| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
No XP on Intel Macs, but Vista is good to go | |
|
||
| Time: 07:40 EST/12:40 GMT | News Source: Engadget | Posted By: Andre Da Costa | ||
|
If you've been counting on being able to run Windows on those new Intel-based Macs, Apple's not about to make it easy for you -- at least not if you're attached to Windows XP. According to Apple SVP Phil Schiller, the new Macs announced yesterday (those being the Intel iMac and MacBook Pro) may not be able to run current versions of Windows due to the fact that the computers will boot using the Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI), rather than a traditional BIOS (current Power PC Macs use Open Firmware). | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 429 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:57:40 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2960 (68.101.39.180) at 1/12/2006 8:00:38 AM |
|
Interesting, but nothing more than a curiosity.
No one is going to buy a Mac to run Windows. People buy Mac's to run MacOS X. What people really want is to run MacOS X on basic PC Hardware. Now that would be cool :) TL |
| #2 By 32313 (72.27.47.48) at 1/12/2006 9:00:20 AM |
| No, they wouldn't buy it to run Windows, they would buy it to run "both" OS X and Windows. |
| #3 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 1/12/2006 9:13:12 AM |
| I may be in a definite minority, but I would consider running Windows on a Mac--I've always been a fan of Apple hardware, particularly their laptops. The price premium is a little high, though. There isn't anything really directly comparable, but I figure it's about $500-$600. |
| #4 By 3746 (216.16.225.210) at 1/12/2006 9:45:15 AM |
|
I don't understand why people would pay that kind of money just to get a fancy case. I mean you can get high quality and well built systems for way less. Unless magic elves are building
the hardware that gies in them the hardware is not going to be better then high quality parts from another manufacturer. I agree I would love to see OS X on all hardware and i think they are slowly moving towards that. imagine all the driver and hardware problems you have to deal with when you are not building your own hardware is you opened OS X up to all PC hardware. The super stable OS X operating system might not look so stable with people trying to run in millions of different combinations of crappy hardware and drivers. |
| #5 By 32132 (64.180.41.62) at 1/12/2006 11:27:50 AM |
|
#5 You so right.
MacBook Pro = 1999 Inspiron 9400 = 1999 And sadly, if you buy the Dell you have to lug around a 17" display instead of the nice small 15.4" display on the Apple. And the Dell makes you use the miniscule 1GB of memory instead of the whopping 512MB on the Apple. And Dell forces 256MB of video ram on you instead of the 128MB on the Apple. And equally sad, the Dell processor runs at 1.83ghz instead of Apples 1.67ghz. |
| #6 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 1/12/2006 12:15:11 PM |
| The Dell is definitely superior spec-wise, but it's also a bit of a tank--more "luggable" than "portable," perhaps. Apple has jammed some very nice hardware into a relatively small, light-weight package, and usually you will pay a little more for that. But if you look at a MacBook Pro that has similar specs to the Dell, it's about $500-$600 higher--too much, in my opinion. I haven't looked around much, but the Gateway S-7510N (starting at $1,150) is closer in some ways, although the graphics card options aren't as good. |
| #7 By 7754 (65.27.90.2) at 1/12/2006 10:33:48 PM |
|
#8--I hadn't noticed about the GbE missing from the Dell--strange. That's the tough part at this point--finding comparable machines. Many manufacturers are reporting models available in February/March, but aren't putting them on their websites yet. But here's another comparison:
Acer 8200: $2499 (according to PCConnection.com) 15.4" display 1680x1050 (no other display specs listed) 2.0 GHz Duo 2 GB RAM 120 GB HD ATI X1600 256 MB 1.3 M camera (swivel-mount--pretty cool) DVD "Super Multi DL" GbE/Bluetooth/802.11a/b/g no idea what apps are included... rather subjective at that point Bumping up the MacBook Pro to match at 2 GB RAM, 120 GB HD, and you're at $2899; the 2.0 GHz Duo isn't an option, of course (at this point). So, I'd say I'm still pretty close--about a $500-$600 premium. It's a little heavier (and no doubt thicker; not sure what the dimensions are--it lists 1" to 1.3" on Acer's site, whatever that means), but it also has a more substantial battery. Incidentally, it looks like Toshiba has a Duo tablet PC coming out. They also were demo-ing a tablet PC convertible with a removable display at CES... not sure what will happen with that. I really do find it funny how often this happens with Apple, though--the Intel processor is suddenly like the best thing on the block. Do they think we all have amnesia, or what??? Amazing how many people lap it up, though. |
| #8 By 2960 (68.101.39.180) at 1/13/2006 1:15:26 PM |
|
#8,
You didn't expect a FAIR comparison from NP did you? Heck, I would have had a heart attack if he did :) TL |
| #9 By 2960 (68.101.39.180) at 1/13/2006 1:17:29 PM |
|
The Mac's are comparable in price to similarly equipped ThinkPads as best I can tell.
At one time I ranked ThinkPads right up there with PowerBooks. Not any more. Not since the T40, and not since the Lenovo take over, especially in the area of reliable service at the Depot. TL |
| #10 By 32132 (142.32.208.231) at 1/13/2006 4:30:47 PM |
|
"You didn't expect a FAIR comparison from NP did you?"
The Mac has half the ram, half the video ram, a slower processor, a significantly smaller lcd, and you say the comparison isn't fair? And note, the DVD Writer on the Mac is NOT DUAL LAYER. No more Firewire 800. No PCMCIA slot. What a ripoff. Even when Apple finally converts to a processor that isn't a slug, they foist off the slow crappy first generation Yonahs on ther sheep followers. Sad. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 429 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:57:40 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
