Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Boot Camp Finally Supports Windows 7 On Macs

Posted by timothy on from the just-like-real-boot-camp-only-nicer-colors dept.

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)."

33 of 216 comments (clear)

  1. ...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by flydpnkrtn · · Score: 3, Informative

    .....just sayin'

    --
    Here's to the crazy ones
    1. Re:...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yep... and also with the commercial VMWare Fusion and Parallels Desktop. They had free betas when Windows 7 was in the free beta period as well.

    2. Re:...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by tepples · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course, the problem with running Windows on a Mac is Microsoft's pricing structure. Boot Camp or Parallels or VMware or VirtualBox needs a retail copy of Windows. But it turns out that one can actually buy a whole PC running Windows, including a spare keyboard and mouse, for close to the price of a retail copy of Windows.

    3. Re:...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by amiga3D · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's not by accident. That's planned that way.

    4. Re:...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

      Running an upgrade without a valid license for the qualifying previous version might stop working after the next BSA audit. (And I'm not talking Scouts either.)

    5. Re:...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While I'm sure that they would all prefer that it be cheaper, I doubt VMware and company are much worried.

      You definitely can get a fully functional, if not very exciting, wintel box for about the cost of a Windows licence. However, that probably won't be of too much use to your average mac user contemplating windows: The bulk of Macs sold are laptops. If you are using a laptop, you are likely carrying it around at least sometimes. Suddenly, your HP box or Asus netbook or whatever it was you purchased for the cost of the OS it runs starts to look annoying.

      Even if you have a Mac desktop, you are going to run into issues: iMacs can function as monitors; but only if the input source is Displayport. With a cheap PC, you'll get VGA or DVI, which means that you'll need either another monitor, or an active converter. You'll also need another set of peripherals, and the desk space for them, or a KVM. Standard 2 or 4 port VGA/PS2/USB KVMs are cheap; but DVI/USB KVMs are kind of pricey. I haven't even dared to look at displayport KVMs. Users of Mac Pros are ever so slightly better off; particularly if they are using a third party monitor with multiple switchable inputs(ie. any Dell monitor that somebody with a $3,000 desktop would purchase); but they will run into the problem that, because they are on a Mac Pro, their windows applications would run faster in a VM than they would on a cheap PC(and since cheap PCs rarely have graphics worth anything, even the notoriously virtualization-hostile task of gaming won't work better).

    6. Re:...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Microsoft is going to support win32 as long as Intel makes chips that are 32-bit only

      What makes you think that? I seem to remember that Intel still makes 16-bit chips, yet Microsoft discontinued MS-DOS and Windows 3.x.

    7. Re:...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by joshki · · Score: 2, Informative

      psst....

      The OSX upgrade costs 29 bucks.

      --
      I do not read or respond to AC's. If you want a discussion, log in. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
    8. Re:...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by node+3 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not quite. Microsoft used the launch of Windows XP to increase the price of Windows dramatically.

      Besides, when amiga3D says, "they planned it that way", he doesn't mean they planned it back then in 1995. He means they planned it that way last year when they priced Windows 7.

    9. Re:...Windows 7 runs great on VirtualBox on Mac by MojoStan · · Score: 3, Informative

      Newegg: $105 I'm still a little confused though as to what, exactly it is that you don't get with the system builder edition that you would get with the full retail version.

      Ars Technica had a nice article explaining the differences when Vista was released: "Buying OEM versions of Windows Vista: the facts"

      My summary (in order of importance):

      • An OEM or "system builder" version of Windows is tied to the computer on which it is initially installed. Unlike retail versions, OEM versions cannot be transferred to another computer, even if you remove it from the first computer.
      • OEM versions include either 32-bit Windows or 64-bit (not both), so you must choose before you buy. Retail versions come with both.
      • OEM versions cannot be returned once opened. That makes the 32/64 bit decision important.
      • No pretty box, no user manual, and no free support. Experienced computer users don't need that stuff, anyway. OEM users still get free windows updates, MS's support web site, knowledge base, and paid support options.
      • OEM versions only allow clean installations. No "in place upgrades" are allowed, which no sane techie would do anyway. Windows Easy Transfer is available for those that want to easily transfer files, settings, and accounts.

      To me, the only important limitation is the no-transfer limit. However, since the OEM version is roughly half the price of the full retail (not upgrade) version, I don't think it's a big deal. Also, I've read in many forums (including Slashdot) that MS will provide a new activation code for OEM versions if you say you "had to replace the motherboard" on your PC.

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

  2. I'm going to buy a Mac just to run Windows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    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.

    1. Re:I'm going to buy a Mac just to run Windows. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I just wish that iPhone OS ran on their desktop systems. It's the best operating system I've used in a long time.

      Maybe single-application mode is what you want in Mac OS X?

    2. Re:I'm going to buy a Mac just to run Windows. by mR.bRiGhTsId3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is unclear to me why you would have to spend 3x as much to run Windows. I recently went Mac and I did price comparisons and found the difference to be $100 in favor of comparable Dells. Only then because they were having some kind of fire sale.

  3. I've been running it for months.... by ducomputergeek · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.
    1. Re:I've been running it for months.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Because now (about 2 weeks ago actually) it's officially supported. I too have been running it for about 6 months on my MBP, and about the only improvements I've seen is temp is a lot cooler with the new drivers.

    2. Re:I've been running it for months.... by itsdapead · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've been running Windows 7 Eval edition since august when OS 10.6 came out. [snip] How is this just now news?

      Before, it worked. Now it should just work (tm). At least until you get to the bit where Windows takes over :-)

      Back in the early days of Intel Macs, the beta bootcamp included essential firmware updates (e.g. the EFI BIOS legacy support stuff). Since then, however, you've just been able to slam in a Windows DVD and go, although if you're not careful you'll hose OS X in the process because Windows doesn't understand the OS X partition table.

      These days, BootCamp is just the point'n'click wizard that holds your hand while you partition your hard drive to hybrid GUID/MBR and set up a dual boot system. Probably recommended, though, unless you have a Mac Pro and are installing windows onto its own hard drive.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    3. Re:I've been running it for months.... by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are now optimized Win7 drivers, previously you were using generic drivers without acceleration provided by Microsoft or drivers designed for Vista from old versions of Bootcamp.

      Both worked fine, but lacked full acceleration and feature set.

      I've noticed the trackpad is better now, not so overly sensitive to touch or irratic. I've noticed no change in video performance at all. I really don't know what the differences are from a user perspective but as a causual gamer, I haven't noticed a difference in Company of Heros or StarTrek Online. Performance or quality seems the same.

      I have had a bluescreen since updating which I never had before, but that was while playing StarTrek Online which I never played before. Only happened once and may have been there before the upgrade as well. It IS Windows after all.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  4. Unofficially for a while... by mederjo · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  5. Re:Why do need to buy 10.6 to get this? more ways by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    $29 upgrade fee send you into bankruptcy? How'd you afford the $100+ for whatever version of Windows you got?

  6. Re:Why do need to buy 10.6 to get this? more ways by iMouse · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

     
      ...more ways people post crap before doing any research.

  7. Hint: If you want Win7 64bit on older MBP by linumax · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Hint: If you want Win7 64bit on older MBP by linumax · · Score: 2, Informative
      Firstly, it's only 64 bit and secondly the problem is not related to bootcamp at all. The second link has some explanation:

      Unfortunately, I could not get the Windows 7 x64 DVD to boot. After restarting and choosing the Windows DVD at the boot screen, the screen would blank out and just display “Select CD-ROM Boot Type” and refuse to continue.

      I had the exact problem as above so posted this workaround in case others with older machines had it.

  8. Re:Why do need to buy 10.6 to get this? more ways by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  9. Re:Good place to ask for help by heffrey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Slipstream SP2 onto the SP1 XP disc. Slipstreaming is the process of converting an installation disk to a higher service pack (well, that's what I think it is!) A bit of Google and you should be there in an hour or so.

  10. A year late... by V50 · · Score: 3, Informative

    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).

  11. Re:Good place to ask for help by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2, Informative

    Thanks that very helpful. I found a howto which links to an install of SP2 and I tried that file directly. But it does the same thing as my brothers file. It fails with a message saying the system has less than 4 mb free. I will try the full slipstreaming thing. Thanks.

    --
    http://michaelsmith.id.au
  12. Re:Why do need to buy 10.6 to get this? more ways by jo_ham · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  13. Re:Why do need to buy 10.6 to get this? more ways by jo_ham · · Score: 2

    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).

  14. Re:In other words by Bruha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  15. Re:Why do need to buy 10.6 to get this? more ways by gandhi_2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Nope, it's about looking cool in front of your coffee-house hipster d-bag friends.

    --
    THL phish sticks
  16. Re:Why do need to buy 10.6 to get this? more ways by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    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!

  17. Re:In other words by node+3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  18. Re:In other words by node+3 · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.