or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple ends Windows 7 support in Boot Camp for new Mac Pro
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple ends Windows 7 support in Boot Camp for new Mac Pro - Page 2

post #41 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

Apple does really dumb shit sometimes.

Why assume it is Apple? Microsoft isn't exactly pushing 7. Further how many Mac Pro people want to run 7 in boot camp? In Parallel or Fusion maybe.
post #42 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewMe View Post
 

Way more drama than warranted here. As others have said, Windows 7 runs wonderfully in VMWare Fusion, which satisfies the vast majority of people who really need to run Windows apps on their Mac. With hardware support for virtualization in the Intel CPUs for some time now the performance difference when running Windows in a VM for anything other than high end games is very minimal. In fact, there are many benefits to running Windows in a VM, like being able to take snapshots and move entire VMs around with ease. If you don't think you can run heavy duty productivity Windows apps in a VM, you are wrong. Many software development organizations develop entirely on VMs. It's very effective.

 

Very true.   Running Windows (natively) was a selling point for Apple, but Boot Camp has never been the smoothest way to do it.

 

As an aside, what are the chances of Apple breaking the ability to run a virtual OS at all in future hardware or systems?   

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PopinFRESH View Post
 

This likely due to EFI/UEFI. Apple is likely removing CSM and requiring Secure Boot. Windows 7 does not support Secure Boot and would require Apple to make a backward compatible video firmware for lack of CSM. I would expect to see this requirement on all future Macs.

 

-PopinFRESH

 

  That makes it an interesting situation, because 8 might be fantastic but businesses still haven't been making much of a move on it.   Seems the majority of dual users in the near future will still be using 7 solutions and not 8, whatever that implies.

 

 It will probably take a plug pulling announcement as with XP to get half of the 7 users to upgrade.

post #43 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Why assume it is Apple? Microsoft isn't exactly pushing 7. Further how many Mac Pro people want to run 7 in boot camp? In Parallel or Fusion maybe.

Windows 8 is all Apple's fault.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #44 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkerst View Post

Maybe I missed the sarcasm here, but this is probably Apple's way of telling MS, "ok, even with the best hardware money can buy, look how crappy your OS is." 

Except according to Microsoft, Windows 8 is awesome, the perfect high note for Ballmer to end his career on.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #45 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
 

 

On purpose too. Why should Apple give a dump whether Windows will run on their machines? If you can produce any survey or study that proves Apple sells more machines because it can run Windows then please do so. Anecdotal “my cousin needs this” doesn’t count. I see this as a stick-it-to-em move.

 

The fact that *Apple* thinks it's important enough not only to market but to develop (it used to require third party software, remember) as a feature of their products seems like enough evidence to me that they think it's making an impact on their bottom line. 

post #46 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post


Why assume it is Apple? Microsoft isn't exactly pushing 7. Further how many Mac Pro people want to run 7 in boot camp? In Parallel or Fusion maybe.

 

7's declared end of life is still more than six years away (and they just extended XP's last year). Microsoft may not be marketing it, but they're supporting it for a long time to come. If people want to use 7 rather than 8, Microsoft wants to support them.

post #47 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seankill View Post
 

Apple sold me my Macbook Pro Retina display mid 2012 BECAUSE it could run windows. As an engineer, I need windows because many of the applications I use are for windows only. Without the i7 and windows support, I would be doing just fine on a Dell, Samsung, or another computer that I would have selected. However, since my macbook pro runs windows 7, I am a happy camper and the laptop is prefect. The day Apple's Macs can not run Windows, is the day I switch back to a pure Windows PC and I can name about a dozen people who will follow me on that one.

 

Well the problem with that threat is that, next month there might only be 11 that follow you back to a PC, by summer 10.  Last year it was 20.   For 70% of users, any hassle with legacy Windows 7 hardware support, won't send them flocking back to PC hardware.  It will only drive them further toward cheaper, easier, more convenient mobile implementations.  Almost every industry is almost directly facing a crossroads in computer hardware, so at the very least you shouldn't be surprised by this development. 

