ie8 fix
madison

Windows 7 on a Mac: my Boot Camp survival guide

By | June 13, 2011, 3:25pm PDT

Summary: Apple’s Boot Camp software is essential to running Windows on a Mac. But after many installations and much research, I’ve concluded that Boot Camp is second only to iTunes in its ability to inflict pain on Windows users. Here are five gotchas to avoid.

I have a Mac and a PC side by side on my desktop. In a multi-platform world, being able to switch back and forth between the two platforms is a crucial part of what I do.

For some comparisons, I find it useful to run Windows directly, without the interference of a virtualization layer. For that, the only alternative is to run Apple’s Boot Camp software.

After multiple Windows installations on Apple hardware and much research (including a thorough reading of the Boot Camp Installation and Setup Guide [PDF] and hours on Apple’s Boot Camp Installation and Storage forum), I’ve concluded that Boot Camp is second only to iTunes in its ability to inflict pain on Windows users. It has some unexpected limitations, and setup is more complex than it needs to be. (Why, it’s almost as if Apple is trying to make this process difficult.)

I have no illusions that Apple will pay any attention to my complaints and improve Boot Camp. But I decided to share my experiences here anyway, in the expectation that I can save you a few hours of banging your head against the wall if you need to use Boot Camp.

In this post, I assume you’re trying to install Windows 7 on an Intel-based Mac and that you’re following the official instructions. Here are the gotchas you need to know about.

You must install from a Windows 7 DVD.

My 2009-vintage Mac Mini has a defective DVD drive. It will play most audio CDs, but it spits out just about any data disc I try to feed it. If I try to burn an ISO image to a blank DVD, I get an error message like this one.

If this were a plain old PC, I would have lots of options. I could run setup from a USB flash drive, or use an external DVD drive, or even copy the setup files to a local hard drive and start the installer from that drive.

None of those options are available on a Mac. You must have an internal optical drive (the only exception is the MacBook Air). The makers of the superb rEFIt toolkit offer this confirmation:

Booting Windows or Linux from an external disk is not well-supported by Apple’s firmware. It may work for you, but if it does not work, there is nothing rEFIt can do about it.

Be prepared for a silly formatting error.

The Boot Camp Assistant creates a new partition and labels it as BOOTCAMP. But it doesn’t format the partition using NTFS, which is required for a Windows 7 installation. During the early stages of Windows Setup, when you choose the partition on which to install the OS, you have to click Drive Options (Advanced) and format the partition as NTFS. This awkward extra step is documented on page 8 of the setup guide, but you might miss it if you decided not to RTFM.

Update: In the TalkBack section, Joe Raby adds some context for this incompatibility:

The reason why you have to format the partition yourself is because Apple didn’t license NTFS from Microsoft (that’s why you can’t write to NTFS in OS X) , and Apple’s OS requires that every volume has a file system, which is why they format it FAT32.

You’ll need a USB keyboard and mouse to get started.

My Mac came with a Bluetooth keyboard. It works fine out of the box with the Mac, but it goes AWOL during the Windows setup process. The solution? Have a USB keyboard and mouse handy and use them to get through the initial installation. Once you get the Boot Camp drivers installed, you’ll be able to set up your Bluetooth hardware and you can put the USB hardware back on the shelf.

Page 2: Update and share –>

Topics

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books written prior to fall 2011 have been distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press. As of November 2011, Ed is a partner in the independent publishing company Fair Trade Digital Exchange, which exclusively publishes his books.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMware. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

129
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Bootcamp nightmare
billcondie Updated - 7th Mar
Ed, it's me from About Windows when I was switching from Mac Classic

I now have the mini Thunderbolt and just can't get Windows 7 installed

Can I wipe all the Mac partitions during the Windows install and create a big NTFS?
0 Votes
+ -
Um, there's this thing called the cloud ...
Clockwork Computer 13th Jun
you have a Mac and a PC,
trust me on this, they can both access it
and any file you choose to put there.
Forgive us if we don't see the "problem".
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@Clockwork Computer

I recommend the use of two CLOUD-BASED SERVICES to sync files: Windows Live Mesh or Dropbox.

Sigh.
0 Votes
+ -
@Ed Bott: ... what I am doing wrong? It is definitely not the speediest application out there, but, besides that, no pain.

As to speed, .NET framework is a true hell for applications performance.

