Dual-Boot Win XP on a MacIntel? – Not So Fast!
I was hoping to get a blog up about this before it broke as major news, but having a normal day job let several web-based news sources beat me to the punch. The best I can do is hope you haven’t heard that we will not be able to dual boot Mac OS X and Windows XP on a MacIntel. The new MacIntels use an Intel-based and new hardware code to interface with the operating system called Extensible Firmware Interface or EFI. EFI takes the place of the BIOS (Built-In Operating System) in a PC and Open Firmware in earlier Macs. Windows XP is built to run on a BIOS, not EFI.
That’s not to say that someone won’t build a translator of some sort, but I suspect that what’s needed is something along the same lines as putting a Apple ROM chip on a card in your PC like some folks did to run software emulators that ran the Mac OS under Windows. I don’t know one could ever say that some kind of software hack isn’t possible to achieve the same thing, but I feel it’s unlikely.
Indeed, when Apple talked about not letting folks run Mac OS X on a PC, this was probably part of the overall strategy for locking them out. While it is certain that future PC’s will use EFI as the MacIntels now do, all the current and older PC’s out there are stuck with BIOS. So, in addition to looking for some telltale Apple hardware, the operating system wouldn’t run because it couldn’t interface with the hardware at all. The execs could claim they didn’t do anything to prevent it while knowing that until new hardware hits the streets, it’s not really a concern anyway.
I’ll sit back and see if anyone figures out some way around this problem and generates some means of easily booting Windows XP on a MacIntel machine. For the moment, though, I have lost any desire to move to a MacIntel at all.
It’s kind of funny, actually, that if I want to dual boot Windows and Mac OS X on a new MacIntel notebook I’ll need to buy Windows Vista, something I had no plans to do. Worse, I’d have to buy two copies if I wanted to also get rid of my PC but still run Windows on a desktop when I needed it. It’s a bit hilarious that with Apple’s move to Intel, both Microsoft and Apple win and the PC manufacturers lose.
Some commentary suggests that running Windows on Mac OS X (Intel) under a translator (vice an emulator since the hardware is capable of running Windows) will run Windows under OS X at almost native speeds. I agree that would be a better deal; and, further, I bet that’s the direction Microsoft will be moving with Virtual PC. Certainly, the Open Source community and perhaps several software companies will come up with such tools. I’m looking at that now as a better and more desirable strategy for the day when I do move to a MacIntel. (Of course, with some Windows notebooks down in the $500 range, I’m thinking more and more about buying a notebook I only use to fly with. I’ve got copies of Office I can run on it, not to mention most Adobe applications. I really love OS X, though, and if I could run Windows under it faster than it does now using Virtual PC, I’d be happy.)
For now, though, I’m holding tight. I’m not going to buy anything; and it’s looking more and more like it may be a year or more before I really move. That’s also based on what I know now. A blog connected to Wired magazine with ties to an Apple insider hinted that there are even cooler MacIntel products in the wings, products that were supposed to have been ready for MacWorld 2006 but didn’t make it. That does explain Jobs’ dwelling on iLife06, something he could have easily covered in half the time. I think I’ll just wait and see.
That’s not to say that someone won’t build a translator of some sort, but I suspect that what’s needed is something along the same lines as putting a Apple ROM chip on a card in your PC like some folks did to run software emulators that ran the Mac OS under Windows. I don’t know one could ever say that some kind of software hack isn’t possible to achieve the same thing, but I feel it’s unlikely.
Indeed, when Apple talked about not letting folks run Mac OS X on a PC, this was probably part of the overall strategy for locking them out. While it is certain that future PC’s will use EFI as the MacIntels now do, all the current and older PC’s out there are stuck with BIOS. So, in addition to looking for some telltale Apple hardware, the operating system wouldn’t run because it couldn’t interface with the hardware at all. The execs could claim they didn’t do anything to prevent it while knowing that until new hardware hits the streets, it’s not really a concern anyway.
I’ll sit back and see if anyone figures out some way around this problem and generates some means of easily booting Windows XP on a MacIntel machine. For the moment, though, I have lost any desire to move to a MacIntel at all.
It’s kind of funny, actually, that if I want to dual boot Windows and Mac OS X on a new MacIntel notebook I’ll need to buy Windows Vista, something I had no plans to do. Worse, I’d have to buy two copies if I wanted to also get rid of my PC but still run Windows on a desktop when I needed it. It’s a bit hilarious that with Apple’s move to Intel, both Microsoft and Apple win and the PC manufacturers lose.
Some commentary suggests that running Windows on Mac OS X (Intel) under a translator (vice an emulator since the hardware is capable of running Windows) will run Windows under OS X at almost native speeds. I agree that would be a better deal; and, further, I bet that’s the direction Microsoft will be moving with Virtual PC. Certainly, the Open Source community and perhaps several software companies will come up with such tools. I’m looking at that now as a better and more desirable strategy for the day when I do move to a MacIntel. (Of course, with some Windows notebooks down in the $500 range, I’m thinking more and more about buying a notebook I only use to fly with. I’ve got copies of Office I can run on it, not to mention most Adobe applications. I really love OS X, though, and if I could run Windows under it faster than it does now using Virtual PC, I’d be happy.)
For now, though, I’m holding tight. I’m not going to buy anything; and it’s looking more and more like it may be a year or more before I really move. That’s also based on what I know now. A blog connected to Wired magazine with ties to an Apple insider hinted that there are even cooler MacIntel products in the wings, products that were supposed to have been ready for MacWorld 2006 but didn’t make it. That does explain Jobs’ dwelling on iLife06, something he could have easily covered in half the time. I think I’ll just wait and see.
posted by Andy Foster at
5:40 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home