or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Winner announced in Windows XP on Intel Mac contest
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Winner announced in Windows XP on Intel Mac contest - Page 2

post #41 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by DaveGee
The contest:

http://windowsxp.onmac.net/The%20Contest.html

The forum:

http://forum.onmac.net/showthread.php?t=64

The photo proof:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/32436196@N00

Looks like (if this is legit and I think it is) 'Narf' is going to be paying the taxes on a cool $12,598 bucks!

Dave

If you go to OSNews you can download a QuickTime movie (.MOV) that shows Windows getting installed and running on an iMac. There is no sound and the video quality is kinda poor but that is probably because of the auto focusing and small file size since it clears up when the camera is held still. It would have been nice to see how we would choose which OS to boot, but I am sure there will be more articles on this subject in the near future, with screen shots.
post #42 of 113
That, I don't get.

It's an x86 mobo. It's running Windows. So why wouldn't the regular drivers work? Are we back to s00per seekrit speshul Apple video cards *again*?
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #43 of 113
Ars mentions:
"For most people that means they'll be playing EVE Online on their iMacs"

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060316-6393.html
WTF? I thought no video drivers yet......................
post #44 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by Dean812
I just dont understand why any Mac user would want to boot Windows to begin with!! I mean arent we all Mac users because we dont like the way Windows runs? I know for me, Windows became increasingly frustrating and laborious. Macs run so much smoother and more sisinctly. Not to mention the entire OS is soooo much more stable.

I guess I just dont get the whole interest in the ability to boot Windows.

Also, I thought the contest was interesting at first but I def see where the prize money stopped all the creative conversations that we usually see on these forums about a solution to a particular problem. Like someone else said, it stopped everyone from working together. Was a bad idea imo. ( For everyone other than the winner that is.)

Plus the solution is crazy!!!! I would have thought the solution was going to be relatively easy. Like something we all could do. I dont know about anyone else but I havent owned a PC since WIndows 98 and try not to ever even sit in front of one let alone own one. Seems like the solution that won the money was and is very difficult for the average user. So i just dont see how ANY of this helped any of us.

Only thing prize money does is create greed, and stiffles a community from working together to achieve something. IMO anyway.

People neved worked together to createDeaPeaJay a solution. That's wishful thinking.

Prizes, and other rewards, such as patents, are there for the express purpose of creating incentive. Otherwise people just talk, and never actually spend the sweat.

This solution is kinky, it's true. But, someone else will find a way to build upon it. Possibly, there is a way to put a Windows drive in a Mac and install from that so that no PC is needed right there. That would be another step.

It's also possible that someone else can find errors in his process, or better ways of implementing it.

There are other projects out these as well, as has been linked to on this thread.

Why would someone who has bought a Mac want to run Windows? This has been commented upon so many times that it's difficult to add anything new.

But, there are three reasons.

The first is that Mac users may sometimes find that they need to run the occasional Windows program. Possibly for work or school. They may also be curious, and want to learn something about it. They may also want to play some games that are simply never going to be on this platform.

The second is that there are people out there who run Windows, who also want to run OS X and/or want to use Apple hardware without committing themselves to the OS for everything. The opposite of the person above.

Three is that there are gamers out there who really want a Mac, but who can't afford two machines. Buying a Mac that also boots Windows to run at full speed is just the combo they want.

I didn't cover all of the details here, but you should get the idea.

Don't be so blinded to think that everyone who is exposed to OS X is going to drop everything they use now and totally switch over. It ain't gonna happen!
post #45 of 113
Originally posted by grahamw
Why would I want to boot windows on my gorgeous 20" iMac? For the odd time I want to play a $2000 (Canadian) Xbox. Seriously.

If the game has a Macintosh version, I'll buy and play that version. If not - and I want to play it, I'll boot Windows. Be that as it may, it'll be a stripped down, barebones Windows that only has what it needs to get the gaming done.

Damn I'm going to have to slipstream a thin (HA!) Windows SP2 when I get home. Now they just have to get the video drivers inline!



Heh... At the end of the day once I get my job thing sorted out that's what I'll do. Kiss goodbye to Windows gaming. Get a sweet iMac/ Mac mini core duo and then get a PS3 for all my gaming. F.E.A.R and Half Life 2 have (are) superb but is it really worth all the Windows trouble if one were to use Windows primarily for games ???
post #46 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by minderbinder
What's your source on that? Sounds like it may just be speculation.

