“When Apple converted its entire product line from PowerPC CPUs to the very same Intel chips used in Windows PCs, the world changed… In very short order after the first Intel-based Macs hit the streets, developers proved that Windows on Macs was more than just a theory — it worked, and it was fast,” Richard Hoffman reports for Computerworld.
Hoffman reports, “Almost immediately, however, the world turned upside down once again. Apple itself released the public beta of a dual-boot enabler, called Boot Camp. With very little fuss or trouble, Boot Camp allowed anyone to load and run Windows on their Intel Mac. The next version of Apple’s operating system, Leopard (OS 10.5), will include the ability to run Windows built in.”
“Macs that run Windows via virtualization are here to stay,” Hoffman reports. “Boot Camp runs Windows (XP and Vista) and Windows software, and it runs them fast, well, and with excellent compatibility. In fact, early tests of Macs running Windows showed that they ran Windows apps faster than did many comparable Windows-only PCs. That’s a huge change from the old emulation days.”
Hoffman reports, “Parallels Desktop for Mac [is] a true virtualizer. This allows users to run Windows within, well, a window on your Mac desktop. Parallels, unlike Boot Camp, can run just about any OS you’d like, from MS-DOS to any flavor of Windows to Linux or Sun’s Solaris, at the very same time as you run your Mac apps… for those needing to run Windows and Mac apps side by side, Parallels is a real breath of fresh air… VMware, has released the beta of a virtualization product for Macs called Fusion. (Read our review of VMware Fusion here.) And now the game gets really interesting… As competition drives innovation, it’s likely that the virtualization options for Macs will keep getting better and better.”
“For now, you can run Windows virtual machines on a Mac, but not Mac virtual machines on a Mac, and certainly not Mac virtual machines on a PC. Although Apple may claim bragging rights for building the most flexible, compatible computers on the planet, pressure will be building fast for virtualization solutions to support running multiple copies of OS X on Macs,” Hoffman reports.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: On the day that Apple released Boot Camp, April 05, 2006, we wrote in our MacDailyNews Take, “Welcome to ‘Embrace and extinguish,’ Apple-style. The war ain’t over, folks. It never was. Now, a new chapter begins and today’s shot will be heard around the world! Don’t you just love the smell of napalm in the morning? This doesn’t hurt Microsoft (yet), but it absolutely puts Dell, HP, Lenovo, Toshiba, etc. into a world of pain… As Windows-only users buy Macs that will provide them their ‘comfort’ of Windows, they will experience Mac OS X and use it for the excellent Mac-only applications. We all know what happens when people are given the chance to really use Macs for longer than five minutes, they usually want to buy a Mac. These new Apple Mac hardware users will start out using Windows more than Mac OS X and end up using Mac OS X exclusively. Watch and see.”
Related articles:
Apple Mac’s 2007 market share climb will dumbfound almost everyone, create mayhem in PC market – September 08, 2006
$399 for Windows Vista Ultimate?! (Hint: Get a Mac) – August 29, 2006
Dude, you got a Dell? What are you, stupid? Only Apple Macs run both Mac OS X and Windows! – April 05, 2006
Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ ultimate goal: ‘to take back the computer business from Microsoft’ – June 16, 2005
Why buy a Dell when Apple’s Intel-based computers will run both Mac OS X and Windows? – June 08, 2005
Intel-based Macs running both Mac OS X and Windows will be good for Apple – June 10, 2005
Windows users who try Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger might not want to go back – June 07, 2005
Microsoft and Dell must have a lot of bricks lying around today – June 07, 2005
Ah, i love it. Parents were considering buying my brother (law student) another PC laptop when his 2nd one in two years crapped out on him. I mentioned that he could install Windows on the MacBook — no problem. The ended up getting him a MacBook, and we never saw the need to install Windows. He is using MacOS X as his sole operating system, and he loves it.
Brilliant.
I like the VMWare approach, run windows programs without windows. No money to MS from here.
wandering joe,
Wander on over to VMWare’s site and you’ll find out that it (Fusion) does indeed require Windows. Just like Parallels.
I think you mean CodeWeavers’ CrossOver for Mac: http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxmac/
Or Darwine: http://darwine.opendarwin.org/
Virtualization and WINE are two totally different things.
I stand corrected! Second time this week. It was CrossOver, that I was thinking about. Thanks for the heads up.
Unfortunately, luz users just want to frag each other at 300 fps, and this is something you won’t get via parallels or crossover.
I know a number of PC people eyeing the Mac when before they would not even consider it. They are tired of their machines grinding to a halt because of viruses and malware and are tickled by the idea of using the mac to do internet-related tasks and the PC side to do whatever crap PC people like to do sans internet.
This ripple I suspect is slowily becoming a wave.
