ok I know it may sound stupid to some of you but when I get my MacBook I want to run Windows majority of the time.....my question is, should I buy a MacBook with Parallels or Bootcamp? what do you think is better? and also, will I be able to run Windows Vista when its released?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
OS X and Windows
- Thread starter bigkito
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Parallel's runs Windows in a virtual environment, as a process in OS-X. The nice thing is you can switch between Windows and OS-X the same way you switch between any apps [in OS-X]. The downside, is it currently doesn't support h/w accelerated graphics (3D).
BootCamp allows a dual-boot solution. You select which system you want to boot into. The drivers support most of the hardware, including the GPU, so games run full speed. BootCamp is in beta, however, and there is no Apple support for it. From what I see, it mostly works fine.
I haven't tried either, as I'm waiting on my 17" C2D.
BootCamp allows a dual-boot solution. You select which system you want to boot into. The drivers support most of the hardware, including the GPU, so games run full speed. BootCamp is in beta, however, and there is no Apple support for it. From what I see, it mostly works fine.
I haven't tried either, as I'm waiting on my 17" C2D.
Running Windows Vista is a relative term. Vista will have a tiered approach to system requirements depending on what you want to run on it. By and large a MB will run most of Vista's bells and Whistles but not all of them without getting a GPU that supports Direct X 10 which I do not think the MBP will. At minimum you are going to want 1GB of RAM but IMHO you should seriously consider spurging and upgrade to 2GB. The overall experience will be better.
Honestly if you are going to run Windows the majority of the time you should really consider getting a system designed for Windows. Macs will run Windows but the hardware was designed with OS X in mind. Windows support is kinda twitchy on laptops still. Desktops where you aren't putting the system to sleep all the time and you don't need to worry about power management less so. I would suggest looking at a Toshiba closer to when Vista actually ships next month and make sure the system is Vista certed. Maybe this? http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/cfam.to?coid=-26374&seg=HHO
Or maybe this http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/cfam.to?coid=-26370
Toshiba is really the only PC manufacturer that I trust. Well that and Voodoo PC but their wares and expensive.
*Shrugs* Just a thought.
yes for work........and to be completely honest I feel like Windows Vista is going to be impressive........but hey maybe Im wrong......i was looking into a macbook for the simple fact that i love the way they look, feel and run but i know im gonna miss windows 
yes for work........and to be completely honest I feel like Windows Vista is going to be impressive........but hey maybe Im wrong......i was looking into a macbook for the simple fact that i love the way they look, feel and run but i know im gonna miss windows
Heh...You haven't used it yet have you? I've used every version of Windows (Even ME for about 5 minutes before I formatted the drive) since Windows 2.1. Vista IMHO has the worst UI since Win 1. And that isn't from the perspective of a Mac user its from the perspective of a computer user who has been in the IT industry for 10 years. In a word. Ick.
Curious, what are referring to in your Windows revisions? It was not until 3.0 that Windows got a GUI interface. The revision prior, Windows 386, was really just a shell. I think 3.0 came out somewhere around 1990. It was dreadful. MS forgot to add a feature called "closing files". Norton utilities were more important than today's malware programs.
yes for work........and to be completely honest I feel like Windows Vista is going to be impressive........but hey maybe Im wrong......i was looking into a macbook for the simple fact that i love the way they look, feel and run but i know im gonna miss windows
You really aught to just buy a PC. When buying a Mac, you're paying for OS X, all the Apps that come with it (much more substantial than the average PC), the OS/Hardware integration, and of course the sexy all-around design.
If you're going to just run Winodws, you lose all of that except the sexy case design.
yes for work........and to be completely honest I feel like Windows Vista is going to be impressive........but hey maybe Im wrong......i was looking into a macbook for the simple fact that i love the way they look, feel and run but i know im gonna miss windows
My roommate is running Vista...not that impressive. It has a bootleged spotlight, and his headphone jack doesn't work. I mean if that's what you want. I guess your going to MISS windows, so you're probably used to this type of stuff.
yes for work........and to be completely honest I feel like Windows Vista is going to be impressive........but hey maybe Im wrong......i was looking into a macbook for the simple fact that i love the way they look, feel and run but i know im gonna miss windows
From what i heard, vista is just going to be more eye candy. Win98 was by far the best version, i've used. By the way i'd get the parallel macbook, but thats cause i love OSX, but if you wanna run alot of windows, then you need bootcamp.
I'd rank Windows 2000 Professional as the best of the lot, XP really felt like a new skin on top of it. Vista seems to be a new skin on top of XP so there's really not a lot of innovation going on.
I second that. 2000 had a very substantial yet trim, "professional" feeling about it.
Windows XP is just... eye candy, if you can even call it that. (it's actually more like eye asparagus)
XP is hardly eye candy. First and foremost the number of reasons to reboot decreased substantially from 2K to XP. The restore util has saved several people I know from doing a full reinstall. The driver rollback tool makes experimenting with a new driver less risky and much easier to...well roll back to the previous version. Built in terminal services is a godsend. I can remote control my home desktop anywhere I can get a net connection (And please don't say VNC. The free version is good. Hardly secure.)
Windows Firewall in XP is OK. Not great but I've found that all those dreaded worms that have been plaguing Windows? XP's default firewall takes care of most. The themeing engine really is slick with such third party integration tools like Style XP. Finally, and most importantly, IMHO power management improved dramatically with XP. 2000 was OK with APM but XP was better. Much better. That being said XP is no OSX when it comes to APM.
My biggest complaint about XP over 2K, and why I didn't migrate my system to XP until 2003, is XP's damnedable product activation. However once I obtained my company's corp license key I went out and purchased XP. No more activation crap. Unfortunately I dont think I will be moving to Vista ever because I don't think that luck is going to strike twice.
Anyways I'm taking the thread off topic. Sorry.
Microsoft had a shell which is what I was talking about. I even still own Windows 1....
It has been a while after all.
My God, that's why I asked. I have not seen one of those since 1990. That is a collector's item for sure. I actually tried that, but went with Quarterdeck instead. When the 386 came within my reach, I eagerly awaited the Windows 386 release. That was my first official copy. I did not care for it and then moved to OS/2.