Regardless of whether VPC comes out, there will probably be other solutions that allow running windows apps without a reboot (wine, Q, etc). [/B]

I can't quote a source right now, but numerous programmers on other sites have pretty much agreed to that. When I first brought up that concept, many rushed in to give rather detailed reasons why it would be. I have no doubt they are correct.

In speaking to people from Connectix years ago as to why they couldn't hijack the video hardware of the Mac with VPC, the reason they gave was that one. They said that the PPC chip wasn't the problem. Only one OS can control that hardware. They were looking onto it, but couldn't find a solution.
post #47 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
That, I don't get.

It's an x86 mobo. It's running Windows. So why wouldn't the regular drivers work? Are we back to s00per seekrit speshul Apple video cards *again*?

Windows biggest problem is driverseven on the Windows platform!

Apple implements things differently. There is likely enough of a difference to matter. don't forget that EFI handles these matters differently as well.
post #48 of 113
WOw Great news this!...

Just a thought, wonder how fast windows applications run on the dual core, i.e. photoshop? maybe this would be a get around using Roseta, until Adobe get there arse in to gear.

what do people think on this?

cheers

tommyt74
post #49 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Prizes, and other rewards, such as patents, are there for the express purpose of creating incentive. Otherwise people just talk, and never actually spend the sweat.

Too true.

Also, I'm surprised at how, well, surprised people are by the economic model here. Think of it as 700 people prepaying a $20 shareware fee for something they wanted badly.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #50 of 113
Originally posted by melgross

The first is that Mac users may sometimes find that they need to run the occasional Windows program. Possibly for work or school. They may also be curious, and want to learn something about it. They may also want to play some games that are simply never going to be on this platform.

The second is that there are people out there who run Windows, who also want to run OS X and/or want to use Apple hardware without committing themselves to the OS for everything. The opposite of the person above.

Three is that there are gamers out there who really want a Mac, but who can't afford two machines. Buying a Mac that also boots Windows to run at full speed is just the combo they want.



Perfectly said.
post #51 of 113
Maybe a similar contest incentive could push ATI to write special drivers for WinXP for Intel-based Macs.

I'm sure the drivers would be on everyone's doorstep within 20 days since it's probably a few couple tweaks to existing drivers.
post #52 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by grahamw
Why would I want to boot windows on my gorgeous 20" iMac?

Why are you asking us? Or do you mean why do YOU want to boot windows? Oh, wait...that's already been answered about a dozen times.

Quote:
Originally posted by sunilraman
[i]Originally posted by jms698
FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK
that just blows it for me.
FUCK. and i'm being serious here.

What blows it? That they haven't fixed every last issue in the FIRST DAY that this solution was released?


Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
So why wouldn't the regular drivers work?

Looks like a combination of recent video hardware, plus it's laptop video chips. Most people running the x1600 have laptops which included a custom install/restore disk from the hardware vendor. The guys involved with this have said they don't think it will be a problem, it's just a matter of time.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
In speaking to people from Connectix years ago as to why they couldn't hijack the video hardware of the Mac with VPC, the reason they gave was that one. They said that the PPC chip wasn't the problem. Only one OS can control that hardware. They were looking onto it, but couldn't find a solution.

If that turns out to be true, there's still the possibility of running something like WINE that runs windows apps without actually having to run the windows OS.

Quote:
Originally posted by tommyt74
Just a thought, wonder how fast windows applications run on the dual core, i.e. photoshop? maybe this would be a get around using Roseta, until Adobe get there arse in to gear.

About the same speed as any other windows box with that core duo.
post #53 of 113
would this be faster then using Roseta?

tommyt74
post #54 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by tommyt74
would this be faster then using Roseta?

tommyt74

Yes. If you don't mind rebooting just for that one app.
post #55 of 113
would this mean, that when developing software, u could possibly use a generic programme that will run on Macs and Pc? if this was the case then, programmes would get much better rather then having too right two programmes.

tommyt74
post #56 of 113
To all the people who are complaining that VMWare hasn't been ported to Mac, and Virtual PC doesn't run on Intel Macs, have you tried this out?

http://openosx.com/wintel/

I haven't tried it myself, but it looks promising, and it reportedly runs well on Intel Macs.

