Apple Fails To Deliver On Windows 7 Boot Camp Promise

SkydiverFL writes "For those fans of Apple's Boot Camp package, it looks like you might be waiting on the next 'end of year' to use Windows 7 on your shiny silver boxes. Back in October of this year, Apple published a rather short, but affirmative promise stating quite simply that, 'Apple will support Microsoft Windows 7 (Home Premium, Professional, and Ultimate) with Boot Camp in Mac OS X Snow Leopard before the end of the year. This support will require a software update to Boot Camp.' The support page has no updates regarding the new version. Maybe they're waiting for iSlate?"

Why bother?

[moderators_are_w*nke]

If you wanted a Windows laptop why would you pay all that money?

Umm...

[Darkness404]

Um, I was under the impression that it was trivial to install Windows 7 on a Mac even without official boot camp support (per http://www.simplehelp.net/2009/01/15/using-boot-camp-to-install-windows-7-on-your-mac-the-complete-walkthrough/ [simplehelp.net]) whats the difference between the tutorial and what you would do normally?

Re:jesus christ

[PitaBred]

It's still not out by when they promised. That's all there is to it. Sure, give the employees time off. They still didn't do the job.

Re:Virtualbox

[BrentH]

Graphic cards arent virtualized. So if you want games, you gotta go to the Bootcamp!

Re:Why bother?

[Darkness404]

VirtualBox is slow at doing 3D acceleration. Therefore, AutoCAD runs pretty slow when working with lots of 3D objects.

Not only that, but games run slow too.

Re:Why do you eschew choice?

[yincrash]

A lot of people would say that 'better quality hardware' is debatable.

Re:Why bother?

[Ragzouken]

I guess it's in their interests not to get the fastest laptop, then.

Re:Why bother?

[E IS mC(Square)]

WTF? It's like saying somebody should buy an F1 car just because it's fastest, while they actually need something which does not cost them their house and children, not require special fuel and can run on ordinary road. Way to go on a tangent!

Re:Virtualbox

[TheRaven64]

Don't see any Linux vendors bragging about what a big extra "feature" GRUB is, and it does the same thing. Often more transparently.

Really? I admit I haven't used GRUB for a couple of years and it may have improved since I last did, but I don't remember it letting me pop in a Windows CD, helping me resize my existing partitions, then installing Windows and setting up the correct third-party drivers for my hardware. Does it really do all of that now?

Re:A want is not a need, and slow is not "not nice

[Darkness404]

By your logic I don't need a decent CPU or RAM because Windows XP will run on 64 MB of memory and a 233 MHZ x86 CPU.

Things that run decently and don't have minute-long lag is a need.

Re:Why bother?

[TrancePhreak]

This is 2010, and the MacBook Pro is very behind. Where's the Core i7? Something newer than the NV9600? Where's the lower price?

Re:Virtualbox

[jedidiah]

> Really? I admit I haven't used GRUB for a couple of years and it may have improved since I
> last did, but I don't remember it letting me pop in a Windows CD, helping me resize my
> existing partitions, then installing Windows and setting up the correct third-party drivers
> for my hardware. Does it really do all of that now?

That's really the OS installer's job which Linux does very well at.

Both Windows and MacOS are inferior in this respect. Given the UI of the install CDs,
I would not hold out great hopes for Boot Camp being terribly usable (despite what
ever features might be buried inside).

Re:Stop with the "Better quality hardware"

[jedidiah]

> The 8-core Mac Pro base sells for $3299 [apple.com]. I tried to duplicate the hardware

Fortunately with a PC I don't get stuck with what Steve thinks I should have. I get to
build systems based on what MY actual requirements are. Yes, that's ME as an INDIVIDUAL
rather than just another member of the hive.

I can skimp on the CPU or supercharge it or leave things out entirely or include things
that exist in no Mac.

Re:Why bother?

[mingrassia]

WTF? It's like saying somebody should buy an F1 car just because it's fastest

I agree 100%. People should buy a machine to suit their needs. Anyone who blindly buys the fastest model available is just being egotistical and foolish.

which does not cost them their house and children

A new Mac mini goes for $599 and a MacBook is $999. This is hardly "house and children" figures. Pick a reasonable Mac then go to Dell and spec out a similar machine. The PC prices will be in a close neighborhood.

not require special fuel and can run on ordinary road

This article is not about the iPhone. It is about Apple systems running OS X that can utilize Boot Camp.

