Hackers get Mac running Windows

[zorankarapancev]

Hackers have managed to get Microsoft's Windows XP operating system running on an Apple Mac Computer!

The pair who managed the feat won $13,854 in prize money for their trouble.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4816520.stm

[hech54]

My first thought was confirmed....

The hackers who won the contest are keen to keep their anonymity and are known only by the handles "narf" and "blanka".

....and that was....wouldn't Microsoft consider this illegal?

[AntnyMD]

Personally I dont get it. If you are convinced that Windows is the best operating system for you, why is it important to try to get it to run on an Apple computer? What is it about Apple computers that fascinates these people?

[tnelson]

Personally I dont get it. If you are convinced that Windows is the best operating system for you, why is it important to try to get it to run on an Apple computer? What is it about Apple computers that fascinates these people?

For me it is simple economics. In my home office I have multiple Macs and multiple PC's. I need both for the work I do. To be able to buy a single computer that can run both OS's reduces my cost, both in the number of computers to buy, and the additional overhead costs (electrical, cooling, etc).

Also, as the person who started the contest pointed out. He was doing it because if he could show his boss that a Mac would run their corporate software, then he could order a Mac for his work use.

Personally, I'm waiting for virtualization software, that will allow me to run multiple OS's from within the Mac environment. That way I can copy/paste data between then, as well as take screen shots, and other tasks needed. Much more versatile then a simple dual boot system.

Tom N.

[zorankarapancev]

Personally I dont get it. If you are convinced that Windows is the best operating system for you, why is it important to try to get it to run on an Apple computer? What is it about Apple computers that fascinates these people?

For me it is simple economics. In my home office I have multiple Macs and multiple PC's. I need both for the work I do. To be able to buy a single computer that can run both OS's reduces my cost, both in the number of computers to buy, and the additional overhead costs (electrical, cooling, etc).

Also, as the person who started the contest pointed out. He was doing it because if he could show his boss that a Mac would run their corporate software, then he could order a Mac for his work use.


Personally, I'm waiting for virtualization software, that will allow me to run multiple OS's from within the Mac environment. That way I can copy/paste data between then, as well as take screen shots, and other tasks needed. Much more versatile then a simple dual boot system.

Tom N.

Ditto!

[edDV]

Personally I dont get it. If you are convinced that Windows is the best operating system for you, why is it important to try to get it to run on an Apple computer? What is it about Apple computers that fascinates these people?

I've always thought that Apple's strong suit would be an alternate GUI running over Windows or Linux/Unix. Apple seems to see their business is selling hardware.

[XL3/\/7]

http://www.hiptechblog.com/2006/03/15/video-windows-xp-booting-on-apple-imac

[LloydAZ]

Has anyone been able to go the other way around? Installing Mac OSX for Intel on a PC?

[edDV]

Has anyone been able to go the other way around? Installing Mac OSX for Intel on a PC?

Apple has

or you can emulate
http://www.windowsdevcenter.com/pub/a/windows/2005/01/18/PearPC.html

[lumis]

thats pretty cool.. i'm sure apple, intel & microsoft wont like that someone has figured it out..

[AntnyMD]

If your business runs Windows and your work relies on Windows, and pretty much everything you can do on a Mac you can do on Windows, why do you have an Apple computer? It seems counter-intuitive.

I work on a PC and a Mac at work, and I have no desire to integrate the two. At home I work solely on a Mac. I find it necessary to help draw the line (more for my work peeps than me) where work ends and my personal life begins.

Having a Mac with its elegant software and ease of use is why I chose Mac for home. My Powerbook actually made computers fun again for me. I would never want Windows, which I equate with "the job", in my home again.

Then of course I saw that Origami thing so I might be rethinking that. That concept is a very cool idea. Not because it runs Windows.... its the form factor.

[vitualis]

I think that you are missing the point.

The new Intel Macs have pretty reasonably specs for a "PC" and have a good form factor. The ergonomics are excellent.

Although I'm not particularly a fan of the new laptop range, similarly, the Mac mini has reasonable specifications for the price - but again, the form factor is pretty unique (and functional).

I would probably never buy a Mac if I was limited to running Mac OS X. However, if the iMac or Mac mini could run Windows XP and run it well, it would definitely be something that I would consider.

Regards.

[edDV]

I think that you are missing the point.

The new Intel Macs have pretty reasonably specs for a "PC" and have a good form factor. The ergonomics are excellent.

Although I'm not particularly a fan of the new laptop range, similarly, the Mac mini has reasonable specifications for the price - but again, the form factor is pretty unique (and functional).

I would probably never buy a Mac if I was limited to running Mac OS X. However, if the iMac or Mac mini could run Windows XP and run it well, it would definitely be something that I would consider.

Regards.

How is this missing the point? The point is Apple doesn't want this to happen. On the hardware side they dread being "reduced" to a Windows support company. On the OSX front, they don't want to support other's hardware. Apple likes the advantages (or illusion) of authoritarian dictatorship, even when this results in 3% market share.

[Faustus]

This is WHY I got a macbook Pro. Mac for general usage and as soon as the video driver issue is worked out Windows XP for games.

[vitualis]

How is this missing the point? The point is Apple doesn't want this to happen. On the hardware side they dread being "reduced" to a Windows support company. On the OSX front, they don't want to support other's hardware. Apple likes the advantages (or illusion) of authoritarian dictatorship, even when this results in 3% market share.

Um... it was missing the point because the original author was wondering why anyone would want to install Windows on an Intel Mac. I can understand why Apple doesn't want this to happen, but MS is probably smiling smugly in the background.

For the user, OS choice is always a bonus. I personally think that on a number of different levels, Windows is a better / more functional OS than Mac OS X.

Regards.

[edDV]

Microsoft wants Apple OSX to continue for multiple reasons. They are even a prime stockholder in Apple after saving them more than a few times.

[Case]

They are even a prime stockholder in Apple

How do you figure that? In fiscal year 2005, there were three companies who held over 5% Apple stock, MS not being one of them (2005 10-K Annual Report, page 110).

[edDV]

They are even a prime stockholder in Apple

How do you figure that? In fiscal year 2005, there were three companies who held over 5% Apple stock, MS not being one of them (2005 10-K Annual Report, page 110).

Gates is there when times are tough. Every time.

In case you haven't noticed AAPL has been up 10x since '03. If you haven't sold yet, you should think about it. AAPL is off 25% from the recent peak.

[vitualis]

If memory serves, Gates/MS sold its shares in Apple several years ago.

If Apple ever decides to make Mac OSX able to be installed on commodity PCs (entirely possible), it will directly threaten MS business. The key is market share. OSX may not have much take up in business or enterprise, it WILL steal a significant share in "home" markets. Once you get a significant proportion of people used to OSX, Windows will no longer seem so "necessarily" on the enterprise market.

This will never happen with Jobs holding the reigns as he is a megalomaniac. He wants to hold the strings with both hardware and software. His dogma may not survive him if he leaves. I would think that it would be relatively trivial to support common hardware on commodity PC boxes with Mac OSX. Most of the hard work has already been done.

MS and Apple are only "allies" insofar that Apple won't release its OS for "ordinary" PCs, even though they could. If MS were clever, they would/should secretly encourage as many OSX users to use Windows as much as possible. They already somewhat have with Virtual PC. Most people I know with a Mac (i.e., they do "real work" with it) have an installed copy of Virtual PC with Windows XP as often there is some necessary piece of software that doesn't come in a Mac version. Making Windows installable on a Mac would increase market share for MS and minimise the impact for a potential "hardware unlimited" version of OSX in the future.

Regards.

[edDV]

I'm hoping they do compete head to head on both the PC and Mactel platforms.

[Faustus]

I'm hoping they do compete head to head on both the PC and Mactel platforms.

Just not gonna happen sadly. Is quite clear that Apple views itself as a hardware company and the software thing is just the side cheese to them. Nevermind that to me software is what they are best at.

So if Apple likes itself as a hardware company what do they care if you boot Windows on a Mac as long as its involved enough that not everyone but the knowledgeable are doing it? Nothing. So What does Microsoft think of booting windows on a Mac? Long as it sells one more license they won't care either.

[mhar4]

Just not gonna happen sadly. Is quite clear that Apple views itself as a hardware company and the software thing is just the side cheese to them.

Apple is both a hardware and software company. It's core business, remember is art and design, advertising and filmmaking, where workflow, integration ... and coolness ... is important.

[vitualis]

Agreed, it is both.

Apple removed the greatest obstruction to installing "Windows" on a Mac when it switched over to the Intel platform. Apple's control of the hardware is somewhat overstated - firstly, although it is involved in design, they don't actually make it. For Intel, Apple is a small customer. I do not expect that they will give Apple preferential treatment, nor will they release specific features for Apple that it does not release for the rest of the PC market.

That being so, MS could easily engineer Windows to be "compatible" with an Intel Mac. In fact, it would be in their interests to do so as like it or not, OS X is the only real competitor to Windows in the consumer market.

Regards.

[edDV]

Just not gonna happen sadly. Is quite clear that Apple views itself as a hardware company and the software thing is just the side cheese to them.

Apple is both a hardware and software company. It's core business, remember is art and design, advertising and filmmaking, where workflow, integration ... and coolness ... is important.

That is their image but Apple only succeeds by projecting that image to the larger consumer market. The last thing Apple needs is to go the route of SGI. There aren't enough customers in the "art and design" space for Apple's computer division to survive. And even in that space, Apple is a distant #2 to WinTel for desktop publishing, image processing and professional video. Apple is reduced to a few narrow niche segments.

Apple is succeeding currently by projecting that image to the IPod space.

[pants]

http://media.libsyn.com/media/macbreak/macbreak20060317-001s2-mp4.mov

here's a video of a mac mini running xp. if above doesn't work try below.

http://twit.tv/mb4

[Faustus]

Just not gonna happen sadly. Is quite clear that Apple views itself as a hardware company and the software thing is just the side cheese to them.

Apple is both a hardware and software company. It's core business, remember is art and design, advertising and filmmaking, where workflow, integration ... and coolness ... is important.

Of course they are both. But over the years its become quite clear where they consider the bread and butter to be and thats selling you hardware. Thats fine, even if they don't "make" it apple designs great hardware.

This Macbook Pro is like a luxury car of notebooks, I can't stress how nice it is. When the XP on Mac video bios problem is sorted out I'll install XP on it. Why? Play some games, otherwse why would I want XP on this ultra nice notebook.

[SERBIAN]

I would probably never buy a Mac if I was limited to running Mac OS X..

Limited???...

I personally think that on a number of different levels, Windows is a better / more functional OS than Mac OS X.

I personally disagrees...strongly...

[vitualis]

Well, that's your opinion. The huge interest from people wanting to install Windows on the Intel Mac proves my point of view.

One obvious area of "better / more function" is software. In the Windows world, there is more of it. It would be impossible for me to swtich to OS X without giving up something that I use frequently and with no OS X alternatively (not a good alternative anyway). That or use Virtual PC - but then, I might as well just use Windows.

The second is hardware. In the Windows world you can buy hardware and peripherals out of consideration of price, features, etc. You never have to worry about OS support or drivers.

I'm not saying that OS X isn't a good OS. It is. For many people, it obviously all they need. It does not, however, fit my needs and it isn't going to be converting enterprise users (or the vast majority of existing Windows users) any time soon.

The current Intel Mac from a hardware perspective is pretty good for the price. As before, if it were limited to running Mac OS X, I would almost certainly not buy it.

Regards.

[mhar4]

The significance of Windows on Macs will no doubt play out over many months, even years, once there are a reasonable number of people doing it. The first will probably be Windows power who know how to get the most out of it, but then regular Mac users will start trying it out, and might find themselves generally irritated by functionality or caught out by viruses. So there might be something of a reaction against Windows on a Mac once the two can really be placed side-by-side.

[Direwolf]

With the lack of video card drivers for Windows, would this affect the performance of apps like Cinema Craft Encoder and other similar ones? Or, would the lack of drivers only affect games and photoshop-like apps?