Windows XP Booting on Mac Contest Over

[O and A]

you are so wrong.....Vista is LOADED with new things....And had added "plumbing" for many more.

WinFX is not new?
WinFS support is not new?
WDDM is not new?

WinFS isn't in vista anymore...COMMON KNOWLEDGE...the biggest reason to upgrade isn't there.

Not saying its not a decent upgrade just saying that so many promised featuers were canceled. AND they were IMPORTANT features. Thats what makes it a decent upgrade and nothing more. Not to meniton so many of todays computers won't even be able to run it well.

 

[millypede]

I await from Apple
a) A patch 'or' upgrade to stop this from working.
b) Law suit
c) Some other crafty thing from Apple Legal, they will find a way, they always do.

This is kinda good, but XP why for the love of god does it always have to be XP, at least make something that will allow me to put Win2k on.

 

[bwintx]

To think that this hack will be mainstream is ludicrously stupid... I'm having enough trouble getting the partition scheme to work

Yep. I had to chuckle at your comment after reading this in the "howto.txt" doc:

The iMac needs to be repartitioned in order to do this.
This procedure requires reformatting the HD. I have not tried
partition managers but if you're feeling adventurous you may
try one. I do not guarantee results in those cases, though.

That info, alone, will stop the vast majority cold.

 

[jared_kipe]

you are so wrong.....Vista is LOADED with new things....And had added "plumbing" for many more.

WinFX is not new?
WinFS support is not new?
WDDM is not new?

WinFX="superset of .NET" Tell me why you need this? Like Cocoa?

WinFS=needed for their version of Spotlight?

WDDM="Wavelength-Division Demultiplexing"? "Worldwide Direct Democracy Movement"? "Windows Display Driver Model"?? New yes, but its like adding glitter to a piece of poo.

Everything you have brought up kinda makes me wonder... They call things new simply cause they are. Not because they are original or wanted. Maybe its just me but when I look at an XP desktop I don't think, "you know whats missing.... transparencies so that I can look THROUGH the menu bars!!"

 

[tdar]

WinFS isn't in vista anymore...COMMON KNOWLEDGE...the biggest reason to upgrade isn't there.

Not saying its not a decent upgrade just saying that so many promised featuers were canceled. AND they were IMPORTANT features. Thats what makes it a decent upgrade and nothing more. Not to meniton so many of todays computers won't even be able to run it well.

that's why I said WinFS SUPPORT....don't you think it takes API hooks to fully use it?

 

[milo]

I await from Apple
a) A patch 'or' upgrade to stop this from working.
b) Law suit
c) Some other crafty thing from Apple Legal, they will find a way, they always do.

If that were the case, why did apple say months ago that they didn't care and would do nothing to stop people from doing this?

And what grounds would they have to try and stop people from running third party software on their boxes? I doubt they could stop this with a patch, if they did it could likely be hacked around again.

And I'm sure the same thing can be done with other versions of windows. Someone just has to care enough to go to the trouble.

 

[tdar]

Are these the catalyst drivers? If they are, they probably won't work. But I will try and see if I can find someone can test them.

Here's some info from the INF file of the drivers.....

[Version]
Signature="$Windows NT$"
Provider=%ATI%
ClassGUID={4D36E968-E325-11CE-BFC1-08002BE10318}
Class=Display
DriverVer=12/20/2005, 8.204.0.0
CatalogFile=CX_29563.CAT

[DestinationDirs]
DefaultDestDir = 11
ati2mtag.Miniport = 12 ; drivers
ati2mtag.Display = 11 ; system32

[ControlFlags]
ExcludeFromSelect=*
;
; Driver information
;

[Manufacturer]
%ATI% = ATI.Mfg, NTx86

[ATI.Mfg.NTx86]
"ATI Mobility Radeon X1400" = ati2mtag_M54, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_7145&SUBSYS_13331043
"ATI Mobility Radeon X1600" = ati2mtag_M56, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_71C5&SUBSYS_10B210



looks to be only X1X mobility drivers so I don't think they are catalyst drivers

 

[janstett]

For goodness sakes !! Why all the bother ? The windows boxes are cheap enough to buy one.....don't mess up a great product ( Mac ) with the crap from microsoft....

Simple, to piss off people like you

 

[John61254]

Who cares???

