Boot Camp limited, Still need OnMac Solution

[docbrody]

First of all, Apple's Boot Camp only works for a limited amount of time.

Second of all, we need an alternative to the "official" Apple solution. Having a 3rd party "unofficial" open source solution is the best way to keep the pressure on Apple and make sure that they are not just throwing together a sub-standard hack job that gets the job done. Actually, I don't think the "powers that be" at Apple feel pressure, but I guarantee that the engineers that are working on Boot Camp do. If they are not just pure automatons, they can't help but to feel a little competitive, and they are surely watching what happens on this site, and maybe even lifting code and ideas generated here outright.

I strongly feel that this site is singlehandedly responsible for Apple's release of Boot Camp so early. I am not even convinced that Apple was ever planning on doing an XP installer until the contest got started. