Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Boot Camp For Suckers?

Posted by Zonk on Thu May 04, 2006 03:56 PM
from the bet-it-works-too dept.
DigitalDame2 writes "PC Magazine's Editor-in-Chief says the whole Mac/Windows dual-boot thing is really nothing to get excited about. He writes that Boot Camp is really just a plan to get Windows users to convert to OS X." From the article: "Once you've laid out a few kilobucks on your BC system and been frustrated a few times with Windows limitations, what are you going to do? Jobs's bet: You'll start spending more and more time in OS X, until you--too--become one of the pod people. It's sad to see so many of my compatriots being turned into lemmings. Perhaps they'll wake up and smell the Apple pie in the sky--and realize they've been taken for a ride. But I doubt it."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived.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.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by MoxCamel (20484) * on Thursday May 04 2006, @03:57PM (#15265675)
    Boot Camp is really just a plan to get Windows users to convert to OS X.

    Well...duh! Did anyone think Apple was doing it as a public service?

    Next up: Publishers put nice pictures on their book covers so you will buy them. Bastards!!

    Mox

    • by jcr (53032) <jcr@NOspaM.mac.com> on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:04PM (#15265752) Journal
      Did anyone think Apple was doing it as a public service?

      The main purposes of boot camp are: 1) keep people from destroying their Macs by trying to follow the directions they found on the web for hacking the boot sequence, and 2) allow Mac users to forego having an extra PC around to run that one windows-only app that they have to use for work.

      -jcr
        • One word: GAMES

          --This has nothing to do with the office environment, and everything to do with shoring up the gaming system on Macs. One OS for games, and one OS for everything else... you don't generally need to have both running at the same time.

              • Re:THANK YOU! (Score:5, Interesting)

                by Schraegstrichpunkt (931443) on Thursday May 04 2006, @08:42PM (#15267592) Homepage
                Guess what OSX = lower ping for WoW. Microsoft needs to overhaul there IP stack again if you ask me. I love linux or OSX for gaming simply because my ping is always better.

                My guess is that it's the scheduler. At least on Windows 2000, the thing was so broken (even in optimize-for-"Background Services"-mode) that I had to re-write a multi-process application to use a sigle process with multiple threads, because producer-consumer was just too much for the OS to handle. I think the last time Linux was so bad, it was considered a bug and fixed within a few releases.

                Cross-platform apps tend to be more affected, because they haven't been designed specifically to work around Microsoft's brain damage.

                JMHO

    • by rewinn (647614) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:14PM (#15265858) Homepage
      Once you've .... been frustrated a few times with Windows limitations, what are you going to do? .... start spending more and more time in OS X

      I don't know whether the article is confused or trying to be clever, but I don't think Apple minds 'criticism' such as that.

    • by FooAtWFU (699187) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:35PM (#15266066) Homepage
      Boot Camp is really just a plan to get Windows users to convert to OS X.
      Well...duh! Did anyone think Apple was doing it as a public service?
      Converting Windows users to OS X is a public service. Converting Windows users to anything is a public service.

      And, for the record, the only thing Apple makes that I own is the Mighty Mouse (it works surprisingly well with my IBM ThinkPad).

      • by colmore (56499) on Thursday May 04 2006, @10:37PM (#15268097) Journal
        Funny, my only Microsoft product is a mouse...
              • by Jeremi (14640) on Thursday May 04 2006, @07:12PM (#15267140) Homepage
                Again: What is the problem?


                The Mighty Mouse is advertised as being able to work as a two-button mouse. With a two-button mouse, I can click the right mouse button while my finger is resting on the left mouse button, and the computer receives a right-click event. With the Mighty Mouse, that doesn't work: the computer receives a left-click event, even though I "clicked" the right side of the mouse.


                I call that a hardware bug. "Caveat emptor" is all well and good to say, but pretending the bug is actually a feature is only deluding yourself.

      • Why do so many Mac users insist on this fantasy that Windows users really hate Windows and would switch to the Mac OS in a flash if only they had a chance to touch it's brushed chrome goodness?

        In fact, I am a long, long-time Windows user. Many would consider me a power user. And I hate Windows. I have sunk more hours than I even care to begin contemplating into making my Windows machine behave. As far as I'm concerned, Gates owes me several extra years of life, for the time I've wasted using his software which is so godawful and yet dominates the market.

        So, no, this isn't just a Mac user fantasy. It's a reality for many of us. Of course, maybe you have a point. Because I am now a Mac user. Thanks, Steve!
          • by SirSlud (67381) on Thursday May 04 2006, @06:43PM (#15266983) Homepage
            > (probably, I don't code)

            That small detail slightly undermines the credibility of your argument. As a programmer, I can offer some insight into your argument which is trotted out everytime an OSX/Windows BBQ hits slashdot. The truth of the matter is that while Windows itself does support a wide range of hardware, its less than Linux (which is free, and comparatively stable, if not more stable) and only sort-of more than OSX since most hardware specific code is abstracted from the OS in the form of common APIs.

            People can debate whether Windows is stable, not stable, better, not better than OSX until th cows come home, but the wide array of hardware argument is a tired old cliche that while somewhat relevant, pales on comparison to more important factors that contribute to code stability: the business approach, time to market policies, varying strategies in deploying product updates, level of integration with 2nd or 3rd party applications, internal organizational consistancy, etc, etc, etc. Most importantly, most everybody in the know agrees that it isn't supporting 'millions and millions' of configs that causes Windows to be such a huge codebase ... its MS trying to remain backwards compatible to itself .. so millions and millions of programs might be more accurate. MS bends over backwards to keep your old applications runnable on newer versions of the OS. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing (bad, IMHO) is an exercise left to the buyer, who pays for this backwards compatibility in lack of feature advancement and stability with each new revision of Windows.

            Most of the 'hardware' support is driven by the hardware (or OEM) vendors themselves; all OSes have sufficient hardware abstraction layers that make supporting 'millions and millions' of configs simply a matter of resources and market support, not technical hurdles.
      • by KillerDeathRobot (818062) on Thursday May 04 2006, @05:20PM (#15266437) Homepage
        Most Windows users actually like their OS and would not want to switch.

        Congratulations! You've just won the Made Up Fact of the Hour Award!

        There's no way whatsoever to prove that. You completely just made it up, probably from your own experience. Which is exactly what you're decrying (though the post you quoted doesn't really seem to have anything to do with that).
          • by eikonos (779343) on Thursday May 04 2006, @06:09PM (#15266782) Homepage Journal
            Maybe they aren't switching because they have to buy all new hardware and then learn a new OS and applications. This is exactly why Bootcamp is useful -- users who are considering buying new hardware, but aren't sure about switching OS's can dual-boot and try out OS X.
          • by PasteEater (590893) on Thursday May 04 2006, @07:31PM (#15267259)
            "If so many Windows users hate Windows, then why aren't they switching?"

            a) The hardware is more expensive
            b) Gotta buy all new software
            c) Not wanting to devote hours re-learning how to use their computer
            d) The usual FUD (nothing's compatible, etc.)

            I'm a Mac user, but there are plenty of reasons not to switch even if you don't like Windows. To put it another way, "hating" Windows may not be compelling enough to scrap everything and start over.

      • by daviddennis (10926) <david@amazing.com> on Thursday May 04 2006, @05:38PM (#15266570) Homepage
        Most Windows(tm) users don't even know what an OS is and have no basis for selecting one.

        If we look at the subset of Windows users who actually know alternatives exist - and I'd say that's 1 in 5 or even less - most of them are either used to Windows or would rather use an alternative but need to use software they're famliar with.

        But remember, Apple is starting from a small base. If Apple's market share changed from 3% to 6% - which I think is definitely possible - that would be a huge story.

        D
      • by cortana (588495) <`sam' `at' `robots.org.uk'> on Thursday May 04 2006, @05:44PM (#15266635) Homepage
        Most Windows users actually like their OS and would not want to switch.
        Stockholm Syndome, perhaps?
  • Apple's Confidence (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RunFatBoy.net (960072) * on Thursday May 04 2006, @03:58PM (#15265688)
    In economics, the most efficient markets are those that can be directly competed against one another. It's a definite statement of confidence by Apple that they will *support* the means to run a competing OS on their system. This may be the first time (myself included) that users will see the two OS's, side by side. BC is the only economic way of doing this comparison.

    While there may be drivers lacking initially, I have full confidence that the open source community will fill this void. And with both OS's available and with XP trying my patience, maybe I'll finally take the dive full-time into OSX and BC will be a non-issue. :-)

    Jim http://www.runfatboy.net/ [runfatboy.net] -- A workout plan that doesn't feel like homework.
    • by ect5150 (700619) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:14PM (#15265859) Journal
      In economics, the most efficient markets are those that can be directly competed against one another.

      I'm just nitpicking here, but that's not what defines efficient markets in economics. A discriminating monopolist market is also efficient. Efficiency is defined by Pareto efficiency ...
      Here is a link
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficient [wikipedia.org]

      Although, its true a perfectly competitive situation results in an efficient market. Most of the time, people like perfect competition mainly because its the market with the lowest prices, not because of its efficiency to allocate resources.

      By the way, neither Apple nor Microsoft exist in a highly competitve market (as defined by those terms in economics).
      • by spun (1352) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {yranoituloverevol}> on Thursday May 04 2006, @05:47PM (#15266648) Journal
        Pareto efficiency seems to be a method for defending the status quo, i.e. we can't make any changes that would make anyone less happy. I mean, I see it's a usefull concept, but it seems to ignore the possiblity that maybe some greedy fuckers deserve to be made a little less happy so the rest of us can be a little more happy.

        But I'm just a mutant commie traitor, what do I know?
  • by yancey (136972) on Thursday May 04 2006, @03:58PM (#15265694)
    I'd rather have Apple pie than Windows pie. Ewww.. gross!
  • by Sierran (155611) on Thursday May 04 2006, @03:59PM (#15265701)
    ...those of us who have a reason to use it will reap the benefits. Yes, Virginia, there are some. Battlefield 2, for example. Annoyingly-single-platform hardware updaters, like cell phone flashers and the like. Those little one-off tasks that I used to have to go find a windows PC for? Not so much anymore. Whee! When I need to do real work? Yep, you're right, I turn back into a pod person.

    Seriously, why does this guy care so much?
    • by Lewisham (239493) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:23PM (#15265951)
      "Seriously, why does this guy care so much?"

      Apparently he's noticed that John C. Dvorak's trolling puts the hit count through the roof. Only makes sense to start using the rest of the magazine's brand to start trolling as well.

      He's obviously got some sort of logic malfunction, his arguments are both bizarre and full of emotive language. It's professional trolling.
      • by Lewisham (239493) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:25PM (#15265970)
        I forgot to mention, that of particular note, is the last paragraph:

        "In fact, I'm blaming the AAF for a wide-range of habits espoused by supposedly "creative people." I'll bet it's responsible for tattoos, piercings, and the wide-spread adoption of the phrase "no worries." In fact, I believe that most of today's societal ills can be either indirectly or directly attributed to Apple. Widespread hearing loss? Blame the iPod. Carpal tunnel? Blame the Newton."

        This is so insane that it seems he's trying to hint that the rest of the article was just a troll as well. He also links to a piece he wrote where he thought Boot Camp was pretty sweet. I don't know what he's trying to pull, but I'm sure his advertisers are happy.
  • by vanyel (28049) * on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:00PM (#15265709) Journal
    So let me understand this: people compare two os's side by side on the same hardware. When they find that the one they're not familiar with is much better than the one they're used to, and they switch, they're lemmings? I always thought a lemming would be doing what everyone else does just because everyone else does it, which sounds a lot more like your typical Windoze user to me...

    Unfortunately, I don't think anyone's going to buy a relatively expensive mac just so they can try osx on a machine that will still run windoze. Boot Camp's primary utility is saving mac users from having to buy a pc to run applications that they need to run, but which only work in windoze. If/when a native mode virtual pc comes out, boot camp will be even less relevant. To that end, I can agree that boot camp is nothing to get excited about, but that doesn't mean it's without merit.
    • by AnimusF6 (765091) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:08PM (#15265800)
      Though I hate to prove you wrong, I, a long time Windows advocate, bought a MacBook Pro solely because of Boot Camp. Yes, Boot Camp convinced me to switch. I found myself in a position that required that I buy a laptop, and intead of going with a boring old Windows box I was able to experiment. I still get the Windows access that my position requires, but I can play around with an entirely new (to me) toy.
        • by colinrichardday (768814) <colin.day.6@hotmail.com> on Thursday May 04 2006, @05:38PM (#15266576)
          real Mac user: someone true to who they are, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They're not fond of rules and they have no respect for the status quo. The ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world.

          So Stallman is a Mac user?
  • by scrondle (805647) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:03PM (#15265742)
    I knew there was a reason I haven't looked at PC Magazine since 1998. That's not an article, it's a rant. How about some technical details/reasons why he doesn't like boot camp? What a tool.
  • by sakusha (441986) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:05PM (#15265764)
    Remember that screed was written by Jim Louderbeck, one of the more notorious anti-Mac PeeCee trolls. I still remember him doing the commentary on a Stevenote carried on ZDTV a few years back, he nitpicked on everything, for no good reasons. Note that his employer, Ziff-Davis, has a major investment from Vulcan Ventures (Paul Allen). Loudermouth knows he has to cater to his owner's financial interests. Nice little doggie, sit up and beg, little Loudermouth!
      • by ickoonite (639305) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:32PM (#15266046) Homepage
        The whole article is supposed to be mildly sarcastic. I am British, so I can detect these things. It's not very well done, but it's the reason he links to himself calling himself "some idiot", and specifically namedrops Mac-compatible hardware (M-Audio and KONA) when wondering whether the stuff will be compatible or not.

        Trouble is, it has rather gone over the average Slashdotter's head. He'll be laughing his arse off now.

        iqu :P
        • by Daedala (819156) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:59PM (#15266267)
          Well... I'm not British, but I've been declared an Honorary Brit for my grasp of irony. I'm also a professional editor and writer.

          And this was just really poorly done. He has no control of tone at all. The "effete" crack in particular was icky (that's the technical term). Only an editor-in-chief could have published it, because anyone else would have been edited by someone who wasn't quite so in love with the thing. Just because it was intended to be satire, doesn't mean it was. [wikipedia.org]

          This is why most Americans are not allowed to have Sarcasm Licenses.
  • Holy crap! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ambiguous Coward (205751) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:06PM (#15265777) Homepage

    Boot Camp is really just a plan to get Windows users to convert to OS X.


    Holy crap! Revelation of the year! I can't imagine this being true!


    Seriously, how is this possibly a new idea? Of course that's what it's for. And switching because of "limitations" in the other OS makes you a lemming? No, I'm afraid not. That makes you "smart." See, when people decide to stop hitting themselves in the head with a hammer, and instead opt for hitting themselves in the head with, say, a a soft piece of fruit, or an old ham, we call that "learning one's lesson."


    The author here needs to get over his own case of being a lemming, and try something new. Pod-people? The whole article stinks of the exact same thralldom the author envisions anyone who switches being caught in.


    Yes, I own a mac. Oh, but guess what, I also own a Windows box, and a Linux box! I'm not going to say which one I prefer, because doing so would, at least according to this article, make me a lemming.

  • My understanding is that BootCamp allows current Mac users to run Windows on their Mac. The article seems to argue that this will encourage Windows users to get Macs and stick with OSX instead of BootCamping in Windows. That may apply to a few people, but for the most part I disagree.

    As others have pointed out, it seems that the primary strategy behind BootCamp is: Give people the option to use whatever operating system they like. Apple has allowed their consumers to install Linux on their machines since forever, and now they're allowing Windows, too.

    What does Apple have to gain? Profits from hardware sales, of course. Plus, whenever you're buying a Mac, you're also buying OSX, so they're not losing much software profits either. Who else has to gain? Possibly Microsoft in the short run (all those Mac kiddies giving Windows a shot without having to buy a PC).

    And then there is the whole other market of people who aren't concerned about software expandability so much as hardware. Macs aren't great for upgrading their hardware. Windows or no windows.

    - shazow
  • by American AC in Paris (230456) * on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:09PM (#15265815) Homepage
    From TFA:

    The more effete among us have embraced BC because now they can run all their favorite Windows apps on a saucy, sexy Mac.

    Wow. Nothing says "class" like a thinly-veiled "Macs are for fags" joke.

    You'd exect this sort of thing from a random blogger or Slashdotter, not the freakin' editor-in-chief of PC Magazine.

  • by MobyDisk (75490) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:11PM (#15265832) Homepage
    Did anyone else read the headline "Boot Camp For Suckers?" and imagine that this was a camp run by Dogbert? I was ready to sign-up some coworkers.
  • Missing the point? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by abes (82351) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:11PM (#15265833) Homepage
    I suspect that the majority of people are not buying macs to run windows as their primary OS. If so, I'm going to agree with him. If I wanted to spend the same amount of money and run windows, I'd get a tablet. If only Apple made one...

    The fact is, the majority of people buying the MacTel, are buying it because it runs OSX AND Windows. No other laptop can really claim that -- at least legally (and easily). This is a really important distinction. I love OSX. I'm a linuxhead, but just having things work, and work together seamlessly. Priceless. (though my desktop is still a linux box)

    For my laptop, I have no desire to run windows. I'm through with that agony in my life. I want to enjoy my computing experience. However, I am realistic. There are some applications, unfortunately, that still require windows. Bootcamp gives me the perfect compromise.

