Apple endorses Windows XP booting with "Boot Camp"

Apple endorses Windows XP booting with "Boot Camp"

Summary: Apple has released a public beta of a product their calling Boot Camp that will let you boot an Intel-based Mac into Windows XP.

boot-camp-beta.jpgApple has released a public beta of a product they're calling Boot Camp that will let you boot an Intel-based Mac into Windows XP.

According to the public beta Web site "Boot Camp lets you install Windows XP without moving your Mac data, though you will need to bring your own copy (of Windows)... Boot Camp will burn a CD of all the required drivers for Windows so you don't have to scrounge around the Internet looking for them."

Boot Camp was originally slated to be included in Mac OS 10.5 (code-named "Leopard") but Apple probably released it early after seeing the incredible amount of interest in installing Windows on Intel-based Macs. In addition to the Boot Camp download, you'll need Mac OS 10.4.6 and and Intel Mac (duh!) and at least 10Gb of free HDD space. See the Installation & Setup Guide for more details.

Once you've downloaded the 83MB installer you can burn a CD that will prepare your Mac for running Windows including adding a Startup Disk control panel for Windows. The Boot Camp CD includes all the Mac-specific drivers that you'll need for Windows, including:

- Graphics
- Networking
- Audio
- AirPort wireless
- Bluetooth
- The Eject key (on Apple keyboards)
- Brightness control for built-in displays

And finally, there's this parting shot at Microsloth on the Boot Camp page:
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.
I'd prefer to run  Darwine (a.k.a. Wine for OX) because it will allow me to run just the Windows applications that I want without Windows, but in the mean time Boot Camp will suit me just fine. Boot Camp will certainly be a boon for Intel Mac customers and is sure to drive sales of Apple's newest iron.

I'll be interested to see what people experience is with this exciting new development for Apple. I'm especially in hearing about the performance of Boot Camp from PC gamers. Post your comments in the TalkBack section below.

Topic: Apple

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Won't make sense until they can't get XenSource

    With something like XenSource, they can boot both OS X and WinXP or Vista at the same time. That would be worth it. Not switching off.
    • Of Course...

      George, your precious PC's don't even come close to this
      functionality, and yet you STILL have to fire shots at Apple's

      It's really incredible.

      Yes, we're all waiting for virtualization, but this is just a step on
      the path. When Macs do incorporate this ability, expect it to be a
      seamless transition for people who have been using Boot Camp.
      Instead of shutting down, users will just install the latest version
      of OS X and *poof* the Mac will recognize that the disk contains
      a valid Windows installation and will allow it to boot in the
      background while OS X is still running.

      If you don't believe/understand this, then you don't know Apple.
    • Ignore Ou

      Ou loves to "hit and run" Apple whenever possible. Then he
      doesn't have the guts to stick around and back up his rhetoric.

      It's obvious that this is a big step. It gives Intel mac owners
      more options. When they need to use a Windows only app, they
      can boot into Windows. It certainly makes more "sense" than
      running a crippled version of Windows in Virtual PC. To
      "switchers," it eases the transition.

      Is virtualization the best option? Definitely. That may be found
      in 10.5, Leopard. Time will tell. But that doesn't change the fact
      that this is a huge step. Wall Street certainly sees it. But Ou is
      so anti-Apple he has to minimize the impact.
  • Boot this

    Reference: "Apple has released a public beta of a product their calling Boot Camp ..."

    I'll bet Apple has released Apple has released a public beta of a product [IT IS] calling Boot Camp ...," too.

    And even, if we wish to go the lazily pseudo-literate route, that "Apple has released a public beta of a product [THEY'RE] calling Boot Camp ...?"

    What do you reckon?

    Blessings - Brian
  • One Problem With Games

    Direct X. Dont know if it runs on a Mac, but most, if not all PC games require Direct X to run & look good.
    • Direct X should work fine

      Unlike virtualisation, this approach is running Windows XP native on the hardware, with Windows drivers. So all the Direct X stuff should work just peachy. Assuming they do decent drivers of course, but that isn't so hard for Windows.

      And Windows' huge game library will certainly help reduce the resistance of consumers to buy Macs in the future.
  • A good short term fix

    Boot Camp avoids calls to Apple's support because of problems
    with 3rd party hacks - makes it well worth putting out the beta.

    I'll wait for VPC to take care of the Win needs. I have to use VPC
    now for one small proprietary Win app and prefer just opening
    VPC up while PS X is running. MS & Apple are probably fairly
    close to a VPC that works at native speeds on Mactels. No
    worries about closing and booting when you want to switch and
    it also allows for drag and dropping of files between the
    desktops. Will probably be out before Vista!
  • Apple running Windows

    Apple is leading right into the games MS played with IBM when IBM tried to run Windows on top of OS/2. Since Microsoft controls Windows, they just tweaked their software to break the OS/2 implementation.

    Apple would do better getting their OS to run on PC hardware. I haven't looked at Apple software in years, but their OS can't be worse than the Windows bloatware that will bog even a fast Intel system.
    Larry Caldwell
  • Paralells

    Run Windows inside of OSX with Paralells. "http://" Virtualization is much better than dual boot.
    Some Windows users might actually run Windows often enough for
    a Dual Boot system, but most Mac users only use Windows when
    necessary. Why reboot?

    As for anyone running Mac and Windows side by side, it wouldn't
    take long before running Windows got real old.
  • I wouldn't call this an endorsement

    That goes a little too far.

    What they have done is protected unwary users from installing
    software that could do other damage and controlled the boot

    If they won't sell the product, then they are not really endorsing it,
    are they?
  • No one sees the larger picture here?

    Let's step back and look at the business implications for a
    second. Steve Jobs isn't stupid. He wants to expand his market
    share beyond 7%. If he has intel chips and an operating system
    that runs OSX and XP, wouldn't it make sense to create an "iPC"
    next? BTW - the old "we tried it before with clones" arguement
    isn't going to work. Apple is bigger and more profitable now
    and I'm not talking about another licensing fiasco.

    So, what if apple took over a company like gateway and bundled
    a line of inexpensive machines with dual operating systems?
    Gateway has a 30% market share and sells 5 million pcs per yr.
    Suddenly, apple would have the market share they were
    originally looking for with the clones.

    BTW - Gateway is the perfect target right now. They're small
    enough to be affordable for apple, but big enough to make a big
    footprint in both market share and retail markets. Think about
    • Hello???

      Hello??? Gateway -> Gates way
      Graham Fluet
  • qpgnckt 63 xin

    nxxaza,oqpykzcb66, egpwf.