Ok I've tried to load this only to get the message
Your startup disk cannot be partitioned because some files cannot be moved
It then advises you to copy all your files, clear your disk, restore and try again. Before going to all that trouble, and risk, does anyone have any idea about a more minor change that would allow the files to be moved (an no, it doesnt say what files ).
and it looks to remain a beta as well. This won't be a seperate product. It expires soon after Leopard is expected to be released.
Then we should be able to find out when Apple is expecting the release of Leopard by tweaking the date/time settings on a machine that has Boot Camp installed. Someone up for that?
I recently spoke to a guy who has owned a post house for over 10 years. He uses Avid on Macs. I asked about the late 90's and if he considered switching to Windows from Mac.
He said no he never considered it at all. He told me most of the post houses that ran Avid on Windows were new start ups. Most all the old post houses that used Avid on Mac did not switch.
In fact when Avid was ported to Windows the Mac community was afraid Avid would dump development for the Mac. The Mac community openly and loudly complained to Avid about this fear.
Avid stated its dedication and continued support of the Mac even when Apple was spiraling down the drain.
Yes, that's true, I remember it very well, because I was one of those people using Avid's.
But, you see, that situation was VERY different. At the time, most of Avid's users were STILL on the Mac. Not the other way around.
One owner of an editing facility, out in the midwest, said that he had almost 106 Avid editing systems running on Mac's, and they were out all the time, and he could use more (they sent them to location). He had bought 28 NT units, thinking that they would do well, but they weren't rented much.
This was during the time period that Avid was forcing a change, when their hi end programs were just running on NT. then, Avid said that they valued their Mac customers, and had new software for us. It was a program to move our Mac based projects over to the NT systems!
This didn't sit well, and Avid's sales dropped through the floor.
They ended up firing all of their management, reorganized the company, almost went into bankrupcy, and totally changed direction back to the Mac. Now their sales are about 75% Mac with the rest mostly windows.
But if their customer base had been slowely moving over to NT on their own, until most of them moved over, we might not see Avid on the Mac today.
Then we should be able to find out when Apple is expecting the release of Leopard by tweaking the date/time settings on a machine that has Boot Camp installed. Someone up for that?
Somewhere, I read about the date. It was somewhere in the first quarter of 2007, I think, or maybe out to April, but I'm not 100% on that. Don't remember where I read it either. but it was today, er (looking at the time on the monitor), yesterday, actually.
It's been discussed for years and years. I'm sure they discuss it at Apple on a periodic basis.
For those who dismiss it, and I'm not saying that you are, no developer would ever leave the Mac platform because of it.
That's wrong. We've seen developers leave the platform even without it!
The best hope here, and I'm sure that Apple is seeing it the same way, is that the growth of the platform will give impetus to developers to stay, and even have new ones join in. If Windows gives Apple a good number of new customers, and most of those who buy a Mac with the eventual idea of installing Windows, never do, then this will be good.
But Apple can't become a one stop shop all alone, with few other developers in competition. No matter how good Apple's programs can be, there will always be people who prefer working another way. If there is only one way on the Mac platform, then Apple will find that there is a limited base of customers to pull from.
Just like there are people who love InDesign, and hate Quark, there are those who love Quark, but hate Indesign. If one of those left the Mac platform, there would be many people who would go to Windows, because their favorite program was only to be found there.
Remember that computer platforms are only as good as the software running on them.
But, it's also better to have five programs that are pretty good, on a platform, than just one that's really good.
I agree to a certain degree, but I think it is also a very risky game that Apple is playing here. It could go well, but it could also go awfully bad.
It's possible that in a few years, more people will have Windows Vista on their mac-intel than not, simply because of the abundance of Vista-software, and less and less developers will continue to produce Mac OSX-software... until MacOSX experiences the same as IBM's OS2 and dies, and then Apple will have to compete only with the characteristics of its hardware and design...
Yes, Windows will run at 'full speed'. It will depend on the optimization of the GPU drivers, etc, but it appears from what little benchmarking I've seen that it isn't bad for the hardware being used.
Note the CPU marks on the iMac are *better* than the 3GHz PentiumD gaming rig. Wacky, huh?
The GPU marks are lower, but I'll leave it to someone else to interpret that. [/B]
That's a great find. It means the Apple GPU driver is really not bad at all, impressive. It's not super duper but 3800+ 3dmarks is not bad for a x1600. it gets about 4100 on a pc driver, so it really isn't that bad. Finally someone can by an Intel iMac, and play most PC games on "medium" setting. This is fucking HUGE.
The CPU settings show what an awesome chip the Intel Core is. A 2ghz Core Duo going up against a 3ghz Pentium D and the Core Duo having an edge, nice
Then we should be able to find out when Apple is expecting the release of Leopard by tweaking the date/time settings on a machine that has Boot Camp installed. Someone up for that?
Apple's betas aren't usually timebombed. X11 beta for Jaguar, for example, still works, as does Xgrid beta for Panther.
Apple's betas aren't usually timebombed. X11 beta for Jaguar, for example, still works, as does Xgrid beta for Panther.
Really? I keep thinking this is just like iChat AV. It was free to try until 10.3 came out and you had to upgrade your OS if you wanted to keep using it. I know my version of iChat AV stopped working after that, and I'm sure boot camp will be the same way. It's the ultimate incentive to upgrade. Everyone installs bootcamp now, gets it up and running, and then by December if they want to keep using it, they'll have to pay for it. It almost reminds me of this kid by the playground who used to give out free bags of pot...
Okay, this all kind of hinges on a single point though...
Name the Mac developers that can tell their users "Oh well, we've decided to drop Mac support - just spend an additional $100-200 and then you can buy our Windows version on top of that...", and have them snap to and do it. I can't think of one. It'd be marketshare suicide for the app.
How about Intuit or MYOB?
Both of which have ancient crufty apps that time hasn't been kind to on MacOS. As OSX development has raced ahead, they've 'made do' with minor updates or versions of their Windows apps with features cut on the Mac. On Windows, they've added more features and since the OS and UI are essentially the same as Windows 3.0, they even look vaguely modern too.
Both of those companies only pay lip service to the Mac because they have few competitors on the Mac. No Microsoft Money or Sage. Both have Windows versions already that will run just fine under bootcamp.
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
Heck, users bitch whine and moan about *regular* upgrade pricing - you think they're going to blow the money on a Windows license just to run an app? \
Like I said, it'd take every developer in an entire market segment ditching simultaneously to actually cause a problem, and I just don't see that happening. For every Adobe that might ditch, there are a couple other developers waiting in the wings, salivating at grabbing some of that marketshare.
I hope so, as otherwise I'll have to get a Windows box to do my accounts and invoicing.
The key Windows software I use for work are Access, Microsoft Project and Visio. I can probably get away with Omni instead of visio, but the other two will be harder to find a decent replacement.
Do you need the exact programs or just alternatives?
hmurchison, you are a senior member too and I have a question for you. Do you think with this strategy from Apple, it gives Microsoft every excuse now to drop all mac software. They already dropped IE and WMP for Mac, now they can drop Mac Office.
From where I sit, I would love to see Office for mac killed for 3 reasons;
1: Office for mac is a retarded cousen to its windows counter part, I am sorry, I didnt mean to insult retarded cousens like that. Why no Outlook, Project, Visio, you know, the stuff that makes Office usefull to a greater extent than every other word processor+spreadsheet tool on the planet.
2: this would set MS up for more anti-trust suff...they control like 99% of the productivity app market, if they lock that down to only their OS, then they will be potentially abusing 2 monopolies at once.
3: If Apple, and the apple community devs (like Omni) could work on a real productivity set in the light of day, with the power of OSX, and not wory about Windows cross-compadibility, they could show some innovation, Office today is much like office 97, they have reved it, and made it take 4x the system to run, and what new features have we gotten? clippy? macro viruses? a slightly better spell check? Real innovation is needed here, and if MS would do this, it would free Apple up to do what they need to do.
One thing that needs to everyone here: are you using an Apple Mac for the hardware, the OS, or both? I know I am using it for both. If I really wanted to spend my time running Windows, then I wouldn't need the Apple hardware. I like the way my system runs, that it is quick to go to sleep and wake up. Last thing I want to do is use Windows, unless I have some dire emergency.
You'll see me grumbling to the developer of the software if I do find myself having to do that, or hunting down a Mac equivalent.
Apple should also make a version that would allow the same on PowerPC Macs. Why?
-----
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
There's already VirtualPC and Q, both of which are ten times more useful than BootCamp.
First off... Why would rob05au even think this would even be remotly possible on PowerPC based Mac. The only reason this was doable at all is due to the fact that the chips Apple uses now are Intel (x86ish based) chips.
Second when aegisdesign says "VirtualPC and Q ... ten times more useful" he MUST really mean VirtualPC and Q one tenth as compatible at one tenth the speed!
Comments
Your startup disk cannot be partitioned because some files cannot be moved
It then advises you to copy all your files, clear your disk, restore and try again. Before going to all that trouble, and risk, does anyone have any idea about a more minor change that would allow the files to be moved (an no, it doesnt say what files ).
Thanks.
Originally posted by melgross
and it looks to remain a beta as well. This won't be a seperate product. It expires soon after Leopard is expected to be released.
Then we should be able to find out when Apple is expecting the release of Leopard by tweaking the date/time settings on a machine that has Boot Camp installed. Someone up for that?
