Just a quick question, is running XP or Vista using bootcamp on a Macbook, slower than the same specs of a non apple laptop? I understand it should be the same because all bootcamp is, is just a boot config utility and Windows is still running on the same hardware, but I just want to make sure before I buy![]()
Thanks in advance.
P.S. Also if anyone could give me their performance score in Vista on their macbook that would be nice.
Preferably with 2.0GHz Core 2 Duo, 1GB ram.
-
Sneaky_Chopsticks Notebook Deity
It's better to use Apple's Parallel software. You can run both windows and MAC OS X at the same time.
However, I'd rather you wait till this fall, because Apple's new Leopard OS is going to come with Bootcamp.
I haven't tried the bootcamp, but I heard it had some great performance with xp and vista. -
I think I got a base score of 3.2 the last time I booted into Vista via BootCamp. The score is based off of the lowest number, which is the graphics card in the case of the Macbook. -
Btw, Parallels is third party software, not from Apple.
There isn't any reason to wait til Fall to use Boot Camp; it can be used now in beta form. -
I don't really see the need for BootCamp besides for gaming. Parallels is convenient, and almost as fast a native Windows machine as long as you have enough RAM.
-
Honestly, it all depends on what someone's needs are. -
Thanks guys, the main reason I want to check the performance of Windows running natively is because I think I'll be spending a lot of time in Windows and I just want to make sure it doesn't run any slower than non-apple laptops.
I guess I'll go buy it next week some time -
If you're going to be spending a lot of time in Windows, wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to just get a Windows laptop? Or do you still plan on using OS X a lot as well?
-
I spend a lot of time in Windows for work, but as soon as I leave the building Windows might as well not be on here, unless I'm just showing somebody how cool parallels is.
To answer the OP:
I've got a MBP, a little bit faster than the macbook in question. Our machines here at work(desktops mind you) have 2.6ghz C2D with 2GB ram each. I'm running a 2.16ghz C2D with 2GB ram. With super pi I a 2 seconds slower time than the desktop(54 vs 56). That's pretty impressive to me. Now, I don't know for a fact exactly why that happened but I have an idea that it's because apple hand picks the components they use, so you know they are made to work perfectly with each other.
I would say Windows runs better on a Mac than a comparably equipped PC. -
XP with Parallels runs fine. Vista on the other hand is horrible.
-
i'm running XP pro w/ parallels and it runs, in my opinion, better than it did on my previous laptops that were made for XP
-
Hi guys thanks for the tips. I've ordered the 2.0GHz with 1GB RAM macbook, although one thing that is bothering me is it only comes with a combo drive, and to get the superdrive I have to pay quite a bit more to go up to the next option.
Is it changeable later on? Does Apple have an official service for this or is it DIY? -
If cost is an option, consider a refurb MacBook with the superdrive.
As it is right now, there aren't any replacement optical drives for the MacBook (this may change in the future, but it isn't an option right now).
-Zadillo -
You can buy SuperDrives for the MacBook with a bit of googling. I've found them before but too lazy to look right now. They run about $150 for the 6x. But then you have to consider that you'll be taking your MacBook apart to put it in.
The wise thing to do would be to cancel your current order and just get one with a SuperDrive. You'll be getting a faster processor and more HDD space, so it will be worth the money.
XP and Vista performance on Macbook?
Discussion in 'Apple and Mac OS X' started by lolmannz, May 17, 2007.