@Wandering Joe:
The beauty of a world with bittorrent is the ability to run windows without giving Microsoft any money.
I agree however that the best solution if you need to run Windows programs is to run them without Windows. Personally I already have Parallels and love it, but if VMWare has the ability to run Windows Programs natively I might shell out some money for it.
Great, I knew I should have continued reading.
Too bad apple sucks at advertising their computers. I’m a mac, I’m a pc is funny, but it gets old quick. Do a simple commercial showing a mac running microsuck office, mail, ical, iphoto etc.
Just show what the frackin computer can do. State that it is the most compatible computer in the world. I had to explain this for 10 minutes to a friend at dinner last night who is so enamored by her dell laptop and how great it is. She said she won’t buy a mac because of compatibility.
Oh, and while you’re at it apple…make a real mouse.
Cross Over is the winner if you just need to run a few light windows apps. It has an open ended installer which has worked everytime for me so far on a Mac Pro 2.66. As it gets better, I would expect it to become the dominant choice.
What, no MDN “insecurity blanket” take? It’s so totally appropriate with this article (no sarcasm.) It must be a busy day. Well, for your pleasure:
Bootcamp indulges those switchers compelled to retain their Windows insecurity blanket, while allowing them to upgrade past Vista, stop banging their collective heads against the metaphorical wall and entering the warm embracing light of a new day.
The biggest problem I have with my Windows machine is that in order to keep it relatively safe and secure I have to run so many applications that there is little room left for other applications and the machine is slow like a mule.
Thetic,
MDN’s take was just fine. Just because you’ve been trained to expect the “insecurity blanket” epithet doesn’t mean the MDN editors need to use it every time.
But I appreciated your own take, regardless.
matt,
How real of a mouse do you need? Mighty Mouse has 4 buttons and an all-direction scroll ball.
I have a question for anyone running XP in boot camp??
If you run MS Vista upgrade advisor,
How does the Mac do??
hotinplaya,
Mac does just fine. 😀
I love the option on the Mighty Mouse to have it work ONLY as a single-button mouse for extremely new users to computers. Tried to show my elderly mom a two-button mouse and it scared her about as much as a real mouse would have. I turned the mouse back to one-button, and she was MUCH happier.
Apple’s new mouse gives me (and her) freedom of choice.
I went from a single button Apple mouse (Mac OS 7, 8 and 9;) to a third-party two-button mouse (OS 9, OS X) and now the Mighty Mouse (OS X). Each was a step-up from the one before. I threw away my hockey-puck mouse after 48 hours — a terrible design from a user perspective.
Recently I was in a server/computer admin room servicing the fire alarm/FM-200 supression system and noticed a Mac Mini on the table running XP…I questioned the administrator and ingaged him in friendly conversation. I learned that his opinion was why buy 2 machines when you could buy just one and run any system the student or faculty member wanted. I was pleasantly surprised to say the least
MDN WROTE:
The war ain’t over, folks. It never was.
WHAT FSCKING WAR? YOU GUYS TAKE YOURSELVES FAR TOO SERIOUSLY!
You’ll have to forgive jOHN. He was just a baby during the Regan years.
He has no idea what a cold war is.
Business is a cold war as well jOHN.
Empires fall without a shot in a cold war jOHN.
Once again, laddies n lassies … yet another dumb assed PeeCeer illustrates just why intellegent people don’t buy the cheapest PC on the market …
Notice John is having problems with his keyboards caps lock !
</sarcasm>
Wow, that was so positive and pro-Apple, it sent tingles down my spine. PC boxes are doomed. The golden days of Apple, the dawn of a new era of computing happiness, are upon us. Prepare for battle. We come.
@MDN Editor
Have you changed personnel? there is a new level of maturity in your commentary. I like it. Keep it up.
The truth, and I don’t want to sound mean, is that even though this MacBook is about a year old, and was the lowest-possible configuration at the time (1.83 w 512 RAM), PC users still look longingly at it. And I’m talking about people that bought Vista PC’s last week. They still drool over this thing, MacBook heat stains and all.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
I don’t blame them. I never feel lacking in speed, power or usability. As far as I’m concerned, everyone should be using Apple laptops.
> pressure will be building fast for virtualization solutions to support running multiple copies of OS X on Macs…
I can understand how this might be useful for testing purposes. If you can run Leopard, Tiger, and Panther concurrently, or different setups of Mac OS X concurrently, it would speed up application developement testing and/or reduce the number of Macs needed. However, if a user just wanted another “instance” of Mac OS X running concurrently, they can just create another user account and use fast user switching to go back and forth between the two users. I do it all the time to switch between “play mode” and “work mode.” That would be far simpler than a virtualization solution.
I’m not sure how much “pressure will be building” for a true Mac OS X virtualization solution.