Is Macbook worth buying to run WinXP?
-
Originally posted by Preternatural.stuff:
For this, reason alone, you really ought to get a Windows machine.Bootcamp and all that crap is marketing fraud... running a Windows OS ontop of a middleware like Bootcamp ontop of a Mac OS ontop of hardware is so fundamentally ridiculous.
The overhead on system resources is so bad even a high end system will be crawling, if not hanging all the time. Its Apple's marketing fraud to tackle the consumer dissonance that I mentioned - anxiety about not being able to function with the rest of the PC world.
The only implementation I know that will work well on a Mac to play Windows games is using VMware, which works at the virtualisation level, basically taking the place of any OS. That's why Microsoft is so afraid of VMware and now beginning to offer products undercutting VMware's prices, while the likes of HP an IBM are investing so much in virtualisation technologies at the enterprise level.
But its the cost and the technicalities lah... not worth it unless you really need to function in both OS worlds.
boot camp runs natively on any intel mac. it runs as fast as any windows laptop. (i remember an article in the past that declared the macbook pro the best laptop to run vista)
VMware is just virtualization. it will never be as fast as running native.
anyway, boot camp and the virtualization software are just software to help smoothen the transit from windows to mac. there are still some software/website that only runs on windows/internet explorer. it's not there for people to use windows on mac. (why would anyone do that in the first place? people buy a mac to use a mac, not to run windows)
-
I would love to try out a mac as well when I want to get away from using windows.
But of course I wouldn't be able to tell you what I will be using my mac for......hmm...most probably for entertainment like web surfing, listening to music, watching movies/anime, viewing my photo album and etc...
I'm more proficient in windows than mac, so I thought since I could get a notebook, I might as well try out a mac this time...only if the mac is able to run windows in native mode.
Cost is not really a problem compared to portability, I can get a new copy of windows xp pro if I really need to.
-
I can get a new copy of windows xp pro if I really need to.
It's no longer on the shelves for sales, unless you buy a machine (from Dell, Acer, etc) that comes with Vista and choose to downgrade to XP. That's the only way to get XP, and even this method, as far as I know, will expire. End of July if I'm not wrong. Will be longer if they can't clear stocks.
-
Getting a Mac to install it with XP is like being a Chinese trying to act like an eurasian...
The key on the mac are different from a normal windows platform keyboard and the mouse only one button... these are the things you have to get used to. Besides, any machine nowsaday can function better with Xp installed rather than vista...
-
Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:
It's no longer on the shelves for sales, unless you buy a machine (from Dell, Acer, etc) that comes with Vista and choose to downgrade to XP. That's the only way to get XP, and even this method, as far as I know, will expire. End of July if I'm not wrong. Will be longer if they can't clear stocks.
Or you can check up auction sites for OEM version. -
Originally posted by caleb_chiang:
Or you can check up auction sites for OEM version.If they have installed it on a machine before, you can't activate this copy without going through all the hassle.
-
Well, anyway, Microsoft can give a free downgrade to XP as in free activation using your vista product key. That was what microsoft customer service told me over the helpline a few weeks ago when I tried to change the product key without reinstalling...
And regarding the issue, what is needed is just a phone call away.
-
Har? Buy a macbook to load in winxp? Serously?
-
Originally posted by caleb_chiang:
Getting a Mac to install it with XP is like being a Chinese trying to act like an eurasian...
The key on the mac are different from a normal windows platform keyboard and the mouse only one button... these are the things you have to get used to. Besides, any machine nowsaday can function better with Xp installed rather than vista...
So next time when you marry, would you like your wife to wear a traditional CHINESE wedding gown or European one?Dilemma right?
-
Originally posted by parn:
So next time when you marry, would you like your wife to wear a traditional CHINESE wedding gown or European one?Dilemma right?
haha, true.
btw, to caleb_chiang: you do know that all you have to do to get your familiar 2-click mouse is to just stick one into the usb?
it is rather expensive to get a macbook to run XP though. if you want a laptop but want XP, get a Sony one or something. if you want a laptop to run Mac OS, get a macbook. you won't usually switch the OSes around anyway, and you can find programs on either OS to run whatever you want. except games, that is.
-
Originally posted by SexyChin:
boot camp runs natively on any intel mac. it runs as fast as any windows laptop. (i remember an article in the past that declared the macbook pro the best laptop to run vista)
VMware is just virtualization. it will never be as fast as running native.
anyway, boot camp and the virtualization software are just software to help smoothen the transit from windows to mac. there are still some software/website that only runs on windows/internet explorer. it's not there for people to use windows on mac. (why would anyone do that in the first place? people buy a mac to use a mac, not to run windows)
Running natively or not can be quite irrelevant, its the stability ultimately of the system that matters over time. No point having a paper weight when it acts up even though its fast when working on an initially clean installation.
Opinion aside, just google say "Bootcamp problems" and you can see the problems that users face.
VMware is way more versatile and offers functionality and features far greater than anything that Bootcamp can offer, which merely dual boots from different partitions and supplies drivers to the Windows OS. I've seen implementations of VMware to run the latest PC games and other apps really fast. Simultaneous access to both OS offers far more utility and productivity. Of course, its difficult to say if future problems will crop up. As I always say its the drivers that always seem to be the problem with system reliability, if not immediately then eventually, as the Vista problems show. Suffice to say, we're all in agreement that its not cool to run OS on hardware not meant for each other.
As for the article you saw, no lah. Its not the best, just that its benchmark test scores happened to be the highest at that point in time. There are new benchmark champions every other week depending on who has the latest Intel CPU or graphics card or RAM chip or HDD. If ASUS launches the latest Calpella quad-core Intel CPUs onto its gaming lappies with the latest monster nVidia 3-D graphics cards, dual SSDs etc. it'll be the new champion wouldn't it?
Apple has a habit of paying premium prices to Intel for exclusive rights to the first batch of any new Intel CPU. Then they charge premium prices to consumers lor. That was how they could make the Mac Air, using the latest ultra low voltage Core 2 Duos b4 anyone else. But 3-4 yrs prior to Mac Air, Sony used generally available components to create the super razor thin carbon fibre lappies weighing less at 900g-1.1kg WITH/without optical drives and swappable batteries. The world's lightest Toshiba Protege is like 800g with optical drive. That's engineering R&D and expertise.
-
Originally posted by Preternatural.stuff:
Running natively or not can be quite irrelevant, its the stability ultimately of the system that matters over time. No point having a paper weight when it acts up even though its fast when working on an initially clean installation.
Opinion aside, just google say "Bootcamp problems" and you can see the problems that users face.
VMware is way more versatile and offers functionality and features far greater than anything that Bootcamp can offer, which merely dual boots from different partitions and supplies drivers to the Windows OS. I've seen implementations of VMware to run the latest PC games and other apps really fast. Simultaneous access to both OS offers far more utility and productivity. Of course, its difficult to say if future problems will crop up. As I always say its the drivers that always seem to be the problem with system reliability, if not immediately then eventually, as the Vista problems show. Suffice to say, we're all in agreement that its not cool to run OS on hardware not meant for each other.
As for the article you saw, no lah. Its not the best, just that its benchmark test scores happened to be the highest at that point in time. There are new benchmark champions every other week depending on who has the latest Intel CPU or graphics card or RAM chip or HDD. If ASUS launches the latest Calpella quad-core Intel CPUs onto its gaming lappies with the latest monster nVidia 3-D graphics cards, dual SSDs etc. it'll be the new champion wouldn't it?
Apple has a habit of paying premium prices to Intel for exclusive rights to the first batch of any new Intel CPU. Then they charge premium prices to consumers lor. That was how they could make the Mac Air, using the latest ultra low voltage Core 2 Duos b4 anyone else. But 3-4 yrs prior to Mac Air, Sony used generally available components to create the super razor thin carbon fibre lappies weighing less at 900g-1.1kg WITH/without optical drives and swappable batteries. The world's lightest Toshiba Protege is like 800g with optical drive. That's engineering R&D and expertise
let's get some facts straightened out. boot camp allows windows to be run on apple laptop natively. which means that windows will run as smoothly as any computer with the same specs. i seriously have no idea where you get the idea that boot camp is unstable.
and i have no intention in going on a mac vs pc debate here. it is meaningless in this topic and i have no idea why are you doing mac bashing here, when the original topic is whether is it worth it to just run windows on a mac.
-
I've seen implementations of VMware to run the latest PC games and other apps really fast.
Because accleration is enabled. Disable it and see the effects yourself.
http://www.vmware.com/support/ws5/doc/ws_learning_prefs_vm_options.html
-
Originally posted by SexyChin:
let's get some facts straightened out. boot camp allows windows to be run on apple laptop natively. which means that windows will run as smoothly as any computer with the same specs. i seriously have no idea where you get the idea that boot camp is unstable.
and i have no intention in going on a mac vs pc debate here. it is meaningless in this topic and i have no idea why are you doing mac bashing here, when the original topic is whether is it worth it to just run windows on a mac.
Then let's get some facts straightened out. I have no idea how anybody knowledgeable looks at some benchmark test scores from websites that do reviews on brand new clean machines and then proclaim that "it is the best to run windows".
For heaven's sakes, any machine that is brand new out of the box and clean, without ANYTHING installed on it except some benchmarking tools will run without problems.
Of course it is never one particular app or software or feature that makes a system problematic. I've never said that bootcamp is unstable, I've always referred to stable implementations of Windows on Mac, and I ultimately strongly recommend against it, short of one being very technical, sibei eng, or rich. I've said before that its often the drivers that cause the greatest problems between the OS and hardware, as the Vista experience shows.
Its everything cumulative over time & it then become insurmountable at some point. Even upgrading Mac OSs on Mac hardware can cause serious problems with bread and butter software like Adobe for many Mac users. Running Windows on a closed proprietary system like Apple exposes one to the highest such risk.
Try running your pet benchmarking tests after a couple of months of real world usage, such as installing all your MS office applications, hardware accessories' drivers, javascripts on your browsers from a million websites, warez, multi-media toys, freeware, bloatware, porn, other misc memory hoggers, a couple of iterations of security patches, updates and service packs from MS and all other said apps, blah blah blah.
Open your eyes, google and see the problems that so ppl are facing running Windows on Mac hardware. Hell juz look at the ppl on this thread who reported problems!
I can't understand the irresponsible posts about benchmarking figures that side track from the real issues of a working computer vs a paper weight costing 4 digits.
Another sensitive soul offended by perceived "Mac bashing" eh? Read the thread title clearly and see what it is about - whether to run Windows for the next couple of years on Mac. Not running a benchmark test result for a couple of minutes. You yourself recommmend against doing so but you sidestep the issue by making naive, contradictory & misleading claims that the "Mac is the best to run Windows". Marketing talk is best found on brochures, not needed on forums!
Pride getting in the way?
-
getting a macbook to run xp is pure dumbness, might as well buy a normal laptop and mod it to look like a macbook
-
Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:
Because accleration is enabled. Disable it and see the effects yourself.
http://www.vmware.com/support/ws5/doc/ws_learning_prefs_vm_options.html
& ur point? That one shld tweak systems to run like crap? Its juz one of many stellar features of VMware. At the enterprise level, these are really important on servers.
I.still.dun.recommend.it.for.the.purposes.of.this.thread.
-
Originally posted by candiz:
getting a macbook to run xp is pure dumbness, might as well buy a normal laptop and mod it to look like a macbook
Actually, no need to mod hardware ... two words:
Dell Adamo
http://www.adamobydell.com/
There are so many stunning designs by laptop manufacturers, if only you are willing to pay premium prices. Mac's price point isn't even considered a premium brand you know, that's why students buy it ... Even if OS etc. isn't an issue, I'd still think twice cos its so student-ish. Even my Panasonic Toughbook is classed as a premium corporate brand.
Maybe we should start a new and more interesting thread called the most desirable lappies - must cost at least S$3k or S$4K and above with really unusual capabilities/features? Maybe people with money to burn, like Parn, can buy them and show them off to us.
-
Originally posted by Preternatural.stuff:
& ur point? That one shld tweak systems to run like crap? Its juz one of many stellar features of VMware. At the enterprise level, these are really important on servers.
I.still.dun.recommend.it.for.the.purposes.of.this.thread.
Hell no.
It's to prove that VMWare can be crap if you turn off the wrong option, which is true.
By the way, not all applications are compatible with that acceleration option. Some VMs can crash or hang or even cause a memory leak on the host machine itself. Most work fine, but is still very much dependent on why you install a VM.
-
I got to admit Dell Adamo is probably the only Dell laptop that I find it nice though I find the metal texture at the bottom (monitor part) kind of out of place. Than there is another problem, the Adamo is only look nice but comes with a rubbish processor. Hence probably, this kind of laptop really for people who have lots of money to burn.
Mac itself is not premium but rather people make it premium. If you really want to run XP, I really recommend you to think twice, cause you are afterall still running on a hardware that is configured to run best on Mac hence you may find problems here and there. Thus it is wiser to get a PC laptop, there are nice ones such as Sony (premium price though).
Also bootcamp was put inside OS X not because Apple thinks that they are hopeless but rather to help users dual boot without the needs of complicated procedure that some people cannot understand.
-
Originally posted by Preternatural.stuff:
Then let's get some facts straightened out. I have no idea how anybody knowledgeable looks at some benchmark test scores from websites that do reviews on brand new clean machines and then proclaim that "it is the best to run windows".
For heaven's sakes, any machine that is brand new out of the box and clean, without ANYTHING installed on it except some benchmarking tools will run without problems.
Of course it is never one particular app or software or feature that makes a system problematic. I've never said that bootcamp is unstable, I've always referred to stable implementations of Windows on Mac, and I ultimately strongly recommend against it, short of one being very technical, sibei eng, or rich. I've said before that its often the drivers that cause the greatest problems between the OS and hardware, as the Vista experience shows.
Its everything cumulative over time & it then become insurmountable at some point. Even upgrading Mac OSs on Mac hardware can cause serious problems with bread and butter software like Adobe for many Mac users. Running Windows on a closed proprietary system like Apple exposes one to the highest such risk.
Try running your pet benchmarking tests after a couple of months of real world usage, such as installing all your MS office applications, hardware accessories' drivers, javascripts on your browsers from a million websites, warez, multi-media toys, freeware, bloatware, porn, other misc memory hoggers, a couple of iterations of security patches, updates and service packs from MS and all other said apps, blah blah blah.
Open your eyes, google and see the problems that so ppl are facing running Windows on Mac hardware. Hell juz look at the ppl on this thread who reported problems!
I can't understand the irresponsible posts about benchmarking figures that side track from the real issues of a working computer vs a paper weight costing 4 digits.
Another sensitive soul offended by perceived "Mac bashing" eh? Read the thread title clearly and see what it is about - whether to run Windows for the next couple of years on Mac. Not running a benchmark test result for a couple of minutes. You yourself recommmend against doing so but you sidestep the issue by making naive, contradictory & misleading claims that the "Mac is the best to run Windows". Marketing talk is best found on brochures, not needed on forums!
Pride getting in the way?
stability of windows in the long run, is it apple's fault or microsoft's fault?
hack running windows on a mac, let's say running windows on a pc, i don't think you can have optimal performance after a few months of usage.
and regarding me not recommending using windows on a mac. i did not recommend it due to obvious costs reasons. it is obviously not WORTH it to buy, considering just costs alone, to just run windows on a mac.
also, i just wanted to change your warped idea that windows in simply unrunnable on a mac and somehow virtualization is somehow faster than running natively.
-
Originally posted by SexyChin:
stability of windows in the long run, is it apple's fault or microsoft's fault?
hack running windows on a mac, let's say running windows on a pc, i don't think you can have optimal performance after a few months of usage.
and regarding me not recommending using windows on a mac. i did not recommend it due to obvious costs reasons. it is obviously not WORTH it to buy, considering just costs alone, to just run windows on a mac.
also, i just wanted to change your warped idea that windows in simply unrunnable on a mac and somehow virtualization is somehow faster than running natively.
Stability of Windows in the long run: I'd say Apple. Not to be bashing Apple, but Macs were meant to run OSX, and even though you might have installed the drivers using the OS X DVD, quite a few problems probably will occur, seeing as the components were built for OSX. For example, I have heard reports of MBP users unable to use their dedicated video card in Windows, and the Hardware automatically used their integrated solutions instead. Sometimes, the Wireless adapter isn't recognised, even with the drivers.Or maybe it just plain crashes. Some have reported overheating in their Macs, not surprisingly an Apple-only chip. There are many problems, and you better hope, its not you.
Well sure, performance won't really be optimal after a few months, but with enough know-how, you can keep it up there somewhere.
And yes, though cost is a factor, usually its the bugs that keep users from getting Windows to run on a Mac. Isn't that the reason why most Mac users got their Macs for? I would still not recommend Boot Camp unless it is a must. Windows can run on a Mac, and vice versa, but both implementations are buggy as hell.
So my opinion is: It's up to you. Do you really need Windows, or is there an alternative to Boot Camping your Mac?
Fun Fact: It takes Apple longer to acknowledge a flaw exists in their products than it takes Microsoft to release a new OS. (iBook series flaws)
-
Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:
Hell no.
It's to prove that VMWare can be crap if you turn off the wrong option, which is true.
By the way, not all applications are compatible with that acceleration option. Some VMs can crash or hang or even cause a memory leak on the host machine itself. Most work fine, but is still very much dependent on why you install a VM.
& still what is your point with such truism? What is so difficult about screwing up?
Isn't it obvious that you are supposed to have technical knowledge of what you are doing before doing it? I can name you a million and one ways you can crash any OS, Mac, PC, lappie or server. Even say a Sun Solaris Unix server.
I've said all along, you want to dual boot or run multiple OS on funny hardware not built for it, u'd jolly well be technical! & that was what I said about VMware too - most people ain't technical enough, especially the Mac demographic.
Surely you didn't google VMware just to find that paragraph to nitpick? Who says that it is crap if you turn off the acceleration, its whether a feature is supported or not and whether performance or stability is favoured. You're not doing the same thing blaming the OS layer again are you? Ever occurred to you that such crashes are due to the software not supported by VMware being buggy? Ever considered that it is no party's fault even cos it isn't within the normal design parameters?
-
Originally posted by parn:
So next time when you marry, would you like your wife to wear a traditional CHINESE wedding gown or European one?Dilemma right?
Then why don't you just advise TS to buy a normal slim notebook and change the casing to a mac look alike then? -
Originally posted by Raraken:
Stability of Windows in the long run: I'd say Apple. Not to be bashing Apple, but Macs were meant to run OSX, and even though you might have installed the drivers using the OS X DVD, quite a few problems probably will occur, seeing as the components were built for OSX. For example, I have heard reports of MBP users unable to use their dedicated video card in Windows, and the Hardware automatically used their integrated solutions instead. Sometimes, the Wireless adapter isn't recognised, even with the drivers.Or maybe it just plain crashes. Some have reported overheating in their Macs, not surprisingly an Apple-only chip. There are many problems, and you better hope, its not you.
[stuff in between]
Fun Fact: It takes Apple longer to acknowledge a flaw exists in their products than it takes Microsoft to release a new OS. (iBook series flaws)
Dude, ALL the stuff that are used in a Mac are the same stuff that are used in a PC. You can also install Mac OS X in your PC if you know how. There's no such thing as an Apple-only chip.
Fun Fact: Vista. 'Nuff said.
-
Originally posted by Preternatural.stuff:
& still what is your point with such truism? What is so difficult about screwing up?
Isn't it obvious that you are supposed to have technical knowledge of what you are doing before doing it? I can name you a million and one ways you can crash any OS, Mac, PC, lappie or server. Even say a Sun Solaris Unix server.
I've said all along, you want to dual boot or run multiple OS on funny hardware not built for it, u'd jolly well be technical! & that was what I said about VMware too - most people ain't technical enough, especially the Mac demographic.
Heh, it's not difficult to screw up, especially with non-technical users. They will find a million ways to screw it up, no matter how idiot proof a program is.
I don't think it's obvious that you are supposed to have technical knowledge of X to do X. You have no technical of how you breathe, but yet you do know how to breathe. If that's the case, we are all long dead.
Anyway, that doesn't matter. If someone feels that they can do something without ever needing to read the manual, then go ahead and do it.
Assuming that you are used to Windows habits... VMWare would most likely suit you.
VMWare is very straightforward. Install it as per usual, create a new VM, insert the CD and everything goes on as normal.
I've no experience for Bootcamp, so I won't touch on that.
To summarize everything, habits and other stuffs that's present naturally in you will move you to do something, no matter how daunting it seems.
If parn can run a Mac + Windows in a Mac without much reading of the manual, then good for her (? your gender I'm not sure).
Nothing much to argue here.