Slashdot Mirror
Boot Camp Finally Supports Windows 7 On Macs
Dave Knott writes "After some delay Apple has updated Boot Camp to support Windows 7 on Macintosh computers. They have also provided an upgrade utility that facilitates transition to Windows 7 for Mac owners who have existing Vista installations. The new version of Boot Camp requires OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard)."
It'd wind up with less crap on it that way.
.....just sayin'
Here's to the crazy ones
Lately I've been thinking about buying a Mac. It's not because I want to run Mac OS X; I don't. I want it just to run Windows.
Why would I spend three times as much on a Mac just to run Windows, when I could buy a Dell instead? Well, it's because I want to support Apple as best I can. I love my iPhone, and I will get an iPad as soon as I can. Apple has earned my love, and my support.
I just wish that iPhone OS ran on their desktop systems. It's the best operating system I've used in a long time.
I've been running Windows 7 Eval edition since august when OS 10.6 came out. Even without bootcamp, it dectected my wireless card and intel graphics on my MacBook without any problems. How is this just now news?
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
Is English your third language? The only thing more feeble than your grip on the English language is your tired and ill-informed "argument". /. sucks these days. Also, fuck the facebook and twitter buttons. Ugh!
I've been running Windows 7 RTM without problems on my Nehalem Mac Pro using Bootcamp for months. It was so painless I've forgotten the details but I think I started off with the Leopard Boot Camp and then updated it with the Boot Camp off the Snow Leopard GM. I did a clean install on a new partition. Windows 7 installed more easily than Vista Ultimate 64.
$29 upgrade fee send you into bankruptcy? How'd you afford the $100+ for whatever version of Windows you got?
You DON'T NEED this update to run Windows 7 on a Mac in Boot Camp. This update is more or less targeted at newer Macs that already shipped with Snow Leopard that are experiencing problems installing 7. (see link)
http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/windows-classic-linux-other-os/174668-windows-7-27-imac-black-screen.html
Windows 7 installed on Boot Camp 2.0 in Leopard also works fine.
These Macs won't have an issue with 64bit Win7 (or Vista). If however, you have an older machine as in my case (2007 Santa Rosa MBP) you might have trouble installing Windows 7 using the DVD.
In case it locks at boot up when trying to install you can modify the ISO and burn it to a new DVD. I used this guide and it worked fine.
I want to install windows XP on my wife's macbook pro. A ran bootcamp and windows installed okay but my XP install disk is pre service pack 2. The apple drivers for windows on the macbook require SP2. Windows can't use the ethernet or wifi to upgrade itself. Microsoft don't give you a simple executable to download to upgrade to later service packs unless you have a special account with them.
My brother gave me an executable which supposedly will install SP2 but it failed for a bizarre reason (claims only 3 megabytes free, I have about 80 Gig).
So I am stuck. Any suggestions? Thanks.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
I'm backing up my MacBook to a file server with a Foxconn motherboard with an AMD Athlon 64 CPU that runs FreeNAS. And your point is...?
So the $29 cost of Snow Leopard is the crippling factor, not the $100+ cost of the Win7 copy you want to install?
The straw that broke the camel's back perhaps?
Oh wait, you torrented Windows and just want a cheap (ha) dig at Apple.
Heh, I've been running Windows 7 64 bit on my MacBook Pro for just over a year now, having downloaded the first public beta out of curiosity. IIRC, it took just a minor amount of tweaking to the get Vista drivers to work for Windows 7 beta.
On that note, I'm mildly dismayed to find Win7 ending up good enough to be used as my primary operating system, which as happened mostly because the DirectX World of Warcraft seems to run better than the OpenGL one for me. That and a few other programs. I feel dirty having OS X end up as my third most used OS on this computer. (Triple booting Ubuntu 9.10, Win7-64, OS X 10.6).
CMD still crashes when trying to run 'dir' on an HFS+ partition.. I guess their QA is still busy testing iPad?
You're already at a base score of -1, you can no longer be down modded. Either way, it actually is redundant, as several people have already brought up this point. Maybe you wouldn't have such shit karma if you actually read the comments first.
Are we Gizmodo? No.
Are we TAUW? NO.
Will this allow Windows 7 to run on the iPad as well?
Foxconn boards are seriously cheap? Hell I switched to ECS for budget builds because even THEY were better than Foxconn. I honestly didn't know that Apple ran Foxconns, and if it isn't just BS...wow. Their profit margins must be truly insane if they are cheaping out with low rent boards like that. If I spent that kind of cash and found I was running a Foxconn board I'd be SERIOUSLY pissed.
For about 3 years the last shop I was at split our budget builds between Foxconn, Abit, and ECS. Abit boards died around 20%, the ECS actually was the best at less than 5% (with them you just have to watch the CPU because they are picky about voltages) but the Foxconns probably were closer to 45% toasty, which is why we ended up dropping the Foxconn and Abit boards and just sticking with the ECS. Between getting shafted with Foxconn boards and getting stuck with Nvidia "we'll just relabel the same chips as new ones!" easily overheated GPUs I would probably be seriously unhappy if I had gone out and spent Apple money on a machine. Wow...you would think at that price they could afford ASUS or Gigabyte.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Did i miss something ? Is it really redundant to bring attention to the fact that software required to boot into another operating system shouldn't depend on weather or not you have the latest version of one of the operating systems ?
Post Date: January 19, 2010
Dude, you get what you pay for. And if you pay for a Mac, you get a Mac. Try paying for an Asus.
What day is it? Could you please tell me?
Seriously. "Share this on facebook", "Share this on twitter". More like "Share this with the shark we just jumped. " and "Share this with the judge at our chapter 7 bankruptcy hearing."
A Mac is a Mac, regardless of where the motherboard came from. For FreeNAS servers, I have no problems with Foxconn motherboards. For a PC gaming machine, I like Gigabyte motherboards.
Not enough Apple news this week, now we're pulling out things from weeks ago? Everyone who cares already updated when they started Windows 7 and were notified that new drivers were available.
Hell the date on the links show its from the 19th.
You also don't need 10.6, just boot Windows 7 with the old drivers installed and Bootcamp will notify you of the updates and install them if you let it.
TIMMAH!
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
But how often do you have to spend that $29? Because despite what MSFT wants you can be just fine in Windows only buying once every 5 years or so, and the way MSFT has been you are better off. Its like this... 98 good, WinME suck, XP SP2/3 good, Vista royal suck, Windows 7 good, so Windows 8 will be a hoover vac o' suck.
That figures up to spending that $100 every 5 years or so as last I checked you can get system builders Win7 HP for $104. At $29 a pop and the faster release schedule I wouldn't be surprised if it cost more in the long run for OSX, hell you Apple guys shell out all that cash on a machine just to shell out more cash just to get a decent warranty, so why not even more for the OS?
and slightly OT, but why won't Apple guys just admit it is a Ferrari and be done with it? I have seen Apple guys tie themselves in logic knots while jumping through flaming hoops trying to prove that Apple computer gear is a "good value" when we all know its bullshit. Apple is like Ferrari--It is sleek, it is sexy, it is exotic looking, it is expensive. Why is that so hard to accept? Hell according to this article more than a third of you are clearing over 100k a year, so just be happy you have money to burn on Ferraris, okay?
There are just certain laws of the universe you can't defeat: never get involved in a land war in Asia, Windows boxes are cheap, Linux guys like CLI, and Apple is expensive. Just be happy that you have enough disposable income to afford Ferrari computers and be happy, okay?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Maybe Apple gets all the first runs that pass QA well, and everyone else gets the rejects? Just sayin' because I haven't heard of Apple having a 45 percent failure rate. Or maybe on Apple's runs they have their own guys standing there watching the whole thing go down, to make sure they don't get stuck with lemons. Something like that.
note: not an apple fanboi, just thinking about what you have observed
Still can't virtualise OSX though, at least not without a lot of difficulty and breaking the license terms.
Because if we say "the hardware is like a Ferrari" then you will come back with "no it;s not, its just the same parts as in my PC just costs more!" - which is true. The packaging of the components is what makes it cost more, and the price is at a point the market will bear.
I know I couldn't find anything in the PC world that matched the features of my iMac - the form factor, the weight, the portability, the ability to run OS X without making a hackintosh. I'm not going to "kid myself" that the parts inside it are like a Ferrari though - I mean, it only has a Radeon X1600 which was only a midrange GPU at the time I bought it, and a regular SATA HD that is the same as the one in a normal PC. You get the picture.
It is "good value" if you believe that the price you paid for something (anything you buy, not just computers) is worth the cost, regardless of what it is. My iMac cost me £1200 when I bought it, and it was totally worth the price *to me*. It wasn't the fastest, or the biggest HD, or the best GPU or the most RAM, but it was worth every pound I paid, even if I could buy an equally specced (in terms of just pure computer spec) PC for a lot less. It's not all about raw performance.
I finally broke down and got snow leopard party so I could install Windows 7.
Yes, the $29 was the crippling factor, as Windows wasn't critical to what I was doing.
The $100+ you speak of is $0 in my case because I'm at a collage where we get Windows 7 Business for free (even after we leave).
Maybe others have special 'deals' as well? Or maybe some are more afraid of Apple's wrath in pirating software than Microsoft's.
So to support Microsoft's best and most reliable OS you have to be running Apple's worst and least stable OS (since leaving classic behind). Funny.
Well, given that all of the OS X installers are just DVDs, with no serial number, no online activation, no phoning home and no protections to prevent easy cloning of the disc, I don't think Apple's wrath is is that strong on that front.
It's one of those things - it's only $29 (or $129 in previous releases).
...that your still a douche.
THL phish sticks
Actually I installed Win 7 Ultimate X64 several weeks ago, but had a minor glitch in graphics and only one speaker working (though headphones worked well). The update for this fixed these issues.
Is it... a pretty collage?
A clean install of Win 7 and the 3.1 package gave me no audio, a red light from the audio port (the opposite of what it was alleged to do) and no iSight, on further inspection in device manager there is also something called "coprocessor" that is not installed.
I got audio to work with drivers from Realtek, but no solution to the iSight issue or what the mysterious "coprocessor" is.
I don't know for sure but I would guess if you upgrade from Vista this most likely isn't an issue, I just never upgrade Windows OS's, always do a fresh install.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
I agree, however Apple has a long history of breaking compatiblity to force you to upgrade to a new product.
Aperature 1 owners upon upgrading to 10.6 find they can not load Aperature until they pay to upgrade to version 2. Happened to Me.
2007 Mac Pro owners find they have to buy a new Mac Pro to get new graphics cards (what's the point of a Mac Pro if you can not upgrade the internals) guess hard drives suffice.
I'm sure the list is longer than that as well. Also iPod 2g owners will soon probably find themselves forced to upgrade to get new apps when a SDK 5 drops or some similar excuse.
In 2004 we got ipods, then mac mini,s then I got a Mac Pro in 07, worked for a good bit, then the BS started, and were back to using Windows 7. It's was just a phase I keep telling myself.
Nope, it's about looking cool in front of your coffee-house hipster d-bag friends.
THL phish sticks
That would be the difference between fabricating the board and designing the board.
When you go buy a Foxconn board, Foxconn engineers designed the board, with the budget market in mind. They likely just took the chipset manufacturer's reference board and started cutting as many corners as they needed to and could get away with to produce a board that would compete solely on price.
When you see Foxconn imprinted on the Apple device, Apple engineers designed the board to their specs, with the specific components they felt they needed to meet their criteria. $40 retail price of the motherboard was definitely not one of Apple's goals in designing the board.
98 good, WinME suck, XP SP2/3 good, Vista royal suck, Windows 7 good, so Windows 8 will be a hoover vac o' suck.
It's just like Star Trek movies!
The packaging of the components is what makes it cost more, and the price is at a point the market will bear.
What does packaging mean? And you could say that about any expensive product - "the price is at a point the market will bear".
I know I couldn't find anything in the PC world that matched the features of my iMac - ... the ability to run OS X without making a hackintosh.
Macs are PCs. And one could say there's nothing in the non-Amiga world that matches the features of an Amiga, because they can't run AmigaOS.
Or I could just install Windows on a non-Apple PC, and save the $29. Just because I spent $100, doesn't mean I feel like throwing an extra $29 away.
I'm sorry, but you misunderstand me. I'm talking about the whole smash here, nit just the guts, which makes sense as you wouldn't drop a Ferrari engine in a Camaro and say it should be worth Ferrari money, would you? With the Apple machines it is about the whole design, just like a Ferrari- the design, the lines, weight, and the guts. Everything is designed together to complete a look, which while I don't care for it personally I can understand why some people do.
But I just don't get the logic hoops. You don't see Ferrari owners tying themselves in knots trying to "prove" their car is a good value, do you? Hell no! It is sleek, and sexy, and exotic, and expensive as hell. Same applies to Apple. Even though I don't care for them I'll be the first to admit that Jobs does have taste, and an Apple looks really nice sitting on a table. So just be happy Apple guys, okay? Be happy you have Ferrari money, don't pretend the rest of us have big wads o' cash to blow on sports car, live and let live.
Everything has it place, to everything a season. Macs are for those with shitloads o' cash, that want their PC to look good as well as run good. Linux is for guys with CS degrees or who aren't afraid of spending hours reading man pages and learning CLI commands. And Windows is for gamers, and those like my mother who if it involves more than "clicky clicky" freezes up and just looks lost. Everything has its place and instead of logic hoops, can't we all just accept that different tools do different jobs and are for different groups and be happy? Can't we all just....get along?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
So, in other words "I know I couldn't find anything in the PC world that is a Mac."
Warning, circular logic detected!
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
I hate coffee though. Do I have to drink it?
Windows 7 Professional you mean. It was only called Business in Vista; it was Professional for 2000/XP and is again for 7.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Packaging - show me a PC that looks just like the iMac, with the same slim case, the same weight and the same look, that packs into its box in two minutes, including the time it takes to unplug, that can then be carried like a suitcase because the box has a decent handle on it.
It's one of the reasons I like the iMac so much, plus the fact I can easily dual book Windows and OS X on it, and I do move it around a fair bit (it has made several transatlantic trips, for example).
Your second point is what I mean - yes, the Mac is "just a PC", but I like the convenience of OS X with no need to make a hackintosh, and the form factor of the case those PC parts are stuffed into.
Yes, if you don't need or want the Apple case, then there really is no point buying it.
ASUS does in fact manufacture a portion of Apple hardware, along with Quanta.
I'd love to - and the reason that you don;t tend to see many Ferrari owners trying to "prove" their car is good value is that people don;t spend time trying to prove that it's worthless.
I'm sure there are some who will say "that car is just a waste of money, buy a Corolla instead!" like you see people saying "Apple Macs are just overpriced toys and anyone who uses one is just trying to look hip and cool and values image over actually wanting to do any work"
Not everyone, but you won't need to look very far to find several of those type of posts in any Apple thread, so you will naturally see people attempting to defend it in response.
I am very much a "right tool for the job" guy, and the iMac happens to be that tool for me - I'm not a zealot or anything (and dual boot windows for some tasks). I'm not going to begrudge anyone their choice of machine or OS - but I spend a lot of time browsing /. and running across posts that criticise my choice of computer because they have a person axe to grind, or believe that anyone who doesn't make exactly the same computer choices as them is totally clueless and stupid.
Yes, that was an important feature to me, but even without the circular logic (say I had found the ideal PC case setup and decided to compromise and deal with the hackintosh setup), it just doesn't exist. Probably because people in the PC world are just not looking for what the iMac offers, and if they are they can just run windows on an actual iMac (and I know a guy that does just that on several iMacs in his office - they run XP 99.9% of the time they are on, only booting to OS X if any bootcamp changes are needed).
Apple pushes the edge of innovation, but keeps control of their platforms to ensure a good user experience. This is good in that the edge keeps moving when WinTel would prefer it remain static. It's bad in that we're replacing one dependency for another if we choose this path.
Fortunately for the most part Google can shadow Apple and deliver the innovation without the leash - if you let them track you. And the Google tech is built on Linux so if you want to shake the tracking you can do that too.
So progress moves forward which is a good thing. Without Apple, Google and Linux geeks we'd have less of this bar-moving and more of the one-step-forward, two-steps back wormfest that is Windows.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Users of Mac Pros are ever so slightly better off
That or Mac mini, which is the basis for the "developing for iPhone requires Xcode, and Xcode costs $600" meme in Slashdot comments. One who has a Mac mini might as well buy an Acer Aspire Revo, which is essentially free with the purchase of a copy of Windows.
their windows applications would run faster in a VM than they would on a cheap PC
On a separate KVM'd box, Windows apps don't slow Mac apps down or make them start to swap, nor do Mac apps slow down Windows apps or make them start to swap.
and since cheap PCs rarely have graphics worth anything
Acer Aspire Revo has NVIDIA ION chipset, whose GPU handily beats the Intel Graphics My A--. Before about a year ago when Apple switched to NVIDIA for the iMac and Mac mini lines, this GMA could be found even in Mac mini and iMac.
I agree, however Apple has a long history of breaking compatiblity to force you to upgrade to a new product.
Not quite. Apple has a long history of focusing on their current products. Windows 7 drivers are part of Snow Leopard because Snow Leopard is the current OS.
You're partially right in that Apple does want people to upgrade to the current OS. But if their motives were as underhanded as you imply, it seems a bit odd they'd price Snow Leopard at $29.
With bootcamp can windows be made to boot off an external drive?
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
RIIIIIIGHT, because the problem with compatibility just does away when you upgrade Windows.
I agree about the Mac Pro and iMac's as well. I never understood the point of owning a desktop that you couldn't upgrade the internal parts.
I will say I'm an extremely happy MacBookPro owner and have upgrade the RAM and the HD (twice) since buying it. With a laptop there's not nearly the expectation of being able to upgrade parts though. Love this laptop though and don't know what I'd do without it.
For Aperture I can't really relate, but that doesn't surprise me. Apple's focus has always been on controlling the entire user experience, which does lead to some very nice perks as well as the ability to dictate advances in technology. They did a really good job on the Intel switch with Rosetta and the universal binaries too.
Leaving some things behind as they move the entire platform forward is going to happen though. As much as it can be a griping point, it's exactly what allows Apple to offer the 100% opposite experience of Microsoft. Microsoft is forced to support horrible legacy software which has largely prevented them from being able to make real strides with the OS over the years. Windows 7 seems to be a major step forward but it's backwards compatibility is certainly something that has held them back for a long, long time.
My gf called last week while I was away for work and told me email and internet on her Win 7 desktop PC had stopped working completely. I tried the usual "check that the leads are plugged in" diagnostics and worked out that while the physical connection was ok, no bits were getting in or out. I got her to call her ISP and troubleshoot it with them.
They couldn't work it out either, though they tried a whole heap of things, including replacing the NIC, and still couldn't get it to connect. They told her to reinstall Windows and all of her software, close to a full day's work by the time all the drivers have been tracked down and licenses sorted. She wasn't brave enough to do that, so she decided to wait for me to come home. She's been copying her work onto a USB drive and taking it to the library each day to email it.
I've got the thing next to me now, trying to diagnose the fault. I've looked in the system logs, I've used known good cables, I've shut down all the antivirus, antispyware and firewall software, checked everything that might be stopping the packets going through the NIC. I've plugged in a USB wireless card with the same result. I've even booted with an Ubuntu live CD and it worked fine with ALL of the network cards, so it's not a hardware problem. Windows 7's network stack simply won't talk to the outside world.
So now I'm at the familiar old backup, find all of the application CDs, find all of the drivers, reformat, reinstall, etc, etc etc.
Then pray to the gods that it doesn't do the same thing again.
Boot Camp is not required to multiboot a Mac, it just makes it pointy-clicky easy. The OS X partition can be non-destructively and easily resized via the CLI, and you can either hold down the Option key (aka Alt key) for a boot menu or install rEFIt for a nice, graphical boot menu.
Apple's focus has always been on controlling the entire user experience, which does lead to some very nice perks as well as the ability to dictate advances in technology.
Well, it is true that Mussolini did get the trains to run on time. Fair enough.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
I agree, however Apple has a long history of breaking compatiblity to force you to upgrade to a new product.
Aperature 1 owners upon upgrading to 10.6 find they can not load Aperature until they pay to upgrade to version 2. Happened to Me.
2007 Mac Pro owners find they have to buy a new Mac Pro to get new graphics cards (what's the point of a Mac Pro if you can not upgrade the internals) guess hard drives suffice.
I'm sure the list is longer than that as well. Also iPod 2g owners will soon probably find themselves forced to upgrade to get new apps when a SDK 5 drops or some similar excuse.
In 2004 we got ipods, then mac mini,s then I got a Mac Pro in 07, worked for a good bit, then the BS started, and were back to using Windows 7. It's was just a phase I keep telling myself.
You know what is worse than this right? The new 09 models have been documented as spiking in heat generation when doing specific audio tasks. They also limited the transfer rate on the HDD bays. Oh and they made it much harder to use 3rd party RAID cards.. The 09 year screwed up all that was good about the 08 Mac Pro.
Foxconn boards are seriously cheap? Hell I switched to ECS for budget builds because even THEY were better than Foxconn. I honestly didn't know that Apple ran Foxconns, and if it isn't just BS...wow. Their profit margins must be truly insane if they are cheaping out with low rent boards like that. If I spent that kind of cash and found I was running a Foxconn board I'd be SERIOUSLY pissed.
Not all boards by a company are made the same, even if they are the same model. I've worked at a company that manufactured circuit boards and you'll get different buyers purchasing the same board at different prices with different levels of burn-in testing and inspection. You might have one buyer purchasing boards at cost X with almost no quality control and another purchasing the boards at a huge markup with a guarantee of 6 sigma (usually for the military or such).
You even have companies like Apple who design their own boards and just use a company like Foxconn as the fabricator. This could mean more robust circuit layout, premium, high-reliability parts, additional quality control, and so on.
Sapere aude!
I'm a mac owner and I compose music and play in a "brutal" deathmetal band. I don't tell anyone I own a mac. I just own it because apple offers software that I enjoy using. If people like OS X over Windows (or vice versa) what does it matter? Only SOME people buy computers for the effects of perceived status, but most do not.
So because you can't figure out wtf is wrong it must be a faulty network stack, right. I'm calling user error. My network stack is working so you must be wrong.
I agree, however Apple has a long history of breaking compatiblity to force you to upgrade to a new product.
You are quite correct, however I would argue that many of Windows biggest shortcomings over the years relate to the push for backwards compatibility. DOS mode, the registry, DLLs... Supporting poor software begets poor software. It even carried over into Microsoft Games division where the 100 member friend-list restriction is retained to this day to support Halo 2 players, years after an original Xbox can no longer be purchased. Somebody hard-coded, because who could imagine a need for more? 640k, etc. etc. They refuse to cut the cord because those are still paying customers.
In principle, Microsoft is willing to sacrifice the satisfaction of new customers to maintain status quo momentum and revenue, and Apple is willing to sacrifice old customers to pull in new adopters with a better made product. Given their respective market shares ten years ago compared to now, I can't blame either of them. They are successful in different ways.
What about when you already own a Mac and occasionally want to run Windows? You may not be able to buy a PC that compares to the Mac you already have for less than the cost of a windows license or a cheap PC.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
You're partially right in that Apple does want people to upgrade to the current OS. But if their motives were as underhanded as you imply, it seems a bit odd they'd price Snow Leopard at $29.
Forces any 4+ year older Mac out of the way since they only started making Intel chips (required for 10.6, no PowerPC chips) in 2006. And thats if you didn't buy an older Mac off the shelf. While the $29 isn't much, it's still a forced upgrade
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
I've been running it at work under 10.5 and 10.6 for a couple months with BootCamp with no problems.
When it comes to mobile phones, tablets, and the like Apple may be at the bleeding edge of innovation. However, when it comes to computer hardware (in terms of processors, video chipsets, hard drive capacities, and the like) they are on the trailing edge of obsolescence.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Not to flame, but to be honest (and regardless what might get mentioned to me) I've been using Ubuntu Linux for about a year, have had no problems with it aside from one wireless USB stick giving issues and had no idea what CLI meant (googled it tbh). The average user doesn't need to use CLI to use Linux when talking about things like Ubuntu. Maybe 10 years ago. Have I touched the terminal? Sure, to cut and paste what was mentioned on the Ubuntu forums to help me, rarely know what they will do beyond that it will work though (DVD ripping had an issue due to US laws and Ubuntu being from the US.) And no, having to cut and paste easy step by step instructions doesn't scare people away. Is it ready for the masses? Not sure, don't see why not just have to get people off the mind set that it'll be a LONG up hill climb because it wasn't I found
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
Mac mini: it is small, reduces clutter, and quiet. The tradeoff is older-generation processors, limited RAM, and limited hard drive space. It's also a pain in the butt to service without marring the case. Upgrade options (video, processor, etc) are practically nil.
iMac: It provides a large monitor without the rat's nest of cables you get with most tower PC/workstation designs. Tradeoff: expansion is primarily through USB and firewire, they are a pain in the butt to service, and good luck upgrading the video card.
There are pros and cons. The question is: which is the priority? We're changing some of our workstations to Mac Minis and iMacs - they offer decent performance for the size and reduce clutter. I'm sticking with PCs since I personally need expandability, but pick Hackintosh-compatible hardware. I am in need of a new notebook, but am not going Apple because my primary OS is Linux, and dealing with the "virtual" second mouse button and absent third mouse button is a PITA. The stupid one-button trackpad on the Macbook Pro is the deal killer for me, followed closely by the lousy 1440x900 resolution. Where is 1920x(1080|1200)? Also, where is the internal RAID option? Asus, Lenovo, Dell, and Sager all offer WUXGA options with internal RAID - with some of the notebook solutions costing less than a base 15" Macbook Pro.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
98 good, WinME suck, XP SP2/3 good, Vista royal suck, Windows 7 good, so Windows 8 will be a hoover vac o' suck.
You mean this new Windows: http://www.tburke.net/fun_stuff/pictures/computers/windows-cement.htm
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
If that is true, then why doesn't Foxconn sell any boards that don't suck except to Apple? No company wants to have their product stand for shit, or have their motto be "we suck!" and anyone who builds PCs for a living will tell you that gamers and other hardcore PC users will happily pay good money for quality, which is why you can have $300 ASUS and Gigabyte boards.
But I have built machines out of just about every kind of board out there, and you know what? Foxconn boards suck ass. The only boards that had a worst failure rate was Abit, and they went tits up. Hell I don't even think Foxconn sells anything at retail except bottom of the barrel cheapo shit. So how come? It just doesn't make sense when there is money to be made by selling decent parts. Hell even the bottom of the line ECS boards (one of which I'm typing this on now) seem to have much better build quality than the Foxconn.
So unless there is a separate Foxconn that hides in the Chinese hills and only makes boards for Apple without sharing any info with the rest of the company it just doesn't make sense to me. China companies are the kings of knock offs and KIRF, so if the Apple boards were great why not just slip the designs out the back doom, tweak a couple of things, and have a decent Foxconn to sell?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Tell me where I can find as nice a case and trackpad as on my MacBookPro? I honestly would like to know, as all other trackpads I have tried... sucked (I've had a chance to play with dozens of laptops over the past 2 years and none compares to my MBP).
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
I had Windows 7 installed on my Mac Book Pro/bootcamp for a few months now. ...").
After the last bootcamp update Windows 7 crashed and self-destructed ("the installed windows os version does not match blablabla
None of the repair solution worked : I had to re-install it from scratch.
Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
But if you read the guy's post he says that he, his gf, and the ISP all tried to get it working and that in spite of all the efforts, Windows 7 wouldn't work.
The network stack may be fine, but if ordinary users can't diagnose problems, even with help from the ISP's network professionals, what choice do they have apart from reformat and reinstall?
I've been running Windows 7 x64 and Snow Leopard in dual boot since about a month before Windows 7 was released. I don't think I had to jump through hoops to get Boot Camp set up either. Might have involved a single command line operation.
But how often do you have to spend that $29? Because despite what MSFT wants you can be just fine in Windows only buying once every 5 years or so, and the way MSFT has been you are better off. Its like this... 98 good, WinME suck, XP SP2/3 good, Vista royal suck, Windows 7 good, so Windows 8 will be a hoover vac o' suck.
That figures up to spending that $100 every 5 years or so as last I checked you can get system builders Win7 HP for $104. At $29 a pop and the faster release schedule I wouldn't be surprised if it cost more in the long run for OSX, hell you Apple guys shell out all that cash on a machine just to shell out more cash just to get a decent warranty, so why not even more for the OS?
and slightly OT, but why won't Apple guys just admit it is a Ferrari and be done with it? I have seen Apple guys tie themselves in logic knots while jumping through flaming hoops trying to prove that Apple computer gear is a "good value" when we all know its bullshit. Apple is like Ferrari--It is sleek, it is sexy, it is exotic looking, it is expensive. Why is that so hard to accept? Hell according to this article more than a third of you are clearing over 100k a year, so just be happy you have money to burn on Ferraris, okay?
You can be just fine on a Mac upgrading your software every five years too. Your point? Of course not EVERY new thing will be backwards compat through five years of software upgrades and patches, and that goes with _any_ system.
What does buying a new version of OS X every five years cost? What is your basis for assuming it costs more than whatever Windows "system builder" is every five years? Is "system builder" even a fair comparison?
Macs are built largely from the same components PCs are, the same processes, and tolerances, etc. Your Ferrari analogy fails miserably.
Its more like Lincoln vs. Ford, to be honest. Macs do have a fair price for their value. People like you like to cheat and discount features you don't like/don't currently have as having no value. You can't just pick every feature from a product _you_ don't want and write the value off as $0. Even if you COULD build a car with one seat, no trunk, no floor mats, one door, and big engine, that does not invalidate the price of a fully featured car, and certainly doesn't compare. To break from cars a bit, I don't need every little doodad that came with my house, but I sure as shit paid for it all. Is my water heater a little too big for two people living here? Maybe. BFD, I'll enjoy longer showers. You can't tell someone that their stuff has no value because it doesn't to _you_, that's idiotic.
Quality, consistency, aesthetics, and support are all value adding features that geeks often mistakenly write off. You see this in software and hardware alike (amongst many other things.. like cars). What's amazing are the logic knots and flaming hoops you'll jump through to poo on things that later turn out to be successful products, then scratch your head and belittle the people who buy them because _they_ are wrong.
You're partially right in that Apple does want people to upgrade to the current OS. But if their motives were as underhanded as you imply, it seems a bit odd they'd price Snow Leopard at $29.
Forces any 4+ year older Mac out of the way since they only started making Intel chips (required for 10.6, no PowerPC chips) in 2006. And thats if you didn't buy an older Mac off the shelf. While the $29 isn't much, it's still a forced upgrade
No one is forced to buy Snow Leopard. Boot Camp with XP and Vista drivers is a feature of Leopard. Windows 7 compatible Boot Camp is a feature of Snow Leopard.
Regardless, Leopard still runs just fine. But like every OS upgrade, if you want the new features, you need the new system.
I'm not sure what you're getting at regarding the older Macs, as they can't run Windows 7 anyway.
On the pc side of things that happens at least on OS level, usually it is the drivers which become an issue once a new OS version comes out. There was a shitload of people who could not decently upgrade to vista because they did not get any new drivers.
As for the aperture thing, there is also on the windows side the problem once a new OS version comes out you in many cases have to upgrade, I think the percentages of programs which needs upgrade is more on OSX though because windows try to keep backwards compatibility, but that causes serious bloat which OSX thankfully does not drag along.
I have yet to think of a single program on my machine which did not survive the 10.5 or 10.5 upgrade, guess I was lucky. (not an aperture user)
I forgot to mention, my experience is that old machines usually are supported by Apple within a 4-5 years timeframe. The so normally OS upgrades work 4 years min sometimes over 8 years although the last 2-3 years might be hackish like it used to be with the old G2 grey boxes.
Apple tends to integrate too much and use that one for incentive to upgrade (not being able to update the graphics card can be a break point for many, but you should have known that upfront when buying the machine). In case of notebooks it does not matter, portable machines usually never survive more than 3-4 years anyway.
If you're going to say WinTel you really should say MacTel as well. At least one of those companies still makes PCs with non-Intel processors.
And it is not a "starter" edition. Please tell me where to buy this magical $65 computer/unicorn/pony, and I'll buy you a legit copy of Windows 7.
Are you honestly concerned with "stealing" from Microsoft?
If I run a business, I am concerned about giving Microsoft the impression that I am encouraging my customers to commit copyright infringement. In my country, there's a legal precedent established in MPAA v. Grokster that encouraging customers to infringe is as bad as infringing.
Is it really unreasonable for Apple to require a $30 upgrade to get support for the latest Microsoft operating system? I guess if you see a Mac as a generic PC that ought to be able to run any operating system, then maybe (although many smaller manufacturers will _never_ release Windows 7 drivers for their older hardware). However, Boot Camp is more than a boot manager, and it's designed to get the two systems running alongside each other with the minimum hassle. Requiring you to use the latest version of their OS to do that isn't really unreasonable at all.
Yes, you are right that they do this for ensuring compatibility.
As an example they do not let Flash to run on iPhone, iPad etc. to ensure compatibility... compatibility with their pocket of course
Then either you A-Researched your ass off before EVERY purchase, B-designed your entire setup around Ubuntu from the start, probably going so far as to buy an Ubuntu system, or C- really should be playing the lotto more, because you sir are one lucky bastard.
And as for why it isn't ready for the masses? Two reasons: 1-Paperweight roulette, and 2-CLI "fixes" when anything and everything goes wrong. As for the first, in my informal research I have found an average of 35% of the items in my local Walmart is "supported" and that is if you count "support" as putting in a page or two of Cli, which may or may not need to be tweaked, which may or may not work, which I don't. Removing those that leaves around 22-26%. Quick, can you tell me WITHOUT doing research, which Joe average will frankly never do, which ones work? You can't. You can't, I can't and the guy behind the counter sure as hell can't. To Joe average it is an OS,nothing more. He don't give a wet fart about "free as in freedom" and isn't gonna do extra work just to be "free" so that is a fail.
As for #2, lets be honest folks: the GUIs in Linux suck. While they look good on the surface if you try sticking to the GUI and ONLY to the GUI in Linux you will quickly find yourself screwed, and I can prove it. There is a chmod that will remove Bash from user access, yes? Do that. Remove Bash from your access for a single year. I'm willing to bet my last dollar that if you swore off CLI for a year you would have a broken machine in less than 6 months, or whenever the next distro upgrade (which at 6 months in Ubuntu is just fricking nuts) comes out. I believe the reasons for this are two fold. One, Linux is heavily skewed by CS degrees in its userbase, and two that the lion's share of Linux development is being paid by corporations that want Linux as a server OS and frankly couldn't care less about Linux as a desktop.
But CLI equals fail for Joe, because as I said he doesn't even like going near control panel in Windows. do you honestly think he will be comfortable in a CLI environment, with NO spellcheck or autocomplete, where a single mistype can equal borked system? And you said you copypasta'd, but by and large I have found that doesn't work, as the "fixes" often have to be tweaked, due to the fact that the CLI script writers system will not have the same hardware/software as YOUR system. Therefor what works for him usually will NOT work for you unless you "tweak" it, unlike Windows where XP is XP and Windows 7 is Windows 7. do you honestly think Joe average is gonna sit down and learn grep and cat and a dozen or two other CLI commands and get fluent enough with them to become qualified to tweak a page long mess of CLI?
So I'm sorry Linux guys, but working retail and dealing with Joe and sally average I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Linux is NOT ready for them. I know because I have tried selling it, Ubuntu 9.04 that last time. They will always get burned either by buying hardware at Walmart to go with their new system that won't work unless you jump through hours of CLI mess (thus raising my after market support costs through the roof) or they get bit right in the ass by "update foo broke my hardware" which due to the truly insane release schedule and lack of backwards compatibility or extensive QA testing is a serious problem at this time. I can't even remember when the last time a Windows update broke a customer's hardware, probably when Sp3 came out. A simple driver reinstall and all was good.
Linux is simply more expensive when you figure in after market support costs. A wise man once said "Linux is free if your time is worthless" and working retail I have to agree. It has too many problems that become serious timesinks and suck up all my profits. If someone wants to be their own tech support and learn CLI and take care of themselves that is one thing, but I have found those that are qualified to do that don't get bugs on Windows and thus have no reason to switch anyway. Linux may be free but my time isn't, and the cost of supporting it makes it more expensive than Windows. Glad that it works for you, but Joe and sally? Not so much.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Don't forget that prior to the latest iMac, both used laptop parts exclusively, and should both be treated as such for upgrade purposes. They were never designed for the end user to take them apart.
That said, the iMac makes it easy to do the memory, but not the hard drive or any of the other components. The iMac has a panel on the bottom edge of the display which can be removed to easily upgrade the ram. The panel is the same sort you see on any laptop. The hard drive on the iMac is much more difficult. You have to use suction cups to remove the glass, which exposes the innards. Fortunately you can order 1 or 2 TB 7200 RPM drives right from the factory for the iMac so it's not a big need for most people to upgrade the hard drive. Most of the pre-fall '09 iMacs used only laptop parts (2.5" HD's, slimline optical drives, mobile graphics chipsets). The latest model iMacs are now using some desktop components which is a nice change, although I still don't have the urge to crack the case. That said, I've always had plenty of space due to the large hard drive selections, and I've found the graphics hardware adequate for my needs.
The mini is easy to replace the hard drive and upgrade the memory, however they still use all laptop parts and I don't expect that to change given it's footprint. The mini is easy to upgrade, but again only the parts you can typically replace in a laptop. It doesn't mar the visible parts of case. You simply use a putty knife on the inside edge of the case. I literally had the entire thing apart in 5 minutes. About the only unnerving bit is releasing the clips that hold the case (the noise sounds like the plastic case is cracking). Mine had no scuffs or any other visible damage when I was done. The cover snapped back on firmly when I was done with no apparent damage to the fastening clips.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-zGbcr1eWw
http://www.methodshop.com/gadgets/tutorials/macmini-ram/index.shtml
I just purchase the base model of Mini, and upgraded it to 4 GB for $80 bucks. The hard drive unfortunately, also uses the 2.5" form factor, so the options for larger storage are expensive (I do see that WD now has a $200 1TB 2.5", although it's only 5200 RPM). I opted for an external 3.5" 7200 RPM 1TB drive for $99 bucks and an external USB SATA enclosure for $20 bucks. It makes a good (and cheap) HTPC since it, like every Mac, includes the Headphone Jack/SPDIF Optical combo port. It has no problems with 1080p video.
I've heard of some people upgrading the CPU in these, but I'd be hesitant to do so considering their both similar to laptops when it comes to thermals. In a work environment, I would think either would be fine. For a home power user, the temptation to upgrade components would probably be contrary to the design.
In all cases, they should be considered as laptops when thinking of upgrade options (Ram, Optical Drive, and Hard Drive). I'm hoping the recent shift to desktop components in the iMac will change that, and hopefully spur Apple to make it a bit more serviceable.
If that is true, then why doesn't Foxconn sell any boards that don't suck except to Apple? No company wants to have their product stand for shit, or have their motto be "we suck!" and anyone who builds PCs for a living will tell you that gamers and other hardcore PC users will happily pay good money for quality, which is why you can have $300 ASUS and Gigabyte boards.
Believe it or not, there is often a lot more money to be made in something cheap rather than something expensive. Most people out there don't know and don't care about the motherboard in their computer, they just want it as inexpensive as possible. A company like Foxconn probably sells a ton of motherboards at a low price and it's not worth it for them to sell a smaller amount of boards at a high price.
You also have to look at where the competition is at. A lot of companies cater to the higher end of the hobbiest industry but there is a low-end market too. Foxconn fills that niche, either to people who don't know better or to people who don't mind possibly returning a bad board or two if it means they will save some cash.
I'm also willing to bet that the bulk of Foxconn's business is as an OEM supplier. The boards they sell to the hobbiest market are probably just their rejects, overruns and reworks from their OEM business. These boards can be sold cheaply because they are designed to be made inexpensively and manufactured in bulk. The high failure rate might be due to the fact that they are the ones that were marginal in QC in the first place - good enough to pass initial inspection but not really run through a thorough burn-in testing process.
As far as selling the better designed boards that are made for a major player like Apple? Don't you think that a smart company like Apple owns the designs for those boards and probably monitors the designs of the motherboards that are sold to the hobbiest industry? If Foxconn sold the boards under their own name and Apple found out then that manufacturing contract would be torn up and a lot more money would be lost than could ever be made up in hobbiest sales.
Definitely don't buy Foxconn boards for building your own computer if you've seen such a high failure rate with them but you really can't extrapolate your experience to the big computer manufacturers. They have much more choice and control over their components than a hobbiest does.
Sapere aude!
Then either you A-Researched your ass off before EVERY purchase, B-designed your entire setup around Ubuntu from the start, probably going so far as to buy an Ubuntu system, or C- really should be playing the lotto more, because you sir are one lucky bastard.