    So, this editor is way off base. It's true, Apple isn't performing a public service. But they are taking down one more barrier that would normally stop people from buying their computers. And it's true. Once you start using OS X, you find yourself much less likely to go back to Windows. But not because of some strange Apple conspiracy. Because it kicks M$'s ass (comparing apples to lemons?). And this is from someone who wouldn't touch a Mac a couple years ago.
  • Truly sad! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Jerry Coffin (824726) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:18PM (#15265910)
    ...Boot Camp is really just a plan to get Windows users to convert to OS X.

    You sir, have a mediocre grasp of the blindingly obvious!

    I'm tempted to go into a lot more detail, but it would just weaken the message...

  • by jayhawk88 (160512) <rockchalk88@yahoo.com> on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:18PM (#15265913) Homepage
    Making John Dvorak look sane and reasonable since 1988.
  • by Yergle143 (848772) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:20PM (#15265931)
    I run two curious little game emulators. The first is called Mame and it permits me run a bunch of antique games once written for public coin-fed consoles. The second is called Boot camp and it permits me to run games on a kooky antique dollar-fed operating system. 537
  • by ickoonite (639305) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:26PM (#15265973) Homepage
    Guys, guys, guys! Calm down, calm down!

    I think he's trying to be funny.

    I am English. I know sarcasm. It's what we do. And I think that's what he's trying to do here. It's not very well done, but there are little hints. It's why he links to himself and calls himself "some idiot". It's why he specifically mentions the M-Audio [m-audio.com] and Kona [aja.com] kit (the latter is Mac only). Of course it works with the Mac.

    So all those who are praising him for his insight, for debunking the Mac myth - stop now. Same goes for the Mac fanbois who are trying to find fault with his article.

    It's subtle, I'll allow that, but remember: always consult the nearest Brit before responding to something that sounds a little bit too stupid to be true. It probably is.

    iqu :P
  • by signore pablo (544088) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:43PM (#15266149)
    From : Louderback, Jim
    Sent : Thursday, May 4, 2006 8:33 PM
    To : "Paul *"
    Subject : RE: Boot Camp: Apple Bobs for Suckers

    It was meant to be somewhat tongue in cheek. Glad you liked it and saw
    it that way!
    • by goMac2500 (741295) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:17PM (#15265898)
      I'm sure you know some great programmers, but honestly, they don't know what they're talking about. First, I like OS X because frequently when I have trouble, I can go pull up the source code to Core Foundation and look at the source of the API I'm using. You can't do that with Windows. while Mac OS X's Core Foundation is open source, Windows has no equivalent Open Source code from the OS. Secondly, the Security API allows me to obtain authorization from the user for my application to do anything it. If I wanted, I could use the Security API to get authorization from the user, and then set about destroying the entire operating system. Yes, there are bounds given so that the user can't accidently delete the system folder, but as soon as a Mac OS X application obtains user authorization via the Security API (by the user inputting his/her name and password), the operating system assumes that program is trusted by the user, and at that point, the program can do anything they want.

      For your Windows programming friends to say OS X closes off systems, they must have had very little or no Mac programming experience. Apple restricts applications for security reasons, but as soon as an application obtains authorization, all bets are off.
    • by FeloniousPunk (591389) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:19PM (#15265923)
      whereas mac closes off its systems so normal users cant screw it up.

      How did this get modded "interesting?"

      Care to elaborate how Mac OS X "closes off its systems so normal users can't screw it up?"
    • Re:Nice spin (Score:5, Interesting)

      by phozz bare (720522) on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:32PM (#15266042)
      It's refreshing to finally see such a non-biased article about Apple.

      Let me see...

      "...once you start using a Mac, your IQ begins to creep downwards..."

      "It's sad to see so many of my compatriots being turned into lemmings."

      "...smell the Apple pie in the sky..."

      "...I'll be smart, fit, and enjoying my real Windows computers..."

      Right.. A sensible, balanced, well written, thought provoking piece! That's it, time to ditch the old Mac, cause everyone knows that only a Windows machine is a real computer!

      phozz

    • Logical Analysis (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kelson (129150) * on Thursday May 04 2006, @04:39PM (#15266106) Homepage Journal
      The logic of the piece appears to be thus:

      1. I don't like Macs, Apple, or Steve Jobs.
      2. I don't like anything that can't be tinkered with.
      3. Boot Camp is an Apple Product.
      4. By #1 and #2, anyone who likes any of the above is an idiot and/or brainwashed.
      5. By #3 and #4, Boot Camp is for idiots.

      While #5 may proceed logically from #3 and #4, #4 does not proceed from #1 or #2.

      I'd say the author has a wonderful future ahead of him in either Slashdot trolling, talk radio, or writing about politics. Editing a computer magazine? Not so sure about that one.