Windows Vista 32 bit EFI support officially dropped!

[Steve1496]

I can't believe this. Microsoft has really let people down with us--not only us, but Intel as well.

Speaking at Intel Developer Forum San Francisco, Microsoft development manager, Andrew Ritz, also revealed that there will never be any support for booting Windows via EFI on systems with 32-bit processors.

Although Microsoft has previously said EFI booting would be supported by Vista, Ritz admitted that EFI support won't be seen in any version of Windows until the release of Longhorn Server.

It will not be available in the release version of Windows Vista later this year ? Microsoft says people will have to wait for an unspecified 'subsequent release of Windows client'. Ritz could not say whether that would be a service pack update to Vista or the next-generation of Windows.

More at source:
http://apcmag.com/apc/v3.nsf/0/E666E4A0A303D9AACA25712C008166C4

[sud0n1m]

I am really bummed that it wont be working - it seemed really fishy when there was no support for it in the betas that were released.

[bgd]

But is it certain that the 64-bit version of Vista will include EFI support?
I'm thinking of waiting for a Merom-based MacBook and this would be another reason for me to do so...

[Afternoon Delight]

Edited. Stupid Q.

[ratzfatz]

...I would have noticed that a growing community wants to run Windows on a Mac. They even rewarded people how to find out about it.

As reaction to this demand, I would seriously think about a Windows version running exclusively on a Mac, with built-in EFI-support. I wouldn't wait too long doing that: all I need to do is a simple repackaging of Windows XP Professional, sold under a well known name: "Virtual PC version 9 for Intel-Macintosh". I'll put a red sticker on the box, saying "NOW set free from virtuality" - as a keen answer to the Intel Apple TV-commercial.

Then I would introduce Windows Vista for common Windows hardware - without EFI-support. It will install on a wide base without problems (so says the concept). I'll make the Windows world happy.

I would wait some time until the (so called) Mac-XP users start whining, begging for Vista. Then I think about making another EFI-based compilation just for this market. I could market it as "PC version X for Intel-Macintosh" and I also will invest in some programming to make it run *parallel* to Mac OS X. Because this is what I know people want to have anyway on the long run. Copy-Paste between Win and OS X and more. No more rebooting to work either here or there.

I will make a lot of money with this strategy.

Just too bad, I'm not "Mr. Microsoft"....

[bgd]

Your reasoning has one big flaw though, Apple's computer market share is only a few percentages of the total computer market so Microsoft's interest in adapting Windows to suit Apple computers is marginal at best...

If Microsoft does decide to implement EFI support in the 64-bit version of Vista, it won't be because they want people to run it on future 64-bit Apple computers but because they see some benefits with that feature in the PC market where the real money is...

If nothing else, that will be evident by the driver support available in Vista. While an EFI version of Vista would be able to install on an Apple 'out of the box', it would still leave unresolved all driver issues that we're facing with the EFI bootloader available through this site for XP. Only if Vista would include all necessary Mac hardware drivers could we speak of Microsoft including support for Apple computers...

[chrispy]

I get the feeling that Intel's Itanium processor chipsets are only EFI based as it seems that all of the 64bit OSes from MS support EFI. And I do believe that the same article stating that EFI wouldn't be supported in Vista 32 bit stated that it would be in Vista 64 bit. I have to wonder though, wouldn't we still be in the same boat with the drivers even if we had an EFI version of Windows? Granted a graphics driver MIGHT work, and this is assuming they don't require a BIOS. We still wouldn't have keyboard, touch pad, or iSight drivers.

[bgd]

I do believe that the same article stating that EFI wouldn't be supported in Vista 32 bit stated that it would be in Vista 64 bit.

I haven't been able to find a definite confirmation that the 64-bit Vista will have EFI support, only that EFI support might be introduced later on. Now, whether that means Vista 64-bit, some later Vista service pack or even a post-Vista version of Windows is left to speculation. I would appreciate if anyone could point me to a definite confirmation by Microsoft that the 64-bit Vista will have EFI support...

I have to wonder though, wouldn't we still be in the same boat with the drivers even if we had an EFI version of Windows? Granted a graphics driver MIGHT work, and this is assuming they don't require a BIOS. We still wouldn't have keyboard, touch pad, or iSight drivers.

I would think so...

OTOH, that makes any current work on the driver issues even more worthwile because the solutions to these issues might be applicable for all versions of XP and Vista unlike the XOM.EFI bootloader which is necessary only as a temporary solution until EFI support is implemented in Windows...