As for #2, lets be honest folks: the GUIs in Linux suck. While they look good on the surface if you try sticking to the GUI and ONLY to the GUI in Linux you will quickly find yourself screwed, and I can prove it
I found the GUI on Ubuntu quite nice and easy. Works like Windows pretty much that there was no learning curve. As for the computer I'm using it on, I'm running it on my old Acer 5920G laptop. Read up online on how to dual boot it since it had a seperate HD on it (read how to do that step by step from the desktop). Did that for about 2 months and released that for the 2 months I didn't even load Windows once so I just did a clean install which was a piece of cake. Only thing that doesn't work are the media/play dvd buttons, but never used those anyways
There is a chmod that will remove Bash from user access, yes? Do that. Remove Bash from your access for a single year. I'm willing to bet my last dollar that if you swore off CLI for a year you would have a broken machine in less than 6 months
And again, I'm going to look dumb... what is a chmod and a Bash? chmod isn't explained on http://www.computerhope.com/unix/uchmod.htm well, and Bash isn't explained either on http://ss64.com/bash/. I'm not saying I've had no problems, but none that a quick 'How do I do x on Ubuntu' search on google hasn't fixed with cut and paste commands. I'm not trying to sound like I don't know computers, because I do since I grew up with them. But thing is I know Windows computers, and found that even though Linux is a completely different system, it's not hard (read that it was 10 years ago but that has been really changing). I also understand your argument that CLI really is the most powerful way to do things in Linux, but the same is for Windows with the Dos Prompt, and even Mac OS has it's command prompt (http://ss64.com/osx/) and both of these OS's can more powerfully handled when done through a command prompt and if there users learned how to master these, then it would be better for them. But like many computer things, just because it can be done and learned, doesn't mean it has to be.
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
Windows and Mac suck.
Get linux its better or the same in almost every aspect. And, best of all its free!
Since I started using a computer I used windows, however two days ago I switched to ubuntu.
Im never going to go back to windows... ever.
Just the fact that you were able to discern your problem with enough clarity that you were able to go to Google, search for the relevant fix, find said fix, read the instructions, and apply it show that you are NOT anything like Joe average but actually have an analytical mind and are capable of complex problem solving. Compare that to the average conversation I have with my customers....Customer-my computer's broke /me/what's the problem? Customer-Didn't you hear? Its broke!
Big difference, huh? One of the nice things about Windows 7 is its built in Internet based troubleshooter frequently fixes the "Windows broke" problems that my customers used to dump on me. For those with XP I sell a $50 "optimization package" that sets it up to autoclean, autorepair registry problems, autoupdate, auto everything so that what they have is basically a toaster for the Internet.
As for "chmod"? It is a command that lets you modify permissions in Linux. And as for bash, remember when you went to the comman prompt? That's bash. here is chmod and here is one for bash, but in the end what I was trying to point out is without bash to input those "fixes" one typically needs in Linux after "update foo broke my" situations Linux quickly falls down and goes boom!
But I'm afraid your comparison to DOS and OSX CLi doesn't really work, as both my Windows and OSX customers have no idea that their OS even HAS a CLI prompt, whereas with Linux no CLI equals a dead system pretty quickly. Which makes sense as the corporations making huge code donations and paying for development only care about Linux as a server OS and frankly don't give a wet fart about Linux on the desktop, as that isn't where the money is at. Notice how even Ubuntu has now moved into the server OS business? I predict in 5 years Ubuntu will be primarily server (because that's where the money is) and Ubuntu desktop will be just another community OS.
The simple fact is billions are spent by MSFT on their OS to make sure the customer has as seamless an experience as possible, and while they don't spend as much Apple invests serious money into OSX as a desktop platform as well. At its heart Linux was, is, and I would argue based on spending always will be, a server OS that some have tried to shoehorn onto the desktop. But users like you, that can articulate their problems, search forums, find fixes, and apply them logically, are a teeny tiny niche I'm afraid, which is what the Linux community doesn't seem to be able to grasp. Joe and Sally will NOT research, nor will they learn bash, nor will they ever be comfortable in a task oriented environment, which is what Linux is. Believe me, as someone who works retail and deals with them 6 days I week I know of which I speak, and Linux is NOT ready for them, and I am talking as of Ubuntu 9.04 so I'm not talking about the past.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Yes, it will run, but knowledgeable people tell me that without the proper bootcamp drivers it is possible to damage the CPU. Apparently conventional PC boards handle all of the power management in firmware. Apple saves a bit of cash by putting some of the functionality in the OS. Bottom line, don't use the proper drivers and your CPU can be getting a bit too much voltage in normal use. This usually isn't a problem, but it can make the machine run hot and may shorten the CPU life.
When it comes to mobile phones, tablets, and the like Apple may be at the bleeding edge of innovation.
Sorry to be a bit argumentative, but I always thought Microsoft was at the "bleeding edge of innovation" in terms of tablets. Linux is really lacking, and the new iPad is, really, an eBook with 10 hours battery life and a touch screen.
Windows 7, on the other hand, has better "tablet" support than Windows Vista, which has better tablet support than Windows XP Tablet Edition -- they've definitely been improving with every iteration, and if you've ever used a Tablet PC, you can tell.
My favorite boot camp experience was installing the latest version (whatever came with snow leopard) on my parents' iMac and discovering that the realtek audio drivers thought the microphone jack was the headphone jack and the headphone jack was the microphone jack. (This happened in both XP and Vista.) On my MacBook Pro, I had to role back the Sigmatel audio because, when I left the machine on for a while, the audio would become more and more static-y. It seems like with every iteration of Boot Camp, I need to selectively role back a number of horrendous drivers to get full functionality, then install mobility-modded graphics drivers because the included ones are about a year out of date.
OK, genius, you're not going to be running Windows 7 under BootCamp on a G4 machine anyway. "Oh no! Apple came to my house and said they were going to kill my dog unless I gave them money for a new computer! WAAH!"
"forced upgrade" means that somebody forces you. They come to your house and put you under duress. That's what 'force' means.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
You all have it wrong. Windows 7 took months to be supported by boot camp, it was not a feature of Snow Leopard.