XP on Macs

Apple Launches Software to Run Windows XP is the announcement (wisely not released on April 1) announcing a patch for Intel-based Macs to boot either MacOS or Windows XP:
The computer maker said its new "Boot Camp" software is available as a download beginning Wednesday. It allows users with a Microsoft Windows XP installation disc to install Windows XP on an Intel-based Mac computer.

"Apple has no desire or plan to sell or support Windows, but many customers have expressed their interest to run Windows on Apple's superior hardware now that we use Intel processors," Philip Schiller, Apple senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, said in a statement.

Boot Camp makes it easier to install Windows software on an Intel-based Mac, with a step-by-step guide. It also lets users choose to use either Mac OS X software, or the Windows software when they restart their computer.

Users can download the new Boot Camp software from Apple's Web site. A final version of Boot Camp will be available as a feature in the upcoming Mac OS X version 10.5 "Leopard."
View : : :
79.
 
Re: Mac on XP
Apr 7, 2006, 10:55
79.
Re: Mac on XP Apr 7, 2006, 10:55
Apr 7, 2006, 10:55
 
Where is the disconnect that is preventing you from understanding that since there is only one version of OSX on the market - and that version is fully capable of doing everything and anything Apple has ever said OSX can do (like XP Pro; you're not going to get it home and discover it won't run on a multiprocessor machine, for example) - I feel it would be unfair to compare it feature-wise to a version of XP that is missing features??????????

Jesus Christ you are thick.

THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU SAID! REREAD WHAT I QUOTED! ALL YOU SAID WAS THAT SINCE THERE WAS ONLY ONE VERSION IT SHOULD BE COMPARED TO THE FULLY FEATURED WINDOWS VERSION!

It wasn't until I asked that you pointed out which version it is actually closest to! Your original point was that there was only one version, and I called that moronic logic.

AND I NEVER ONCE DISAGREED WITH YOU OVER WHICH ONE IT WAS CLOSEST TO, I JUST SAID YOUR LOGIC WAS MORONIC!



As for webcams, you're flat-out wrong about many people using them daily. A handful, tops. Why do you think webcam technology hasn't improved in 7 or 8 years? Why do you think they're so low-res? Why do you think so few digital cameras have webcam capabilities?
Because no one uses webcams! There's no market for them therefore no one invests money into their development

-------------
Doomriders: the first new band worth a signature - http://www.deathwishinc.com/
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
4.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
66.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
68.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
69.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
2.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
11.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
12.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
15.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
16.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
   mac os
21.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
    Re: mac os
17.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
18.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
19.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
     Re: No subject
20.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
22.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
23.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
     Re: No subject
24.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
      Re: No subject
28.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
       Re: No subject
25.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
26.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
27.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
29.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
     Re: No subject
31.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
      Re: No subject
32.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
      Re: No subject
35.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
      Re: No subject
38.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
       Re: No subject
39.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
        Re: No subject
40.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
         Re: No subject
43.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
        Re: No subject
44.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
         Re: No subject
34.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
     Re: No subject
36.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
      Re: No subject
37.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
      Re: No subject
42.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
      Re: No subject
45.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
       Re: No subject
49.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
        Re: No subject
52.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
         Re: No subject
53.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
        Re: No subject
47.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
       Re: No subject
57.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
        Re: No subject
63.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
         Re: No subject
70.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
          Re: No subject
75.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
         Re: No subject
76.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
          Re: No subject
77.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
          Re: No subject
54.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
       Re: No subject
56.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
        Re: No subject
58.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
         Re: No subject
60.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
          Re: No subject
61.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
           Re: No subject
62.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
            Re: No subject
64.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
             Re: No subject
73.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
              Re: No subject
50.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
3.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
5.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
6.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
7.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
8.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
51.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
9.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
10.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
13.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
14.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
30.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
33.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
41.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
46.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
48.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
55.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
59.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
65.
Apr 5, 2006Apr 5 2006
67.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
71.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
72.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
74.
Apr 6, 2006Apr 6 2006
   Re: If...
78.
Apr 7, 2006Apr 7 2006
 79.
Apr 7, 2006Apr 7 2006
 Re: Mac on XP
80.
Apr 7, 2006Apr 7 2006
81.
Apr 7, 2006Apr 7 2006
82.
Apr 7, 2006Apr 7 2006
83.
Apr 7, 2006Apr 7 2006
     Re: Mac on XP
84.
Apr 7, 2006Apr 7 2006