Running Windows on a Mac: Boot Camp, Parallels Desktop & VMware Fusion

Hm, it's kinda strange then. According to 3dmark benchmarks mbp is very close to asus g1s - wouldn't it be right to say that if Bootcamp somehow affected windows performance then 3dmark scores would have dropped first? I looked at those charts and just thought that maybe mac os is a bit superior in terms of multimedia applications?

All in all, bootcamp is just drivers for Windows - or am I wrong?

E.g. mbp in 32-bit vista on 1024x768 gets stock 4674 3dmark06
asus g1s in 32-bit vista on 1024x768 gets stock 4746 3dmark06

but, mind that g1s is clocked @ 513/702, while mbp is clocked @ 470/635. So, basically, mbp is even faster than g1s(which it should be, given that cpu is faster)

So I kinda doubt those charts in terms of bootcamp performance... I'd just say that given tests strongly favored mac os over windows

 

Then you should tell CNET about it . Yeah, I included those charts for the purpose of "just letting you know that CNET did this", not really "look! VMware Fusion totally won! Get it!", and I would add more charts from other reviews if I could find them. If you find any, let me know!

 

What is stopping a developer from coming up with a solution that allows a user to run WinXP on a macbook, natively? It's mostly the same hardware, si it not? It's just a little disgruntling, because I can not find a $1000 notebook that is as slim, well built, and powerful as the macbook. Dell Vostro is really my only other option, but it's rather clunky compared to the macbook.

 

Boot Camp does run Windows natively on the Mac.

 

LOL, check page 1 of this thread/sticky .

 

If XP runs significantly slower on Macbook than it does on a PC notebook with the same system specs, then I would suspect it is not 100% native, per see, rather using some sort of emulation. No? Maybe Apple simply does not want the macbook to run Windows 100%.

 

Boot Camp does not run Windows under an emulation. This has to do with drivers and such, and also, Boot Camp is a Beta and you expect performance issues and bugs.

And I wouldn't be surprised if Apple didn't want the Macs to run Windows 100% perfectly. As said before, Boot Camp isn't meant to drive Mac hardware sales to run Windows, its meant to bridge the gap between Mac OS X and Windows; you can finally try out that admired OS X without totally leaving Windows.

 

Sam,

thank you very much for that comparison. I am quite new to this and would like toswitch to the Mac, but would also like to use Windows (mainly for the Office Suite) Am used to it!! If I were to get a Macbook Pro, you suggest having a license in order to install Windows. Do you mean I need to buy the full version of the MS Ultimate or Business??
Appreciate your help--Patrick

 

Hi Soulsurfer,

Yes, if you want to run Windows on the Mac, you will need a license of Windows, whether that is XP SP2 or Vista.

One thing you should note: only if you want to run Windows Vista virtually (using Parallels and VMware Fusion) do you have to get Vista Ultimate or Business. If you want to run Windows XP virtually, any version (Home and Professional) will do fine.

If you plan to run Windows natively, any version of Windows XP SP2 and Vista will do. You don't have to get Ultimate or Business if you decide to run Windows via Boot Camp.

 

Boot camp is 100% native, and I get around the same performance as a similarly configured computer....Where do you see that XP runs significantly slower on a MacBook than on a PC?

EDIT: Oh, just looked, if you are talking about the app performance results shown on the first page, thats probably a discrepancy between the OSX and Windows versions of QuickTime and iTunes. They are coded differently for the two OS's so it likely that the programs work faster on the Mac OS, for which they were originally written. I'm sure that an identically configured PC (say, Dell XPS M1330) would give similar if not identical performance.

 

I definitely do notice a speed difference between the Windows version of iTunes and the OSX version. The OSX version definitely starts up faster, even on similarly spec'd machines.

 

As far as I know, Windows is slower anyhow, even on a PC with the same hardware. It has to do with the Windows works. Even an ultra fast PC usually cannot achieve >30 second boot times of Windows, which my MacBook can do with OS X.

But yes, iTunes for PC is not fantastic. iTunes for Mac is much better, in terms of speed and how smooth it runs.

 

Do you know how to make windows to recognize the screen? it appears default monitor or monitor plug and play up to 3840x2400 and thats a problem when i try to play pES6 for example because it runs always at 640x480 (it doesn't mutter which resolution i choose) and i think its because the screen driver.

Any idea?

 

I see you said "usually" > (greater than) 30 seconds.. heh, anyhow it is tough.. I had to tweak my XP quite a bit to get it down to under 20 seconds. Basically it requires removing extra bios checks, and startup services and startup programs to whip right into the Desktop. Once you lean it down though, it can be fast enough to catch a greased chicken.

 

Nice, JimyTheAssassin. Sounds like quite a task though .

 

Sticky Update:

I've added a new section to the guide: Articles of Interest; related to "External Links", but I decided to make a new section for articles and guides related to Windows on a Mac, and leave the "External Links" section for links to product information.

The first and only link in the new section is Macworld's new Migrating from Parallels to VMware Fusion article. It may be of interest to some of you.

Once again, I am always open to suggestion. If you have any suggestions, comments, complaints or corrections, feel free to PM me or post it on the thread. I would appreciate it .

 

I keep seeing this (the quote below) mentioned, but regardless of speculation on the intent it's obviously making the mac hardware a lot more appealing to windows users. For example, I'm not sure I can find a better equipped 15" notebook out there? The 3dmark (and frame rate) numbers people are posting are well in par with being faster than just about anything out there (sager 2090, asus g1s, hp 8510, etc). Plus the mac is thin, light, led backlit, and generally thought of as one of the best looking designs available.

So although the numbers on the front page do indicate that Mac OS X can load Photoshop faster than XP what does that really mean to people wanting to run windows? I mean I don't get it? It doesn't indicate that running windows "under" bootcamp makes xp or vista slower just that some apps load faster in OS X? How is that a useful comparison? I am in no way trying to knock your great article. I very much appreciate it and maybe I'm just confused?

So I guess my question is this, although I don't expect it to run 100% perfect, is there a list of definite things that just don't work under bootcamp? I read the first post and honestly most of those things seem pretty inconsequential? I'm considering the purchase for no other reason than to get the hardware and run windows.

 

Well, all programs that run on Windows will run on the MacBook Pro. By not 100% perfect, I mean, as in, the keyboard isn't a Windows keyboard; there's no Print Screen key, for example.

And I included the CNET comparison charts "just in case anyone's interested". Anyways, according to CNET, programs such as Photoshop ran faster natively on OS X than natively on Windows. A reason why that may be is because OS X is "faster" than Windows anyhow; for example, OS X startup times on an average Intel Mac is under 30 seconds; on Windows it'd be very hard to get under 30 second Windows startup time.

So yeah, I don't believe Windows runs slower on the Mac, as it does run natively with Boot Camp; I think it has to do more with the way OS X is written to be "faster".

And I want to explain why I always say "get a Mac for OS X". With a Mac, you pay for OS X, iLife, and other bundled things. If you get a Mac just to run Windows, you pay for these bundled things automatically by purchasing the Mac, but you will never use them. So when I tell people not to get a Mac to run Windows full time, its because I don't want them spending money on something they'll never use. However, if you have no problem spending money on OS X and iLife and such with no intention to use it, then go right ahead and purchase a Mac.

And I do agree; in the current "what's the most powerful 15.4-inch" debate, I do agree that the MacBook Pro certainly is ahead of a lot of the competition.

 

Yeah I absolutely see your point with wasting money, but other than the cheaper alternative (sager and rebanded) it's really not that much more and I kind of see it as getting those as a "bonus" with the hardware. It's all a matter of perspective I guess.

The keyboard issues can definitely be annoying but I really dont' use insert all that often to really be annoyed by having to use an fN-key combo. The right click is a bit more troublesome. Anyway here is some of the limitations apple lists that I dug out of their faq if anyone else is interested.

The sudden motion sensor and light sensor is a bummer to lose but again not something most other venders offer anyway and I don't really see that as a "loss". Maybe bootcamp final will support it? I don't use the apple specific bluetooth devices, but I find it odd that they don't work as normal bluetooth devices do in XP/VISTA? Must simply be there are no windows drivers for those extra devices. Not a major concern for most windows users as they won't have those anyway.

Here are some macbook specific issues, one at that you already cover in your article.

Power management issues kinda scare me. What exactly does that mean? How much worse is it? Show pointer... I don't think I've ever used that.

 

Well, the lack of "double-finger tap = right click" is just a missing driver, and also, most users actually don't use this method to right click anyways - they either use a mouse or they place two fingers on the trackpad and they press the mouse button. So to me, not a big problem.

Well, most likely these will be added in the final version of Boot Camp. The ambient light sensor isn't that useful, to be honest. Most MBP users turn it off because they don't like the LCD brightness being randomly adjusted.

I don't think that's right...I believe Boot Camp does support scrolling on the trackpad, and also, it supports right clicking by placing two fingers on the trackpad and pressing the mouse button as well. Its just the double finger tap that's missing.

And for now, Boot Camp does run down the battery faster than running OS X. Running the Mac on Windows also makes it hotter as well; however, this doesn't have much to do with the power management as much as it has to do with the default fan speed being set to 1000 RPM (OS X's default fan speed is 1800 RPM). And for now there is no way to adjust fan speeds in Windows. On OS X, there is an application called SMCFanControl to do this.

 

RE the fan. Anyone tried using speedfan or something? I mean it's just intel hardware right?

 

I thought the same thing, but SpeedFan doesn't work. At least, not the current version (4.33).

 

cool. well hopefully the official release of bootcamp will fix some of these remaining issues. Anyone taking bets on when leopard will be released? =)

 

Well, if I remember correctly, Apple always releases new OS X versions on Friday...and Apple's stated that it is still on track for an October release...so my guess is October 26th. Or October 19th. Depends on my mood .

 

Sam,
thank you very much for your reply. Understand what you mean. I am searchging the web for my info pertaining to the Mac.

I came across this statement:

...Whatever you do: beware to be sure that you use a XP SERVICE PACK 2 disc. Any older system can cause irreversible damage to your EFI (firmware = instructions in a chip on the motherboard) and then your Mac WILL BE DEAD.

I have a full version of the Windows XP with SP1 on it. On my flash stick, I have SP2, which I will upload on the Mac as soon as the OS is loaded. Though, because the SP2 is not on the loadable CD for my Windows XP, may I encounter this problem as well?
I plan on getting the Macbook (13") with 2GB RAM, can it handle both OS'?
Appreciate your reply.

Take Care--Soulsurfer

 

As far as I know (because in fact, I do not run Windows on my MacBook, so I have no "first-hand experience"), you cannot even install Windows onto the Mac if its not Windows XP SP2 or Vista. So I don't think it'll work at all.

Can't you slipstream your SP1 into SP2? If you do that, it will work then.

And the MacBook will handle both OSes fine. The only thing you may want to note is the MacBook's hard drive isn't that large, so both the Windows and the OS X partition will be pretty small. However, you can always replace the hard drive easily on the MacBook.

 

I saw this on the MS webpage.

Anyone have any idea when windows plans on supporting EFI? Maybe in the next patch of Vista? That means you could run windows truely natively without any bios emulation! Not that there appears to be a problem there. Most of the problems are with drivers, but any emulation can potentially make things slower.

 

Maybe Vista SP1 in 2008...

 

I have a MB with 2GB RAM. I'm using Parallels and dedicated 800MB to Parallels, but when I run Parallels and I'm checking the amount of free memory, I was really shocked. 1,8GB RAM has been used and my MB was running pretty slow in overal. Is that a normal thing?

 

Hmm...that's a bit high. But sometimes there may be RAM leakage, so that may be the case. Restart the Mac and try again, it should not take up that much RAM.

 

Sticky Update:

VMware Fusion released Fusion 1.1 Beta today, that includes minor additions and bug fixes but also includes experimental DirectX 9.0 3D support, so more graphics-intensive applications and games are now supported in Fusion.

Also, I've updated some dates and information to keep it up-to-date.

 

memory leak by mac os or windows? Perhaps in mac os? Because at the moment, I'm not running parallels and mac os is using 1,17GB memory, only 854MB free memory left :s

 

Yeah, that is abnormally high, for OS X to use up 1.17 GB of RAM...what applications do you have open?

And by the way, you do know that "Inactive RAM" is free memory, right? Inactive RAM isn't in use...so maybe your free memory is higher than you think.

 

well, I restarted my MB, and immediately went to my activity monitor and now I have 1,6GB free memory. So it's clearly a leak. Do you know how I can prevent this or what the cause could be?

at startup, I only run Quicksilver and SMARTreporter. And normally I run colloquy, firefox, itunes and mail. Sometimes pages or another text editor

 

Okay, good to hear. Usually, memory leaks happen from open applications or an application "malfunctioning". There isn't really a way to prevent it; if you experience it again just restart the Mac. Easy fix.

 

Sam, appreciate your help.
The Macbook has a 160GB HDD. It seems it has ample space.
Do you have a good link pertaining to slipstreaming? I have adventured in that area and don't want to screw anything up.

Soulsurfer

 

This should work fine, Soulsurfer:

http://www.helpwithwindows.com/WindowsXP/winxp-sp2-bootcd.html

 

Congratulations Windows on a Mac Guide for surpassing 10'000 views . Thanks everyone for their support!

 

Thank you Sam

 

And thank you for putting together a great guide!

 

Sticky Update:

I've added a review for both VMware Fusion and Parallels Desktop. They are both from Macworld magazine. If you have any other reviews for these two applications, send them in to me!

Parallels Desktop 3.0 Review
[URL="http://www.macworld.com/2007/09/reviews/vmwarefusion/index.php']VMware Fusion 1.0 Review[/URL]

 

I'm back, guys!

Anyways, minor Sticky Update. The previous link to Macworld's VMware Fusion Review does not work, and I've edited it so it is the proper link. Thanks to tpoynton for pointing that out!

 

I'm still on the fence on what Windows to buy for a purely gaming partition. Everything else is going to be done within OSX, but not most games (Civ IV works on OSX, hehe).

The options are between XP Home, Vista Basic, and Vista Basic 64-bit. I've seen benchmarks that favour XP, and some that favour Vista, so I'm a bit clueless how both will perform under Bootcamp. While I would like to get Vista Basic 64 just for a 64-bit OS, I need the internal microphone to work. I've heard certain devices like the iSight camera (which I don't care about) don't work, but I'm not sure about the microphone, obviously.

So, help me.

 

Well, as far as I've seen, Windows XP is still the way to go for gaming...the main advantage of Vista is DX10 but most games have not heavily incorporated DX10 yet.

Vista Basic is kind of pointless if you ask me...it barely has any of the features that Microsoft marketed Vista to be all about.

So if you ask me, I'd say get Windows XP Home. Your applications and hardware are sure to work fine on XP, but the same cannot be said for Vista.

Hope this helps .

 

Well, for a purely gaming partition, the Aero interface, Windows Media Extender, backup options, etc. won't mean a thing to me. The 64-bit + DX10 merely seemed a reasonable choice, given that performance difference be miniscule.

XP Home will take up less space though...

 

yeah, and bootcamp doesn't officially support 64-bit OS for now, so XP is one of the best options so far

 

I've heard the drivers for the essentials work fine, but that I'll simply be missing things like the iSight camera, which I won't miss in Windows.

 

Sticky Update

I've decided to remove this part of the Windows on a Mac Guide until more confirmed reports:

Mainly because more recent reports are saying that Boot Camp will be Leopard-exclusive, so I've decided to remove this until we have more information on whether Boot Camp will be available for Tiger.

 

Are you ****ing kidding? That really sucks for the people that use Windows exclusively. I don't want to pay $69, much less $129, for an OS that I will never use, no matter how upgraded it is.

As a Windows version for Gaming, I'd either go XP (whatever version you like best - I'm using Pro with the MCE theme), or Vista HP if you want DX10. I'd stay the hell away from Vista though - its an absolute pain.

 

Nopes, I'm not kidding .

More recent reports seem to indicate that Apple is hinting that Boot Camp will be an exclusive feature of Leopard. There's been no mention whatsoever about whether Tiger will be able to have Boot Camp. So for now I've decided to take down the message.

Frankly, Vivek, what you just last said is a great example of why I don't recommend people get Macs for the sole purpose of running Windows full time. You'll be paying for things you never use. Exactly in your case, where you may need to get Leopard to get Boot Camp even though you don't use OS X.