[chrispy]

I can't remember or find the page that listed all of the versions of Windows that supported EFI, but basically it looks like the Itanium version of Windows only supports EFI, so my guess is Intel is pushing it on everyone for that platform. I believe the AMD 64bit version of Windows also supported EFI. So I have to assume that since Itanium only supports EFI then the 64bit version of Windows Vista will support it as well. The Microsoft article I read did say that Vista would support EFI, but I can't find it anymore. If you do some searching on Microsoft's website (try technet or msdn as opposed to the regular one) you'll quickly discover that ALL 64 bit versions of Windows (XP and 2003 server) support EFI, so I think it's safe to assume Vista will as well. I also have to assume that Apple will use the Itanium processors or some version of them for the highend workstations, although this is also speculation on my part as I have not read anything about this.

[bgd]

Well, IA64 (64-bit Itanium) and X86-64 (64-bit X86) are two different platforms. Unlike X86-64, IA64 isn't backwards compatible with 32-bit X86 CPU:s and because of that certain older technologies like BIOS can be scrapped without much consideration. But if the X86-64 version of Windows XP indeed supports EFI then that's a very good sign for the upcoming X86-64 edition of Vista...

Regarding the driver issues on an EFI-based Vista edition. Apparently there are som beta video drivers available for EFI-based Windows platforms by ATI. Also, the issue with the internal speakers apparently seems to be because they are supposed to be enabled by BIOS. So, both the video and sound issues may be solved by themselves on an EFI-based Vista edition. Most (or all) other driver issues will be the same as with the 32-bit XP/Vista...

EDIT: Apparently the X86-64 version of Windows XP does not support EFI, so it's still an open question whether the X86-64 edition of Vista will have it...

[bgd]

It's becoming more and more obvious that we won't see any EFI support in the 64-bit desktop version of Vista. The 64-bit server version of Vista, Longhorn Server, is officially the first upcoming Windows version with EFI support.

Since I guess the 32 and 64-bit desktop versions of Vista will be released simultaneously then that means that the 64-bit desktop version won't have EFI support either. Even if that wouldn't be the case, the remark by the MS official that there aren't enough 64-bit desktop platforms with EFI support to warrant EFI support in Vista makes it perfectly clear.

The distinction that Microsoft makes in terms of EFI support in Vista obviously isn't 32-bit vs 64-bit platforms but server (Itanium) vs desktop (X86) platforms, which makes sense since it's the case with Windows XP as well...


http://www.apcmag.com/apc/v3.nsf/0/E666E4A0A303D9AACA25712C008166C4

Although Microsoft has previously said EFI booting would be supported by Vista, Ritz admitted that EFI support won't be seen in any version of Windows until the release of Longhorn Server.

It will not be available in the release version of Windows Vista later this year – Microsoft says people will have to wait for an unspecified 'subsequent release of Windows client'. Ritz could not say whether that would be a service pack update to Vista or the next-generation of Windows.

...

It said its decision to 'reprioritise' EFI development to the server version of Windows was based on a lack of available desktop PCs with EFI support on the market.

"A combination of factors changed our plans. The big one, in my opinion was platform availability. With this huge move to 64-bit based platforms and for us to support it, we needed to see a large heterogeneous sample of 64 bit implementations out there for us to feel comfortable in supporting it." said Ritz.

[jfantastic]

doesnt seem like a big deal, windows xp wasnt efi, and im running it on my mbp right now...
couldnt they make a slipstreamed version of vista?

[bgd]

Well, with Apple's EFI firmware updates this issue has become irrelevant :)

[crypto7]

Did this situation change??
http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/macpro/index.html#mar26

[chrisp]

Microsoft's official position (http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/firmware/efibrief.mspx) hasn't changed. See http://refit.sourceforge.net/info/vista.html for some more explanations on that.

The reader reporting to MacInTouch doesn't realize that all new Macs ship with everything needed to run BIOS-based operating systems in the firmware, out of the box. The only thing you need the actual Boot Camp Assistant for is a) partitioning for dual boot and b) Windows drivers for Apple hardware. See http://refit.sourceforge.net/myths/ for more explanations.

[ProMacUser]

Microsoft Suckssssss. And it always was the same. They will never change.
________
Live sex (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

[zarmanto]

Awww... come-on, ProMacUser; have a positive attitude. I'm positively certain that Microsoft will change -- just as soon as it is profitable to do so! :D