Originally posted by TenoBell
I recently spoke to a guy who has owned a post house for over 10 years. He uses Avid on Macs. I asked about the late 90's and if he considered switching to Windows from Mac.
He said no he never considered it at all. He told me most of the post houses that ran Avid on Windows were new start ups. Most all the old post houses that used Avid on Mac did not switch.
In fact when Avid was ported to Windows the Mac community was afraid Avid would dump development for the Mac. The Mac community openly and loudly complained to Avid about this fear.
Avid stated its dedication and continued support of the Mac even when Apple was spiraling down the drain.
Yes, that's true, I remember it very well, because I was one of those people using Avid's.
But, you see, that situation was VERY different. At the time, most of Avid's users were STILL on the Mac. Not the other way around.
One owner of an editing facility, out in the midwest, said that he had almost 106 Avid editing systems running on Mac's, and they were out all the time, and he could use more (they sent them to location). He had bought 28 NT units, thinking that they would do well, but they weren't rented much.
This was during the time period that Avid was forcing a change, when their hi end programs were just running on NT. then, Avid said that they valued their Mac customers, and had new software for us. It was a program to move our Mac based projects over to the NT systems!
This didn't sit well, and Avid's sales dropped through the floor.
They ended up firing all of their management, reorganized the company, almost went into bankrupcy, and totally changed direction back to the Mac. Now their sales are about 75% Mac with the rest mostly windows.
But if their customer base had been slowely moving over to NT on their own, until most of them moved over, we might not see Avid on the Mac today.
I'm on set one day for 16 hours, and I come on this site to find hell frozen over.
This came out of nowhere.
And now this:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...loaded&pl=true
Jesus Christ.
Hmmmm...maybe I'll start using photoimpact again I left it for dead when I switched.
Originally posted by Anders
Then we should be able to find out when Apple is expecting the release of Leopard by tweaking the date/time settings on a machine that has Boot Camp installed. Someone up for that?
Somewhere, I read about the date. It was somewhere in the first quarter of 2007, I think, or maybe out to April, but I'm not 100% on that. Don't remember where I read it either. but it was today, er (looking at the time on the monitor), yesterday, actually.
Originally posted by rob05au
Apple should also make a version that would allow the same on PowerPC Macs.
Certainly not. It would be too difficult and not forward looking. The money is MUCH MUCH better spent elsewhere
Originally posted by melgross
It's been discussed for years and years. I'm sure they discuss it at Apple on a periodic basis.
For those who dismiss it, and I'm not saying that you are, no developer would ever leave the Mac platform because of it.
That's wrong. We've seen developers leave the platform even without it!
The best hope here, and I'm sure that Apple is seeing it the same way, is that the growth of the platform will give impetus to developers to stay, and even have new ones join in. If Windows gives Apple a good number of new customers, and most of those who buy a Mac with the eventual idea of installing Windows, never do, then this will be good.
But Apple can't become a one stop shop all alone, with few other developers in competition. No matter how good Apple's programs can be, there will always be people who prefer working another way. If there is only one way on the Mac platform, then Apple will find that there is a limited base of customers to pull from.
Just like there are people who love InDesign, and hate Quark, there are those who love Quark, but hate Indesign. If one of those left the Mac platform, there would be many people who would go to Windows, because their favorite program was only to be found there.
Remember that computer platforms are only as good as the software running on them.
But, it's also better to have five programs that are pretty good, on a platform, than just one that's really good.
I agree to a certain degree, but I think it is also a very risky game that Apple is playing here. It could go well, but it could also go awfully bad.
It's possible that in a few years, more people will have Windows Vista on their mac-intel than not, simply because of the abundance of Vista-software, and less and less developers will continue to produce Mac OSX-software... until MacOSX experiences the same as IBM's OS2 and dies, and then Apple will have to compete only with the characteristics of its hardware and design...
I hope not, cause I really like OSX.
Nightcrawler
Originally posted by Kickaha
Yes, Windows will run at 'full speed'. It will depend on the optimization of the GPU drivers, etc, but it appears from what little benchmarking I've seen that it isn't bad for the hardware being used.
Fer instance: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?c=880378_1
Note the CPU marks on the iMac are *better* than the 3GHz PentiumD gaming rig. Wacky, huh?
The GPU marks are lower, but I'll leave it to someone else to interpret that. [/B]
That's a great find. It means the Apple GPU driver is really not bad at all, impressive. It's not super duper but 3800+ 3dmarks is not bad for a x1600. it gets about 4100 on a pc driver, so it really isn't that bad. Finally someone can by an Intel iMac, and play most PC games on "medium" setting. This is fucking HUGE.
