Windows Vista Catchall

[naum]

I should probably explain why I don't like Linux.  I'm accustomed to a real UNIX, if you can call AIX UNIX, and the pervasive halfassness of Linux bothers me.  Admittedly this is mostly from a work perspective; things I can do in a three-word command on AIX would take a script or third-party app to do on Linux... or HP/UX or Solaris for that matter (thinking about the LVM here).  Another is that I know ksh.  I know ksh.  I can and will learn bash, but I am not at all excited about it.  I could use ksh on Linux, but the system files are all in bash so it would be in my best interest to just use bash myself.

Real Unix? I wouldn't call AIX "real" Unix (which I have worked with) any more than Sun Unix, HP Unix, etc...
 
Bash and ksh arn't much different except for top end features that really shouldn't be used if you're looking for cross platform agree-ability… …one of the things that bit me a lot when working w/ commercial Unix platforms was how seemingly gimped some of the system commands were, compared to F/OSS Linux counterparts… …tar, awk, etc... And each vendor (Apple + the Linux variants) throws their own custom admin tools on top…

[naum]

Question for people with Bootcamp experience; can files on the Windows partition be accessed from OS X and vice versa?  I'm considering putting either XP or Vista on my iMac for Oblivion and a few other games but I can't make up my mind on partition sizes.  I'd like to, for example, be able to access MP3s in Windows that are stored on the OS X file system.

Will find out in a week or so after I get delivery of another Mac Book Pro and I am going to put BootCamp on.

But Parallels can do this.

[OcellotJenkins]

Question for people with Bootcamp experience; can files on the Windows partition be accessed from OS X and vice versa?  I'm considering putting either XP or Vista on my iMac for Oblivion and a few other games but I can't make up my mind on partition sizes.  I'd like to, for example, be able to access MP3s in Windows that are stored on the OS X file system.

Will find out in a week or so after I get delivery of another Mac Book Pro and I am going to put BootCamp on.

But Parallels can do this.

I have Parallels, and while it is rather wiz bang, it doesn't do DirectX as far as I know and therefore won't run Oblivion.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[naum]

Question for people with Bootcamp experience; can files on the Windows partition be accessed from OS X and vice versa?  I'm considering putting either XP or Vista on my iMac for Oblivion and a few other games but I can't make up my mind on partition sizes.  I'd like to, for example, be able to access MP3s in Windows that are stored on the OS X file system.

Will find out in a week or so after I get delivery of another Mac Book Pro and I am going to put BootCamp on.

But Parallels can do this.

I have Parallels, and while it is rather wiz bang, it doesn't do DirectX as far as I know and therefore won't run Oblivion.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

No, I think even if it would run, it would be painful...

[squirrel]

Question for people with Bootcamp experience; can files on the Windows partition be accessed from OS X and vice versa?  I'm considering putting either XP or Vista on my iMac for Oblivion and a few other games but I can't make up my mind on partition sizes.  I'd like to, for example, be able to access MP3s in Windows that are stored on the OS X file system.

Will find out in a week or so after I get delivery of another Mac Book Pro and I am going to put BootCamp on.

But Parallels can do this.

Depends. If you run XP and format your Windows partition FAT then OSX can read/write the win partition. If you run Vista or use NTFS then no, OS X can't. Either way Windows can't read or write your OS X partition, doesn't even see it. I use a separate Firewire drive formatted FAT to share files between Vista and OS X.

[OcellotJenkins]

Question for people with Bootcamp experience; can files on the Windows partition be accessed from OS X and vice versa?  I'm considering putting either XP or Vista on my iMac for Oblivion and a few other games but I can't make up my mind on partition sizes.  I'd like to, for example, be able to access MP3s in Windows that are stored on the OS X file system.

Will find out in a week or so after I get delivery of another Mac Book Pro and I am going to put BootCamp on.

But Parallels can do this.

Depends. If you run XP and format your Windows partition FAT then OSX can read/write the win partition. If you run Vista or use NTFS then no, OS X can't. Either way Windows can't read or write your OS X partition, doesn't even see it. I use a separate Firewire drive formatted FAT to share files between Vista and OS X.

It's odd that OS X has no problems reading and writing to an NTFS shared folder on a Windows XP machine over the network.  One other question about Bootcamp and abandon the Mac talk; can you adjust the partition sizes after both operating systems are installed or are you stuck with that initial choice?

[HaemishM]

I don't know what the hell Microsoft is thinking

They are thinking "You will be our bitch, again."

[stray]

As long as it's in FAT (FAT32 for XP) format. It can only read ntfs, I think.

Also, you don't even need Boot Camp, if you're willing to shell out. Parallels allows you run Windows in a OS X window (though a full boot through Boot Camp would be better for more performance intense applications). It also allows some drag and drop abilities.

[EDIT]

Umm...Weird. Everyone said this already. My bad. I didn't see any of those above posts for some reason.