Just look at Catalyst Control Centre by AMD (ATI), done with .NET framework. Despite this being just an utility for configuring a videocard, It takes long seconds to load, and then it crawls.

What amazes me even more is that ATI (and AMD, as successor), is long time prime partner with Microsoft and it is already 10th version. And .NET platform that I have is the latest version available, it has all ten years of refinement in it.

So we have both CCC application from ATI (AMD) and .NET framework that can not have any more tuning and optimization than they have, and yet even this best possible collaboration Between Microsoft and ATI/AMD is unbelievably slow in everything it does much slower than similar ATIs utility from before 2002, when no .NET framework was and I had zillion ways slower hardware.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@DeRSSS

On my main Windows desktop, CCC loads in about 1.5 seconds and it responds with no lag or delay.

I'm also not sure what it has to do with this post.
@Edward Bott: if it is "just" 1.5 seconds for you, then you are lucky. It takes much longer for me (and for many more who hate the slowdog CCC), and then every move takes like a second (for example, clicking to "performance", "AMD overdrive", et cetera).

And this theme is related since you mentioned iTunes being "pain". And I would say that comparably to .NET applications, iTunes is much faster.
  • Flagged
@Ed Bott
To all complaining about ATI Catalyst Control Center...
When was the last time you saw any decent piece of software written by OEM? I have never seen it. It is always crap. If you get decent drivers be happy. OEMs just do not care about utilities they provide. Be it printer utility, digital camera utility, video card or sound card utility.. anything is unrefined and slow. Just tried to change a bit more "advanced" audio settings on my machine. Guess what, I have a karaoke option and all kinds of sound effects but no way to select the output or use an equalizer.
@DeRSSS

iTunes is a complete cow-turd of an application. It offers you no control over your collection and just plonks everything whereever it sees fit. It also doesn't work on x64 without hacking the msi package. A couple of years ago, my stock answer to virtually all reported instability in Windows XP was "Do you have iTunes installed?"

Incidentally, iTunes is probably second only to Quicktime in terms of rubbishy-ness. Yes, on no less than an Intel integrated GFX I need to disable DirectX acceleration and switch to GDI? Even better! I need to apply this setting PER USER as there is no global override!! Class software... just class. Really shows everyone else how things are done!
@DeRSSS

You've obviously got something loaded wrong. CCC loads up on my system in a second flat. And it's not a fast system. Besides, what do you need with CCC anyway? ATI cards just work, without tweaking and twiddling like nVidia cards REQUIRE.
@Ed Bott Truly nice as well as precious stuff to watch for one and all. I as well propose you the http://nzedpills.com
Gael
I ran Windows virtually with Virtual PC on the G5. Now that was slow. So, Parallels and VMWare's Fusion were massive improvements. I like Parallels better for Windows and VMWF for the Linux/*BSD oses.

I just need to run a Windows application or two. I have no doubt that when Mr. Bott needs to break out of the virtualization box, it's because he is the power user I'm not. Mileage does vary.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
The biggest reason...
Ed Bott 13th Jun
@DannyO_0x98

The biggest reason is to make use of all system resources, especially memory. In a virtual machine, the host has a lot of overhead. On a 2GB system, virtualization is painful. It's acceptable on a 4GB system but not optimal. And of course you're using virtualized storage and display drivers in a VM, which means benchmarks are skewed.
0 Votes
+ -
Ed, you're talking out of of your
jacarter3 Updated - 13th Jun
@Ed Bott

er, hat here. VMWare Fusion DOES NOT add a lot a over head to the the VM machine running in its virtual environment. Modern hypervisors DO NOT take that much over head in memory, CPU cycles or graphics capabilities.

This is your opinion and likely guided by your own and paid for agenda. I have run Win 7 Pro x64 on my MBP with 8 GB RAM for over 6 months now.

My system runs much better than trying to load Win & on an older piece of hardware. The only thing that may cause a slight reduction in performance is the routine that indexes the the Mac file system to allow Spotlight to give expedient search results. The other factor that may impair Win 7 VM performance is your Norton Antivirus resource hog. Thankfully I don't use that garbage.

If you don't don't like the the BootCamp approach then pay some of the cash you get by spewing FUD about OS X malware and buy a separate Win 7 box.

But the host, when properly configured, DOES NOT use a lot of system resources. Only a someone with an obvious agenda would ever postulate such a ridiculous claim with no evidence to back it up.

