive, reinstall OS X
5: MBP runs okay again. Yay!
6: reinstall Bootcamp/XP/MacDrive
7: OS X kernel panics again


I don't care if you layered your installs and re-checked the drive after a little tinkering and it looked okay at the time.

It's there and it's obviously causing a problem that randomly manifests itself. I mean, right there is the sort of troubleshooting timeline you'd give to your company helpdesk guy right before he told you to stop installing the problem software (probably MacDrive), hung up on you and told his co-workers how oblivious he thought you were in no-so-polite terminology.

Anyway, I don't see why waiting a day or two without installing Windows and/or MacDrive to properly troubleshoot the problem is such a burden.

BTW, could you give me the serial# of your MBP? I want to request yours specifically when it shows up on Apple refurbished deals page so I can snag a perfectly fine specimen for $500 off retail.

Ok, let me CORRECT your chronology.

0: get new MBP. Yay!
1: install Bootcamp/XP
2: OSX kernel panic
3: Format drive, Reinstall OSX
4: Reinstall Windows
5: Use both for a day, no problems
6: OSX Kernel Panic/corrupted drive
7: Format drive, reinstall OSX ONLY
8: Use for a day
9: OSX Kernel panic/corrupted drive
10: Reinstall OSX
11: Fine for a few days
12: Reinstall XP
13: Run Disk utility, fine
14: Install MacDrive, juggle files, use files in OSX, juggle more files
15: Run Disk utility, fine
16: use ONLY OSX for 2 more days
17: OSX kernel panic/corrupted drive

Do you get the picture yet?

Take your sarcastic attitude elsewhere.

 

[dpaanlka]

Do you get the damn picture yet?

Take your sarcastic attitude elsewhere.

Dude, you came here, we didn't come to you. Just calm down, and listen to what we're saying: Take your MBP back if you so desire, but if you still want to try and get it working properly, just forget about Boot Camp just for now, do a low level format and write zeros to disk of the Hard Drive (do it overnight it will take forever) - reinstall OS X, and see how it runs for several days without Boot Camp. Most of us who know what we're talking about still have the *feeling* that it may be Boot Camp, as Boot Camp is known to cause plenty of problems, and more specifically MacDrive.

When you do get your MBP back, it is still good advice to hold off on Boot Camp for a short while. If you're not doing anything 3D graphics intensive, it really really really is in your best interest to consider Parallels.

Macs are not PCs. You can't go apetits on a Mac forum because your Macintosh isn't running Windows the way you wanted to. It's unsupported, it's beta, and Apple doesn't recommend you do it unless you know what you're doing and have a very good fracking reason besides "well, I'm just used to Windows".

 

[dmurray14]

Dude, you came here, we didn't come to you. Just calm down, and listen to what we're saying: Take your MBP back if you so desire, but if you still want to try and get it working properly, just forget about Boot Camp just for now, do a low level format and write zeros to disk of the Hard Drive (do it overnight it will take forever) - reinstall OS X, and see how it runs for several days without Boot Camp. Most of us who know what we're talking about still have the *feeling* that it may be Boot Camp, as Boot Camp is known to cause plenty of problems, and more specifically MacDrive.

When you do get your MBP back, it is still good advice to hold off on Boot Camp for a short while. If you're not doing anything 3D graphics intensive, it really really really is in your best interest to consider Parallels.

Macs are not PCs. You can't go apetits on a Mac forum because your Macintosh isn't running Windows the way you wanted to. It's unsupported, it's beta, and Apple doesn't recommend you do it unless you know what you're doing and have a very good fracking reason besides "well, I'm just used to Windows".

YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME

Check post number 73. TWO pages ago. I've already done that.

I have already LISTENED to what you're saying, and I've been doing it FOR DAYS now. Please read before you form your arguments.

Since page 3, this thead has mostly been a waste with the rare exception. I DO very much appreciate those of you who have helped me. I just don't understand why those who just want to argue keep posting.

Dan