Why is Apple crippling Bootcamp?

[MintyZen]

I have a MacBook Pro (early 2011), which I almost exclusively use as a Windows machine. Seeing how SSDs are reaching sort of affordable prices, I have been considering getting one, but I have put the idea on hold after learning that I wouldn't be able to use TRIM under Bootcamp and would get nowhere close to 6Gbps link rate.

Why is Apple forcing the SATA controller into legacy IDE mode when using BIOS emulation with Bootcamp? While doing so sort of made sense at first, as Windows XP couldn't support AHCI natively and wouldn't work without a driver, Bootcamp has dropped XP support quite a while ago. There are at least two or three generations of Macs that have never supported XP but are still crippled this way.

Is there any valid technical reason for disabling AHCI under Bootcamp or is Apple yet again nudging users towards its own closed sandbox?

P.S. I know you can hack the bootloader to sort of fix this, but doing so has its own drawbacks and I'm more interested in learning the rationale behind the decision.

 

[BrightCandle]

I can never explain why Apple does the things it does. Ultimately IMO it fits with their philosophy and stated market goals of taking computing and making them desirable devices via usability improvements often at the expense of the generic usability of the device. Everything they produce is locked down in ways that many users can't believe.

It could just be a limitation of their technology and fixing it isn't a priority. Many Apple buyers are relatively unsophisticated technically and wouldn't notice the impact of trim absence nor the reduced link speed being hindered. Heck Apple don't even list what type of SSD they put in their mac books when you buy it and that information matters a lot.

IMO you have to care more about the looks of your computer than its performance to choose a Mac over a real operating system. The amount of severe performance problems due to its micro kernal do make IO heavy operations pretty painful and the lack of open market hardware makes it downright expensive to own. Honestly I have never seen the appeal, but then I know what I am doing with a computer, I am not their target market.

 

[Nothinman]

Because they want you within their environment and no one else's. Bootcamp is most likely just a carrot dangled to get you to buy their hardware in the hopes you'll eventually ditch Windows or relegate it to a VM within OS X.

 

[TheStu]

I can never explain why Apple does the things it does. Ultimately IMO it fits with their philosophy and stated market goals of taking computing and making them desirable devices via usability improvements often at the expense of the generic usability of the device. Everything they produce is locked down in ways that many users can't believe.

It could just be a limitation of their technology and fixing it isn't a priority. Many Apple buyers are relatively unsophisticated technically and wouldn't notice the impact of trim absence nor the reduced link speed being hindered. Heck Apple don't even list what type of SSD they put in their mac books when you buy it and that information matters a lot.

IMO you have to care more about the looks of your computer than its performance to choose a Mac over a real operating system. The amount of severe performance problems due to its micro kernal do make IO heavy operations pretty painful and the lack of open market hardware makes it downright expensive to own. Honestly I have never seen the appeal, but then I know what I am doing with a computer, I am not their target market.

If you are somehow implying that most PC buyers AREN'T unsophisticated, then you need to spend more time off this forum. What you mentioned in bold applies to the vast majority of computer users out there. These are the same people that buy their big screen HDTVs and then watch SD signals stretched, and remark about the amazing picture. That (when HD-DVD was a thing) would go to the store looking for a BluRayTV. That still call it a BluRay DVD. That buy their phones at <insert major carrier here> based on the fact that the salesperson said that it had more mega-gigabytes.

I think that Nothinman more or less summed it up, Apple provided Bootcamp for their own reasons, and they aren't going to waste engineering resources on making sure that it is the best Windows implementation in the world.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Because they'd have to rewrite their BIOS emulator, and they don't want to.

If your laptop supports UEFI 2.0, you should be able to install Win7 on it without the bootcamp/BIOS emulator. I don't know much more than that, though.

 

[BrightCandle]

If you are somehow implying that most PC buyers AREN'T unsophisticated, then you need to spend more time off this forum. What you mentioned in bold applies to the vast majority of computer users out there.

Quite right, didn't express that well at all. Its about Windows and Linux having targeted markets in the server arena and professional space where every little bit of performance matters and the users are sophisticated enough to know they need it.

But I think in all honesty its probably just they haven't got around to it.

 

[bearxor]

If you are somehow implying that most PC buyers AREN'T unsophisticated, then you need to spend more time off this forum. What you mentioned in bold applies to the vast majority of computer users out there. These are the same people that buy their big screen HDTVs and then watch SD signals stretched, and remark about the amazing picture. That (when HD-DVD was a thing) would go to the store looking for a BluRayTV. That still call it a BluRay DVD. That buy their phones at <insert major carrier here> based on the fact that the salesperson said that it had more mega-gigabytes.

I think that Nothinman more or less summed it up, Apple provided Bootcamp for their own reasons, and they aren't going to waste engineering resources on making sure that it is the best Windows implementation in the world.

This is totally true. I was eating at a restaraunt last week and there was a big party next to us. One of the guys had just gotten a new phone (Note) and the family was talking about it and he was obviously the "tech savvy" guy in the family. Anyways, he started talking about how powerful the processor was and said "its a big phone and the bigger the phone you get the more powerful processor you have to have. Big phones have faster processors."

Yeah, you enjoy that Snapdragon S3.

 

[dagamer34]

This is totally true. I was eating at a restaraunt last week and there was a big party next to us. One of the guys had just gotten a new phone (Note) and the family was talking about it and he was obviously the "tech savvy" guy in the family. Anyways, he started talking about how powerful the processor was and said "its a big phone and the bigger the phone you get the more powerful processor you have to have. Big phones have faster processors."

Yeah, you enjoy that Snapdragon S3.

Almost as bad as people taking pictures with an iPad 2. Almost...

 

[vbuggy]

Quite right, didn't express that well at all. Its about Windows and Linux having targeted markets in the server arena and professional space where every little bit of performance matters and the users are sophisticated enough to know they need it.

But I think in all honesty its probably just they haven't got around to it.

In 6 years?

There's a lot more crippling behind the scenes nad it starts with the start. A recent Sandy Bridge i5 notebook with a modern BIOS and a SATAIII SSD can boot Windows faster than the i7 Air can boot OS X - yet when you Boot Camp an Air, it takes upwards of a minute to boot.

You could say that Boot Camp is perfectly suitable for those unsophisticated Windows users that Stu mentioned - and who moved to the 'superior' OS X environment which caters to their egos better, to run as a second environment to deal with legacy apps. Any consequent issues in Boot Camp can be dismissed as "Damn Microsoft, jeez" and the negative reinforcement is,well, reinforced.

I gues Microsoft sees every Boot Camp license as a full Windows license sold, but it seems like the wrong way to go for me. Apple is definitely going stealth-all-out to present Windows in the worst 'plausibly possible' light while claiming compatibility. Typical Apple behaviour but still.

 

[bearxor]

Almost as bad as people taking pictures with an iPad 2. Almost...

"well its a huge tablet, I bet it has an awesome camera! Let me just hold up this huge viewfinder to take my picture!"

 

[JJChicken]

"well its a huge tablet, I bet it has an awesome camera! Let me just hold up this huge viewfinder to take my picture!"

To be fair, at least the large screen makes it easier to see what you are taking a photo of.

 

[Oyeve]

To be fair, at least the large screen makes it easier to see what you are taking a photo of.

The "techy" part will be how to get the pic off the ipad.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

The "techy" part will be how to get the pic off the ipad.

Imagine a video shot on an ipad in portrait mode at 1080p. (1080x1920)

Now imagine it letterboxed into a 16:9 DVD.

Now imagine the 16:9 DVD letterboxed on a 4:3 television.

Weep with me. Weep.