I guess it's always fun to beat a challenge (and get paid besides), but who really cares if you can boot Windows on a Mac? If I wanted to boot Windows, I'd buy a PC. And has anybody thought about the fact that booting Windows may/will now make your previously safe Mac susceptible to all the Windows-specific viruses out there? Don't go crying to Apple to fix your machine when it's all mucked up from running Windows.
I bought a Mac for the software, as much as the hardware.
I'll stick to OS X on my Mac, thank you very much.

 

[janstett]

OS2 isn't much of a comparison since it never had much of a user base to start with.

I'm not so sure about that... I believe in the 1992-1995 timeframe OS/2 equalled or surpassed the Mac's market share and may have even been as high as 7%. And Apple did drop as low as 2-3% in the dark days.

 

[janstett]

I guess it's always fun to beat a challenge (and get paid besides), but who really cares if you can boot Windows on a Mac? If I wanted to boot Windows, I'd but a PC.

Have you not been reading any of the 10,000 threads on this?

People want to run Windows on Macs, and conversely OSX on PCs, for the geek factor. But then there are people who want to do it for "legitimate" reasons.

Like carrying ONE notebook instead of TWO. Like having ONE machine instead of TWO on your desk. Like running OSX on a laptop that weighs less than five pounds.

And has anyb ody thought about the fact that bboting Windows may now make your previously safe Mac susceptible to all the Windows-specific viruses out there?

Oh no, the VIRUUUUUUUSES, the VIRUSSSSES, as soon as you log onto Windows the machine explodes from VIRUUUUUUSES. Talk about FUD. Anybody here watch "Drawn Together"? Ling-Ling the Asian thing inserts the key into the ignition for his drivers' test, and immediately the entire city crashes into him including a 747 falling from the sky. Reminds me of you guys

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4942162778167603560&q=apple+switch

 

[milo]

If I wanted to boot Windows, I'd buy a PC.

And if you wanted to (or needed to) run mac AND windows apps? I guess you'd spend a few hundred bucks and buy a PC too?

I'm very impressed.

 

[Shaker]

Anybody here watch "Drawn Together"? Ling-Ling the Asian thing inserts the key into the ignition for his drivers' test, and immediately the entire city crashes into him including a 747 falling from the sky. Reminds me of you guys

That was hilarious...I remember...

 

[RichCoder]

OT: Toshiba ads

Sorry to go offtopic for a second, but what's with the Toshiba Laptop ads on here? That's pretty bad ad placement

Okay back to the "why would you want to put XP on your mac" posts.

-rich

 

[Pragmato]

someone is smiling

Apple does not mind this at all They want the business/user that they would otherwise not get. Not get for a long time. Company XYZ running PlumberClassic2000.mdb will continue to use windows until their office burns down, but prob forever. Run your business app on windows, do everything else in os x. Apple solid state disk Macs could help with Fast OS Switching.

 

[Church]

If I had an iMac I would try this myself...
but from this http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=12185 thread there is this http://support.toshiba-tro.de/tools/Tecra/ta7/xp/display-ta7-xp-8204051220a1.zip driver. Probably close to something already posted for the video drivers FOR IMAC. Just trying to help the cause.
(take note, the download is from .de (denmark? germany?) so it's not going to go super fast. I tried the dl and it was about 120kb/s from Alabama on my 3mb connection for that 70mb file)

 

[dejo]

that's why I said WinFS SUPPORT....don't you think it takes API hooks to fully use it?

Well, since Microsoft plans on adding WinFS support to Windows XP as well, I don't find this much of a Vista bonus.

 

[Maaij]

I think I will wait for a complete torrent file

 

[bumfilter]

Can someone please explain to me why some people keep saying:

"It's like putting a crappy engine in a ferrari" (you get what I mean)

and posts of that nature, basically suggesting, why would you want to run XP on a Mac, just buy a PC.

Why can't people understand that some of us need functionality like this? Some of us don't want to have to carry two laptops everywhere we go. Some of us don't want to use a PC at work and would rather use our laptops (then sneak into OSX when we can).

I'm getting sooo tired of reading posts like that and of posts like mine whinging about it. I just can't believe how stupid some people are. What is the psychology behind this?!

 

[Senbei]

Will this know open up our macs to the windows world of viruses??

