View Full Version : Boot Camp is here
dparm
04-05-2006, 06:57 AM
Public Beta now available (http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/)
Wow.
Apple officially sanctioning (though not supporting, of course) installing Windows XP on Intel Macs.
What does this mean for the OnMac project? They worked so hard, too. They just released the source code to the original hack and were on the road to being the premiere Windows-on-Mac solution. I've been following their progress via their forums, and they've been a rather impressive community (look at this thread to see just how hard they were working to try and get accelerated video working http://forum.onmac.net/showthread.php?t=482&page=26) - but I guess this will more or less steal their thunder. They have many clever workarounds and hacks to get drivers working, but nothing that Apple can't do better.
My question is this: did Apple willingly do this (i.e. was it planned all along?) or do you think they had their hand forced by the OnMac hack?
fischerm
04-05-2006, 02:14 PM
The biggest thing Apple brings to the party is drivers. Real drivers. Nick installed the apple drivers on his MacBook and it makes a world of difference. Especially the graphics. Google Earth works flawlessly now. I'll be trying this out tonight on the intel iMac.
I'm sure they had their hand forced - why else would they release at such a random time? I would think it was planned if it was introduced, say, April 1st (30th Anniversary) or if they waited until WWDC.
But initial reports (and apparently Nick) are saying that it's a much cleaner install than the OnMac hack and everything works as it should (except the 3dmark numbers seem low). Also, it's not Windows XP specific - some on the forums say they've booted Knoppix and a few Linux install CDs as well.
Some of the noise over on Slashdot suggest that this is step one - since 10.5 Leopard is supposed to have virtualization, this is where your Windows installation will sit, and you'll be able to run it without rebooting at near-native speed.
Some of the noise over on Slashdot suggest that this is step one - since 10.5 Leopard is supposed to have virtualization, this is where your Windows installation will sit, and you'll be able to run it without rebooting at near-native speed.
Could it be that we will finally see peace between the Mac and Windows world?
dparm
04-05-2006, 05:07 PM
Still doesn't change the fact that Apple hardware is expensive compared to Windows machines.
amccabe
04-05-2006, 05:11 PM
I don't see peace between users (the Mac Mini Hack thread is a good example) - but there does not seem to be "warring" between Microsoft and Apple.
Things are shaping up to be very strange right now and I have no idea what to expect in the next year.
Still doesn't change the fact that Apple hardware is expensive compared to Windows machines.
Though I don't have any of the article links handy, most comparison articles I've seen show that (IIRC - though my memory has been known to fail me), with matching configurations, the MacBook Pro has a $200 - $300 premium over an equally equipped Core Duo Dell or Acer lappy. Yes, that can be a significant premium to pay (though, at least for us students, that's more or less covered by the Apple student discount, woot), but I'd say that, if you want an Apple, you can justify the price difference. Besides, the MacBook Pro does have a few features that, as far as I know, are exclusive to Apple laptops (or at least not stock on competitor's offerings) - the built-in iSight (though I know some Sony Vaios have webcams built in as well), backlit keyboard (I've always been partial to the feel of PowerBook keyboards, too - second only to IBM Thinkpad keyboards), remote, optical audio, ExpressCard slot (are there any other laptops with ExpressCard slots? I've been wondering lately), sudden motion sensor (side note - if you have an iBook or PowerBook with the sudden motion sensor, you definitely have to check out BubbleGym - the most fun game you can play without touching your keyboard or mouse!), aluminum casing. Worth the extra few hundred bucks? For some, yes.
But back on topic - being able to run Windows XP on a Mac I think more or less removes any reason for potential switchers to not buy an intel Mac, and I think that's a big part of Apple's strategy for the coming year. I mean, you really can't have any fear of buying a Mac and not having it run that "one program that's Windows only" anymore - a simple reboot (or maybe when Leopard comes out, starting up a VM) is all you need. Plus, by putting Windows XP and OS X on the same machine, it really emphasizes the big differences (and the way most people will probably perceive it, Windows XP's shortcomings). I mean, look at Apple's page - they have statements along the lines of "Well, unfortunately, Windows XP is still using a twenty year old technology called the BIOS - but thanks to Boot Camp, your Intel Mac works equally well in both centuries!" and "Remember, now that you're running Windows, you're prone to viruses and spyware. Make sure to get security updates!" Even the Windows logo they use is four bland grey boxes - it looks more like a warning label than anything. Running Windows XP is sort of the trojan horse to get the Intel Mac into the house of the potential switcher that needs safety - but with OS X and Windows on the same machine, they'll quickly see just how different the two OSs are, and Apple hopes they stick with OS X for most of their computing experience (but either way, they've already coughed up the cash for the machine, and Apple's made their sale).
I think this appeals to the tech savvy as well, because we all love choice in what we run on our computers - and what greater example of this than running two operating systems that have been the center of many an internet flamewar - on the same computer.
//typed from my Linux box instead of my iBook just so that I don't feel like a fanboy
//sad, I know.
//typed from my Linux box instead of my iBook just so that I don't feel like a fanboy
//sad, I know.
I just read that before I went to class and it totally made my day.
fischerm
04-06-2006, 09:33 AM
So I installed XP on my intel iMac last night using Apple's new Boot Camp assistant, and basically it was a non-event. It worked just fine. It took 2 hours start to finish. The hardest part was looking for my OS X install CDs because I had to repair my hard drive before partitioning. I did the live partitioning, gave XP 40GB. Installed XP without a hitch, and ran Apple's driver CD. Patched up XP up to current levels. All I need to do is install Sophos now and it's good to go.
So I installed XP on my intel iMac last night using Apple's new Boot Camp assistant, and basically it was a non-event. It worked just fine. It took 2 hours start to finish. The hardest part was looking for my OS X install CDs because I had to repair my hard drive before partitioning. I did the live partitioning, gave XP 40GB. Installed XP without a hitch, and ran Apple's driver CD. Patched up XP up to current levels. All I need to do is install Sophos now and it's good to go.
You should run 3dMark or some games - there are already videos on the net of Oblivion running on the intel Macs, but some firsthand gaming benchmarks couldn't hurt.
According to this article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20060406/tc_pcworld/125325) high end video games seem to work really well...
dparm
04-06-2006, 10:14 AM
Boot Camp can also run Linux, it would seem...saw a few articles on Digg about it.
According to this article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20060406/tc_pcworld/125325) high end video games seem to work really well...
That's pretty impressive - FEAR on high at 1280x720! Who says Macs can't play games?
Just as another update to this tread Cnet has released some Windows XP Photoshop on Intel iMac data (via Digg):
http://reviews.cnet.com/4531-10921_7-6484134.html
abudhu
04-06-2006, 08:14 PM
Anyone have a link on the technical specifications on how Boot Camp works?
I understand it uses an emulation BIOS layer to allow Windows XP / x86 architectures to boot? If this is incorrect,by all means, direct me to links so that I may read up. Currently I will be working under the BIOS emulation assumption. If this is the case, I can see why benchmarks would show an Mac OS outpreforming Windows on some test. Emulation will always be slower than native preformance. In that vein who is to say these "Offical Apple/Windows Signed Drivers" haven't been coded to down-play Windows Benchmarks? Much like Nvidia optimized their drivers to preform better on 3dsMarks than Ati. Seems odd. Though Apple opening up Windows to their hardware is quite nice. I found it funny when I read this line:
"Well, unfortunately, Windows XP is still using a twenty year old technology called the BIOS"
Well..so does Linux, Solaris, UNIX, and (insert your OS here). EFI is the latest and greatest no doubt, but when Windows hold around 90ish percent of the computer Market I don't think they can just "change" on a whim and have all OEM manufactures change with them. Apple was able to do it because apple manufactures their computers, so its not like they had to deal with 3rd party manufactures. Very interesting marketing :) Boot-Camp just seems like one fancy Boot-Loader. An incredibly facinating Boot-Loader however.