[BoredSomewhere]

Just some notes about Parallels, specifically Beta3 http://www.parallels.com/products/desktop/beta_testing/:

With Coherence, Windows no longer requires a full screen. Each app will launch in a normal window and look like a native application (aside from the widgets). Heck, they've even been able to get Parallels to use your Boot Camp partition as a VM so any changes made via Parallels is reflected when rebooting into Windows. Pretty snazzy.

Beta3 also now allows for adding Windows app icons to the dock for one-click launching. Finally, Command-Tab now cycles through each Windows app by name along with the native Mac apps.

For Boot Camp, there is a third party app called MacDrive 6 http://www.media4.com/products/macdrive6/ that allows for accessing your HFS+ Mac partition from the Windows side. I've used it a bit and it seems to work well although there can be conflicts with Daemon Tools (just turn off MacDrive and all is well).

Apologies for the continued derailing but I've just discovered Parallels and am having a blast with it.

[Yoru]

It's odd that OS X has no problems reading and writing to an NTFS shared folder on a Windows XP machine over the network.

Not really. When writing to a "shared folder", you're really interacting with a SMB/SAMBA server over the network. Like this.

( Mac FS ) <-> ( OSX ) <-> ( SAMBA client ) <-> ( network ) <-> ( SMB server ) <-> ( Windows ) <-> ( NTFS )

The Windows OS on the other end is doing all the actual NTFS work, not OSX. This works for the same reason that you don't really need to care what OS a web server is running on. When trying to read a regular HDD locally, it would be more like this:

( Mac FS ) <-> ( OSX ) <-> ( NTFS )

And there's no non-Windows driver currently out there that has good NTFS write support. There's good NTFS read support though, at least in the Linux kernel. I would guess and Linux or BSD-derived OS has it available as a kernel module somewhere.

[Strazos]

Erm, if you have a OS X partition and a Vista partition, can they both read and write to entirely separate, other partitions?

[stray]

Windows can't interact with OSX (as far as I know [EDIT] Nevermind. Just saw that link above from BoredSomewhere), but OS X can read and write to FAT32.

Vista might very well require NTFS though (or maybe something new? I remember awhile back that MS was trying to implement a new file system....).

[Strazos]

If I were to set the other, separate partitions to Fat32, both OSs could then access that data, correct?

[stray]

Yeah. I'm just not sure if the Vista OS itself can run on FAT32. But besides that, I can't think of any problems.

[Big Gulp]

Apple is looking good, actually, with no small thanks to Boot Camp.  It's not like all of my games run on WinXP, so I'm not married to that bullshit.

The problem with Apple is their lineup, which should have been rectified at this MacWorld.  Can you tell me what's missing in this picture?


The MacMini.  No forced upon you monitor, which is good.  However, shitty non-upgradeable video card, no PCI expandability, lack of HD space.  Starts at $599.


iMac.  All in one solution (monitor included, boo!), not expandable.  Starts at $999.


MacPro.  Finally, we have expandability!  You can replace the GPU, easily add RAM, and you have PCI slots.  Downside?  Starts at $2499.

Now what's missing in the tremendous gap between the iMac and the MacPro?  Apple is fucking retarded.

[stray]

I agree (speaking as a so called "Appletard" at that). They need a midrange expandable machine.

Apple had both tower and desktop versions of expandable midrangers for years. Until the G4.

[Yoru]

Yeah. I'm just not sure if the Vista OS itself can run on FAT32. But besides that, I can't think of any problems.

IIRC, Vista demands that it, itself, be installed on an NTFS partition, but yes, it can read/write/access other partitions, so long as those partitions are FAT16/FAT32/NTFS.

You can also get some handy programs like explore2fs to read from Linux ext2/ext3 partitions.

[Yegolev]

Yes, Apple hardware is expensive.  I have no interest in Apple hardware,  I want OS X... maybe.  That's why I wanted to know if I could install OS X on a plain-jane x86 platform, or is there some specialness to the Intel Macs?  I mean, if that's possible then I don't see why I should not do that.

[naum]

Now what's missing in the tremendous gap between the iMac and the MacPro?  Apple is fucking retarded.

From your perspective perhaps… …most Mac users don't really care for expandability, wanting stuff that just works, preferring to work with their computer, not on it. I bought an iMac for Mrs. Naum a few years back and she digs it... ...and it's a lot less hassle for me to admin (basically none, other than MS Office annoyances), basically plug and play.

Perhaps they could address the desktop market more, it seems that laptops (and I have one of the new shiny MacBookPros, which is expensive, but I don't think much more than the equivalent high end Dell laptop) are where they've made the biggest gains. If Linux wireless and peripheral stuff was a lot more painless I would go that route, but OS X brought the joy of computing back into my life.

Apple stock rose again, up to $97… …wonder if the Cisco squabble they intentionally wanted high profile public controversy… …free promotion for teh win…

And a final note on the Apple announcements… …one of my office mates bit takeaway was that they were playing Beatles tunes at the Keynote and he was geeked over the possibility that the Beatles would be on iTunes soon… …would never imagine someone getting all excited about that but I guess if you're a hardcore Beatles fan and you like splurging on iTunes…

[Trippy]

Yes, Apple hardware is expensive.  I have no interest in Apple hardware,  I want OS X... maybe.  That's why I wanted to know if I could install OS X on a plain-jane x86 platform, or is there some specialness to the Intel Macs?  I mean, if that's possible then I don't see why I should not do that.

Intel Macs have TPM chips and probably some other funky stuff that OS X presumably checks for on install to make sure you are installing on Genuine Apple™ hardware.

[Trippy]

And a final note on the Apple announcements… …one of my office mates bit takeaway was that they were playing Beatles tunes at the Keynote and he was geeked over the possibility that the Beatles would be on iTunes soon… …would never imagine someone getting all excited about that but I guess if you're a hardcore Beatles fan and you like splurging on iTunes…

Which is ironic given how many times Apple Corps/Records has sued Apple and I wouldn't be surprised if they sue them again because of the name change.

[Yegolev]

Intel Macs have TPM chips and probably some other funky stuff that OS X presumably checks for on install to make sure you are installing on Genuine Apple™ hardware.

Possible solution:
http://uneasysilence.com/os-x-proven-hacked-and-running-on-an-ordinary-pc/

Naturally I have not investigated this.

[OcellotJenkins]

Just some notes about Parallels, specifically Beta3 http://www.parallels.com/products/desktop/beta_testing/:

With Coherence, Windows no longer requires a full screen. Each app will launch in a normal window and look like a native application (aside from the widgets). Heck, they've even been able to get Parallels to use your Boot Camp partition as a VM so any changes made via Parallels is reflected when rebooting into Windows. Pretty snazzy.

Beta3 also now allows for adding Windows app icons to the dock for one-click launching. Finally, Command-Tab now cycles through each Windows app by name along with the native Mac apps.

For Boot Camp, there is a third party app called MacDrive 6 http://www.media4.com/products/macdrive6/ that allows for accessing your HFS+ Mac partition from the Windows side. I've used it a bit and it seems to work well although there can be conflicts with Daemon Tools (just turn off MacDrive and all is well).

Apologies for the continued derailing but I've just discovered Parallels and am having a blast with it.

Wow, that beta version of Parallels is hot!  Thanks for the heads up.

[Sky]

Gulp: you are correct in that Apple does not cater to this crowd. Only their highest end workstation can be set up as a gaming machine, and even then you're very limited and it'll be in line with boutique kits. Unfortunately, it's also a good business decision, uniformity is great.

So, as always, work on macs and game on pcs. Nothing new.

[stray]

Unacceptable. One computer for work and play should be enough. The entire PC industry is built on the idea of expandable midranged machines. Apple until the G4 did this shit. They're being cocksuckers now.

[HaemishM]

Unacceptable. One computer for work and play should be enough. The entire PC industry is built on the idea of expandable midranged machines. Apple until the G4 did this shit. They're being cocksuckers now.

NOW?

This is hardly unique. Apple is a buzzword for pretentious design douchetards.

[Sky]

Except that OSX kicks ass eight ways to sunday.

[bhodi]

A buddy at work runs osx on a dell precision. No clue how it's done, though. I could ask if you wanted.

[Sky]

It'd be fun to play with.

[Baldrake]

We've been doing a lot of testing of Vista at the office, and the conclusion is that there are still a lot of problems, including surprisingly standard apps don't run under it yet. Like Sky and others said, probably best to defer this upgrade for a few months until things settle down.

[Surlyboi]

Question for people with Bootcamp experience; can files on the Windows partition be accessed from OS X and vice versa?  I'm considering putting either XP or Vista on my iMac for Oblivion and a few other games but I can't make up my mind on partition sizes.  I'd like to, for example, be able to access MP3s in Windows that are stored on the OS X file system.

Not straight out of the proverbial box. There are a few third party apps that will let Windows see your OS X partitions, however. This of course, leaves you with the possibility of any particularly vicious malware screwing with those volumes as well though. And pretty much, since it's a beta, you're on your own if something goes wrong.

As for running Dawn of War, Jain (I always did like the Eldar). It kicks all sorts of ass on my Mac Pro with the 30".

[Quinton]

Except that OSX kicks ass eight ways to sunday.

It's damn cool in that it's "unix with real desktop applications", but performance-wise it remains terrible.  Linux runs circles around it on the same hardware for things like compiling larger projects (something I care about for work).  I haven't tried it again since Steve invented virtual desktops -- that might actually address some of my complaints about usability of the windowing system.

The lock-in to apple's hardware is annoying.  Their laptops in particular are huge.  If I could run OSX on my thinkpad x40, I'd seriously consider dumping Linux, but having to haul around some 5+ pound ginormous brick with a one button trackpad -> no thanks.

As for Vista... no, just no.  They've yanked all the interesting technology they were going on about and added more and more DRM and trusted computing shit that's just terrible for actual *users*.  Bleah.

-Q