MAC PRO CAN NOW RUN WINDOW!

Message

ayja · #1 Post by **ayja** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:12 pm

should I return the t60p????

http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

christopher_wolf · #2 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:22 pm

ayja wrote:should I return the t60p????

http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

Err, No...Why would you want to return the T60p?

You already bought the T60p, you have tried it out and you know exactly how it responds. You will have to do that all over again if you instead get the MacBook Pro. Both are absolutely wonderful systems.

ayja · #3 Post by **ayja** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:35 pm

well, it is really much nicer looking...my only reason now to keep to the t60p is that the video are is better than the mac pro for 3d model applications... are there any other reasons... do you think eventually all the bugs in running windows on macs will be ironed out or will there always be bugs?

christopher_wolf · #4 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:55 pm

There will always be the risk of bugs on both systems; slightly more, I suspect, with XP on the MacBook Pro because of driver issues, etc. Other than that, they are quite comparable.

The only gripes I could see one having with the MacBook Pro are; 1.) No bay option, you have a fixed optical drive and that is it. 2.) No trackpoint, although the touchpad is very well executed on the Powerbooks and, I assume, the MacBook Pro. 3.) Differing requirements of the hardware and more expensive options on the MacBook Pro.

To me, the shift that Intel has enabled from the previous generation (i.e Thinkpads and Powerbooks) to the new Thinkpads and now the MacBook Pro have really changed quite a few things. It seems, to me at least, that there are many more features on the MacBook Pro than on previous Powerbooks and iterations thereof; same goes for the T60p and the T4X/P Series. There will always be more and more in the latest model.

Right now, I am waiting for Intel to put out the Merom chipsets and for the T61, maybe p, and next MacBook Pro.

taphil · #5 Post by **taphil** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:13 pm

Too bad there's no way yet to right-mouse click on a MBP in XP without using an external mouse.

#6 Post by **daeojkim** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:16 pm

Now that Apple is willing to support Windows on their machine MacPro is an attractive option.

Two more things that I would like it to happen. A trackpoint and right click button.

kwramm · #7 Post by **kwramm** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:21 pm

I used to have a G3 powerbook with OS8, which supported right click context menus among other things and it was a hassle to right click, especially when you didn't have the thing on a desk, but instead on your lap for example.

The thing is, the right click was a software solution that worked under OS 8 by holding down ctrl when clicking. It would be interesting how this works with the current MBP and XP. I assume you have to use a 3rd party program to get right click ability in XP when using the trackpad only.

Also, the t60p seems to be the far superior machine to me in terms of features and expandability (ultra bay, dock), unless you like widescreen displays, OS X as primary OS, DVI out and minimalistic apple design.

a31pguy · #8 Post by **a31pguy** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:33 pm

The best part of a Powerbook is the operating system. Not the hardware. (Yes the cases are nice and carbon fiber + aluminum or Ti) I'd rather run OS X on a thinkpad than windows on a Mac Book Pro. Thinkpads have better expandability.

I have to say that OS X with a developer pack installed is hands down much more useful to me that XP with Cygwin installed. So if I could get OS X on a thinkpad - that would be sweeter.

#9 Post by **Kyocera** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:49 pm

It is possible, however there are some issues with the software running on an intel platform. The OS does fine.

brentpresley · #10 Post by **brentpresley** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:37 pm

I won't touch one of these until Apple irons out the hardware bugs.

There a tons of complaints from first adopters that they get so hot they nearly burn the users' legs.

MagicBoy · #11 Post by **MagicBoy** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:59 pm

brentpresley wrote:I won't touch one of these until Apple irons out the hardware bugs.

There a tons of complaints from first adopters that they get so hot they nearly burn the users' legs.

It's not that bad in my experience. I bought a MacBook Pro 1.83 last week and it runs warm but it's no worse underneath than my work supplied T42.

Boot Camp works well - the CD it burns as part of the process has all the required drivers including proper ATI ones for the graphics card.

Sottozero · #12 Post by **Sottozero** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 8:49 pm

I've received an RMA for my T60p. I love the ThinkPad, but I'm a Mac guy at heart and this new development by Apple is everything I've always wanted. I no longer have a need for two machines, and I can boot into Windows if I have to.

kaotic504 · #13 Post by **kaotic504** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 9:17 pm

i read all this today as well. Apple is silently releasing a new revision to the MBP to resolve some issues such as heat. I downloaded the bootloader today while i was at work (hush, don't tell anyone

) i think i'm just going to buy a huge hard drive and try to triple boot my T60 w/ XP Pro, OSX 10.5 (when it comes out) and Gentoo.

DavidNZ · #14 Post by **DavidNZ** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 9:59 pm

"Wow - this is GREAT! Now I can combine the overpriced hardware with the inferior software!"
http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/50658#1268522 (via Ed Bott)

Hu-larious...

#15 Post by **K. Eng** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 10:31 pm

Comparing the MacBook Pro to the T60 is Apples to Oranges. My take on it is that you should buy the machine that suits your needs best.

Business users will probably want the T60 because most of the business world runs on Windows XP. There's no point in buying a Mac and then having to go out and buy a copy of XP Pro.

Multimedia developers may want the MacBook because of its larger widescreen. OS X is also a lot slicker and more fun to use than XP.

They are both good machines and as others have noted, both use the same types of processor and chipset.

My personal choice would be the T60. I like the smaller footprint, TrackPoint/Ultranav system, and modular bay. But I'm sure I could make do with a MacBook Pro if that was my only choice.

ayja wrote:should I return the t60p????

brentpresley · #16 Post by **brentpresley** » Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:33 am

K. Eng wrote:OS X is also a lot slicker and more fun to use than XP.

Man, I will fight this opinion till the day I die. I just have to say I HATE the feel of the OS X. Better than the OS 9, but it is still cumbersome. I have used both PCs and Macs for years (the joys of Academia) and it always takes longer to do routine tasks on OS X (moving files, etc.).

With that said, there is one I do love about OS X - I never have to worry about a virus, spyware, or a rootkit on the machines in the lab. This it the main reason, IMHO, that XP needs to be re-written from the ground up (and Vista just isn't going to fit the bill I think).

I'm going to be playing with OS X on my T42 here in the next week or so. I will have a more concrete feel for which OS is faster/better on identical hardware, but from others running dual boot scenarios I have heard that OS X's speed is disappointing compared to XP.

egibbs · #17 Post by **egibbs** » Thu Apr 06, 2006 6:20 am

Personally I would much rather have a TP that boots to OSx than a Macbook that boots to WinXP.

And in either case, I'd like to be able to run alternate OSes in Virtual Machines, rather than as boot options. How cool would it be to have a TP that boots natively into OSX, with WinXP and Linux both running simultaneously in separate windows.

I believe this could actually be done today, using one of the OSX hacks and VMWare. But it would take way more time that I'm willing to invest, and probably be unstable as hell. In a year or two you might be able to order it that way.

Ed Gibbs

#18 Post by **GomJabbar** » Thu Apr 06, 2006 7:33 am

I couldn't miss the couple of diggs that Apple threw in.

Apple wrote:Macs use an ultra-modern industry standard technology called EFI to handle booting. Sadly, Windows XP, and even the upcoming Vista, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS. But with Boot Camp, the Mac can operate smoothly in both centuries. [colored text added]

Apple wrote:Word to the Wise
Windows running on a Mac is like Windows running on a PC. That means it’ll be subject to the same attacks that plague the Windows world. So be sure to keep it updated with the latest Microsoft Windows security fixes. [colored text added]

Actually I think this is pretty cool.

Makes me want to finally give Mac a try. I used to tri-boot my family PC with OS/2 Warp, Windows 3.1, and MSDOS 6, so I have done this sort of thing before. There were features I wanted in all three OS's.

kaotic504 · #19 Post by **kaotic504** » Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:29 am

egibbs wrote:Personally I would much rather have a TP that boots to OSx than a Macbook that boots to WinXP.

And in either case, I'd like to be able to run alternate OSes in Virtual Machines, rather than as boot options. How cool would it be to have a TP that boots natively into OSX, with WinXP and Linux both running simultaneously in separate windows.