Thanks for the "fair and balanced" assessment ED.
@jacarter3

And try and run VMWare Fusion with Linux or Windows guest on a 2006 iMac with 2GB RAM. It is painful. That said, Snow Leopard on a 2006 iMac is also slow, compared to Tiger...

Loading applications etc. in Windows under VMWare on the iMac takes an age and thrashes the disk no end, even if I give it 1GB memory and don't have anything other than Firefox running on the OS X side.

Booting to Vista in BootCamp on the same machine is a totally different kettle of fish.

Don't forget, your MBP has a much faster processor and 4 times the RAM. That last part makes a huge difference.

Running Ubuntu in a virtual machine on my Windows laptop, with 8 core processor (hyperthreading) and 8GB RAM is fine, running it on a dual core iMac with 2GB RAM makes you want to fling the 24" monstrosity out of the window!
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@jacarter3

I did not say the hypervisor adds overhead. But the host OS MUST be running for the hypervisor to be available. So on 1 4GB machine, you have to subtract the resources used by OS X and the virtualization software. At best, you get around 2GB of RAM and a virtualized display driver, whereas if you boot directly you get 4GB of RAM and direct access to the video hardware for acceleration, etc.

See the difference?
@Ed Bott

Agree completely with the RAM requirements and virtualization performance limitations, but I have been successfully running Sun Miicrosystem's (now Oracle) Virtual Box on my Mac for years.

I made the tradeoff that rebooting into Bootcamp (and the associated installation obstacles you identify) are more painful than the small performance hit of virtualization.

YMMV, but I'm OK with this tradeoff.
@wright_is, Use Parallels instead of VMWare. VMWare is great for servers, (lousy for workstations on the Mac at least.)

I use parallels every day and never have issues. Boot Camp was just too kludgy for me.
0 Votes
+ -
@DannyO_0x98

Eek! I shutter to think of running Windows in a VM at all. Windows just isn't meant to be run in that kind of environment.
0 Votes
+ -
Not true,....
dtroyerSMU 14th Jun
@Cylon Centurion .... we have 50+ vitural machines here with windows server and 7 in them. These work great and we couldnt live without them in their VM worlds. So much better than the physical alternatives.
0 Votes
+ -
@Cylon Centurion I have a Macbook Pro 2011 8 Gig of RAM and the i7 and run it using VMWare Fusion. Works great.
@Cylon Centurion I've got an $80 AMD Athlon II X3 unlocked to four cores and slightly overclocked to 3.3GHz. I've got 2GB of DDR3. I've switched to running openSUSE as my main OS and I can tell you Windows XP runs just fine in a 512MB Virtualbox VM. Surprisingly, when I wanted to see what Windows 7 looked like, it could also boot fine into a 512MB VM. I'll go even further - because it's doesn't work with linux's WINE Windows compatibility libraries, I've been playing The Sims 1 full-screen in a 512MB WinXP VBox VM lately!! Granted, much of the Sims 1 is just pseudo-3D, but still... I was quite surprised. If I run the XP VM full screen, you'd never know I was even in a VM at all in regards to performance.

Download a free copy of Virtualbox yourself and give it a try. The only hitch is if you have certain older Intel processors that don't support the virtualization extensions that allow VMs to run at nearly-native speed. I know all AMD processors have had them for ages, and I'm fairly certain all of the Intel i-whatevers do to.
@Cylon Centurion
As with the others, we run about 30 virtualised Windows systems here, on a blade server. Ranging from Win 2k server, through Windows 2003, Windows XP, Vista and 7 through to Windows 2008 R2 Server.

No performance problems at all - you just need to ensure that you have the right hardware.

Virtualising Windows on an old Core 2 Mac with less than 4GB of memory is just a no-no. On a dual hexa-core Xeon with 128GB RAM, you can run several virtual terminal servers with little or no impact.
@Cylon Centurion Yes Windows 7 IS WRITTEN to run well in a VM invironment. Extremely well.

Personaly I don't though, as it is so much easier to manage individual machines. Any maintainance needed on a VM host brings down all the VMs. Not a good solution for a shop attempting to keep 99.99% uptime.
@Cylon Centurion
For the one or two things I do in the Windows world, running in a VM (Fusion) is fine here. VMWare Fusion on my 09 mac mini with 8g of ram, 2g allocated to my Win7 VM does what I need it to. The only drawback I find is the CPU hit - HUGE when doing updates. Especially on tuesday's...LOL!!!
0 Votes
+ -
@Cylon Centurion Windows is perfectly capable of being virtualised, and Microsoft even make virtualisation product! Windows is fine as a host or client.

