Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Apple to Charge for Boot Camp?

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:15 AM
from the now-wait-a-minute dept.
OS X The Almighty Buck Apple
An anonymous reader writes "According to a report MacScoop has obtained, Apple will charge current users of Mac OS X Tiger for the final version of Boot Camp that will be released at the same time as Mac OS X Leopard, this Spring."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Apple to Charge for Boot Camp? 50 Comments More | Login /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login
Keybindings Beta
Q W E
A S D
Loading ... Please wait.

  • Uh.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AWhiteFlame (928642) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:18AM (#17702462) Homepage
    I'll believe it when I see it.

  • "will be sold for $29 to Tiger users" (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lord Satri (609291) <alexandre AT leroux DOT net> on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:22AM (#17702496) Homepage Journal
    Well. I guess most users will want to upgrade to Leopard (isn't that why some use the mac instead of XP/Vista/Ubuntu, the OS itself?). If you don't want to, 29$ looks like a fair price (and you can stick with the beta version afaik if you don't want to shell out money at all).

    There are now great alternatives. Boot Camp, Parallels, CrossOverMac, Wine. Competition is great (even if cooperation is better ;-).

  • The reason given will no doubt be (Score:3, Informative)

    by Hawthorne01 (575586) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:24AM (#17702510)
    Sarbanes-Oaxley compliance. Again. FWIW, I have Boot Camp on this very machine. It's worth an addtional 30 bills, if for no other reason than it opens up the world of Windows gaming to me yet again. If some of the Wine-based alternatives for OS X pan out, then I'll drop Boot Camp. Until then...

  • Just like iChat (Score:5, Informative)

    by Finque (653377) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:24AM (#17702522)
    This is nothing new from Apple. I believe when iChat AV came out with Panther (10.3), users of Jaguar (10.2) could upgrade to it for $29. Apple wants you to buy the latest OS from them, but for certain things (iChat, now maybe BootCamp) you can purchase them separately for a previous OS.

  • Yeah and you expected? (Score:5, Informative)

    by shawnce (146129) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:26AM (#17702528) Homepage
    Apple stated all along the Boot Camp would ship with Mac OS X 10.5 (aka you buy 10.5 you also get Boot Camp). So this left open the question if you would be able to purchase Boot Camp (the final version) for 10.4 or not. This rumors implies that 10.4 users will have the ability to use the release version of Boot Camp... which is a good thing. It was never really likely that Boot Camp would be free for 10.4 users.

  • Dual Booting? (Score:3, Funny)

    by jaymzru (1005177) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:43AM (#17702664)
    Inconsequential. Dual booting is *so* 2005.
    Nobody even turns off their macs anymore, much less boots into a different OS.

  • What is the difference between Boot Camp and GRUB? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Sporkinum (655143) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:46AM (#17702688)
    Excuse my ignorance to all things Mac, but what is the difference between Boot Camp and GRUB/LILO? Can't GRUB/LILO boot a Mac OS?
      • Well, actually a lot of things. Boot camp isn't simply a bootloader, it is a packaged solution. Upon first running bootcamp, it has you do a destructionless partition on your HD in order to hold windows (if you don't already have a windows part). Then it burns a cd with all the drivers you will need for your mac hardware once windows is installed and looking for drivers for these things. Now yes, it also doeds include a bootloader, but it is designed to be a more "plug and play" solution than having to find and download the individual programs that would do these things, and configure them properly. Just more of a "mac-like" experience.
        [ Parent ]
  • Check out(http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxmac) Crossover for OSX. Just a commercial version of WINE, but for the $40-60 I can run office 2k without having to put a Win32 OS on the machine. It feels like it launches a hidden copy of the OS for each application under the covers, so I stay in OSX with my win32 apps running along side the Mac ones. Not a dual OS boot like boot camp, not a vmware OS in a OS like parallels. Just another option. I suspect you could do WINE for free, but the helper stuff was well worth the money, IMHO.

    • Re:For those only having a few Win32 applications. (Score:4, Informative)

      by istewart (463887) on Sunday January 21 2007, @01:03PM (#17703322)
      You can in fact do WINE for free, it's been supported on OS X since sometime in the 0.9.2x versions. However, you are correct that you don't get any of the helper stuff (you pretty much have to figure out how to launch your app using command-line WINE), and compatibility isn't as good as CrossOver -- there's no Direct3D support at all, as far as I can see. Of course, you don't get the same user support that Codeweavers gives you either. Plus you have to compile it yourself (meaning you need the dev tools installed), since there's no installer package yet. I just have it installed for the PokerStars client, but for someone who needed more extensive support or was running a mission-critical app, Crossover Mac is probably well worth it.
      [ Parent ]

  • parallels (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Triv (181010) on Sunday January 21 2007, @01:27PM (#17703518) Journal
    It's been said, but.

    I need Windows for my job, and I refuse to reboot my macbook twice a day into XP and back. I had tried Parallels but was entirely unsatisfied with its performance until I upgraded to 1.25 gigs of RAM. Sweet Jeebus is it cool. Booting XP in a window takes about fifteen seconds from launch to login, automatically recognizes my hardware setup and network connection and does exactly what I need it to while staying the hell out of my way.

    BootCamp looks neat, I guess, but really - who the hell restarts their computers anymore?

    • Re:parallels (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MadCow42 (243108) on Sunday January 21 2007, @02:57PM (#17704214) Homepage
      Add dual monitors to your setup, and you'll REALLY be blown away. I'm running the 24" iMac, with a 17" flat screen hooked up on the side. OSX is running full-screen on the iMac, and W2k is running full-screen on the external flat screen. It's like having to computers for the price of one, with a shared keyboard and mouse. Bootcamp took the risk out of going to Mac, but Parallels made it sweet. I can't give up Windows 100%, so it's there whenever I want it. But truthfully, 95% of what I do is on the Mac only (unless you count running the Windows screensaver).

      MadCow.
      [ Parent ]

  • The weird and wonderful world of the machead (Score:4, Funny)

    by Budenny (888916) on Sunday January 21 2007, @01:51PM (#17703664)
    "This is great. It will encourage more people to move to Leopard at a faster rate.
    More revenue for Apple. More profits for Apple. More Macs for us to buy. Yea!"

    This is a comment on the site. Most illuminating, people who do not know the difference between their own interests and that of other people.

    Hardly know where to begin....

    • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Marcion (876801) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:20AM (#17702472) Homepage Journal
      Ok I just read the article, "there is strong possibility that Apple's boot manager software, allowing to use Windows and Mac OS X in dual boot mode will be sold for $29 to Tiger users." How will they do this when we *already* have bootcamp?
      [ Parent ]

      • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:4, Informative)

        by SachiCALaw (856692) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:22AM (#17702494)
        BootCamp is currently a beta. Apple would charge for the release version.
        [ Parent ]

        • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Glonoinha (587375) on Sunday January 21 2007, @12:29PM (#17703022) Journal
          Charge for undocumented, unsupported software? Who do they think they are, Microsoft?

          But really, I see this as a good thing. If they are going to release it as a full retail release with documentation and actual support, then by all means put a price tag on it. It will only take one half hour phone call to support to burn through the $30 retail price, and in the scope of things the price vs additional functionality you will get from a Mac is a mind bending proposition.
          [ Parent ]

          • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Kyokugenryu (817869) on Sunday January 21 2007, @05:21PM (#17705314)
            Why is it that the Mac cultists always support ANYTHING Jobs and Co. do, but down on MS. I mean, if MS were to do this, people would be up in arms! "Charging for something we have free already? Come on! This should be FREE to all users! They just want more money!" Apple's basically pulling an MS and Mac people are going "Sure, it costs a little more, but what doesn't? :)"

            Just pointing out the massive hypocrisy here, and I'll probably get modded down for it by rabid fanboys, but I can't ignore the massive hypocrisy here.
            [ Parent ]

      • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:5, Informative)

        by Bastardchyld (889185) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:24AM (#17702512) Journal
        Its because they are selling the final version. This no different than any other public beta. No one expects Microsoft to offer the final version of Vista for free because there was a free public beta.

        Nothing to see here.
        [ Parent ]

          • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:4, Informative)

            by Firehed (942385) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:53AM (#17702740) Homepage
            It's probably not a driver thing, it's most likely an EFI thing. Booting is done differently since the current line of Apple hardware uses EFI instead of BIOS, so GRUB (etc) probably isn't compatible. That, and the live partitioning without destroying data that's currently on the drive, which I've never seen before (though I haven't dabbled in the Linuxes in a while).