I believe this could actually be done today, using one of the OSX hacks and VMWare. But it would take way more time that I'm willing to invest, and probably be unstable as hell. In a year or two you might be able to order it that way.

Ed Gibbs

i agree, i'd rather have a T60 boot OSX than a MBP boot XP as well. When AMD comes out w/ the Turion X2, it's supposed to support hardware virtualization, so you can act like you have 2 pc's on 1 physical machine. i'd love to see who is going to come out and support the laptops with those new chips.

ayja · #20 Post by **ayja** » Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:44 am

Now that the mac book pro can run windows and thus rhino, Can someone let me know if autocad/maya/rhino/any type of rendering.... runs smoothly on the MBP? IS there any loss speed? Also if someone has the t60p, can they compare the two? I know they are very similar laptops in specs except for the video card...I am interested how in open gl apps, the ati 1600 compares to the ati 5200. Thanks.

egibbs · #21 Post by **egibbs** » Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:50 pm

kaotic504 wrote:i agree, i'd rather have a T60 boot OSX than a MBP boot XP as well. When AMD comes out w/ the Turion X2, it's supposed to support hardware virtualization, so you can act like you have 2 pc's on 1 physical machine. i'd love to see who is going to come out and support the laptops with those new chips.

Actually, I think Lenovo is missing out on a HUGE opportunity, and I wish they'd wake up.

All of our machines come with the ability to boot to a non-windows OS - the Rescue and Recovery environment. The R&R environment has some pretty good functionality - you can web browse, email, perform disk operations, even basic word processing.

Why not do a deal with VMWare (or even Microsoft) to embed Virtual Machines in the R&R environment? That would enable us to have our machines boot by default to the R&R OS (although the name would probably be changed to Machine Manager or something similar), and then from there launch VMs running any OS we wanted. To keep MS happy it would probably include a default Windows VM, and maybe a basic Linux VM optimized for the TP. But users could add as many new VMs as they wanted, and open and close them as needed.

If all you want to do is surf the web, you wouldn't even need to fire up a VM - you could do it from the boot OS. If you want to run MS Money, load the Windows VM, and kill it when you're done. Linux web development? Open Fedora or Gentoo or Debian, according to your preference.

Personally, I think this is where the PC world is headed. One OS is no longer enough, and Windows can't be all things to all people. For surfing the web I want the simplest, most bullet-proof OS that will get the job done. For 3D solid modeling I need all the power of a modern OS, and then some. Expecting to get both in one product is not realistic.

Apple seems to have recognized this paradigm shift, and is attempting to capitalize on it. Microsoft senses it too, which is why they are giving away Virtual Server and offering support for Linux under Virtual Server. Lenovo can steal the lead but they must be quick to do it.

Ed Gibbs

dizzyspell · #22 Post by **dizzyspell** » Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:57 pm

It seems to me that this is a mistake on Apple's part.

The Mac experience used to be a package deal: you buy certain hardware and it comes with only one kind of software. Designed with usability in mind, it's the Mac experience.

But now, consider a current customer who buys a Mac Book Pro. The customer tries out Windows using Boot Camp, and discovers that it suits their needs better. (Very simple tasks, like displaying fonts in Word, or streaming video in a browser, simply work better in Windows.) Wouldn't they feel stupid after coughing up over 2k$ for a Mac Book? They would.

Most computer users are superficial users. They only see the front end. I sit behind my computer 6-7 hours a day, and use many features, but even I don't care about what's under the hood. As long as it works.

Maybe Apple is trying to catch rich users who are looking for high-end Windows laptops, or who are extremely style conscious. Or maybe Apple realizes that it is futile to stop hackers from installing other OS's on Macs.

In any case, the appeal of Apple for regular costumers has dimished, it seems to me, because it is no longer a one-package deal.

(This is coming from a Mac user, by the way. Now that Apple has switched to Intel hardware, OS X is no longer slow as molasses, as it was for years. OS X is definitely an example of an OS X that was released too soon.)

christopher_wolf · #23 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Thu Apr 06, 2006 3:44 pm

egibbs wrote:
kaotic504 wrote:i agree, i'd rather have a T60 boot OSX than a MBP boot XP as well. When AMD comes out w/ the Turion X2, it's supposed to support hardware virtualization, so you can act like you have 2 pc's on 1 physical machine. i'd love to see who is going to come out and support the laptops with those new chips.
Actually, I think Lenovo is missing out on a HUGE opportunity, and I wish they'd wake up.

All of our machines come with the ability to boot to a non-windows OS - the Rescue and Recovery environment. The R&R environment has some pretty good functionality - you can web browse, email, perform disk operations, even basic word processing.

Why not do a deal with VMWare (or even Microsoft) to embed Virtual Machines in the R&R environment? That would enable us to have our machines boot by default to the R&R OS (although the name would probably be changed to Machine Manager or something similar), and then from there launch VMs running any OS we wanted. To keep MS happy it would probably include a default Windows VM, and maybe a basic Linux VM optimized for the TP. But users could add as many new VMs as they wanted, and open and close them as needed.

If all you want to do is surf the web, you wouldn't even need to fire up a VM - you could do it from the boot OS. If you want to run MS Money, load the Windows VM, and kill it when you're done. Linux web development? Open Fedora or Gentoo or Debian, according to your preference.

Personally, I think this is where the PC world is headed. One OS is no longer enough, and Windows can't be all things to all people. For surfing the web I want the simplest, most bullet-proof OS that will get the job done. For 3D solid modeling I need all the power of a modern OS, and then some. Expecting to get both in one product is not realistic.

Apple seems to have recognized this paradigm shift, and is attempting to capitalize on it. Microsoft senses it too, which is why they are giving away Virtual Server and offering support for Linux under Virtual Server. Lenovo can steal the lead but they must be quick to do it.

Ed Gibbs

You can already set such things up with bootable USB media, high-capacity USB sticks and what not. The Thinkpad BIOS has supported this for a *long* time. Just carry around a bunch of OSes on a USB Keyring in your case and use the HDD in the machine for a common data repository. I tried out something like that and think it could be *very* useful. Not all OSes lend themselves well enough to boot from a USB stick, but with 1GB+ sticks and more than 1 USB port per Thinkpad, you could easily boot huge OSes quickly. BSD, Plan 9, and Linux can be put onto boot sticks...I imagine that Windows and OS X can be slimmed down well enough. Consider that the boot times also have the ability to become very small as you are booting from a solid state device with very little lag time and not from a disk that can get easily fragmented, but not easily defragmented.

Thinking about this some more, you could simply use the USB as a boot-assist if you need to get into a *really* huge OS; say, given any OS, you can't get it small enough no matter what you do. Simply use a partition or part of the HDD on the Thinkpad as a main repository for all the "larger" files that the OS needs (GUI, Apps, etc), and use the USB stick to boot from and into it. You can even make USB sticks that can be used to recover systems like that.

egibbs · #24 Post by **egibbs** » Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:54 am

Yes, you can dual or multi-boot now. But that's not what I'm talking about.

I want to boot to a very simple but functional OS that is good enough for basic stuff like file management, email and web surfing. Ideally that boot should be automatic and lightning fast - a couple seconds max.

Then I want to be able to load one or more OSes as VMs within that simple OS if I need to. If I have the desire and the licenses I should be able to have Windows, BSD, Fedora, and OS X all running simultaneously in separate windows and memory spaces, each doing the stuff they are best suited for, while I'm still surfing the web in the simple boot OS.

Right now for most people switching OSes is like moving to a new house, or at least going to a hotel for the night. I think it needs to become more like switching channels on the TV.

And yes, I can do all that right now with VMWare or Virtual Server, except that I need to load a full featured OS first and then kick off the VMs. The ugly fact is that most of us (including power users) rerely use even 1% of the capabilities of a modern OS, so why do we have to load all that overhead until we actually need it?

Ed Gibbs

MAC PRO CAN NOW RUN WINDOW!

MAC PRO CAN NOW RUN WINDOW!

Re: MAC PRO CAN NOW RUN WINDOW!

Not that impressive

Re: MAC PRO CAN NOW RUN WINDOW!

Re: MAC PRO CAN NOW RUN WINDOW!

Who is online