The malicious code would need to be written specifically for OS X. By default, Windows XP does not natively read/write HFS+ partitions. Using something like MacDrive though, it does open up the possibility to inject OS X specific malicious code or do something nasty like deleting files on your Mac volume as you would not be protected by the usual OS X authentication methods while running under Windows. This is some of the known dangers of dual booting as opposed to virtualized solutions where things run in their own sandbox.

I haven't been able to discover if they've implemented the acceleration option available for QEMU when it's an Intel processor emulating an Intel processor. Anyone know if this has been done?

There is a virtualization module for QEmu called QVM86 (which will be a kernel extension for the universal binary of Q) being worked on which will replace the emulation code. Not really sure how far along that is coming but it should bring a nice speed boost.

I think better methods are coming along, including the BAMBIOS project, which would add complete BIOS support to an EFI system. Then, all you'd need is a standard XP install disk.

Exactly. The winning method is great as far as it being a proof of concept but it is still a hackjob and nowhere near a mainstream solution. This is basically just the starting point to something simpler and refined. For dual boot, I personally am looking forward to Amit Singh's BAMBIOS since they are striving for transparency which will work without a need to hack together an installation CD. While the blanka/narf bootloader is pretty nice, I'm hoping BAMBIOS comes up with something that is integrated with the current Mac volume chooser like Clay's graphical boot volume chooser so that it shows up with the press of the option key.

Am I the only one thinking that the MacBU at Microsoft should be paying a lot of attention to this? If I'm working on the Intel Virtual PC development team, I've just learned of a great way to install MS Windows on a Mac. I now just need to develop some sort of user friendly installation and I'm almost done.

They are but it is probably out of their hands. Originally during MacWorld, a marketing manager for the Mac BU was quoted in eWeek (January 10) as saying, "We are committed to moving forward with Virtual PC". In Microsoft's official Q&A though, that has been changed to "we’re working with Apple to figure out the best way to bring this technology to Intel-based Macs. We’ll have a better idea once we have the new machines and can accurately evaluate just what is required to transition the product.".

I believe the Mac BU were overruled at a higher level. Jim Allchin (who has a notorious dislike for that group) might have had something to do with it. There was also an interview with him a few weeks later where he addressed Vista on Intel-based Mac's. The relevant parts is where he says they have no plans to bring Vista to the Mac and about Vista being targeted at the sizeable business market where Apple has no real presence. Microsoft is known for their paranoia and there might be some techno-politics involved to insure that Intel Mac's (while highly unlikely to be considered in many corporations anyway even if they could cleanly dual boot; which will be the only sanctioned way since many corporations will not want to invest time in training their people to learn OS X as people are already familiar with the way Windows works) sales don't accidently get a helping hand from them.

I hope you can see why being able to run Windows applications at full speed is a bad thing for the Mac market in general. It may not be bad for users in the short term but in the medium to long term you want strong Mac development, even if it means that excludes the heavyweights from the Windows world. Many Mac only developers exist because the big Windows only companies don't bother with the Mac.

And this is where this same argument falls flat on its face. Before all of this Intel switch even happened, these developers saw no reason to develop for the Mac anyway. They had an exclusive PowerPC-based Mac OS X market to deal with as well. Yet many chose to stay out. Why? Because of that thing called marketshare. Neither did you hear developers telling potential customers to go and run their apps under Virtual PC for Mac.

So what has changed with moving to Intel? From the developer perspective, it is still a Mac. From a user perspective (for those who have a need to run Windows programs), the ability to run Windows programs is no longer going to be tied to slow emulation. Additionally, this trait opens up a whole new ballgame with regards to the way different markets look at the Mac platform as it will offer ways to legally run the two main consumer desktop operating systems on a single piece of hardware. This holds more relevance to the home market and niche business markets that are dual platform (where a single box has an economic impact by lowering hardware costs as well as expenses related to lowering that electricity bill). Within that realm is the potential to increase marketshare and part of that will depend on the solutions for running Windows on the Intel Mac (hack jobs naturally won't cut it which is why some of us are going to wait to see how BAMBIOS will turn out for dual booting). If the Mac market can grow, that provides developers a better metric for considering a native application. The dual boot/virtualization crowd is a smaller fraction of the overall market and software vendors like in the past aren't going to tell the non-technical customers to jump through hoops to run their programs in those environments.

 

[bruf]

Can someone please explain to me why some people keep saying:

"It's like putting a crappy engine in a ferrari" (you get what I mean)

and posts of that nature, basically suggesting, why would you want to run XP on a Mac, just buy a PC.

Why can't people understand that some of us need functionality like this? Some of us don't want to have to carry two laptops everywhere we go. Some of us don't want to use a PC at work and would rather use our laptops (then sneak into OSX when we can).

I'm getting sooo tired of reading posts like that and of posts like mine whinging about it. I just can't believe how stupid some people are. What is the psychology behind this?!

100% agree on this. It would be great if this topic could focus only on installing/configuring/troubleshooting Windows XP on our Intel Macs. We have already more than 20 pages of posts... Thanks.

 

[jmbear]

Good news, bad news and mixed news...

Good news for...

Consumers, now you can natively run Windows on the best looking and best performing computers in the world.

Apple Hardware, now they will attract PC users to try out their nifty computers without worrying about software not running on them.

Bad news for...

Dell, IBM, Sony and every single PC manufacturer. Usually PC users would not consider Apple because, it can't run Windows, but now, every single Intel Mac will compete directly with PC manufacturers, and frankly, the Mac is superior in all aspects, plus you get OS X! Its like a whole new brand entered the PC market, and its an awesome brand!

Mixed news for...

Apple Software, think for a minute here, Mac OS X and Windows used to compete from different hardware, Apple for the Mac OS X or PCs for Windows. Now they will be able to compete on the same computer since speed is no longer an issue because Windows can run natively on the Mac. People will be able to administer their computer through one OS and use the other to run specific applications for that OS. Basically the battle will be for which OS ends up being the "main OS" in which people usually work, and which OS ends up being the "bitch OS" which people use to run specific applications. If people like OS X better, then they will do most of their stuff on OS X and boot Windows when they want to play a game or use some Windows only software. The opposite is true. In my opinion, OS X is superior to Windows in most aspects, the only draw back from OS X used to be software that would not run on it, that is no longer a problem, so this means...

Microsoft will have trouble, why? Well, most people pirate Windows and Mac OS X, the true sales for those OS come from those pre-installed in brand-name computers (you can count OS upgrades too, but then again, they are pirated). Apple will continue to sell OS through their computers, and since people are likely to start buying more Macs (since they can now run Windows, and Macs are cute ), for every Mac bought, there is an OS X sold, but not a Windows sold. People will likely pirate Windows to run it on a Mac, or use the Windows disc from a previous computer. Again, Windows and Mac OS X will compete to see who ends up as the "main OS" and the "bitch OS". I honestly think that Windows will be the "bitch OS".

It would be awesome if somebody developed a tool that ran Windows on the background so you don't have to see its ugly face, then when you run a Windows specific application, it just launches it in "window" but you never have to deal with the OS. Sort of like when you ran Mac OS 9 applications on the X, that is the best analogy I can think of. Microsoft could do the same thing, but then again, why would anyone prefer Windows over OS X?

My 2 cents.

- My ideas are bastardized when they travel from my brain to the world -

 

[Pistol Pete]

I await from Apple
a) A patch 'or' upgrade to stop this from working.
b) Law suit
c) Some other crafty thing from Apple Legal, they will find a way, they always do.

This is kinda good, but XP why for the love of god does it always have to be XP, at least make something that will allow me to put Win2k on.

more so agreed. but I still hate all windows users...ok ok .... just the computer not the user

 

[mrplow]

Why would Apple do anything? This doesn't modify any of their code- it's simply an EFI environment that loads another OS- if anyone owns soemthing it's intel... plus, it would cost them oney.. why would they spend money on something that (if you read through this forum) motivates people to buy a mac?

stop being silly...


now, anyone know where driver discussion is taking place? the osx86 forum preivously mentioned is erroneous and brief...

 

[tdar]

Why would Apple do anything? This doesn't modify any of their code- it's simply an EFI environment that loads another OS- if anyone owns soemthing it's intel... plus, it would cost them oney.. why would they spend money on something that (if you read through this forum) motivates people to buy a mac?

stop being silly...


now, anyone know where driver discussion is taking place? the osx86 forum preivously mentioned is erroneous and brief...

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=12185&st=0