Speaking of VM, Parallel Workstation just released their first Beta that runs VMachines on Intel Mac. Though I am not a fan of Parallel (as I feel Vmware is the superior product) its still an incredible step, and will open so many more doors for the OS X world. Who needs reboots when you can just launch a VM :)
So...when will the MLL be getting these Intel Macs :D
Amit -
http://www.intel.com/technology/framework/overview4.htm
Boot Camp is a CSM, or Compatibility Support Module to allow legacy OSs to boot and run on EFI based systems. The module allows EFI to perform hardware calls as BIOS would, and there shouldn't be a performance hit since it's not emulation. It's sort of how WINE in Linux isn't technically emulation - it allows Windows executables to call Windows DLLs and run in Linux, and they run at more or less native speed.
The OnMac hack was a custom written CSM, but its biggest problem was that the CSM wouldn't relinquish control of the video card (a generic video driver was more or less hardwired into the hack), so actual accelerated video drivers couldn't take over. OnMac actually were/are holding a second contest to whoever can get video drivers working with the OnMac hack.
Linux does in fact run on EFI systems, and has since about 2000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface) - Linux was actually up and running on the Intel Macs well before Windows XP was.
Gateway also has released a Media Center PC featuring EFI instead of a BIOS - they used a CSM too.
So it's not up to Microsoft to push EFI, since their OS will always install and run so long as a CSM is present. It is up to the hardware manufacturers to push systems out the door with EFI, and though Gateway was the first to do so, I think that Apple will be leading the way (typical Apple - they're not the first to do something (mp3 players, USB, eye candy in an OS, etc.), but they still end up being the ones to push it hardest). Microsoft will be the one following the whim of OEM manufacturers on this one - not the other way around (and I say the sooner the better - if tomorrow Dell and HP said they're shipping EFI systems, Microsoft would have to step up to the plate and deliver EFI support in Vista).
In that vein who is to say these "Offical Apple/Windows Signed Drivers" haven't been coded to down-play Windows Benchmarks? Much like Nvidia optimized their drivers to preform better on 3dsMarks than Ati.
Even prior to Boot Camp's release, benchmarks showed that the Intel Macs were some of the fastest Windows XP machines - http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/03/22/mac_fastest_core_duo_laptop/ - and that was using what's probably the most eclectic mix of 3rd party drivers and workarounds I've ever seen for one machine (http://wiki.onmac.net/index.php/Users/Drivers). The article Lars linked to from Cnet really supports the idea that intel Macs are blazing fast Windows machines in addition to being elegant Apple machines - though, to be fair, the discrepancy between OS X Photoshop performance and XP Photoshop performance was largely due to the fact OS X has to run Photoshop through Rosetta (but the iMac still bested comparably equipped Dell and Gateway computers).
Um, I've been rambling, haven't I? Well, I guess the long and short of it is that Boot Camp isn't just a fancy bootloader - it's a fancy bootloader, coupled with a CSM, a repartitioning tool, and Windows drivers for every device on the intel Macs except the remote and the iSight (most importantly, the one thing the OnMac community couldn't provide - video drivers).
EDIT: I just reread Amit's post, and I think he misread the Cnet article
I can see why benchmarks would show an Mac OS outpreforming Windows on some test. Emulation will always be slower than native preformance.
The Cnet test actually shows the intel Mac running Windows XP coming out ahead of the same intel Mac running OS X - Photoshop actually completed the same filter test faster running Windows XP than OS X, not the other way around (Photoshop does run slower on OS X right now because it has to run thru Rosetta emulation on the intel Macs).
The Cnet test actually shows the intel Mac running Windows XP coming out ahead of the same intel Mac running OS X - Photoshop actually completed the same filter test faster running Windows XP than OS X, not the other way around (Photoshop does run slower on OS X right now because it has to run thru Rosetta emulation on the intel Macs).
Right. From what I understand, it gives Photoshop pros (and, in theory, other high end graphics users) the chance to upgrade their hardware (though I don't seem them doing that until the desktops come out) and not have to worry so much about the fact that Universal Adobe CS3 isn't scheduled to come out for a while because now they can use CS2 in another environment.
abudhu
04-07-2006, 09:01 AM
AWESOME! Thanks Dane, you have cleared up a great many things for me. Those links were a great and educational read. Very Nice indeed.
Freaky:
http://www.dealcatcher.com/forums/m_402248/tm.htm
Mac + BSOD = Does not Compute.
nlopez
04-07-2006, 09:57 AM
If this is the case, I can see why benchmarks would show an Mac OS outpreforming Windows on some test. Emulation will always be slower than native preformance.
It's BIOS emulation, that's all. Which means whatever emulation might be invovled would slow down the initial setting up the ugly XP loading screen, and loading the hard disk driver. Once the driver is loaded everything is native and the BIOS is never touched.
fischerm
04-07-2006, 02:30 PM
Last night I installed the Parallels software. (http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/) After a small problem getting their container to recognize me CD drive (Need to have a disk in the drive before launching Parallels), it worked without a hitch. So now I have my choice of XP in a window, or XP in dual boot mode. I'm looking for some basic benchmark stuff that doesn't focus exclusively on 3D, since the parallels system will obviously suffer greatly in the 3D realm. This weekend if I have enough time I plan on expanding my Windows dual boot partition enough to get World of Warcraft installed, and look at some frame-rate comparisons since WoW is native on intel and mac/win.
abudhu
04-08-2006, 10:47 AM
Vmware says their VMWorkstation in the works for Mac OS X. Excellent :)
http://www.macosxrumors.com/articles/2006/04/07/vmware-ceo-confirms-mac-version-plans/
dparm
04-08-2006, 10:57 AM
Well supposedly Boot Camp will void your warranty....not entirely sure how that works out, and how they can even tell if you ever installed it. Weird.
Well supposedly Boot Camp will void your warranty....not entirely sure how that works out, and how they can even tell if you ever installed it. Weird.
That was mentioned on Digg and when I went to the discussion on the Apple Support pages that they linked it from, it appears that two things are true (assuming the posters are being truthful):
1. There appears to be a difference of opinion between Apple Store reps (who say that it will void the warranty) and the Apple Care tech people (who say it will not).
2. There appears to be some paranoia about Apple releasing a piece of software (albeit in a beta version) and then claiming that it voids the protection that Apple has promised.
I personally do not believe this story to be true. While I don't have an Intel based mac to play with, I simply cannot believe that Apple would release some software so full of problems (although they have) and then not provide a remedy for fixing problems caused by it. They may have done each of these things in isolation, but not all together.
dparm
04-08-2006, 04:31 PM
I don't even understand how software can void the warranty? It doesn't modify hardware in any way (to my knowledge). And frankly, all you'd have to do is just reformat the drive and reinstall OS X if you ever take it in...how would they even know?
Well, part of Boot Camp is a firmware update (it adds the CSM to the EFI - see my above (rambling) post) - so even though it probably won't happen and hasn't happened yet, if you're unlucky enough to be the only person who borks their system using Apple's beta (and therefore without warranty) firmware and can't boot back into an OS, Apple doesn't want to be required to be held responsible.
abudhu
04-10-2006, 09:45 PM
Vista Works under BootCamp
http://grabberslasher.no-ip.com/B1FC8465-6928-4ED7-AD7C-FAA372A5DE57/21FA70D3-A47A-49A7-A6B6-5B25026D115F/6326A862-2B0F-42C8-B231-2FC40F022139.html
Heh, Vista almost looks right running on a Mac. It's pretty eerie...
Here's the reason using Boot Camp beta voids the warranty
http://news.com.com/2061-10793_3-6059694.html
It's a beta, after all.
Not supporting the tech support end of it and voiding the warranty are two different things. Its not as if by virtue of installing boot camp, they won't honor their obligations to replace faulty hardware and the like.
Aside from that, the comments seem to indicate that the people reporting problems didn't read the directions carefully enough.
That's true - I got "support" and "warranty" confused. Either way, if I were Apple tech support, I'd have no sympathy for overly-eager people borking their systems by (mis)installing clearly-labeled beta firmware/software - besides, would you expect anything besides crashes after installing Windows?
//that last statement was tongue-in-cheek
But it looks like it can be fixed with either a disk repair or a reinstall of the OS - so, thankfully, it's not the end of the world for these ten or so people (unless they don't backup regularly) - and it's the first I've heard really of serious problems caused by Boot Camp (and I read Digg a lot - every third story lately has been on Boot Camp).
I checked out the OnMac.net forums for the first time in a while, and found this posted and thought I'd pass it on in case any OSCRites w/Macbooks didn't know about it:
http://www.olofsson.info/
Guy wrote a great program to use the fn key to add back functionality like controlling screen brightness and volume, and perhaps most usefully, adding right-click functionality as well.
nlopez
05-08-2006, 10:00 AM
Nice, thanks Dane
Boot Camp 1.1 Beta released
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
Change Log (from site):
Boot Camp 1.1 beta includes:
* Support for the latest Intel-based Macintosh computers
* Easier partitioning using presets for popular sizes
* Ability to install Windows XP on any internal disk
* iSight camera support
* Support for built-in microphones
* Right-click when pressing the right-hand Apple key on Apple keyboards
* Improved Apple keyboard support including Delete, PrintScreen, NumLock, and ScrollLock keys
amccabe
08-16-2006, 09:54 PM
I installed it a little while ago and it has been working great for me so far. This is a huge upgrade from the last version. It looks like just about every driver is updated.
Apparently, the latest build of Vista works with Boot Camp without a hitch - http://home.mchsi.com/~khadzic/MyWebsite/files/cfc6211606c6ae86a4169400da828a6d-26.html
Installing Vista on an Intel Mac used to be quite a process, but I guess now the install process is identical to XP's install process. Only the iSight and new keyboard driver don't work.
I wonder if the Public Beta 2 would work as well. Any OSCRites with an Intel Mac wanna give it a try?
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
Boot camp 1.1.2 released. The important changes this update are that now you can do two-finger scrolling and two-finger right click in Windows (seriously - I wish Apple would just release a generic driver so that I can do that on ANY windows laptop).
Also (and I don't know if they did this before - I don't think they did) they have a comprehensive user's guide as well (warning - PDF link) - http://images.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/pdf/Boot_Camp_Beta_Setup_Guide_en.pdf - it shows where the print screen and scroll lock keys are (and, unfortunately, they're not on any of the laptop keyboards).
dparm
10-31-2006, 07:59 AM
Also has a new dynamic repartitioning utility, XP drivers for Apple hardware, improved Wi-Fi, support for non-US systems, sleep functions are improved, and the USB 56K modem should work.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
Boot Camp 1.2 has just been released. Changes:
* Support for Windows Vista (32-bit)
* Updated drivers, including but not limited to trackpad, AppleTime (synch), audio, graphics, modem, iSight camera
* Support the Apple Remote (works with iTunes and Windows Media Player)
* A Windows system tray icon for easy access to Boot Camp information and actions
* Improved keyboard support for Korean, Chinese, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Finnish, Russian, and French Canadian
* Improved Windows driver installation experience
* Updated documentation and Boot Camp on-line help in Windows
* Apple Software Update (for Windows XP and Vista)
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.