 

Quote:

It is a major selling point for many of us to be able to run windows 7, including me.

 

I know what a bind it can be getting stuck between platform changes.  However the new Mac Pro doesn't even support OS X from two years ago.  Windows 7 is five years old.  That alone says a lot about about the state of your platform.  Bummer, but this is going to be a lingering side effect of your industry in choosing to develop on Windows.  Why do you think Gates is so publicly trying to cleanse his soul?  Deep down, he knows he has wronged you and your kin.  :smokey:

 

Better start vocalizing your concerns to your app's developers.

post #48 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


Windows 8 is all Apple's fault.


How so?

post #49 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Windows 8 is all Apple's fault.
If you look beyond the sarcastic first impression, actually... Win8 is Apple's fault. Think about it...1smoking.gif
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #50 of 82

Has anyone actually been able to purchase an clean install version of Windows 8? The 2 options available for purchase here are only for upgrades.

 

So, if there is no clean install version of Windows 8, how does one install it on Bootcamp, or on VMware/ Parallels for that matter?

 

When our office called up Microsoft to enquire about installing Windows 8 on Bootcamp for a MBP, the person said that we will need to buy an install disc from Microsoft, which is priced almost thrice as much as standard Windows 8. Needless to say, we thought it wasn't worth it and stayed with Windows 7.

post #51 of 82
given that win 7 is at 50% use still worldwide, and the main target audiences for the pro being media and power users, take into consideration the need for win 7 in those enviroments. the need for legacy support for cad programs alone eliminates the use by architects to an extent, and yes i do know that cad has moved on but given recent conversations ive had with sophies dad alone leads me to beleive there is still a culture out there still doing the same as they were many years ago on the same programs.
however my biggest concern is that in essence the pro is a commercial product more so that a home user product, window 8 is not really being taken up so much in the commercial market, so why remove support for the os that is the comcercially most utilised. surely this is effectively shooting yourself in the foot for commercial users to look at the pro as being their go to product for dual use
post #52 of 82
Ironically, Microsoft has pretty much dropped support for Windows 8! Turns out no wanted a tile interface on a desktop.
post #53 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by leighr View Post

Ironically, Microsoft has pretty much dropped support for Windows 8! Turns out no wanted a tile interface on a desktop.
have they? Has someone told ms?
post #54 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLite View Post
 

There was a recent study done on laptops that found that the Macbook Pro Retina was the most reliable and highest-rated Windows laptop. Getting a Mac device gets you higher build quality and reliability than most Windows devices, as well as letting you run OS X if you need. 

 

You can still get that optimal performance of Windows 7 on a Macbook Pro Retina.

post #55 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seankill View Post

Apple sold me my Macbook Pro Retina display mid 2012 BECAUSE it could run windows. As an engineer, I need windows because many of the applications I use are for windows only. Without the i7 and windows support, I would be doing just fine on a Dell, Samsung, or another computer that I would have selected. However, since my macbook pro runs windows 7, I am a happy camper and the laptop is prefect. The day Apple's Macs can not run Windows, is the day I switch back to a pure Windows PC and I can name about a dozen people who will follow me on that one.

Agreed 100%.

It is a major selling point for many of us to be able to run windows 7, including me.

This article is about a new Mac Pro. If it were about MBPs, Mac minis or Airs then many of the posts in this thread would make sense. As it is they don't.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #56 of 82
Well, there went Boot Camp as a serious application.
post #57 of 82
Originally Posted by John.B View Post
Apple does really dumb shit sometimes.
Originally Posted by photoeditor View Post
Well, there went Boot Camp as a serious application.

 

So that’s six people who don’t comprehend anything about why Apple would stop supporting anything but their competitor’s worst software. Want to try for seven?

 

Oh, and where’s MY update to Boot Camp Utility that includes Windows 8 drivers? Because even 7’s set refused to actually work with my graphics card.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #58 of 82

Getting Win7 to boot on this hardware doesn't just happen magically.  There's significant development effort to maintain compatibility with Windows 7 on a Mac.

