New Macs will be able to run Windows?

[Guest Vitamin X]

SEATTLE - Apple Computer Inc. won't thwart users from loading Microsoft's Windows operating system onto its new Intel-based Macintosh computers _ but don't expect Apple to start offering a Mac running Windows.

 

Phil Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, said in an interview Tuesday that the company won't sell or support Windows itself, but also hasn't done anything to preclude people from loading Windows onto the machines themselves.

 

"That's fine with us. We don't mind," Schiller said. "If there are people who love our hardware but are forced to put up with a Windows world, then that's OK."

 

Schiller made the comments at Tuesday's Macworld Expo, where Microsoft also said it had signed a five-year pact with Apple to develop versions of Office for Macs and announced plans to release a version of Office that will be compatible with Apple's new Intel-based computers.

 

Macs currently run Apple's own proprietary operating system, which competes with Windows. However, since Windows is much more dominant, Mac users don't necessarily have access to many software programs written only for Windows.

 

Apple on Tuesday unveiled its first computers using Intel chips, which power most PCs using Windows.

 

The switch could technically and theoretically allow a person to load Windows onto a Mac computer, although the user would require some technical expertise to pull it off. That would allow a person to run both Microsoft and Apple's operating systems on the same Apple machine.

 

It was news Microsoft Corp. welcomed.

 

"Any new machines that are on the market that run Windows are great," said Scott Erickson, director of product management and marketing for Microsoft's Mac business unit.

 

Erickson said it was too early to say how Microsoft might take advantage of an ability to run Windows on Macs, saying only that it could give Mac users the potential to run Windows-based applications they previously couldn't.

 

Still, Erickson said Microsoft remains committed to offering a version of its Office business software for Macintosh computers.

 

Microsoft, based in Redmond, wouldn't say when the new version of Office for Macs will be released or what it will cost. Erickson said the company last released a version of its Office business software for Macs in May of 2004, and Microsoft generally releases updates every two to three years.

 

Erickson said the five-year deal, in which no money changed hands, should help quell customer concerns that Microsoft will stop developing software for its rival.

 

"What we wanted to do was just put to rest the question of, `Hey, are they going to be around now that (Apple is) making a major switch to Intel?'" Erickson said.

 

This is the second time Microsoft and Apple have signed pledges to work together, although Microsoft has developed software for Macintoshes for more than two decades.

 

Link which I originally got from here.

[Mik 0]

I can't believe they ditched the G5 for a dual core Intel. Something I never thought I'd see.

[Mole 0]

I thought Apple was all about everything being made within the company.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

You've always been able to boot Windows on a Mac, at least in recent years. I think this is just gonna streamline that a bit.

 

MacBook Pro is the worst name I can think of for a computer, but so be it. I'm kinda glad I got a brand new Powerbook G4, though--I'm expecting the first few runs of intel chips to be pretty buggy.

[Steviekick 0]

Apple went with Intel because Motorola/IBM weren't able to make any more advances on their Power PC chips. Ironically, Microsoft uses a Power PC to run Xbox 360.

 

They changed the Powerbook name to MacBook because Powerbook connotated Power PC.

[ZGangsta 0]

MacBook Pro is the worst name I can think of for a computer, but so be it. I'm kinda glad I got a brand new Powerbook G4, though--I'm expecting the first few runs of intel chips to be pretty buggy.

I don't think that's really true. Apple has been planning for this move to x86 archecture for a long time. Steve Jobs even said when they announced it that OSX had been designed from the ground up to comply with Intel's processors microcode. What's amazing about this is that they managed to keep that secret for like 5 years until the day that they announced the move to Intel cpus.

[Mole 0]

You can't get Final Cut with the new MacBooks it seems.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Booooo.

 

I have no reason to get one now, since the only thing I'd use it for would be for that exact purpose.

[Mik 0]

It will be fixed.

 

Many of the programs built for Mac can't handle the Intel processing. They included temporary patches with these first units shipped, but they aren't permanent solutions. The bugs will be fixed over time, because Mac is making a total transition to Intel processors.

 

I read an article on engadget about it.

[Guest Danny Dubya v 2.0]

You've always been able to boot Windows on a Mac, at least in recent years.

Was that not just with emulators, though? I wouldn't know (haven't used a Mac since the 5th grade), but that's my guess. Personally, I'm more interested in the vice-versa of the effects that being able to run OS X natively on any random PC would have on Microsoft's business, especially if computer vendors other than Apple started to preinstall OS X as opposed to (or even with) Windows. It would be funny to see M$'s partnership with Apple backfire on them down the road.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Can anyone confirm if Kiefer Sutherland does the voiceover in the new Intel ad?

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Yep, that's him. And the ad is a take-off on the Postal Service's "Such Great Heights" video, directed by the same guys. Very strange.