Comments on: Vista On Intel Macs Looks Likely http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/ For MacGeeks by MacGeeks Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:56:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: aaron http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/comment-page-1/#comment-7218 aaron Tue, 06 Jun 2006 07:12:57 +0000 http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/#comment-7218 it says on the bootcamp website that it will run vista "EFI and BIOS Macs use an ultra-modern industry standard technology called EFI to handle booting. Sadly, Windows XP, and even the upcoming Vista, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS. But with Boot Camp, the Mac can operate smoothly in both centuries." from http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/ it says on the bootcamp website that it will run vista

“EFI and BIOS

Macs use an ultra-modern industry standard technology called EFI to handle booting. Sadly, Windows XP, and even the upcoming Vista, are stuck in the 1980s with old-fashioned BIOS. But with Boot Camp, the Mac can operate smoothly in both centuries.”

from http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

]]> By: eternalnewb http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/comment-page-1/#comment-5469 eternalnewb Mon, 22 May 2006 22:59:13 +0000 http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/#comment-5469 Well, I think that Vista will be like Tiger... but worse. And I have seen Tiger running on some really ancient machines, including a 256 Mb RAM 786 MHz G4, a 256 MB RAM 333 MHz G3, bith of which run it flawlessly. Basically, you can't run too many applications on them, but the system never takes more than 0.0% of the processor while idle, and even when something like Finder is actively using the system for heavy file moving/copying/rebuilding, it only uses around 20% of the processer. The system is just insanely efficient, and in itself basically uses no resources whatsoever. Vista supposedly NEEDS a 1 GHz processor and 1 GB of RAM, as well as a serious graphics card? That is not an unobtrusive thing to have running on any computer, and when you compare it to OS X's resource usage... it's just pathetic, whether it is possible to obtain a computer that will run it or not. Well, I think that Vista will be like Tiger… but worse. And I have seen Tiger running on some really ancient machines, including a 256 Mb RAM 786 MHz G4, a 256 MB RAM 333 MHz G3, bith of which run it flawlessly. Basically, you can’t run too many applications on them, but the system never takes more than 0.0% of the processor while idle, and even when something like Finder is actively using the system for heavy file moving/copying/rebuilding, it only uses around 20% of the processer. The system is just insanely efficient, and in itself basically uses no resources whatsoever. Vista supposedly NEEDS a 1 GHz processor and 1 GB of RAM, as well as a serious graphics card? That is not an unobtrusive thing to have running on any computer, and when you compare it to OS X’s resource usage… it’s just pathetic, whether it is possible to obtain a computer that will run it or not.

]]> By: purrdeta http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/comment-page-1/#comment-5453 purrdeta Mon, 22 May 2006 15:23:17 +0000 http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/#comment-5453 Well, Vista is a step in the wrong direction even for the windows. I know a lot of people who will switch to FreeBSD if Windows XP ever becomes unusable for them. Windows will be interesting... computers sold today are not technically compatable because of the graphics. Low end Dells dont have 128Mb of GFX memory! How stupid can Microsoft be... Then again Apple is the one who started putting integrated graphics in their macs... AND they closed the source... They make bad decisions too... Well, Vista is a step in the wrong direction even for the windows. I know a lot of people who will switch to FreeBSD if Windows XP ever becomes unusable for them.

Windows will be interesting… computers sold today are not technically compatable because of the graphics. Low end Dells dont have 128Mb of GFX memory!

How stupid can Microsoft be… Then again Apple is the one who started putting integrated graphics in their macs… AND they closed the source… They make bad decisions too…

]]> By: Matt Hoult http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/comment-page-1/#comment-5436 Matt Hoult Sun, 21 May 2006 21:22:44 +0000 http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/#comment-5436 Answers to those questions won't be available for some time, not until Vista hits the shelves. That said I don't think a 1Ghz CPU is a big ask really, it's rare to find a computer built in the past 3 years that doesn't have at least a 1Ghz CPU and most sales of Vista (to consumers) will be made via new hardware purchases. The RAM will be interesting for sure, especially as people are only just moving towards a 1GB standard and 2GB top end on average. I agree that new hardware sales will boom but I also think that many "techies" will simply pirate a copy on whatever system they happen to have for a very long, possibly indefinite period. I would imagine the reasoning behind the high requirements, based on historical truth, is badly written or implemented code that will be required for all the bells and whistles (viz. transparency etc.). The one thing Mac OS X does well is that it has a very small footprint, something that needs to be worked on heavily by the Windows team and frankly, being this far behind doesn't give much hope of that. I have to say though that the 15GB HHD space is pretty much as expected given the 10GB+ that most people allow for XP Professional. At this point I would like to point out that Mac OS X Tiger requires less than 2GB, but that is stripped of all unnecessary add-ons and languages. I would imagine Vista to be around 10GB in the same conditions, but that's a by product of the above statement about their coding and file structure. Answers to those questions won’t be available for some time, not until Vista hits the shelves. That said I don’t think a 1Ghz CPU is a big ask really, it’s rare to find a computer built in the past 3 years that doesn’t have at least a 1Ghz CPU and most sales of Vista (to consumers) will be made via new hardware purchases.

The RAM will be interesting for sure, especially as people are only just moving towards a 1GB standard and 2GB top end on average. I agree that new hardware sales will boom but I also think that many “techies” will simply pirate a copy on whatever system they happen to have for a very long, possibly indefinite period.

I would imagine the reasoning behind the high requirements, based on historical truth, is badly written or implemented code that will be required for all the bells and whistles (viz. transparency etc.). The one thing Mac OS X does well is that it has a very small footprint, something that needs to be worked on heavily by the Windows team and frankly, being this far behind doesn’t give much hope of that. I have to say though that the 15GB HHD space is pretty much as expected given the 10GB+ that most people allow for XP Professional. At this point I would like to point out that Mac OS X Tiger requires less than 2GB, but that is stripped of all unnecessary add-ons and languages. I would imagine Vista to be around 10GB in the same conditions, but that’s a by product of the above statement about their coding and file structure.

]]> By: Stephen http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/comment-page-1/#comment-5435 Stephen Sun, 21 May 2006 21:10:41 +0000 http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/#comment-5435 wow, I bet you, computer and computer part sales (in general) will see a big boom when Vista comes out JUST because of those requirements. But 15Gigs simply for the OS?? and a full gig of system memory to be premium? Does that mean that if a current computer (PC or Mac) were to run it, that 2 gigs of ram would feel like 1 gig or less? wow, I bet you, computer and computer part sales (in general) will see a big boom when Vista comes out JUST because of those requirements.

But 15Gigs simply for the OS?? and a full gig of system memory to be premium? Does that mean that if a current computer (PC or Mac) were to run it, that 2 gigs of ram would feel like 1 gig or less?

]]> By: eternalnewb http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/comment-page-1/#comment-5433 eternalnewb Sun, 21 May 2006 20:45:38 +0000 http://www.maccast.com/2006/05/21/vista-on-intel-macs-looks-likely/#comment-5433 Those are some pretty high requirements. What makes it need so much of a system? If the system won't run on anything less than a 1 GHz processor, than how do they expect us to be able to run anything but the system, which is going to lag badly anyway, probably. Microsoft never fails to amaze me. And not in a good way. Those are some pretty high requirements. What makes it need so much of a system? If the system won’t run on anything less than a 1 GHz processor, than how do they expect us to be able to run anything but the system, which is going to lag badly anyway, probably. Microsoft never fails to amaze me. And not in a good way.

]]>