 

Consider:

 - Windows 7 uses a slightly different driver model, that requires drivers to be developed for both Win7 and Win8.x

 

 - Windows 7's uEFI booter is a piece of crap and doesn't work with a display adapter that has an EFI byte code ROM, and requires an ancient video BIOS that responds to the old school 30-year old INT13h bootstrap, which has been used exactly never on the Mac.  Thus, any Mac using boot camp to get to Windows 7 is doing it through the EFI compatibility support module (CSM), which Apple then has to maintain and continue developing.  Windows 8 can boot on the native EFI on any 64-bit Mac, so the CSM can be removed from future models and no longer developed.

 

 - Any OS booting without the CSM boots stupidly faster, because it's talking in 1MB chunks to the disk controller, rather than old-school 64K chunks until the OS drivers load.  Windows 7 under CSM on a MacPro4 takes 90 seconds to load, where Windows 8 on native EFI takes 15 seconds on the same machine.

 

 - Most people's problem with Windows 8 (besides it being Windows) is the garbage UI.  This can be fixed through a multitude of 3rd party ways to make it look, act, and feel like Windows 7.

post #59 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

Apple does really dumb shit sometimes.

I agree; dumping W7 from the nMP is an understandable move. In tech, you just don't support legacy software.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #60 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by MachineShedFred View Post

 - Windows 7's uEFI booter is a piece of crap and doesn't work with a display adapter that has an EFI byte code ROM, and requires an ancient video BIOS that responds to the old school 30-year old INT13h bootstrap, which has been used exactly never on the Mac.  Thus, any Mac using boot camp to get to Windows 7 is doing it through the EFI compatibility support module (CSM), which Apple then has to maintain and continue developing.  Windows 8 can boot on the native EFI on any 64-bit Mac, so the CSM can be removed from future models and no longer developed.

 - Any OS booting without the CSM boots stupidly faster, because it's talking in 1MB chunks to the disk controller, rather than old-school 64K chunks until the OS drivers load.  Windows 7 under CSM on a MacPro4 takes 90 seconds to load, where Windows 8 on native EFI takes 15 seconds on the same machine.

That is one hell of an insightful explanation, thank you.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #61 of 82

Great move!  Why run windows on a mac machine?  Just let windows machine run windows and mac machine run macs.  If one really wants to run both, run vm.

post #62 of 82
I really like Windows 8. It's not OS X but it is actually a great OS when you get used to it and to be honest that's mostly a day's worth of use.

Windows 8.1 has gone a massive way to bringing back a psuedo Windows 7 feel but I feel Windows 8 is a much better product and I quite liked Windows 7.

People are scared of change and I admit that the forced change threw many. It took me 1/2 hour to work out how to shut the machine down when I first tried it and it still doesn't make sense to me but frankly Windows 8 is definitely the product to choose. Think of the Start screen as more of a versatile QuickLaunch and you'll get the idea. It's not perfect but then I prefer it well over the old Start menu in my not so humble opinion.

The rumours of the next update to Windows 8.1 are going to get more people onboard because it is supposedly going to allow machines running 1GB RAM to run which is possible in Windows 7 but I'd recommend smashing your testicles with a hammer before I recommend running Windows 7 with 1GB RAM.
post #63 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Windows 8 has been widely shunned & licences can still be purchased for Windows 7. This is a poor move for Apples customers who require bootcamp.


Actually no it isn't. It's being shunned by corporates but corporates are traditionally lazy fools who refuse to upgrade anything until it's too late. I know. I did a project about 6 years ago to upgrade a corporate office to Windows XP from Win2K. They're going to be screwed next month aren't they? They haven't even looked at Windows 7 let alone 8.

 

Many consumers hate Windows 8 but that's because they hate computers in general but have been forced to upgrade to a new machine because their one died. Truth be told most are upgrading because their machine is 5 years old and ran Windows XP so even going to Windows 7 would have thrown them.