            Mind you, I still think it's a lame cash grab, but I figure that Leopard will include the full version at no extra cost so it won't affect future switchers anyways. When I tested out the current beta version, it worked fine, other than the fact that Parallels was much more useful and it meant having a Windows installation on my MBP. In either case, I needed the hard drive space back. I wonder if they'll put this down to the S-O Act too...
            [ Parent ]

            • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:4, Informative)

              by tepples (727027) <slash2006@pineight.com> on Sunday January 21 2007, @12:12PM (#17702902) Homepage Journal

              Booting is done differently since the current line of Apple hardware uses EFI instead of BIOS, so GRUB (etc) probably isn't compatible.

              They're working on that [enbug.org].

              That, and the live partitioning without destroying data that's currently on the drive, which I've never seen before (though I haven't dabbled in the Linuxes in a while).

              FIPS shortens FAT32 partitions. Linux had it in 1999.

              [ Parent ]

              • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:5, Informative)

                by hammock (247755) on Sunday January 21 2007, @02:00PM (#17703734) Homepage
                That, and the live partitioning without destroying data that's currently on the drive, which I've never seen before (though I haven't dabbled in the Linuxes in a while).

                # FIPS
                # GNU Parted
                # Partition Magic (bought out by Symantec and discontinued)
                # Paragon Partition Manager
                # Acronis Disk Director Suite

                Some of these have been out for quite a long time.
                [ Parent ]

          • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:5, Insightful)

            by shawnce (146129) on Sunday January 21 2007, @12:12PM (#17702900) Homepage
            Why would Apple charge for something that is basically akin to GRUB? Sure, they offer you native drivers for their hardware
            Ok let me know when you have it working and will support customers using it? Surely something less expensive then $29 would win the market ... *rolls eyes*
            [ Parent ]

          • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Mike1024 (184871) on Sunday January 21 2007, @12:18PM (#17702952)
            Sure, they offer you native drivers for their hardware, but what manufacturer of computer equipment WOULDN'T offer a Microsoft Windows XP driver for their hardware?

            Apple.

            As is demonstrated by the fact they used PowerPC chips for years, with nary a thought for people wanting to boot windows.

            Just my $0.02
            [ Parent ]

      • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:4, Insightful)

        by TomHandy (578620) <`moc.liamtoh' `ta' `ydnahmot'> on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:26AM (#17702530)
        What everyone has right now is a time limited beta, I think, so it will eventually expire. I'm not quite sure how that will work though (i.e. if it will prevent you from accessing the other partition, or just not let you create a new bootable partition, etc.).
        [ Parent ]

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Marcion (876801)
          I assume it will try to stop you setting up a new partition, because presumably the boot loader has no idea what the date is.

    • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:4, Insightful)

      by dema (103780) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:22AM (#17702484) Homepage
      Although this is still speculation, I wouldn't be surprised given what happened with the 802.11n upgrade. But, I would be willing to bet that Boot Camp will be free as part of Leopard. Sort of how the 802.11n upgrade is "free" if you buy the n-compatible Airport.
      [ Parent ]

    • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TomHandy (578620) <`moc.liamtoh' `ta' `ydnahmot'> on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:28AM (#17702544)
      I'm not sure I understand the logic. You have Tiger right now, and you are unhappy that they will be charging (or at least possibly charging) for Boot Camp for Tiger, and that is the reason you will not upgrade to 10.5. But 10.5 will have Boot Camp included as part of its featureset, so it would not cost any more or less than what it would if you had been planning on upgrading to 10.5 anyway. So I'm not sure I understand why charging for Boot Camp for Tiger affects your decision to upgrade to 10.5?
      [ Parent ]

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Marcion (876801)
        I suppose when you put it like that then the $29 charge to Tiger users is just a sop to Panther users ('look you get a "free" version of bootcamp). Although I understand that Apple wants to keep everyone up to date, an easier solution would be a yearly $50

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by masklinn (823351)

          $50/year for updates when you have to (and will) shell out $130 for your update box?

          Dude, Apple's in for they money, why would they offer you a service that would yield them $80 less per year per Mac user?

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Vidar Leathershod (41663)
          Umm... People using Panther on their Mac do not have a "Boot Camp"-compatible Mac

    • Re:Looks like I'll stay with Tiger then (Score:5, Interesting)

      by iluvcapra (782887) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:30AM (#17702562) Homepage

      Just to make something clear that is not so clear in the summary: Boot Camp is included with Leopard, it is free with Leopard. It is BETA on Tiger, and if you wish to use the supported final Boot Camp on Tiger after Leopard is released, you will have to pay.

      This is an inducement to upgrade. If they let you just keep BootCamp for free, without wrapping it up in something else you paid for, then the SOX fairy would surely turn them into a pumpkin.

      I hope every lobbyist is working overtime to fix this damn GAAP rule. It makes sense on paper, but the implementation is "Retarded".

      [ Parent ]

    • Re:Really? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TomHandy (578620) <`moc.liamtoh' `ta' `ydnahmot'> on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:23AM (#17702502)
      Umm, yes? Because they have already, and it will be an integrated feature of OS X 10.5? And Boot Camp does in fact do what it claims to do, make it very easy to dual boot Windows and Mac OS? It seems like this is mainly something to give people who don't want to pay the full amount to upgrade to Leopard the ability to at least buy the Boot Camp functionality if that's all they care about.
      [ Parent ]

    • Re:No way. (Score:4, Informative)

      by avalys (221114) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:29AM (#17702550)
      We already know that BootCamp will be part of Leopard. This article is about Apple allowing Tiger users to buy the Leopard version of BootCamp (as opposed to the betas that have been released thus far) for $30.

      [ Parent ]

    • Re:No way. (Score:4, Informative)

      by masklinn (823351) <slashdot@org.masklinn@net> on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:41AM (#17702650)

      Apple doesn't care, full Bootcamp will be part of Leopard (for "free"), this is just a boon to the few users who don't want to get Leopard but want a non-beta bootcamp in the end.

      They already did it with iChat AV (OSX 10.3 included iChat AV, you had to pay $29 to get it on 10.2) and with the 802.11n update (will be available with the 802.11n Airport, should be included in Leopard, $29 if you stick to Tiger without getting the 802.11n Airport Extreme)

      Most people will buy Leopard anyway.

      [ Parent ]

    • Define Vista then... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SuperKendall (25149)
      Sub-point release?

        • Re:Define Vista then... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by John Betonschaar (178617) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:51AM (#17702724)
          Leopard is not a friggin' point release, it's a major update with lots of new features and major improvements to the core system libraries. The fact that its version number only goes from 10.4.9 to 10.5.0 does not make it a minor update.

          Please, can someone explain why it is so damn hard for some people to look past the version numbers and just check out what's new and improved in OS X releases??
          [ Parent ]

          • Re:Define Vista then... (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Clock Nova (549733) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:59AM (#17702800)
            The difference between 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, etc, is the same as the difference between OS 6, OS 7, OS 8, and OS 9. The only reason they are numbered as point releases is so that Apple doesn't have to give up the X logo. Think of 10.5 as Mac OS 16, if that helps.
            [ Parent ]

          • Re:Define Vista then... (Score:4, Funny)

            by ColdWetDog (752185) <rgolub&lostrange,com> on Sunday January 21 2007, @01:11PM (#17703390) Homepage
            Please, can someone explain why it is so damn hard for some people to look past the version numbers and just check out what's new and improved in OS X releases??

            'Cuz, you see, on Windows, it's easier: Every new version is a real new version. A whole number, not some wimpy little decimated digit to the RIGHT of the decimal point. That's why Windows is always TEN TIMES better than the Mac. You don't see us Windows users trying to boot OS X on our computers do you? You guys are just lusers.

            [ Parent ]

            • Re:Define Vista then... (Score:5, Informative)

              by bsane (148894) on Sunday January 21 2007, @12:37PM (#17703082)
              Apple tends to lock 10.2 from running new software, and you bet your ass they'll lock 10.3

              Apple isn't restricting what you can do with 10.2 or 10.3, the problem is that each new release has included a major new api or toolkit (CoreData comes to mind in 10.4). If developers take advantage of the new features then their apps won't run on previous versions.
              [ Parent ]

    • Re:Same shit different day (Score:5, Informative)

      by kalidasa (577403) on Sunday January 21 2007, @01:04PM (#17703334) Journal
      Do you know what the version number is of Windows XP? It's Windows NT 5.1. Care to guess what the version number was of Windows 2000? Windows NT 5.0.
      [ Parent ]

    • Re:Apple milking its users? I'm shocked! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tshak (173364) on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:43AM (#17702666) Homepage
      Apple is the king of "nickel and dime"ing the user for all it's worth.

      Right, because the millions of dollars a month they spend on developing OSX should be coming out of the kindness of their hearts.
      [ Parent ]

    • Re:Apple milking its users? I'm shocked! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 21 2007, @11:55AM (#17702760)
      This is the same company that charges you $10 for the ability to use their media player to play videos at full screen, for crying out loud.

      If all you want from QuickTime is full screen, go here [macworld.com]. I'm not sure where you're getting $10 from, because QuickTime Pro is $30, and that gets you a lot more than just the ability to play movies full screen.

      They charge $130 for incremental OS updates every 12-18 months, which is basically a subscription service.

      Wrong. Truly spoken like somebody who doesn't actually know what they're talking about! Don't be fooled by what looks like a change in the minor version number; what you think are "incremental" updates always have a large amount of new features -- it's closer to uprading from Windows 2000 to Windows XP than applying a service pack. Besides, if you don't want the new features, it's not like the older versions of OS X stop working, and they still provide security updates for them.

      They're charging $2 to enable the 802.11n hardware that they will ship.

      For legal reasons. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act really is that stupid.
      [ Parent ]

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by falcon5768 (629591)

      charge $130 for incremental OS updates every 12-18 months, which is basically a subscription service.
      The difference between .3, .4 and .5 are like the differences between XP and Vista. Just because it takes Microsoft 5 years to make a .1 increase that t
    • Sweet Jesus, they never described BootCamp as anything but a beta technology from their upcoming major OS release. The fact that Tiger users even have the option at any price to continue using it once Leopard is released is more than they ever stated they would do and more than any Tiger user had reason to hope for. I think everyone needs to stop their goddamned whining about it. I fully expected to have to upgrade to use it. I don't know why anyone wouldn't have had that assumption.
      [ Parent ]

        • Re:Apple milking its users? I'm shocked! (Score:4, Informative)

          by Rodness (168429) on Sunday January 21 2007, @04:03PM (#17704658) Homepage
          While Apple does put out great products.. please dont think you are giving your money to the good guys. They are every bit as altruistic as Microsoft.

          You completely missed my point. I'm NOT buying their products because "I want to give my money to the good guys" or any such philosophical or idealistic bullshit.

          I buy their products because at the end of the day, they just work. It's not just a marketing slogan. I can sit and relax on my couch and not fight with my computer.

          That's all it is. I don't care about their philosophy, or revolutionary upgrades. I just want a computer that does what I want, when I want, without irritating me.

          All I care about is the quality. And I'm willing to pay for it. And people like me are Apple's target demographic. That was my point.
          [ Parent ]

    • Re:Not til they fix it... (Score:5, Informative)

      by sokoban (142301) on Sunday January 21 2007, @03:13PM (#17704336) Homepage

      Sorry, but I'm not paying a cent for Bootcamp til they make it work 100%.
      Okay, then I won't charge you for the Bootcamp Beta. Though if you want to post your credit card number, expiration date, name, and security code, I'll gladly take them. Also, if you only run software that works 100% do you mostly run software written in HAL/S?

      For a bunch of guys that brag about how much better their product is than Windows, they certainly code their Windows-based stuff poorly.
      Apple doesn't have a lot of experience coding for their competitors' platforms. Strange, isn't it.

      Itunes on Windows uses more juice than nearly every other application I run.
      Your computer runs off juice? What kind is it, Apple or Orange?

      Back to Bootcamp... it took almost a solid year for them to release a build of the Windows drivers that actually made use of all of the system's hardware... until then, the two-finger trackpad drag didn't work (and it's still sub-par to the responsiveness of the OSX drivers)...
      Okay, and every company that sells PCs with Windows preloaded ships drivers that work well? If you're this up in arms about Apple shipping beta Windows XP drivers that don't work as well as their OS X counterparts, what do you think about the actual final version drivers that are shipped preloaded on Windows based computers?

      opening the onboard camera blew the OS up...
      And I bet it splashed juice everywhere.

      Even now, running the latest code, when you bring Windows back from hibernate on a Macbook, the trackpad doesn't work at all and a reboot is required to bring it back. It's been tolerable because it's a beta, but put a price tag on it and we have a different situation. They're going to have to put a lot more effort into making a quality product if they want us to shell out for it.
      So, in order to sell a piece of software, it should have less bugs than the free beta version. That should be modded: (+liek infinity, Insightful)
      [ Parent ]
Check for more

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2008 SourceForge, Inc.