Apple makes Macs run Windows XP -

Daniel Silevitch wrote:
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 06:56:29 +1200, Dibley Fanshaw wrote:
I can't see many Mac owners actually installing XP. Simple as it is, the
process is still too complex for most people and besides, XP is friggin'
expensive to buy.

I did it last night; it's more tedious (~2.5 hours) than anything.
Apple's step-by-step instructions are pretty straightforward. You run
the Boot Camp application, put in a writeable CD when it tells you to,
pick the amount of disk space to allocate to XP, then put in an XP SP2
installer disk.

After XP finishes installing, put in the driver disk that you created in
step 2, let that run, and then you're all finished.

Sounds great! Have you ever had the pleasure of installing Win XP
onto a virgin computer? Loads of fun. Last time out it took
me about six hours with loads of retries until all the hardware
was recognized and Windows actually ran.

That was on an X86 platform having nothing to do with Macs.

---- Paul J. Gans

J. Clarke wrote:
Ron Hunter wrote:

Kinon O'Cann wrote:
Bad news for Windows users, bad news for Mac users, bad news for
everyone. Why? Simple. If Apple switches to Windows, and eventually stops
developing their own OS, then OS innovation will stop. You think MS will
innovate? Right. Once there's no real competition for Windows, MS will
tighten their EULA and raise prices. Why? Why not? Once Apple users start
running Windows, what private developers will write for the Mac OS? Why
write for 5% of the market when you can write for 100%? Again, innovation
will shut down. Bad news all around...

wrote in message
news http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4880022.stm

Interesting topic.....


Discussion on!!!!!


Just dying to see all you ms/apple freaks go nuts lol

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Maybe if Ms stopped 'innovating', read that as trying to included every
application out there into the OS, they could finally squash BUGS and
make a better product!

If you think that Microsoft "includes every application out there into the
OS" you've never tried to get work done on a bare installation of Windows.

I said TRYING. They seem intent on putting everything but the kitchen
sink in there, and I suspect the holdup on Vista is to get the disposal
mounted correctly. Grin.
This computer has the 'media edition' WinXP, which is WinXP Pro with a
few 'made for TV' displays for playing media. Nothing that interests me
much.

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
In article , Kinon O'Cann
wrote:

Bad news for Windows users, bad news for Mac users, bad news for everyone.
Why? Simple. If Apple switches to Windows, and eventually stops developing
their own OS, then OS innovation will stop. You think MS will innovate?
Right. Once there's no real competition for Windows, MS will tighten their
EULA and raise prices. Why? Why not? Once Apple users start running Windows,
what private developers will write for the Mac OS? Why write for 5% of the
market when you can write for 100%? Again, innovation will shut down. Bad
news all around...

Apple is not going to dump OS X development.

How can you be so sure of that? They haven't, in the past, been afraid
to make a new OS that isn't compatible with older ones, so why not just
ditch the OS X software and go with the flow? It would be a good
business decision in the end. Of course, then they would just be one
more over-priced, under-powered computer manufacturer along with a host
of others in the PC world.

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
In article , Dibley
Fanshaw wrote:

I can't see many Mac owners actually installing XP. Simple as it is, the
process is still too complex for most people and besides, XP is friggin'
expensive to buy.

Plus it's downright ugly along with all the security issues.

Expensive, yes, but ugly is a matter of perception. I find OS X rather
unpleasant to look at.

Daniel Silevitch wrote:

On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 21:01:54 +0100, Keith wrote:
Daniel Silevitch wrote:

On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 06:56:29 +1200, Dibley Fanshaw
wrote: I can't see many Mac owners actually
installing XP. Simple as it is, the process is still too complex for
most people and besides, XP is friggin' expensive to buy.

I did it last night; it's more tedious (~2.5 hours) than anything. Apple's
step-by-step instructions are pretty straightforward. You run the Boot
Camp application, put in a writeable CD when it tells you to, pick the
amount of disk space to allocate to XP, then put in an XP SP2 installer
disk.

After XP finishes installing, put in the driver disk that you created in
step 2, let that run, and then you're all finished.

-dms

Can the XP see the Mac volume so you can work on Mac files from the
PeeCee side of things? Or save PeeCee stuff to the Mac for later
processing?

Out of the box, no, XP can't mount HFS+ partitions. Apparently there is
some software (called MacDrive) which can do that, but I haven't tried
it. Under OSX, both NTFS and FAT volumes can be mounted, but NTFS is
read-only.

I'd really like to be able to run both XP and OS X at the same time,
just like I can with Virtual PeeCee at the moment - can be useful
ocassionaly to do some work in Windows and hand over the stuff back to
OS X without having to re-start.

A company called Parallels just announced a Mac version of their
virtualization software, which does allow running OSX and having an XP
virtual machine in a window:
http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/
Still in beta, though.

-dms

Thanks for the info, have you tried something called 'Wine' (if I
remember correctly) which somehow lets Windoze apps run directly on
Linux/Unix?

On Sat, 8 Apr 2006 09:14:47 +0100, Keith wrote:
Daniel Silevitch wrote:

On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 21:01:54 +0100, Keith wrote:
Daniel Silevitch wrote:

On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 06:56:29 +1200, Dibley Fanshaw
wrote: I can't see many Mac owners actually
installing XP. Simple as it is, the process is still too complex for
most people and besides, XP is friggin' expensive to buy.

I did it last night; it's more tedious (~2.5 hours) than anything. Apple's
step-by-step instructions are pretty straightforward. You run the Boot
Camp application, put in a writeable CD when it tells you to, pick the
amount of disk space to allocate to XP, then put in an XP SP2 installer
disk.

After XP finishes installing, put in the driver disk that you created in
step 2, let that run, and then you're all finished.

-dms

Can the XP see the Mac volume so you can work on Mac files from the
PeeCee side of things? Or save PeeCee stuff to the Mac for later
processing?

Out of the box, no, XP can't mount HFS+ partitions. Apparently there is
some software (called MacDrive) which can do that, but I haven't tried
it. Under OSX, both NTFS and FAT volumes can be mounted, but NTFS is
read-only.

I'd really like to be able to run both XP and OS X at the same time,
just like I can with Virtual PeeCee at the moment - can be useful
ocassionaly to do some work in Windows and hand over the stuff back to
OS X without having to re-start.

A company called Parallels just announced a Mac version of their
virtualization software, which does allow running OSX and having an XP
virtual machine in a window:
http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/
Still in beta, though.

-dms

Thanks for the info, have you tried something called 'Wine' (if I
remember correctly) which somehow lets Windoze apps run directly on
Linux/Unix?

I've heard of it, and there's a Mac version called 'Darwine', but I've
never actually used it, so I can't comment on how good it actually is.

-dms

Ron Hunter wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:
Ron Hunter wrote:

Kinon O'Cann wrote:
Bad news for Windows users, bad news for Mac users, bad news for
everyone. Why? Simple. If Apple switches to Windows, and eventually
stops developing their own OS, then OS innovation will stop. You think
MS will innovate? Right. Once there's no real competition for Windows,
MS will tighten their EULA and raise prices. Why? Why not? Once Apple
users start running Windows, what private developers will write for the
Mac OS? Why write for 5% of the market when you can write for 100%?
Again, innovation will shut down. Bad news all around...

wrote in message
news http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4880022.stm

Interesting topic.....


Discussion on!!!!!


Just dying to see all you ms/apple freaks go nuts lol

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Maybe if Ms stopped 'innovating', read that as trying to included every
application out there into the OS, they could finally squash BUGS and
make a better product!

If you think that Microsoft "includes every application out there into
the OS" you've never tried to get work done on a bare installation of
Windows.

I said TRYING.

If they were trying to include "every application out there" then they would
lose all their profits from sales of Access, Excel, Frontpage, Outlook,
Power Point, Project, Publisher, Visio, Word, Small Business Accounting,
Money, Encarta, Streets And Trips, Mappoint, Visual Basic, Visual C++,
Visual J++, Visual C#, and probably quite a lot more than I have forgotten.
And they'd not have divested their CAD program.

They seem intent on putting everything but the kitchen
sink in there, and I suspect the holdup on Vista is to get the disposal
mounted correctly.

Same as always, they were overoptimistic on setting their ship by
date--might well be a management ploy to keep a fire lit under their
technical staff.

Grin.
This computer has the 'media edition' WinXP, which is WinXP Pro with a
few 'made for TV' displays for playing media. Nothing that interests me
much.

It's not quite XP Pro--the functionality is midway between XP Home and XP
Pro. All versions of XP have "a few displays for playing media" except the
ones sold in the EU that have media player removed so that Microsoft won't
put Winamp out of business g. MCE is aimed at being a Tivo alternative.



--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Ron Hunter wrote:
Randall Ainsworth wrote:

Apple is not going to dump OS X development.


How can you be so sure of that? They haven't, in the past, been afraid
to make a new OS that isn't compatible with older ones, so why not just
ditch the OS X software and go with the flow? It would be a good
business decision in the end. Of course, then they would just be one
more over-priced, under-powered computer manufacturer along with a host
of others in the PC world.

You just answered your own question, but the "good decision" part needs
rethinking.

--
John McWilliams

In article , Sam Lowry
wrote:

And this is exactly why 'Doze will win in the end. Macs are great for
productivity work (not to say that WinTel boxes are not) but most computers
out there are used primarily for two things Games and Porn. Although porn
is available whatever platform you use, games are mainly a windoze thing
(excluding the dedicated games machines).

Macs can do porn quite well...or so I'm told.

Sam Lowry wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 13:04:34 GMT, Daniel Silevitch wrote:

-dms, who's thinking about putting XP on his MacBook (for games, mainly)

And this is exactly why 'Doze will win in the end. Macs are great for
productivity work (not to say that WinTel boxes are not) but most computers
out there are used primarily for two things Games and Porn. Although porn
is available whatever platform you use, games are mainly a windoze thing
(excluding the dedicated games machines).



So, when is this "end" coming? And can you possibly provide a source
study for "most computers".... that are used "primarily for porn and
games?"

Can one not get porn on one's X-box? (Not a rhetorical question.)

--
John McWilliams