Probably not a solution for gamers I realize, but for all the people who've used Virtual PC, it looks like an option.
 
Reply
 
Reply
post #57 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by minderbinder
Why are you asking us? Or do you mean why do YOU want to boot windows? Oh, wait...that's already been answered about a dozen times.

Maybe you missed that - it was a rhetorical question. No need to be a snark about it.
Modding for Great Justice
Reply
Modding for Great Justice
Reply
post #58 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by tommyt74
would this mean, that when developing software, u could possibly use a generic programme that will run on Macs and Pc?

No.

Quote:
Originally posted by grahamw
Maybe you missed that - it was a rhetorical question. No need to be a snark about it.

Sorry, I misread your post. After the multitude of "but why would I want to..." posts I've seen I tend to ignore everything else after that.
post #59 of 113
LOOK!!!!! got to wal mart buy a $300 Emachine with flatscreen load it up with Mondo ram get a huge ass eSSSpensive Gourmet graphics card "make sure you never use this machine for internet to avoid maleware" and use that for games...

and then shed app!!!! you windows lovin windows envying bitches.........
post #60 of 113
Does anyone know if this will work on the Mac mini?
post #61 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by tommyt74
WOw Great news this!...

Just a thought, wonder how fast windows applications run on the dual core, i.e. photoshop? maybe this would be a get around using Roseta, until Adobe get there arse in to gear.

what do people think on this?

cheers

tommyt74


With this announcement why does Adobe even have to think about "getting their arse in to gear"? Just stop all development of Mac products right now and tell people to run Windows on their Macs. Ever think think about that, tommy74? Hmmmm?
post #62 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by minderbinder
Sorry, I misread your post. After the multitude of "but why would I want to..." posts I've seen I tend to ignore everything else after that.

It's alright, sorry I got snippy about it.
Modding for Great Justice
Reply
Modding for Great Justice
Reply
post #63 of 113
Graham, that's cool, it was my bad.

Quote:
Originally posted by lkrupp
With this announcement why does Adobe even have to think about "getting their arse in to gear"? Just stop all development of Mac products right now and tell people to run Windows on their Macs. Ever think think about that, tommy74? Hmmmm?

You think they're going to tell customers they have to spend $300 extra and reboot their machines every time they want to run photoshop? Why aren't they just doing that today, just tell users to get a PC and get rid of their mac?

Sure, that's a great idea if Adobe wants to lose all their mac customers to another company that IS willing to ship a mac version. Adobe can do whatever they want, but mac users will punish them for it.
post #64 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by noah93
Does anyone know if this will work on the Mac mini?

Yes, it works on the mini. Its almost the simplest machine since it uses built-in graphics.
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
post #65 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by minderbinder
What's your source on that? Sounds like it may just be speculation.

Regardless of whether VPC comes out, there will probably be other solutions that allow running windows apps without a reboot (wine, Q, etc).

PCI-Express doesn't support virtualisation, as such only one OS can have control at any one time so if you attempt to run an OS in an OS like VPC does then OS X gets the video card. Middle of next year there is meant to be support for virtualised PCI-Express as part of Intel's continuing push in the server space but it isn't here yet.
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
post #66 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by Dean812
I just dont understand why any Mac user would want to boot Windows to begin with!! I mean arent we all Mac users because we dont like the way Windows runs? I know for me, Windows became increasingly frustrating and laborious. Macs run so much smoother and more sisinctly. Not to mention the entire OS is soooo much more stable.

I guess I just dont get the whole interest in the ability to boot Windows.

I have a reason to want this: CADD. The best solution I've seen (for me, at least) is called Concepts Unlimited (www.csi-concepts.com), but as of yet it can't touch SolidWorks. You know, limit my frustrations with Windows...

Industrial Designers, like me, who like to use their Mac for design work (other than CADD) typically need a PC handy to do the other work. Most just use a PC. VPC is too choppy to be usable (again, a subjective opinion).

Still looking forward to seeing a VM solution, but this would work for now!
post #67 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by auxio
To all the people who are complaining that VMWare hasn't been ported to Mac, and Virtual PC doesn't run on Intel Macs, have you tried this out?

http://openosx.com/wintel/

I haven't tried it myself, but it looks promising, and it reportedly runs well on Intel Macs.

Probably not a solution for gamers I realize, but for all the people who've used Virtual PC, it looks like an option.

1. WinTel is just a front-end for QEMU - you could just download one of the freeware front-ends like Q and use that. In fact, this would be preferable over using WinTel, since they are a bunch of con artists and their software is buggy crap (especially recently, when they used to use the unusably slow Bochs and market it as a legitimate alternative to VPC).

2. Even with QEMU, you're still running an emulator, not a virtual machine. This means performance is going to be far, far slower than it would be with a virtual machine.
Proud member of AppleInsider since before the World Wide Web existed.
Reply
Proud member of AppleInsider since before the World Wide Web existed.
Reply
post #68 of 113
I guess I'm being a bit pessimistic with regard to the crack team getting the video driver side happening. with the GMA950 that should be much closer to getting it sorted out for Windows-on-Mac to access. The biggie is 3D stuff happening on the x1600. a decent card, capable of running some nice decent 3d games.

Apple should covertly (anonymous donor) fund development of the 3d graphics driver for the Windows-dual-boot-on-x1600-Macs. If accomplished, it would really really boost sales IMHO.
post #69 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by CharlesS


2. Even with QEMU, you're still running an emulator, not a virtual machine. This means performance is going to be far, far slower than it would be with a virtual machine.

The Q ppl claim to be working on virtualization. When that is done, you can expect pretty much everything other than apps that make heavy use of the video card (i.e., games) to run at near native speeds. For most people, it will be a much, much better solution than dual-boot. But gamers will still need dual-boot (with working video card support).
post #70 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by auxio
To all the people who are complaining that VMWare hasn't been ported to Mac, and Virtual PC doesn't run on Intel Macs, have you tried this out?

http://openosx.com/wintel/

I haven't tried it myself, but it looks promising, and it reportedly runs well on Intel Macs.

Probably not a solution for gamers I realize, but for all the people who've used Virtual PC, it looks like an option.

It's very bad. Takes FOREVER (or it just seems to) to install XP, and when it's done...
post #71 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by minderbinder
If that turns out to be true, there's still the possibility of running something like WINE that runs windows apps without actually having to run the windows OS.

Sure. But that doesn't seem to be a very popular idea here. And, it only runs SOME apps.


http://darwine.opendarwin.org//
post #72 of 113
Fuck Windows!!
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #73 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by Ireland
Fuck Windows!!

(5, Insightful)
post #74 of 113
Originally posted by Ireland
Fuck Windows!!



post #75 of 113
Still waiting...

Quote:
Thank you for your inquiry. Unfortunately, we do not provide information in advance of an official press release. My only suggestion is to stay tuned to our website for further details.

Kind Regards,

XXXXXXXXXX
VMware Sales Operations
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
post #76 of 113
Quote:
Originally posted by auxio
To all the people who are complaining that VMWare hasn't been ported to Mac, and Virtual PC doesn't run on Intel Macs, have you tried this out?

http://openosx.com/wintel/

I haven't tried it myself, but it looks promising, and it reportedly runs well on Intel Macs.

Probably not a solution for gamers I realize, but for all the people who've used Virtual PC, it looks like an option.

I believe the thought was a few months ago that the software was horse $h!t. Maybe that has changed. After using my mini Core duo for a few days now, I am about half willing to fork over the $$ to try it. This mini is freaky fast compared to my 1.8 GHz iMac. When Office and Adobe get with it on the UB's, my hardcore windows neighbor may switch.
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #77 of 113
Does anyone know if narf2006's modifications to the WinXP boot disc are legal? I can just see the guys in Redmond slapping down a huge lawsuit against these guys. Maybe that's why they want to remain anonymous. Personally I think a dualboot iMac is great. I just don't want these clever guys to get hung up in a lawsuit.
"...men are that they might have joy."
Reply
"...men are that they might have joy."
Reply
post #78 of 113
I would imagine since they are changing the bootloader to get XP to install & run, it could be a violation of the XP EULA, since part of the EULA prevents reverse engineering of any of XP. Whether MS does anything about it is another matter.
post #79 of 113
There is no way this whole thing is not in violation of XP's EULA.

That said, Microsoft doesn't make the law, so it is certainly not illegal.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #80 of 113
Since this requires legitimate XP discs (or at least doesn't require pirated discs like OSX86 does), Redmond shouldn't care.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Winner announced in Windows XP on Intel Mac contest