Gawd, what WILL Vista have? I wonder if it will even turn "on" at this stage With the amount of stuff being stripped out on a daily (probably hourly) basis, what we'll end up with is the Bootup BIOS screen, then, shiny sexy Mac-esque screen, "Welcome to Microsoft Windows Vista".... and... that's about it.
Yeah, I googled "EFI Vista" at microsoft.com found something dated in April, also found several sites from March indicating that 32-bit Vista won't support EFI (at least not initially). The websites indicated that the server version would support EFI, and I also thought that I saw that 64-bit Vista would support EFI. This (March/April) timeframe predated 64-bit MacTels, so it wasn't clear to me the meaning of MS EFI support for 64-bit x86 CPU's.
Any clarification (or links) would be most appreciated, thanks.
Basically, my reason for asking, is if Vista doesn't support EFI what incentive is there for MB makers to include this feature, or do/will Intel (or nVidia/ATI) chipsets support EFI going forward?
Does Linux support EFI?
I mean if EFI isn't adopted by MB/GPU makers, what chance is there of seeing PC EFI GPU cards that we all can slap into a Mac, in the near future?
I believe the Vista EFI support is limited to Itanium (IA-64), not AMD64/x64/EM64T (x86-64).
Ouch, if that's true going forward.
The I2 at 90nm (June '06) and 1.66GHz (I know it's a fast chip at this clock, no MHz myth for me thank you), doesn't appear to be something Intel is updating anywhere near the pace of their EM64 chips?
I do remember that these have always been EFI from the get go, but lack of MS 3rd party software adoption has severly limited the success of these CPU's, and that this has caused Intel much frustration.
Hobbled by BIOS legacy, OUCH! I would really like to see an EFI ray of hope in the future (on the PC side), so that the Mac platform can leech PCIE HW!
The I2 at 130nm and 1.66GHz, doesn't appear to be something Intel is updating anywhere near the pace of their EM64 chips?
Well, the Itanium isn't for home markets, but it's been kind of dying, yes. Lots of vendors pulling back.
Quote:
Hobbled by BIOS legacy, OUCH! I would really like to see an EFI ray of hope in the future (on the PC side), so that the Mac platform can leech PCIE HW!
Chicken and egg. Microsoft don't want to support EFI when there's only one major vendor (Apple) using it. Vendors don't want to use EFI when the major OS (Windows) doesn't even support it. On other operating systems, it's a lot brighter. Obviously, Mac OS X has full EFI support, and Linux's has improved a lot, too.
Well, the Itanium isn't for home markets, but it's been kind of dying, yes. Lots of vendors pulling back.
Chicken and egg. Microsoft don't want to support EFI when there's only one major vendor (Apple) using it. Vendors don't want to use EFI when the major OS (Windows) doesn't even support it. On other operating systems, it's a lot brighter. Obviously, Mac OS X has full EFI support, and Linux's has improved a lot, too.
It's a real shame there aren't more PCIE cards for the Mac platform, but only the MAC Pro has multiple PCIE slots (not counting the G5 quad, since it's EOL).
This does bring up the OLD saw on a cheaper (i. e. Conroe) desktop, if it didn't have the potential to erode Mac Pro sales. More Mac multi slot PCIE systems, more market penetration, more 3rd party PCIE HW options.
I'm optimistic that this will change in the coming months, and certainly hope for some new products at (or shortly after) MWSF07.
If more PCs started shipping with EFI BIOSes, and graphics card manufacturers made their cards EFI compatible, these would work on Macs, correct?
No. You still need full drivers for them. If Apple or the card manufacturer don't provide one then you're stuck with EFI.
EFI only provides a very basic working driver model to boot itself and provide generic services to the OS. You'd be better off with a full implementation of Intel GMA than an EFI only driver for a Carlos Fandango XT700000XTX-GT Special Edition. It's like running Linux in frame buffer mode at best and I'd suspect MacOSX will just boot into single user character mode.
As such, we're in no better a position than Open Firmware support. The only difference is that with EFI, technically, a card manufacturer can ship identical hardware now with the same firmware on it. They've still got to write a MacOSX graphics driver.
If the cards used EFI, a driver for most operations would already be provided right and accessible through the firmware. Additional drivers would only be needed for 3D-accelerated operations, which is really no different than VGA BIOS, so I don't see the point of your remark.
Quote:
If Apple or the card manufacturer don't provide one then you're stuck with EFI.
What does EFI have to do with that?
Quote:
As such, we're in no better a position than Open Firmware support.
Yes, we are, because third parties are much more likely to adopt to EFI, which actually has a viable future, than they were for OpenFirmware.
Quote:
They've still got to write a MacOSX graphics driver.
OS X already ships with a lot of graphics drivers for many chipsets.
If the cards used EFI, a driver for most operations would already be provided right and accessible through the firmware. Additional drivers would only be needed for 3D-accelerated operations, which is really no different than VGA BIOS, so I don't see the point of your remark.
But that's the major issue. All EFI provides is a very basic driver. Enough to display text, a frame buffer-esque flat graphics mode and maybe a mouse cursor. You can't run OSX on that just the same as running OSX on plain jane VGA won't work either or be painful at best.
You ALSO have to provide a full hardware specific driver that supports all the shaders and pipelines of the specific chipset. Then there's stuff like HDCP and video in/out on the more media oriented cards. Dual display support...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker
What does EFI have to do with that?
Because if you're stuck with just an EFI driver it's as much use as a chocolate teapot. You may as well stick in a Cirrus Logic 1MB VGA card.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker
Yes, we are, because third parties are much more likely to adopt to EFI, which actually has a viable future, than they were for OpenFirmware.
Well that's one way of looking at it and I agree. There's certainly a rosier future for it than Open Firmware even without Microsoft behind it but I still don't see why a card manufacturer would go to the trouble of supporting EFI when Windows does not.
Windows not supporting EFI is a major blow to the uptake of EFI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker
OS X already ships with a lot of graphics drivers for many chipsets.
It supports SOME of ATi, SOME of Nvidia and SOME of Intel's chipsets. Whereas that's probably good enough for most of the market, Apple only has to create drivers that support cards it's shipped in it's hardware. What happens if it decides to stop shipping ATi cards in it's Macs? Where will your driver updates come from then when ATi ships a new chipset?
EFI doesn't solve that problem, no more than Open Firmware did.
You're still reliant on the card manufacturers writing OSX drivers for their cards if Apple do not. You can't just slap in an EFI card and expect it to run DOOM 3 at 500 OMG!s per second although it might play Gravitar and that's a better game anyway.
But that's the major issue. All EFI provides is a very basic driver. Enough to display text, a frame buffer-esque flat graphics mode and maybe a mouse cursor. You can't run OSX on that just the same as running OSX on plain jane VGA won't work either or be painful at best.
EFI easily provides a driver at very high resolution. It easily does 1440x900, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it handle 2560x1600.
Quote:
You ALSO have to provide a full hardware specific driver that supports all the shaders and pipelines of the specific chipset.
But Apple already provides such drivers.
Quote:
Because if you're stuck with just an EFI driver it's as much use as a chocolate teapot. You may as well stick in a Cirrus Logic 1MB VGA card.
No, because a Cirrus Logic 1MB VGA card can handle nowhere near the same resolutions and color depths EFI on every Intel Mac already can.
Quote:
Windows not supporting EFI is a major blow to the uptake of EFI.
Certainly.
Quote:
It supports SOME of ATi, SOME of Nvidia and SOME of Intel's chipsets.
What doesn't it support?
Quote:
What happens if it decides to stop shipping ATi cards in it's Macs? Where will your driver updates come from then when ATi ships a new chipset?
Why would ATi suddenly decide not to release Mac drivers any more?
Quote:
You're still reliant on the card manufacturers writing OSX drivers for their cards if Apple do not.
For high-end features, yes.
Quote:
You can't just slap in an EFI card and expect it to run DOOM 3 at 500 OMG!s per second
If more PCs started shipping with EFI BIOSes, and graphics card manufacturers made their cards EFI compatible, these would work on Macs, correct?
In theory they should. However, they'd need an incentive to move to EFI ahead of Microsoft like another major operating system. Since Apple is sticking to its very narrow view of computers and expecting everyone to come to them, I wouldn?t expect EFI anytime soon. EFI might be an open standard, but for all intents and purposes it?s just like open firmware. The PC makers can't change until Microsoft changes, they have nowhere else to go. Microsoft isn't going to change until they want to put in the effort
The PC makers can't change until Microsoft changes, they have nowhere else to go.
Gateway has had EFI consumer computers for years, so it's certainly possible to do this even if you're not Apple. For Windows, it doesn't matter, as there's emulation.
The problem is lack of incentive. One thing that can be done a lot nicer in EFI than in BIOS is setting up drivers easily and early on through the firmware. Another is providing a smart boot menu. Heck, why not provide a target disk mode while you're at it.
I would think yes, unless Apple programmed lock-outs in the drivers so it only uses an Apple video card.
Well, Apple's drivers respond to specific PCI signatures, but those could probably adjusted easily; plus, there's no reason Apple would deliberately lock out third parties.
EFI easily provides a driver at very high resolution. It easily does 1440x900, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it handle 2560x1600.
And your point is?
There's more to graphics hardware than just the resolution of the display.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker
But Apple already provides such drivers.
But what if they didn't. Do the Intel Macs support ATi all the way back to the Rage128?
Or what if you want to use a card from Matrox? EFI doesn't help you get anything but basics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker
No, because a Cirrus Logic 1MB VGA card can handle nowhere near the same resolutions and color depths EFI on every Intel Mac already can.
It still stands that that's about the level of hardware support you'll get, just with a bigger frame buffer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker
What doesn't it support?
Without running through the whole list of ATi, Nvidia and Intel chipsets, surely you can see that Apple have picked and chose which they support even from just that subset of manufacturers and have chosen not to support specific features of the cards that weren't required for their Macs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker
Why would ATi suddenly decide not to release Mac drivers any more?
AMD buying them and the parent company deciding it's not financially worth it? Who knows. EFI doesn't solve that. Do nVidia release Mac drivers at all?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker
For high-end features, yes.
High end features like Core Graphics and Quartz. EFI doesn't get you that.
What's the point in using a card that isn't supported except by EFI if even the cheap cards Apple do support can beat EFI drivers into a corner.
EFI is useful to get a machine booted but past that, it's as useful as VGA.
Comments
If more PCs started shipping with EFI BIOSes, and graphics card manufacturers made their cards EFI compatible, these would work on Macs, correct?
Yessir.
Yessir.
So when might we see this?
When 64-bit Vista is released?
I'm assuming a 64-bit Vista will be released later this fall.
Vista will not have EFI support.
Gawd, what WILL Vista have? I wonder if it will even turn "on" at this stage
Vista will not have EFI support.
Yeah, I googled "EFI Vista" at microsoft.com found something dated in April, also found several sites from March indicating that 32-bit Vista won't support EFI (at least not initially). The websites indicated that the server version would support EFI, and I also thought that I saw that 64-bit Vista would support EFI. This (March/April) timeframe predated 64-bit MacTels, so it wasn't clear to me the meaning of MS EFI support for 64-bit x86 CPU's.
Any clarification (or links) would be most appreciated, thanks.
Basically, my reason for asking, is if Vista doesn't support EFI what incentive is there for MB makers to include this feature, or do/will Intel (or nVidia/ATI) chipsets support EFI going forward?
Does Linux support EFI?
I mean if EFI isn't adopted by MB/GPU makers, what chance is there of seeing PC EFI GPU cards that we all can slap into a Mac, in the near future?
Thanks again (I'm definitely a n00b on this one).
I believe the Vista EFI support is limited to Itanium (IA-64), not AMD64/x64/EM64T (x86-64).
Ouch, if that's true going forward.
The I2 at 90nm (June '06) and 1.66GHz (I know it's a fast chip at this clock, no MHz myth for me thank you), doesn't appear to be something Intel is updating anywhere near the pace of their EM64 chips?
I do remember that these have always been EFI from the get go, but lack of MS 3rd party software adoption has severly limited the success of these CPU's, and that this has caused Intel much frustration.
Hobbled by BIOS legacy, OUCH! I would really like to see an EFI ray of hope in the future (on the PC side), so that the Mac platform can leech PCIE HW!
Ouch, if that's true going forward.
The I2 at 130nm and 1.66GHz, doesn't appear to be something Intel is updating anywhere near the pace of their EM64 chips?
Well, the Itanium isn't for home markets, but it's been kind of dying, yes. Lots of vendors pulling back.
Hobbled by BIOS legacy, OUCH! I would really like to see an EFI ray of hope in the future (on the PC side), so that the Mac platform can leech PCIE HW!
Chicken and egg. Microsoft don't want to support EFI when there's only one major vendor (Apple) using it. Vendors don't want to use EFI when the major OS (Windows) doesn't even support it. On other operating systems, it's a lot brighter. Obviously, Mac OS X has full EFI support, and Linux's has improved a lot, too.
Well, the Itanium isn't for home markets, but it's been kind of dying, yes. Lots of vendors pulling back.
Chicken and egg. Microsoft don't want to support EFI when there's only one major vendor (Apple) using it. Vendors don't want to use EFI when the major OS (Windows) doesn't even support it. On other operating systems, it's a lot brighter. Obviously, Mac OS X has full EFI support, and Linux's has improved a lot, too.
It's a real shame there aren't more PCIE cards for the Mac platform, but only the MAC Pro has multiple PCIE slots (not counting the G5 quad, since it's EOL).
This does bring up the OLD saw on a cheaper (i. e. Conroe) desktop, if it didn't have the potential to erode Mac Pro sales. More Mac multi slot PCIE systems, more market penetration, more 3rd party PCIE HW options.
I'm optimistic that this will change in the coming months, and certainly hope for some new products at (or shortly after) MWSF07.
If more PCs started shipping with EFI BIOSes, and graphics card manufacturers made their cards EFI compatible, these would work on Macs, correct?
No. You still need full drivers for them. If Apple or the card manufacturer don't provide one then you're stuck with EFI.
EFI only provides a very basic working driver model to boot itself and provide generic services to the OS. You'd be better off with a full implementation of Intel GMA than an EFI only driver for a Carlos Fandango XT700000XTX-GT Special Edition. It's like running Linux in frame buffer mode at best and I'd suspect MacOSX will just boot into single user character mode.
As such, we're in no better a position than Open Firmware support. The only difference is that with EFI, technically, a card manufacturer can ship identical hardware now with the same firmware on it. They've still got to write a MacOSX graphics driver.
Oh dear, not again.
Yeah, I know.
Let me reiterate, I'm optimistic about more PCIE choices by MWSF07 (or shortly thereafter).
No. You still need full drivers for them.
If the cards used EFI, a driver for most operations would already be provided right and accessible through the firmware. Additional drivers would only be needed for 3D-accelerated operations, which is really no different than VGA BIOS, so I don't see the point of your remark.
If Apple or the card manufacturer don't provide one then you're stuck with EFI.
What does EFI have to do with that?
As such, we're in no better a position than Open Firmware support.
Yes, we are, because third parties are much more likely to adopt to EFI, which actually has a viable future, than they were for OpenFirmware.
They've still got to write a MacOSX graphics driver.
OS X already ships with a lot of graphics drivers for many chipsets.
If the cards used EFI, a driver for most operations would already be provided right and accessible through the firmware. Additional drivers would only be needed for 3D-accelerated operations, which is really no different than VGA BIOS, so I don't see the point of your remark.
But that's the major issue. All EFI provides is a very basic driver. Enough to display text, a frame buffer-esque flat graphics mode and maybe a mouse cursor. You can't run OSX on that just the same as running OSX on plain jane VGA won't work either or be painful at best.
You ALSO have to provide a full hardware specific driver that supports all the shaders and pipelines of the specific chipset. Then there's stuff like HDCP and video in/out on the more media oriented cards. Dual display support...
What does EFI have to do with that?
Because if you're stuck with just an EFI driver it's as much use as a chocolate teapot. You may as well stick in a Cirrus Logic 1MB VGA card.
Yes, we are, because third parties are much more likely to adopt to EFI, which actually has a viable future, than they were for OpenFirmware.
Well that's one way of looking at it and I agree. There's certainly a rosier future for it than Open Firmware even without Microsoft behind it but I still don't see why a card manufacturer would go to the trouble of supporting EFI when Windows does not.
Windows not supporting EFI is a major blow to the uptake of EFI.
OS X already ships with a lot of graphics drivers for many chipsets.
It supports SOME of ATi, SOME of Nvidia and SOME of Intel's chipsets. Whereas that's probably good enough for most of the market, Apple only has to create drivers that support cards it's shipped in it's hardware. What happens if it decides to stop shipping ATi cards in it's Macs? Where will your driver updates come from then when ATi ships a new chipset?
EFI doesn't solve that problem, no more than Open Firmware did.
You're still reliant on the card manufacturers writing OSX drivers for their cards if Apple do not. You can't just slap in an EFI card and expect it to run DOOM 3 at 500 OMG!s per second although it might play Gravitar and that's a better game anyway.
But that's the major issue. All EFI provides is a very basic driver. Enough to display text, a frame buffer-esque flat graphics mode and maybe a mouse cursor. You can't run OSX on that just the same as running OSX on plain jane VGA won't work either or be painful at best.
EFI easily provides a driver at very high resolution. It easily does 1440x900, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it handle 2560x1600.
You ALSO have to provide a full hardware specific driver that supports all the shaders and pipelines of the specific chipset.
But Apple already provides such drivers.
Because if you're stuck with just an EFI driver it's as much use as a chocolate teapot. You may as well stick in a Cirrus Logic 1MB VGA card.
No, because a Cirrus Logic 1MB VGA card can handle nowhere near the same resolutions and color depths EFI on every Intel Mac already can.
Windows not supporting EFI is a major blow to the uptake of EFI.
Certainly.
It supports SOME of ATi, SOME of Nvidia and SOME of Intel's chipsets.
What doesn't it support?
What happens if it decides to stop shipping ATi cards in it's Macs? Where will your driver updates come from then when ATi ships a new chipset?
Why would ATi suddenly decide not to release Mac drivers any more?
You're still reliant on the card manufacturers writing OSX drivers for their cards if Apple do not.
For high-end features, yes.
You can't just slap in an EFI card and expect it to run DOOM 3 at 500 OMG!s per second
Well, of course.
If more PCs started shipping with EFI BIOSes, and graphics card manufacturers made their cards EFI compatible, these would work on Macs, correct?
In theory they should. However, they'd need an incentive to move to EFI ahead of Microsoft like another major operating system. Since Apple is sticking to its very narrow view of computers and expecting everyone to come to them, I wouldn?t expect EFI anytime soon. EFI might be an open standard, but for all intents and purposes it?s just like open firmware. The PC makers can't change until Microsoft changes, they have nowhere else to go. Microsoft isn't going to change until they want to put in the effort
If more PCs started shipping with EFI BIOSes, and graphics card manufacturers made their cards EFI compatible, these would work on Macs, correct?
I would think yes, unless Apple programmed lock-outs into the drivers so it only uses an Apple approved video card.
The PC makers can't change until Microsoft changes, they have nowhere else to go.
Gateway has had EFI consumer computers for years, so it's certainly possible to do this even if you're not Apple. For Windows, it doesn't matter, as there's emulation.
The problem is lack of incentive. One thing that can be done a lot nicer in EFI than in BIOS is setting up drivers easily and early on through the firmware. Another is providing a smart boot menu. Heck, why not provide a target disk mode while you're at it.
I would think yes, unless Apple programmed lock-outs in the drivers so it only uses an Apple video card.
Well, Apple's drivers respond to specific PCI signatures, but those could probably adjusted easily; plus, there's no reason Apple would deliberately lock out third parties.
EFI easily provides a driver at very high resolution. It easily does 1440x900, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it handle 2560x1600.
And your point is?
There's more to graphics hardware than just the resolution of the display.
But Apple already provides such drivers.
But what if they didn't. Do the Intel Macs support ATi all the way back to the Rage128?
Or what if you want to use a card from Matrox? EFI doesn't help you get anything but basics.
No, because a Cirrus Logic 1MB VGA card can handle nowhere near the same resolutions and color depths EFI on every Intel Mac already can.
It still stands that that's about the level of hardware support you'll get, just with a bigger frame buffer.
What doesn't it support?
Without running through the whole list of ATi, Nvidia and Intel chipsets, surely you can see that Apple have picked and chose which they support even from just that subset of manufacturers and have chosen not to support specific features of the cards that weren't required for their Macs.
Why would ATi suddenly decide not to release Mac drivers any more?
AMD buying them and the parent company deciding it's not financially worth it? Who knows. EFI doesn't solve that. Do nVidia release Mac drivers at all?
For high-end features, yes.
High end features like Core Graphics and Quartz. EFI doesn't get you that.
What's the point in using a card that isn't supported except by EFI if even the cheap cards Apple do support can beat EFI drivers into a corner.
EFI is useful to get a machine booted but past that, it's as useful as VGA.