[Peter Cohen]

In reply to:

---

I optimistically plan on utilizing both vitualization (such as Parallels or VirtualPC) as well as Boot Camp

---

Just a point to note Virtual PC isn't a virtualization system, at least not on the Mac (VirtualPC for PCs is, however). Virtual PC on the Mac is an actual emulator, software pretending to be hardware. That's probably why Microsoft has taken a wait and see approach to offering Virtual PC on the Intel Macs. They're not lying when they say it'd be a tremendous amount of work; though I'm willing to bet they have a big leg up already in their X86 Virtual PC efforts.
If someone can come up with a virtualization solution that runs as well as a dual-boot Mac does, I'll be perfectly content to play PC games in a window on my Mac OS X system. Barring that, I'd love to see a variation on Boot Camp that lets you switch between Windows and Mac OS X like Fast User Switching. That'd be real nifty, too.

[bradleys]

In reply to:

---

I fully expect that this will effectively decimate the licensing of some Mac conversions of high-profile AAA list releases that fall into the hardcore gaming camp.

---

Maybe now BootCamp has turned things on their head, this isnt neccessarily a bad thing.
Even when (or more commonly if) AAA games are released for the Mac they usually :
1) come out months/years behind the PC version,
2) cant play with PC's online (only other Macs), and
3) are more expensive.
People who buy these games tend to spend looonnnnggg periods at a time playing them, so booting out of OSX into Windows isnt a hassle in reliative terms. Also given that it is unlikely that when playing these games you would be doing anything else (iChat, browsing, word processing etc) I cant see how changing systems would be a hindrance to "productivity" either. Biiiggg games are virtually platform neutral anyway, as they are almost a platform in their own right!!...Mac or PC...its basically transparent when in their environment.
As for where the real action is, casual games, it is an entirely different story. No-one is going to boot out of OSX to Windows to play solitaire or Cubies!! The market for these games on the Mac wont shrink because if they cant be played on OSX, they wont be played by Mac users:
1) Casual gamers are quite often doing other stuff at the same time...thus the platform you are using becomes important.
2) As already mentioned, people are HIGHLY unlikely to boot out of OSX then into XP just to play a casual game.
3) Casual games are often used as a break between doing other things...see #1 & #2 above!!
4) I cant believe casual gamers will even consider spending $$$$ to buy a commercial version of XP to play casual games on the Mac.
I think this has been a very smart move by Apple for 2 important reasons:
1) A list gamers can now buy a Mac and play all the blockbuster games they want on their Mac, returning to OSX when they are finnished.
2) People with a specific PC-only requirement (such as MS Access) can do what they need on their Mac, then return to OSX.
Apple is clearly attempting to cash-in on its current high profile by leaving almost no excuses for not making a Mac your next computer purchase.

[entspeak]

I remember 1998... October... After having played Half-Life on my dad's computer (and more importantly Team Fortress Classic the first really cool team-based multiplayer game)... sitting at work and reading that Half-Life for the Mac had gone gold master... and then reading that it was cancelled. I remember being very upset and writing to Gabe Newell at Valve and the people at Sierra asking that they reconsider. Now, almost 8 years later Half-Life will be coming to the Mac via Windows XP. Not only that but Half-Life 2. I've never been totally keen on console gaming (I love team-based tactical shooters and the like and I love the keyboard/mouse arrangement), so I, for one, am happy this has happened. Of course, I probably won't be able to make use of it for another year... but I've waited this long, I can drool for a while until I can afford to upgrade to an intel Mac.
This may not switch those who already have top of the line PC gaming gear, but for those people shopping for a new computer, it removes the common CompUSA Mac line, "but you can't really play games on it." or "There isn't as much software out there for it." Now we've got the entire Windows software catalog in addition to Mac only software. So, I think it will increase the amount of Mac buyers in the future. Now, if only Apple can get OS X to read and write to NTFS in addition to FAT32.
Might this have an adverse effect on Mac games... it will have an effect on those who port games. They will have to begin developing their own games to survive I think. I hope they will take up the challenge and develop and develop some great OS X games. I'll still play OS X games. But I won't play ports because it's cheaper to play them in Windows.

[Douglas]

I totally agree with you here...the moment I saw the announcement about Boot Camp my first thought was "Far out..I can FINALLY play Half Life 2 without buying a windows pc!!". I have been holding out on buying another mac and this announcement was exactly what I've been waiting for. I mean come on, what other possible reason should I buy another mac? Every time Apple releases another computer it is a big yawn for me...it's essentially the same thing that I have only slightly faster and with a newer version of iLife. But now...FINALLY a REAL reason to upgrade..I can play all the games that I miss from the PC world on my Macintosh!! The only bummer I see now is the long wait until the G5 Intel replacement ships.
Douglas

[Douglas]

Hey..One question I haven't seen an answer for anywhere...How do you compare the intel based Mac to the Windows machines as far as game system specs are concerned? In other words, If I pick up a Windows game box and it says something like..."Recommend specs for this game are a Pentium 4, blah, blah, blah" How do I know what the Intel chips in the Intel Macs are comparable to in the PC world? Can anyone list the comparables of the Mini, Mac Book Pro, & Imac? Is a Mini comparable to a Pentium 3 at 900 Mhz, etc.
Thanks!!!

[pln]

In reply to:

---

How do I know what the Intel chips in the Intel Macs are comparable to in the PC world? Can anyone list the comparables of the Mini, Mac Book Pro, & Imac? Is a Mini comparable to a Pentium 3 at 900 Mhz, etc.

---

If you're talking about game performance in Mac OS X vs Windows, then Windows will still be faster. But if you're talking about Windows on Mac, then this is easy now that the Mini, iMac and MBP use Intel chips, ie. the Core Solo Mini @ 1.5GHz is equivalent to a Core Solo PC @ 1.5 GHz.

[sakura]

The intel cpus Apple are using in their new systems are more then up to the task of running windows xp and its programs. The Macbook pro i am using to write this is running on a 667mhz FSB and is clocked at 2ghz per core, the only thing i'm not sure on is how luch level 2 chache they feature. But either way this cpu is basically the best you can buy in a portable system full stop, as it's relatively new there arent to many benchmarks on the web comparing them to other cpus on the market.
But none the less given their clock and fsb speed, no to mention being dual core, they would at least be the equivelent of a 3.4gh single core pentium 4 HT cpu in single core apps. As far as AMD go, i'd probably put them on the same level as perhaps a AMD64 3800+.
Either way irrespective of their power, it can run any new game with no problems.
The only problem i am having with my macbook pro at the moment is lack of memory. As above i have the 2ghz model, which thankfully comes with the upgraded x1600 mobile with 256mbs of memory, and i also chucked in the 100gb 7,200 rpm hard disk. At the moment when i check my page file in windows xp when running games like doom3 and half life 2 i notice it is using over 500 meg of page file. When i originally brought it i had no intentions of using it for gaming or running xp, but thanks to boot camp i know can.
So once i chuck another gb of memory in there that should not only smooth and reduce lag in games, but also allow me to run games at higher settings and better fps.

[fellows]

Good points are made for both sides, switchers and non-switchers alike.
Personally I think Apple has accidentally (or more likely on purpose, those geniuses) stumbled upon an evergrowing trend in the PC world... Gaming Notebooks
From a Hardware point of view, it is hard to find a reason not to buy a MacBook Pro. The 2.0 Dual Processor, the X1600 Video Card, 100Gb hard drive, etc.
Notebookreview.com did a comparison on the MacBook Pro and other high end laptops, and although you can find a better gaming laptop rig, you will be hard pressed to find one with such a nice balance.
Consider this. (The 2 laptops I WAS looking at)Acer's 8200 series of notebooks and Sony's new SZ series are preety decent offerings for gamers. Obviously the Acer 8200 has huge gaming potential, it like most other gaming laptops is a BEAST. It's heavy, not really portable, and eats through battery life in 1-2 hours. The slim and sleek sony SZ series is targeted more towards the business class, but it has a dual core CPU as well as an Nvidia 7400. I looked at this one mainly for it's size and battery life. 4.3 pounds and about 4-5 hours of battery. It's price is roughly the same as the lower end MacBook Pro. ($2500 CDN.) Yet it suffers from a small 13.3 inch screen.
When I heard about BootCamp I almost flipped out. Here was a computer that gave me the best of both worlds. A 15.4 inch widescreen, large and bright enough to watch movies or play games. Also thanks to a seamless design and a weight of just over 5 pounds, the portability to take it around wherever I go. At school or work I can boot to OS X to take notes or perform related tasks with 4-5 hours of battery life. Then on break, or to relax reboot in Windows and have the required GPU, and CPU power to handle the newest games.
Personally I'm not sure what everyones worried about. I think this only helps Apple, and OS X. Hell I just got converted, and at work many of the Apple users I know are retirees. More and more people are already switching over to Macs, and now they have found a new category. People needing a laptop that is powerful enough for gaming, but portable enough to lug around on a daily basis. More and more students will easily be picking up macs even the gamers, or especially the gamers.
Let's not forget the trump card in this operation. Forget having superior hardware, DVI outputs, etc. Once you reboot this sucker your running OS X. I've never even used the program and I'm excited.
Let's not forget that this allows long time Windows users to make the switch at their own pace. If they feel uncomfortable using an unfamiliar OS X program, they simply use Windows, and switch back when they are more familiar with it.
Wow that was a long post... but the potential here can't be ignored... or feel free to crush the hypothesis of someone thinging heavily on "theory" and "it should workisms"

[Peter Cohen]

In reply to:

---

How do you compare the intel based Mac to the Windows machines

---

When it's running Windows XP in a dual boot environment, a Mac is a PC. So it's a direct comparison -- a 2.0GHz Intel Core Duo-based iMac is a 2.0GHz Core Duo-based PC, equipped with Radeon X1600 graphics.
So far I haven't found a Windows game that won't run on the 20-inch iMac I have.

[leroybrown]

In reply to:

---

How do I know what the Intel chips in the Intel Macs are comparable to in the PC world? Can anyone list the comparables of the Mini, Mac Book Pro, & Imac? Is a Mini comparable to a Pentium 3 at 900 Mhz, etc.

---

ANY intel core processor should best ANY P3. That's too old of a chip. The higher end Core processors should best the higher end P4's, too. It's debatable on the lower end - those probably don't best the higher end P4's.
Those Core Duo chips have 1mb of level 2 cache for each core, iirc...

[JimmyXJ]

After having read everyones comments, I have to wonder if Boot Camp is really a part of a Switch Back campaign.
How many people left the Mac platform because they couldn't play games (or get access to other applications)? Wouldn't these Windows switchers be the ones most likely to appreciate Boot Camp and be very likely to consider a switch back? They already know the Mac platform and their windows software will still work and so they can gradually transition back to the Mac OS as they purchase new/replacement software.
I'm guessing that there is some sweet spot for a user base that will cause software development companies to reconsider writting software for the Mac (or in the case of Quicken, improve their offerings). Could Boot Camp generate enough new/returning Mac users to reach that sweet spot? If so, then you may see more games/software for the Mac platform. However, I think ported games will probably disapear but we will see other types of software being ported to the Mac platform (the developers that do this sort of work won't just disapear, they will move on to something else).
If loosing games means that we can get other types of software, OK then. The Mac platform will be better served in the long run by doing so.

[JimmyXJ]

What if Apple partnered with Nintendo to bring their games to the Mac?
It would give Nintendo another source of revenue and help them compete with Sony and Microsoft and it would give Apple users access to a lot of new games that wouldn't be available to Windows users.
You could start with Game Boy titles and run them in emulation (I'm assuming that the extra horsepower in a Mac would compensate for the loss in performance) and you could sell them as downloads through iTunes. Later, console games could also be ported and also sold through iTunes. In return, Apple would allow for GameBoys to link up to the iTunes store and possibly allow for iTunes to be added to the Revolution console.
If the games were sold through iTunes, you could also sell them by level. A demostration level, to get you to try the game, might be $2.00, while other levels could be $5.00.
While a lot of work, Nintendo and Apple are quickly loosing the whole gaming market and need to do something bold. It would seem like a win-win.

[FallenApple]

Nintendo is doing just fine thank you. The Revolution will be a success I have no doubts. Losing market? Please.
Let Sony and MS fight over specs, Nintendo knows where its priority should be, gameplay.

[Peter Cohen]

In reply to:

---

What if Apple partnered with Nintendo to bring their games to the Mac?

---

What if my grandmother had wheels? She'd be a wheelbarrow.
This is not going to happen.