Microsoft have been using virtualisation in Windows since NT was first introduced (WoW - "Windows on Windows" was present to make older software run, and worked so well most users believed the applications were running native).
@Cylon Centurion I completely disagree. I use a 2008 2.4 GHZ MBP w/4GB ram and Parallels and run W7 Ultimate every day without any issues at all.

I'm doing standard Office apps and it works perfectly. I'm not gaming or using Photoshop CS 5; that probably would not work well, but for a project manager for a multiplatform web development company it's perfect...
Whether you strength be concerned all the rage addition reviews regarding http://las-vilis.com/roulette/ online roulette , the http://las-vilis.com/ live casino might advantage you in array of http://las-vilis.com/videoslot/ online slots
0 Votes
+ -
RDC
jeremychappell 13th Jun
Ed, I tend to use RDC. Especially in a situation where I have a Mac and a PC sat next to each other! I don't really know why you're bench testing this old Mac Mini (hardly a speed demon) but RDC would be utterly useless.

A lot of Mac users don't know about RDC (and I guess a lot of PC users are unaware it is an option on a Mac). However, it works really well, with Windows File Sharing enabled on the Mac you can even transfer files easily. What is nice is being able to reboot either system without disrupting your work on the other.

Maybe this might help consolidate some desk space Ed?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
It's a Core 2 Duo
Ed Bott 13th Jun
@jeremychappell

Perfectly good machine. A 2009 design is neither old nor slow. Especially when you add enough RAM and a decent (not 5400 RPM) hard drive.
0 Votes
+ -
@Ed Bott It's expectation isn't it? I look at a Mini and see "entry level", and I see 2009 and I think "middle aged". I look at "Core 2 Duo" and I think... "someone else's desk" wink
I run Win 7 Pro inside Parallels 6 on a 3 yr old Blackbook 2.4 Core 2 Duo. I allocate 2 gigs of memory to the guest OS, and find that Win 7 runs ok as an app inside Snow Leopard. An important bonus is the ease of cloning backups to a bootable external FW drive, including the Win 7 install (SuperDuper is ideal for this). Unless you need to do some very intense Windows stuff, this solution is a solid alternative for many of us.
Thanks for the post! I didn't know there were updates for the Windows drivers available.

I understand that a BlueTooth keyboard won't work with the Win7 installer, but I ran through this on a MBP and I didn't have a problem with the built-in keyboard. Didn't have any problem at all with BootCamp, actually. At work I did need a Windows USB keyboard to install WinXP on white iMacs running Tiger, or to do any work in Windows safe mode.

Snow Leopard's BootCamp was a painless experience. (Doing a fast NTFS format during a Windows install is SOP to me, so I was oblivious to that snag.)

Oh, and don't worry about the fanboys who say that OS X is sacrosanct and that you must run Windows as a VM on top of it, or be guilty of heresy. wink I'm thinking of doing the opposite: run Snow Leopard in a VirtualBox VM with Windows 7 as host, since I only need Snow Leopard to learn Office 2011.
0 Votes
+ -
No biggie
bluenote84149 14th Jun
Win 7 was incredibly easy to install, nuff said!
Quote:'If this were a plain old PC, I would have lots of options.'

Yes, including popping down to the local store and picking up a dirt-cheap DVD drive to replace the failing one.
@TV John There's nothing stopping Ed from doing just that, other than, perhaps, an innate desire to keep complaining.
@dheady@... No, Ed cannot just go buy a generic DVD drive and install it. A Mac Mini (and MacBooks and iMacs) needs a specific type of drive that will fit with the disc slot in the case.
@dheady@...

And opening a Mini is a real pain.
0 Votes
+ -
Apple will continue to succeed but remain an elite niche product purveyor
Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate 14th Jun
As for boot camp?
It's as unnecessary as dual boot when you can run a type 1 hypervisor, kvm, and just park a vm on your Linux Desktop.

Apple can tell you what to do.
I prefer choice and vote Linux.

Oh, if you don't understand kvm, stop by RedHat's website and learn about why they have a billion dollar flourishing business with RHEV. It runs on kvm and cuts out the added cost of VMware entirely.
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate

I don't see how this is something to add as to how one would install Windows 7 on a Mac using bootcamp... I didn't see "Linux" in the article anywhere, maybe I missed it... Could you show me?
0 Votes
+ -
@audidiablo LOL - he never does. Tries, and Tries to push the agenda, but it falls on deaf ears.
Is it not possible to format the entire drive and install Windows on a Mac? Just in case, you know, I win the lottery and can afford to buy Apple hardware.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Well, sort of
Ed Bott 14th Jun
@Spam.Me.Not

But the EFI architecture makes it a bit difficult. A topic for another day.
@Ed Bott

It worked fine for me when my ex bought a MacBook and hated OSX and the fact it did nothing but ask for money... I kindly formatted and installed Windows 7 for her without a hitch. Once in the OS I just used windows update and looking through the device manager to build up a decent driver pool. The I believe 3 devices that were Apple proprietary I installed from the Bootcramp disc. She seemed to be quite pleased after that.
@audidiablo

What? OSX "did nothing but ask for money?" That's funny, I've never seen that one before.
@lostarchitect

Neither did audidiablo. His posting history makes it clear he is a liar.
It's funny how Apple will allow you to run Windows 7 on your PC hardware Mac but will not allow OSX to run on your PC. This is where Apple tries to say they are also superior to PC's because they can do something pc's can't. Has no one taken notice that Apple's OSX is built off of freeBSD, which linux supports all hardware. Apple sued Psystar out of business for selling TRUE pc based OSX installs and again to have them shut down RebelEFI which allowed your retail purchased OSX installation disc to install OSX on your pc, which just isnt branded by apple..
@Nate_K
What Psystar was doing was selling illegal copies of OS X. First the copies were not from Apple, but Psystar (in the form of a recovery partition). That being said, it is no better than you, or I, photocopying a book and selling it to other people. Sure you?ll have some people that are willing to buy it., but that doesn?t make it legal.
@Rick_K

But isn't OSX written off of *FreeBSD*? Hence the word FREE. Apple is selling a freeware product they customized? Sounds fishy.
@audidiablo

Do you really not understand the difference? FreeBSD hardly has the ease of use and applications that OS X has. Apple invested considerable R&D money & time into developing FreeBSD into a user-friendly variant of Unix for average folks who have no idea what Unix is. They have every right to charge for that.

If you don't want the Mac GUI, then you can download Darwin -- the underlying Unix core on which OS X runs -- for free. But it's command line only. Consequently, only geeks tend to run it.

As for Psystar: Apple's EULA -- and the Digital Millennium Act -- make it illegal for anyone but Apple to port Mac OS X to standard PC hardware. It's not a capability issue, it's a licensing one. Apple has the right to control the license and to refuse to issue a license to companies that want to put it on commodity PC hardware.

Why would Apple do that? Because _ensuring_ that OS X runs well and "trouble-free" is a lot easier if Apple only has to certify it on a handful of hardware designs that it controls. Move it to some other logic board with whatever processor and whomever's video card, and someone else's storage controller, etc. and it's difficult to know if things will work properly.

Besides, Apple is a hardware company. It's OSes and cloud-based services exist to sell hardware, hence the reason they're either free (iOS and iCloud) or darn cheap (OS X at $29/copy .. even cheaper per machine for "family" packs). Compare those prices against what Microsoft charges for Win7 and OS X looks like a bargain. OS X Server (a $49 add-on for Lion) is an even bigger bargain.
@Rick_K BUT, they included a full version of tiger or leopard as well, just their recovery partition was changed to work with their hardware.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Windows 7 on a Mac: my Boot Camp survival guide
DeusXMachina Updated - 17th Jun
@Nate_K & audidiablo

And we have a winner! Of the clueless award.
OSX is built on MACH, which was written down the street from my house, with freeBSD extensions. I.e., NeXTSTEP.
It is NOT "built off" freeBSD in ANY sense of the word.
And FTR, the VAST majority of current code in free BSD was written by... wait for it... Apple, and given to the project free of charge.
0 Votes
+ -
Bootcamp nightmare
billcondie Updated - 7th Mar
Ed, it's me from About Windows when I was switching from Mac Classic

I now have the mini Thunderbolt and just can't get Windows 7 installed

Can I wipe all the Mac partitions during the Windows install and create a big NTFS?

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix