Dual Boot Windows XP on Mac: Apple's Boot Camp

  • Thread starter Thread starter dduardo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mac Windows
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Apple's Boot Camp enables dual booting of Windows XP on Intel Macs, allowing users to run both macOS and Windows on separate partitions. This implementation modifies the bootloader to simulate BIOS for Windows installation, ensuring compatibility with Intel architecture. Users report that Windows XP runs smoothly on Macs, provided the correct drivers are installed for hardware components. This strategic move is expected to enhance Apple's hardware sales and attract more users to their ecosystem.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of dual booting concepts
  • Familiarity with macOS and Windows XP installation processes
  • Knowledge of Intel architecture and driver requirements
  • Basic understanding of partition management on hard drives
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "Installing Windows XP on Mac using Boot Camp"
  • Learn about "Driver installation for Windows on Mac hardware"
  • Explore "Differences between BIOS and EFI booting"
  • Investigate "Performance optimization for dual boot setups"
USEFUL FOR

Mac users considering dual boot setups, IT professionals managing cross-platform environments, and anyone interested in optimizing performance on Apple hardware.

dduardo
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,902
Reaction score
3
Apple now supports dual booting on their new Intel Macs.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Computer science news on Phys.org
But... Why?
 
I actually think this is a good business move.

1) People who buy Macs are still buying OSX.
2) More people with Apple hardware are more likely to buy more Apple hardware.
 
Smart move Apple. Yea, I think that this will be good for Apple because now that people have the ability to run windows on Apple hardware, I personally would be less reluctant to purchase something from apple. It may seem like this would kill the mac os but it should boost the hardware department. Aren't they primarily hardware?
 
How "cleanly" (error free and without quirks) does ported WinXp run on a dual booting Mac-intel ?

I mean, even desktop linux has more than its fair share or problems and weirdness running native Linux apps, let alone something like using Wine to run Windows apps. Is WinXP on a Mac smoother ?
 
Curious3141, there was no porting/emulating done. All apple did was modify it's bootloader to trick windows into thinking it was booting from BIOS instead of EFI. From there you just stick your stock windows xp cd in the drive and install like you normally do. Windows XP and OSX run on separate partitions and you choose which one you want to boot at startup. They are completely isolated from one another.
 
Curious3141 said:
How "cleanly" (error free and without quirks) does ported WinXp run on a dual booting Mac-intel ?

I mean, even desktop linux has more than its fair share or problems and weirdness running native Linux apps, let alone something like using Wine to run Windows apps. Is WinXP on a Mac smoother ?


Its not ported, its dual booting. Windows already runs on that processor natively, it just needed drivers for the rest of the hardware.
 
Ah, I see, so as long as one can get a "normal" Win driver for each piece of hardware, it runs perfectly ? That's cool.
 
I think apple are true idiots looking for money and not caring about mac users. Apple OSs are only protected from viruses because powerpcs are expensive and not many people know asm for OSX, but now, when hardware becomes cheaper - intel, people will start to write real case malware for macs too, because there's many assembly-coders or virus writers, and learning asm syntax of another os is a matter of weeks, I think OSX should stay off on apples and don't bother with intel.

Thanks,
 
  • #10
hearless, I disagree. The majority (99.9999%) of exploits come from flaws within system libraries/applications. The issue isn't hardware architecture, but the quality of the software.
 
  • #11
It looks like investors are happy about the move. The stock went up 10% yesterday.
 
  • #12
dduardo, could you advise on whether Vista will also be able to run on Macs ? Thanks.

Also, are Mac intels 32 or 64 bits ?
 
  • #13
You probably won't get the full Vista Aero GUI on the mac mini, but it might be possible on the iMac or Power Mac. I'm sure it will run, but I don't know how much of the experience you'll get.

The intel core duo is a dual core 32 bit processor.
 
  • #14
dduardo said:
You probably won't get the full Vista Aero GUI on the mac mini, but it might be possible on the iMac or Power Mac. I'm sure it will run, but I don't know how much of the experience you'll get.

The intel core duo is a dual core 32 bit processor.

Supposedly, the 32 bit procs will only be able to run Vista without Aero or some lesser version of it. :confused:
 
  • #15
dduardo said:
It looks like investors are happy about the move. The stock went up 10% yesterday.

So did intels and M$ but not by as much..

I think its a very savy business move, they will catch a lot of people with this stratagy...

Job's is a good buisnessman, this was the whole idea behind moving to intel, IMHO, it had zip to do with IBM not making good enough procs. It seems to fit in with the whole "consoladation" the IT (and telecoms) industries are going through... Although I don't whole heartly aggree with this ideal, less consumer choice is bad...
 
  • #16
Curious3141 said:
Supposedly, the 32 bit procs will only be able to run Vista without Aero or some lesser version of it. :confused:

32bit will be fine. You just need a high end graphics card.
 
  • #17
^Ah, thanks. :smile:
 
  • #18
yeah

yeah actuall i have my mac os X running smoothly on my P4 processor
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
90K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K