Forums | MacLife

Fracai wrote:

It's funny though, I first saw the link to BC on digg.  One of the more interesting comments was someone that wanted to use BC to install Windows and then uninstall OS X.  The logic there is confounding.

"Dude, nice machine.  What's up with the apple-key?"

Fracai wrote:

MacBoy4139 wrote:

Macskeeball wrote:

As for Boot Camp, I am genuinely afraid for the survival of the Mac platform now. Apple themself providing a solution for this really adds credence to the argument that 3rd parties might see no reason to make or continue to make a Mac version. I've got a very bad feeling about this, and I didn't agree with those people until now. Time will tell, i guess, but I wishh Apple would have continued to take a more neutral position (ie. not stopping it, but not supporting it either).

It will be a feature of the next version of the Mac OS.  So in order to gain this functionality, you have to buy OS X.

Nice move, Apple!

Enh, that's not the issue.  Apple is a hardware company so they'd have to get much larger market share to stop caring about OS X.  And ironically, a Mac is not the hardware, it's the software.  Hence, Apple cares about tieing the OS to the hardware.

This isn't a blow to OS X because the Mac experience isn't about the flashy Apple on the case, it's about the OS X experience.  If anything this is insanely great for the Mac.  The Mac Mini was all about switching the curious Windows user over to the Mac platform.  Boot Camp continues this.  It's like saying why buy a dedicated Windows machine when you can get both in one system.  And who's going to spend most of their time in Windows on a Boot Camped machine anyway?

Some developers might think they don't need Mac native apps because you can always boot into Windows, but no one will want to reboot for one critical app.

I see this driving more users to the Mac.

It's funny though, I first saw the link to BC on digg.  One of the more interesting comments was someone that wanted to use BC to install Windows and then uninstall OS X.  The logic there is confounding.

I've met more people than I can remember that could care about OS X, and wanted just the hardware for its elegance.  They bought it, took it home, erased it, and installed Linux.  That is always going to happen.

It's no different than the person coming in that wants to buy a Power Mac G5 and matching Cinema Display for their receptionist because they want the "look."

There are people that buy design over function.

Zetetic Apparatchik wrote:

test wrote:

Too bad the partitioning dingus almost certainly will never work on PPC Macs.

There's always 3rd party solutions.

Yup.

Well here's the thing.

How easy is it to pirate a game for Windows compared to the Mac? A lot harder simply cause there aren't as many copies floating around. We buy legitimate versions  as a general rule. (Also Mac users are more wealthy, read it somewhere) We should see some new and old developers switching and cross developing simply to sell more copies. (Assuming Apple doesn't end up with an 80% market share)

Also with iLife etc we have a very good switching tool to make sure ppl with a Mac use OS X as default.

Finally, it has been suggested that being able to read across the partitions would be good. I don't think so! Think about it, Windows all of a sudden becomes the backdoor  for Mac viruses, worms and whatnot. I'll be very glad to see (or not see as the case may be) Apple partitioning off such that Windows can't write to or overwrite the OS X partition.

They also make the best personal computer operating system and some of the best personal computers on the market...

MacBoy4139 wrote:

F041 wrote:

Will viruses in Windows affect the Mac data if they are / are not on the same partition?

Most likely not, as Windows can't natively read the Mac OS hard drive.  If you installed a utility that allowed Windows to read the Mac HFS+ file system, it theoretically puts your data at risk.

Unless it starts messing with your partition table...

,xtG
.tsooJ

I predict  Adobe stops Mac development of their products, Mac gaming is officially dead now. Hell I already Battlefield two running on my wintel box I built. Now I just buy a mac and install windows. This is bad for Mac "Software users" over the long haul.

mikedemo wrote:

I predict  Adobe stops Mac development of their products, Mac gaming is officially dead now. Hell I already Battlefield two running on my wintel box I built. Now I just buy a mac and install windows. This is bad for Mac "Software users" over the long haul.

Why?

MacBoy4139 wrote:

mikedemo wrote:

I predict  Adobe stops Mac development of their products, Mac gaming is officially dead now. Hell I already Battlefield two running on my wintel box I built. Now I just buy a mac and install windows. This is bad for Mac "Software users" over the long haul.

Why?

Because it dminishes the reason to create a mac version of an application. I recognize this is a great solution for those who run both operating systens in their home or at work. But as we all know, developers play the numbers game. They always look at the installed user base. This often makes them hesitant to develop on mac. Most long time users like myself can remember a time when photoshop was exclusive to the mac, but since the release of Photoshop for Windows, I've seen much more attetion paid to Windows by Adobe.

The few good things that come from this "Boot camp" is;

This will allow a lot of people who have avoided or just plain never used a mac, the opportunity to check OS X out, while still having the  MS Windows safety net,

This may be a sign that Apple will be alowing "select" or "any" intel box makers to run OS X on their hardware.

Both could grow the Mac User base, but I doubt enough to encourage more Mac OS programming. I think this will futher niche the Mac and shrink its library to strictly creative tools.

Last edited by mikedemo (2006-04-05 11:33 am)

From the article linked above:

BBC News wrote:

By releasing Boot Camp, Apple is hoping to cash in on the interest generated by its iconic iPod music player. The dual booting system could let users run Windows to play games but use Mac applications for everything else.

That's the key - Games will be done on Windows - everything else will be done in the mac OS.  Will mac gaming die?  Possibly - but it's not going to kill off the real apps (and certainly not Adobe!).

To me, this is a pre-emptive strike by Apple. If Apple does not take over the XP to Apple computer hack, then a third party would be in charge of placing a potentially danger hack on Macs. This way they can control the app and control the security risks.

As for the danger of third parties like game creators (and Adobe) not creating Mac specific software, yes, that's a big threat but isn't it now easier to develop for both now that they use the same processors?

Apple should buy adobe.

AaronS wrote:

SpacemanSpiff wrote:

Blinding Flash of the Obvious:  Apple is a hardware company.  Yes, yes they have some software titles but for the most part they make their money when they sell a machine.

Looks like they will sell a few more machines now.

Apple is not a hardware company. In this context, when I am talking about Apple, I am not talking about the iPod or anything related to the iPod.

Apple uses standard RAM, standard HD's, and now standard intel chips. What is it that sets Apple apart from the rest of the industry? It's the software. People want to run Mac OS X. People want to run Final Cut Pro. These days, the hardware is pretty standard across the board. It's the OS, the software, that sets Apple apart.

Your statement is true that Apple makes most of their money on the hardware and not the software, but that fact alone does not make them a "hardware company".

That's my opinion.

Agreed.  I was thinking of the "pocket book" and you are thinking of the viseral experience related to using an Apple Computer.