The CPU settings show what an awesome chip the Intel Core is. A 2ghz Core Duo going up against a 3ghz Pentium D and the Core Duo having an edge, nice
Originally posted by Anders
Then we should be able to find out when Apple is expecting the release of Leopard by tweaking the date/time settings on a machine that has Boot Camp installed. Someone up for that?
Apple's betas aren't usually timebombed. X11 beta for Jaguar, for example, still works, as does Xgrid beta for Panther.
Originally posted by Chucker
Apple's betas aren't usually timebombed. X11 beta for Jaguar, for example, still works, as does Xgrid beta for Panther.
Really? I keep thinking this is just like iChat AV. It was free to try until 10.3 came out and you had to upgrade your OS if you wanted to keep using it. I know my version of iChat AV stopped working after that, and I'm sure boot camp will be the same way. It's the ultimate incentive to upgrade. Everyone installs bootcamp now, gets it up and running, and then by December if they want to keep using it, they'll have to pay for it. It almost reminds me of this kid by the playground who used to give out free bags of pot...
Originally posted by Kickaha
Okay, this all kind of hinges on a single point though...
Name the Mac developers that can tell their users "Oh well, we've decided to drop Mac support - just spend an additional $100-200 and then you can buy our Windows version on top of that...", and have them snap to and do it. I can't think of one. It'd be marketshare suicide for the app.
How about Intuit or MYOB?
Both of which have ancient crufty apps that time hasn't been kind to on MacOS. As OSX development has raced ahead, they've 'made do' with minor updates or versions of their Windows apps with features cut on the Mac. On Windows, they've added more features and since the OS and UI are essentially the same as Windows 3.0, they even look vaguely modern too.
Both of those companies only pay lip service to the Mac because they have few competitors on the Mac. No Microsoft Money or Sage. Both have Windows versions already that will run just fine under bootcamp.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Heck, users bitch whine and moan about *regular* upgrade pricing - you think they're going to blow the money on a Windows license just to run an app?
Like I said, it'd take every developer in an entire market segment ditching simultaneously to actually cause a problem, and I just don't see that happening. For every Adobe that might ditch, there are a couple other developers waiting in the wings, salivating at grabbing some of that marketshare.
I hope so, as otherwise I'll have to get a Windows box to do my accounts and invoicing.
Originally posted by rob05au
Apple should also make a version that would allow the same on PowerPC Macs.
Why?
There's already VirtualPC and Q, both of which are ten times more useful than BootCamp.
Originally posted by geobe
The key Windows software I use for work are Access, Microsoft Project and Visio. I can probably get away with Omni instead of visio, but the other two will be harder to find a decent replacement.
Do you need the exact programs or just alternatives?
Access = Filemaker
Project = xTime Project / Merlin
Visio = Omni Graffle
Originally posted by geobe
hmurchison, you are a senior member too and I have a question for you. Do you think with this strategy from Apple, it gives Microsoft every excuse now to drop all mac software. They already dropped IE and WMP for Mac, now they can drop Mac Office.
From where I sit, I would love to see Office for mac killed for 3 reasons;
1: Office for mac is a retarded cousen to its windows counter part, I am sorry, I didnt mean to insult retarded cousens like that. Why no Outlook, Project, Visio, you know, the stuff that makes Office usefull to a greater extent than every other word processor+spreadsheet tool on the planet.
2: this would set MS up for more anti-trust suff...they control like 99% of the productivity app market, if they lock that down to only their OS, then they will be potentially abusing 2 monopolies at once.
3: If Apple, and the apple community devs (like Omni) could work on a real productivity set in the light of day, with the power of OSX, and not wory about Windows cross-compadibility, they could show some innovation, Office today is much like office 97, they have reved it, and made it take 4x the system to run, and what new features have we gotten? clippy? macro viruses? a slightly better spell check? Real innovation is needed here, and if MS would do this, it would free Apple up to do what they need to do.
You'll see me grumbling to the developer of the software if I do find myself having to do that, or hunting down a Mac equivalent.
There is a virtualisation solution out there for those who wants a more integrated solution. It is discussed in this thread:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=62545
[/Anders edit]
.....It almost reminds me of this kid by the playground who used to give out free bags of pot...
Bloody hell where did you grow up ??
----
Apple should also make a version that would allow the same on PowerPC Macs. Why?
-----
Originally posted by aegisdesign
There's already VirtualPC and Q, both of which are ten times more useful than BootCamp.
First off... Why would rob05au even think this would even be remotly possible on PowerPC based Mac. The only reason this was doable at all is due to the fact that the chips Apple uses now are Intel (x86ish based) chips.
Second when aegisdesign says "VirtualPC and Q ... ten times more useful" he MUST really mean VirtualPC and Q one tenth as compatible at one tenth the speed!
Because that's the real truth...
Dave