Hardly any "special fuel" required on OS X systems. Take your pick from any of the great open source apps available for the platform: Firefox [mozilla.com], Thunderbird [mozillamessaging.com], Inkscape [inkscape.org], Gimp [gimp.org], VLC [videolan.org], Eclipse [eclipse.org], the list goes on. Wanna write some code? Xcode comes free with OS X. Don't wanna use Xcode, then use another IDE or directly use make [gnu.org], gcc [gnu.org], gdb [gnu.org], and vim [vim.org].

As for your "ordinary road" comment ... I'm writing this on a four year old iMac. Over the years I've upgraded the memory (Crucial has great prices) and hard drive (1TB was only $99 at Fry's). My mouse of choice is a five button Logitech scroll mouse. I hardly feel "locked in" or "abused".

Way to go on a tangent!

Way to spread FUD. How about we just let people use the computer that best suits their needs.

Getting back on topic, I've been running Windows 7 in both Boot Camp and Parallels 5 with no problems. I don't know what the damage is with this "article".

Re:Why do you eschew choice?

[Anonymous Coward]

No hibernate on OS X, but sleep is virtually flawless and performs almost the same task - if you ever want to close down for long enough that a battery will run flat, why not just power off completely? Is it because it takes a week for windows to boot?

No, it's because it takes a week for OS X to boot. That's why they're looking for a hibernate feature for OS X.

Also, define "forever"

Ten years, at least.

Re:Apple Specific Drivers

[selven]

I use Ubuntu on a Macbook. The power management (battery life, suspend, hibernate) is much better on Mac OS, and there are a few drivers that need to be installed, but otherwise it works just fine.

Re:Why do you eschew choice?

[Anonymous Coward]

...it seems reasonable to pay a little more for more choice.

This might be the most ironic statement in this whole discussion. Non-Apple PCs can't run OS-X because Apple FUCKING MAKES IT A VIOLATION OF THE EULA to do so. Where's you're "choice" now?

You're singing the praises of the very company that wants to control everything you can do with "your" purchases.

Re:Apple haters...

[drmitch]

I dunno. I switched to Mac in September after making fun of them for my entire life. Although I paid more than I would for a PC (just saying I would have purchased a 500 dollar PC laptop that didn't have the same specs as a MBP) I am quite happy with the little things that Apple does in the hardware and software. I do miss a few Windows programs (especially being an engineer and coder and needing the special software/hardware) but 98% of the time, I am perfectly happy with the visuals, lack of viruses, *NIX capability, and user-friendliness of my MBP.

Re:Says to guy who got proven a liar (you)

[Anonymous Coward]

Dells are inferior products. They use the cheapest parts available, always. Good luck on it lasting 2 years. My time is worth more than that. Mucking around looking for cheaper, cheaper, cheaper is a waste especially when the manufacturer won't stand behind its products or has a reputation for being cheap.

Or, put another way, there is always a cheaper product, but it usually isn't the same product. You have to cut corners to be cheaper.

Re:Stop with the "Better quality hardware"

[StuartHankins]

The list of complete models must be limited, or you get the chaos of half-assed support and conflicting drivers which exists in the Windows world. Apple has a reputation for ease of use, and part of the reason for that is having very specific models with very specific parts designed to work together. Once you open the gates to allow anyone to put just anything they want in the machine, you have support issues. It's a closed product with limited options.

If Apple products don't suit you, don't use them. Simple as that. But you come across as a maligned Apple-hater when you could just say "Meh, not for me" instead. I would expect better from someone with a low ID.

Re:Why do you eschew choice?

[StuartHankins]

"Looking for" a hibernate feature? What? I'm using 10.4 and the hibernate works fine. The reboot is somewhere around 90 seconds. Big deal.

Re:Why bother?

[RedK]

You're comparing a tower PC to a small form factor PC. The only Dell comparable to a Mac Mini is a Studio Hybrid (the Zino and Zino HD use low power processors that aren't up to par with the Core 2 Duo in the Mini). The small form factor PCs are always a bit more expensive due to requiring laptop parts instead of desktop parts. Price out a Studio Hybrid vs a Mac Mini and compare more than just 3 specs (RAM, HD, CPU) and you'll see Apple isn't priced out of the market like you claim. But of course, that would require a good faith effort on your part.