Considering the G5 chip was faster than the G4, but just didn't exist in a way that could be used in a notebook, those folks should have been well aware that the G4 was relatively slow.
I do wonder what a G5 notebook would have been like...
Considering the G5 chip was faster than the G4, but just didn't exist in a way that could be used in a notebook, those folks should have been well aware that the G4 was relatively slow.
I do wonder what a G5 notebook would have been like...
Wuzup101
Platinum Member
- Feb 20, 2002
- 2,334
- 37
- 91
As I understand it, EFI has a compatability module that is designed for BIOS compatability, IE it can be configured so that it will boot operating systems that requre BIOS and do not natively support EFI. However, it's up to the manufacturer of the motherboard/EFI system if the compatability module is included and to what extent. That was done do ease the switch from BIOS to EFI for system makers. It is unclear, as of this time, what features the EFI system on the new Macs will use, and if it is required to include a compatability module of this kind. It is entirely possible, if such a compatability module is included, that you will be able to load windows on a new Mac. IMHO, it would be silly for Apple as a company not to include such a compatability module. They would still be selling their machines for the same price with OSX, and the user could then pay extra for a copy of windows to install if they so desired. Also, since all the hardware in the macs is now the same as that used in PCs, I highly doubt that there will be much of a problem supporting windows on Mac hardware. Remember Steve said that they wouldn't do anything to stop you from running windows (and why would they if that's what you want to do - you're stilling buying their stuff at normal price). A microsoft rep in charge of the mac devision, and for the life of me I can't remember his name, was quote as saying something to the effect of: we welcome any new comptuers that can run windows. From this I'm guessing that microsoft will indeed support the mac hardware (as if it's much different than PC hardware).
The dev kits, which IIRC currenty use BIOS, have no problems running windows. So it all hinges on the compatability module included with apple's implementation of EFI. I don't doubt that you'll see iMacs and MacBook Pros running windows hours after they are received if the compatability module exists in a form that allows BIOS OSes. This also means that all flavors of linux for x86 would also work.
Take this for what it's worth please. I'm pretty much summing up the discussion about this from the www.macnn.com forums and expressing my own oppinions. They are only my oppinions based on the facts that I know - and obviously if your primary goal is to run windows on a new mac you should wait for some rich sob to test it first. That being said, you could actually try OSX!
The dev kits, which IIRC currenty use BIOS, have no problems running windows. So it all hinges on the compatability module included with apple's implementation of EFI. I don't doubt that you'll see iMacs and MacBook Pros running windows hours after they are received if the compatability module exists in a form that allows BIOS OSes. This also means that all flavors of linux for x86 would also work.
Take this for what it's worth please. I'm pretty much summing up the discussion about this from the www.macnn.com forums and expressing my own oppinions. They are only my oppinions based on the facts that I know - and obviously if your primary goal is to run windows on a new mac you should wait for some rich sob to test it first. That being said, you could actually try OSX!
To those who think switching is buying a Mac, wiping OS X, and putting Windows on instead: That's not switching!!! That's changing OEM, like going from Dell to HP. Switching is going from Windows to OS X. The whole thing about getting a mac is for the OS X experience (well it should be anyway). If you want a stylish computer that runs Windows, get a Vaio.
Oh, BTW, when I get an Macintel, I'll still use virtual PC like I do now, because it's better for me as a web developer to see both Windows based browsers and Mac based browsers next to each other I'm not a gamer so I don't care about dual booting and running games at full speed. Also, I prefer OS X as my main OS. I've been using it for 20 months now.
Oh, BTW, when I get an Macintel, I'll still use virtual PC like I do now, because it's better for me as a web developer to see both Windows based browsers and Mac based browsers next to each other
I'm not a gamer so I don't care about dual booting and running games at full speed. Also, I prefer OS X as my main OS. I've been using it for 20 months now.Well I think all potential buyers here won't wipe OS X but simply wish to install Windows as a secondary operating systems for some programs or because they like to fool around with fresh hardware
Of course the face of a Mac zealot booting your MacBook and it only booting in Windows would be priceless, but I don't think many will do this 
- Sep 28, 2005
- 21,042
- 3,522
- 126
Originally posted by: hopejr
To those who think switching is buying a Mac, wiping OS X, and putting Windows on instead: That's not switching!!! That's changing OEM, like going from Dell to HP. Switching is going from Windows to OS X. The whole thing about getting a mac is for the OS X experience (well it should be anyway). If you want a stylish computer that runs Windows, get a Vaio.
Oh, BTW, when I get an Macintel, I'll still use virtual PC like I do now, because it's better for me as a web developer to see both Windows based browsers and Mac based browsers next to each other
Ummm... and how long do u think its going to take now for people to get smart, buy a FX-60 with 2 gigs of ram, and install OS X on it? I highly doubt the G5's could keep up with a moderately OC'd FX-60.
Personally back to my original statement, If i wanted just the OS X experience, i'll wait for it to come out for my X2 which will probably blow away a G5. But as for hardware, I would say APPLE is way better in construction then a VAIOS is. So that brings me back to my original statement, Since the core is now intel, the ram standard DDR2, the only bottleneck i would see in trying to install windows on this thing would be the annoying 1 button mouse vs the 2-3 buttons most OEM company's make.
:X
Commodus
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2004
- 9,215
- 6,820
- 136
The FX-60 also came out months after dual-core G5s did. There are certainly some things Athlon 64 processors do better than G5s, but you'd have to compare what Apple was competing against.
It won't come out for your X2. Not officially, at least. And it will probably only blow away a G5 in that the compiler may be more optimized (GCC for x86 is more optimized than the PPC version).
Oh, and please remember that this is 2006, not 1996. Apple has used industry-standard RAM for a very long time. It has also had multi-button mouse support for several years or more; you could plug in a basic three-button USB mouse and expect everything to work without drivers. Also, you might forget what Apple released last year and now includes with all iMacs and Power Macs. Yes, the MacBook Pro still has a one-button trackpad, but you can either use a USB mouse or else use the common keyboard shortcut - hold Ctrl down when you click and you'll do the equivalent of a right-click.
I agree. The one button does suck, but that's why I plug in 3 button mice with scroll wheels into my macs when I use them for extended periods (well, my iBook anyway. I always have a 3 button mouse plugged into the iMac - note, it's the model before the mighty mouse came out - and the 1 button abomination that came with it sits in the cupboard).
I really don't think that ctrl+click will work in Windows.
Don't ever....ever believe performance benchmarks. Whem the Apple put the old G4 powerbook up against Intel chips, they used G4 optimizing compilers versus non-optimized intel code. Wow! Look, the G4 is faster.
You can guess what they did with the G4 vs. Dual Core Intel chips. They're faster, sure. The bus is better, the graphics is out of this world better, etc etc, but no way is it 4 times faster.
All Apple really did here is throw the owners of a G4 powerbook under a bus (assuming they were trying to sell one).
For me, I'm probably not going to upgrade. Sure it's slimmer, but the one thing it's not is lighter. When they can get the whole thing at 5 pounds (or under) maybe I'll bite.
You can guess what they did with the G4 vs. Dual Core Intel chips. They're faster, sure. The bus is better, the graphics is out of this world better, etc etc, but no way is it 4 times faster.
All Apple really did here is throw the owners of a G4 powerbook under a bus (assuming they were trying to sell one).
For me, I'm probably not going to upgrade. Sure it's slimmer, but the one thing it's not is lighter. When they can get the whole thing at 5 pounds (or under) maybe I'll bite.
Wuzup101
Platinum Member
- Feb 20, 2002
- 2,334
- 37
- 91
Hehe, It's all about size to me. Sure it would be great if it were 0.6lbs lighter. But at the end of the day, I'll just lift some weights and not ***** about the weight. It would be really nice if they made a case that was more durable though. Maybe some sort of high impact plastic composite or carbon fiber instead of aluminum which dents all over the place.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter