Jump to content

Will New Intel Macs Run Windows?

Swad

By Swad

 Share

No one seems to know.This betanews article seems to think that they won’t, due to the EFI (see below article). But Apple, as they’ve always said, won’t prohibit people from installing Windows on their Mac. From an MSNBC article:

 

“That’s fine with us. We don’t mind,” Schiller said. “If there are people who love our hardware but are forced to put up with a Windows world, then that’s OK.”

“Any new machines that are on the market that run Windows are great,” said Scott Erickson, director of product management and marketing for Microsoft’s Mac business unit.

 

So what do you think? Has Apple effectively shut out Windows installation until Vista ships? Is this a mistake or a smart move?

 Share
Go to articles

User Feedback

Recommended Comments



Guest terry
Wow, this is amazing!!

 

Have you already tested it? I would like to know about the speed. :D

AFAIK, Bochs is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from being really usable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrJägermeister
@terry, ah ok. just thought it could not be too old because its slashdotted today. well next time i look at the date :D

Wow, this is amazing!!

 

Have you already tested it? I would like to know about the speed. :)

On a fast PC (Athlon 64) and Windows/Linux as host only DOS or Windows95 are usable as guest OS, everything else is too slow.

On the website from Wintel they show XP but I can't believe that this is running fine.

Edited by DrJägermeister
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cyrana

I doubt the latter, more likely there is just a special EFI+El Torito format needed. They did say they'd not prohibit Windows from running on it, and the HFS+ thing would obviously mean the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xtraa
AFAIK, Bochs is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from being really usable.

 

yes, but with Yonah, You don't need the PPC to Intel translation anymore. If this should be the case, It will run much faster.

 

Could it be that the Mac EFI is programmed to ONLY recognise HFS+ disks as bootable and not ISO9660, FAT32 and NTFS?

 

No, I don't think so, because EFI needs a hidden fat32 Partition for itself.

Edited by xtraa
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cyrana
yes, but with Yonah, You don't need the PPC>Intel translation. If this should be the case, It will run much faster.

 

 

 

No, I don't think so, because EFI needs a hidden fat32 Partition for itself.

Bochs is slower than you'd believe, even on x86. Even QEMU+KQEMU is a bit too sow for me... But at least it is tolerable, basically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xtraa
Bochs is slower than you'd believe, even on x86. Even QEMU+KQEMU is a bit too sow for me... But at least it is tolerable, basically.

 

thats too bad... a fast emu would be very helpful. :pirate2:

 

But can you explain one thing for me: I really wonder, what they want to emulate!? I mean the hardware is 100% compatible. This is like running PearPC on a mac.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xtraa
It does not.

 

Well actually it does:

 

- An Interface between the Operating System and the platform firmware

- Provides for multiple CPU architectures support

- EFI uses disk storage with a specific FAT file system, identified by a specific FAT type and NVRAM storage

- Introduces a new GUID Partition Table (GPT) [GUID = Globally Unique Identifier]

- Allows legacy MBR methods (boot and partitioning)

 

But that's just how Intel describes EFI specifications. If you have newer infos, call Intel and surprise them :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
crazymonkeypants

'Uses' does not imply 'requires'.

 

EFI, as implemented on the currently shipping Macintosh systems, does not 'need a hidden fat32 Partition for itself.'

Edited by crazymonkeypants
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cyrana

Technically that isn't the Apple EFI menu, as there is no access to it. But, it might help some people out anyway.

Edited by cyrana
Link to comment
Share on other sites
xtraa
'Uses' does not imply 'requires'.

 

EFI, as implemented on the currently shipping Macintosh systems, does not 'need a hidden fat32 Partition for itself.'

 

 

Yes, thats what terry sais, too. And I wish that you are right.

 

But take a look at this:

 

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?s=...indpost&p=44511

 

Now, in the boot chain graphic (the second), you see step three, the EFI OS Loader.

 

And in the first picture, see the little blue Square located in the Harddisk that sais also EFI OS Loader.

 

Now thats what made me thougt, it is a "must have", not a "can be" :weight_lift:

Edited by xtraa
Link to comment
Share on other sites
crazymonkeypants
Yes, thats what terry sais, too. And I wish that you are right.

 

But take a look at this:

 

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?s=...indpost&p=44511

 

Now, in the boot chain graphic (the second), you see step three, the EFI OS Loader.

 

And in the first picture, see the little blue Square located in the Harddisk that sais also EFI OS Loader.

 

Now thats what made me thougt, it is a "must have", not a "can be" :happymac:

 

Ooh, it's a blue square in a purple oblong, all wrapped up in a PowerPoint presentation. It must be real!

 

Seriously; the ESP is something that *can* be used. However if you were to actually *look* at one on a real Apple system, you would find that the OS loader is read off the HFS+ root filesystem. And you can nuke the ESP and things still work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...