 

Once you get used to the interface it's actually far more productive than the stupid Start menu, there's a reason why people stupidly fill their desktop with shortcuts. Windows 8's Start screen actually reduces this need. It is also far more stable believe it or not and right out of the box you get virus and spyware protection so you don't need to waste resources with Norton or McAfee et al.

post #64 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I agree; dumping W7 from the nMP is an understandable move. In tech, you just don't support legacy software.
There was a really great indepth article in a different thread last week explaining all of the nasty legacy garbage that Windows lugs around from version to version since the 90's.

@PB - did you ever get achnace to read it? Or was it you that posted the link? I read it in full and it was a great although exausting!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MachineShedFred View Post

Getting Win7 to boot on this hardware doesn't just happen magically.  There's significant development effort to maintain compatibility with Windows 7 on a Mac.

Consider:
 - Windows 7 uses a slightly different driver model, that requires drivers to be developed for both Win7 and Win8.x

 - Windows 7's uEFI booter is a piece of crap and doesn't work with a display adapter that has an EFI byte code ROM, and requires an ancient video BIOS that responds to the old school 30-year old INT13h bootstrap, which has been used exactly never on the Mac.  Thus, any Mac using boot camp to get to Windows 7 is doing it through the EFI compatibility support module (CSM), which Apple then has to maintain and continue developing.  Windows 8 can boot on the native EFI on any 64-bit Mac, so the CSM can be removed from future models and no longer developed.

 - Any OS booting without the CSM boots stupidly faster, because it's talking in 1MB chunks to the disk controller, rather than old-school 64K chunks until the OS drivers load.  Windows 7 under CSM on a MacPro4 takes 90 seconds to load, where Windows 8 on native EFI takes 15 seconds on the same machine.

 - Most people's problem with Windows 8 (besides it being Windows) is the garbage UI.  This can be fixed through a multitude of 3rd party ways to make it look, act, and feel like Windows 7.

Thanks for the short version!
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #65 of 82
I use Win7 for a handful of non-OSX apps. I don't want to upgrade my alternate-OS until those apps force the issue.

Of course, when I update HW I have to buy a new license, anyway, so Win 8 will have its day.

I doubt a whole lot of power users hang on to HW for more than 3 years (you might have some kind of disparity in your laptop/desktop upgrade cycle, if you use one way more than the other, but even then 3 years is pushing it; I'd guess your average user isn't upgrading much less frequently than that.)

Seems like a non-issue outside of a few fringe cases (which exist for any change, of any kind.)
post #66 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Why assume it is Apple? Microsoft isn't exactly pushing 7. Further how many Mac Pro people want to run 7 in boot camp? In Parallel or Fusion maybe.

I certainly would not bother with Bootcamp for one.

But out of interest as I don't run Bootcamp, perhaps someone who is on a MBP running Bootcamp and Win7 might compare the results from my nMP running VMWare. I have no idea if these are good or not, not being a Windows person.

The Geekbench is only 32 bit as I only have the demo version for PC which is limited to 32 bit.



Edited by digitalclips - 3/18/14 at 6:07pm
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #67 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by MachineShedFred View Post

Getting Win7 to boot on this hardware doesn't just happen magically.  There's significant development effort to maintain compatibility with Windows 7 on a Mac.

Consider:
 - Windows 7 uses a slightly different driver model, that requires drivers to be developed for both Win7 and Win8.x

 - Windows 7's uEFI booter is a piece of crap and doesn't work with a display adapter that has an EFI byte code ROM, and requires an ancient video BIOS that responds to the old school 30-year old INT13h bootstrap, which has been used exactly never on the Mac.  Thus, any Mac using boot camp to get to Windows 7 is doing it through the EFI compatibility support module (CSM), which Apple then has to maintain and continue developing.  Windows 8 can boot on the native EFI on any 64-bit Mac, so the CSM can be removed from future models and no longer developed.

 - Any OS booting without the CSM boots stupidly faster, because it's talking in 1MB chunks to the disk controller, rather than old-school 64K chunks until the OS drivers load.  Windows 7 under CSM on a MacPro4 takes 90 seconds to load, where Windows 8 on native EFI takes 15 seconds on the same machine.

 - Most people's problem with Windows 8 (besides it being Windows) is the garbage UI.  This can be fixed through a multitude of 3rd party ways to make it look, act, and feel like Windows 7.

Just for information purposes my Win 7 launches in VMware on a nMP in a shade under 4 seconds. 1smoking.gif (from sleep mode of course but why would I shut down 7 in a VM?)
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #68 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post


I agree; dumping W7 from the nMP is an understandable move. In tech, you just don't support legacy software.

 

Regardless of the merits of the first sentence, the second sentence just isn't true. Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, SAP, etc. make tons and tons of money supporting old versions of their software. Apple's the outlier in its shorter end-of-life deadlines for old versions of software.  

post #69 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor View Post

Regardless of the merits of the first sentence, the second sentence just isn't true. Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, SAP, etc. make tons and tons of money supporting old versions of their software. Apple's the outlier in its shorter end-of-life deadlines for old versions of software.  

You can't say 'just isn't true' either. It depends on the business model.

Looking at the market caps of all those you mention then Apple's makes me think Apple isn't totally stupid to cast off and move on. It seems to be working pretty well for them.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #70 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


You can't say 'just isn't true' either. It depends on the business model.

Looking at the market caps of all those you mention then Apple's makes me think Apple isn't totally stupid to cast off and move on. It seems to be working pretty well for them.

 

Perhaps I shouldn't have echoed the word "just," but all I was saying was that the OP's statement isn't true. The contrapositive of the OP's statement that "in tech you just don't support legacy software" is not "in tech you must support legacy software." I never said that. 

 

Market caps seem like strange evidence to make your point, though. Apple's may have the single highest of the five companies I named, but in the aggregate the other companies' market caps add up to considerably more than Apple's.

 

I think the real issue is that Apple's not really focused on the corporate and institutional markets (aside from maybe K-12, where I think they're doing it mainly to win future consumers). In the consumer space that Apple operates in, most of their customers are content with being forced to upgrade. Corporate and institutional IT departments are (largely) not interested in being forced to upgrade. Apple can get away with not supporting legacy software in a way that its "competitors" can't because they're selling to different kinds of customers. 

 

Those FAA flight bag tablets will be an interesting test. The airlines are going to insist that those things be rock solid. That means that they're not going to upgrade them right away every time a patch comes out for iOS, and so they're going to insist on legacy support. Is Apple ready to provide that? (I think they are, or at least they can be, but it's going to provoke a bit of change in Apple's culture if the corporate and institutional sales really take off.)

post #71 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I agree; dumping W7 from the nMP is an understandable move. In tech, you just don't support legacy software.
There was a really great indepth article in a different thread last week explaining all of the nasty legacy garbage that Windows lugs around from version to version since the 90's.

@PB - did you ever get achnace to read it? Or was it you that posted the link? I read it in full and it was a great although exausting!

I searched for it, but could't find it. I have read quite a few of those articles from DED on his own RD blog. Some are really great reads.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #72 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlor View Post

Perhaps I shouldn't have echoed the word "just," but all I was saying was that the OP's statement isn't true. The contrapositive of the OP's statement that "in tech you just don't support legacy software" is not "in tech you must support legacy software." I never said that. 

Market caps seem like strange evidence to make your point, though. Apple's may have the single highest of the five companies I named, but in the aggregate the other companies' market caps add up to considerably more than Apple's.

I think the real issue is that Apple's not really focused on the corporate and institutional markets (aside from maybe K-12, where I think they're doing it mainly to win future consumers). In the consumer space that Apple operates in, most of their customers are content with being forced to upgrade. Corporate and institutional IT departments are (largely) not interested in being forced to upgrade. Apple can get away with not supporting legacy software in a way that its "competitors" can't because they're selling to different kinds of customers. 

Those FAA flight bag tablets will be an interesting test. The airlines are going to insist that those things be rock solid. That means that they're not going to upgrade them right away every time a patch comes out for iOS, and so they're going to insist on legacy support. Is Apple ready to provide that? (I think they are, or at least they can be, but it's going to provoke a bit of change in Apple's culture if the corporate and institutional sales really take off.)

I agree with much of what you say, but aggregating those five companies.... really? Not sure what point that was supposed to make? I could aggregate a lot of lesser company's market caps to come to more than Apple's, so what? My point was simple by mentioning their 'individual' caps ... Apple seems to be doing OK, that's all.

It's also a strange thing to think a company, by your inference, might prefer a product that isn't updated over one that is .... I guess the airlines would be better off with Win XP 1wink.gif It could just be we are entering new times and new IT attitudes, you can but hope. 1smile.gif
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #73 of 82
Not a big deal. If you have latest Mac, you can also run windows on VM. New Macs now equipped with SSD, so running macs and older windows like XP or 7 in VM would be flawlessly.
post #74 of 82
Windows 8 uses the same drivers as Windows 7 so it would be perfectly possible to install Windows 7 and use the Windows 8 boot camp drivers.
post #75 of 82

The only problem I see is this IMHO is a dumb move because it is well known most businesses have forgone windows 8 and keep Windows 7. This is why most serious applications for Windows still support Windows 7. Plus the outrageous yearly fees for employers is pushing them to Linux servers.

Mac Pro Dual 2.8 Quad (2nd gen), 14G Ram, Two DVD-RW Drives, OS X 10.9
Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Ghz, SuperDrive, ATI X1600, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.7
1TB Time Capsule

Reply

Mac Pro Dual 2.8 Quad (2nd gen), 14G Ram, Two DVD-RW Drives, OS X 10.9
Mac Book Pro Core 2 Duo 2.16Ghz, SuperDrive, ATI X1600, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.7
1TB Time Capsule

Reply
post #76 of 82
Originally Posted by Ryan Taylor View Post
Windows 8 uses the same drivers as Windows 7 so it would be perfectly possible to install Windows 7 and use the Windows 8 boot camp drivers.

 

I guess that’s why my GPU was recognized in Windows 7 but cannot be seen regardless of what I do in Windows 8.

 

I wish EVERYONE ELSE with Apple products could have these nice new Windows 8 drivers. Maybe that would fix my problem.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #77 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

I guess that’s why my GPU was recognized in Windows 7 but cannot be seen regardless of what I do in Windows 8.

Was it a stock gpu or after market? Also if it's a stock AMD, did you try downloading catalyst drivers?

post #78 of 82
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
Was it a stock gpu or after market? Also if it's a stock AMD, did you try downloading catalyst drivers?

 

Standard 4870. The Radeon 4xxx family’s support was discontinued in Windows 8, but, you know, you’d figure that since Apple supports it that their driver would work.

 

Nope. 640x480 every time I boot.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #79 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Standard 4870. The Radeon 4xxx family’s support was discontinued in Windows 8, but, you know, you’d figure that since Apple supports it that their driver would work.

 

Nope. 640x480 every time I boot.


Blargh.....if I come across any working drivers on that card from the hackintosh crowd, I'll either link or PM it. You never know. I don't actually use a hackintosh. I just go through them because they're fun to read.

post #80 of 82
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
Blargh.....if I come across any working drivers on that card from the hackintosh crowd, I'll either link or PM it. You never know. I don't actually use a hackintosh. I just go through them because they're fun to read.

 

Thanks; I appreciate that. I’m obviously in the market for a newer card, and they’re the ones to whom I’ll turn when I finally decide on one. No way am I buying a four year old Apple 5870 for hundreds when I could buy a modern PC card and have it work perfectly in Windows and OS X. EFI boot menu? Pshh, who needs to see that?

 

On a related note: WHY ISN’T WINDOWS USING EFI YET. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THEM?! IT’S TWENTY FOURTEEN.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple ends Windows 7 support in Boot Camp for new Mac Pro