No EFI support for VIsta

At least for the 32-bit version, which means that Vista will likely not run on the intel Macs either.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/10/sorry-mactel-owners-windows-vista-wont-support-efi/

It's really too bad, because some people simply have to run windows programs, and Virtual PC is way to slow for any real use.

wine will run on the new intel macs soon anway so their will be next to no need for VPC for the majority of people

Why do so many mac users want to run windows?
most Windows users don't really care or even know about Mac OSX.
There are some Pc users wanting the challenge of getting Mac OSX PC's
but i think this is just a challenge and not for the purpose of running Mac OSX for anything useful

It seems so many mac users want windows to run on thier mac so they can use it for this program or that program instead of running virtual PC.
Why dont these people just get a cheap PC for a second computer?

applepissue said:

It seems so many mac users want windows to run on thier mac so they can use it for this program or that program instead of running virtual PC.
Why dont these people just get a cheap PC for a second computer?

Click to expand...

1. Cheap PCs are usually underpowered and are not useful for many programs such as CAD.
2. Virtual PC is very slow.
3. Some people don't want to have two different computers or it would be inconvenient to use two (eg. someone on the road a lot-- you don't want two laptops in your bag)
4. Some people like Apple's styling and would rather use a Mac for all of their needs.
5. Some people want to use Macs exclusively, but also like to play cutting edge games. Game ports are ported to Macs usually months after their PC release if at all. It'd be nice just to reboot into windows for your gaming and use OSX for everything else.
6. Many IT departments won't support OSX because they don't have much experience with it. This means that they might not let you use your Mac on the company network or even know how to set you up for it-- if it could be windows it wouldn't be a problem.

Anyways, that's just off the top of my head. I'm sure people can think of other reasons as well.

Seeing as people have traditionally purchased Macs without Windows in mind, I don't see how this changes anything. Furthermore, when Microsoft releases a universal version of Office and Virtual PC, the VPC will run MUCH more quickly than it used to because it will no longer have to emulate hardware. Besides, allowing Windows on Macs would HURT Apple from a business standpoint because less and less developers would be inclined to bother developing for OS X when Mac owners could just use Windows instead.

Things stay the same: If you want to run the MAC OS, get a Mac. If you want to run WINDOWS, get a Windows PC.

Honestly, I just think Windows on a Mac belongs in an application window, not as the actual OS. Once VPC goes UB, it'll be 90% up to speed anyway.

As dan828, this applies to the 32-bit version of Vista.

Once Intel starts putting out the 64-bit Conroe and Merom processors, and these make it into Macs, this will not be an issue. (Hopefully.) But it sucks for people who've already bought iMacs or MacBook Pros with the hope that they'd be able to boot Vista natively.

I guess that's what "Don't buy Revision A" means in this case.

If you want to use windows, why not just get a pc? I thought the object of getting a Mac was to get away from the windows environment . I just don't get why Mac users keep talking about windows.

jram said:

If you want to use windows, why not just get a pc? I thought the object of getting a Mac was to get away from the windows environment . I just don't get why Mac users keep talking about windows.

Click to expand...

My theory is that the Intel switch made the possibility plausible in the minds of many and wishful thinking turned into speculation turned into rumors turned into selling points assumed before official confirmation turned into a few vocal Mac users on the Internet (not all as you seem to think) whining. Yay for insanity!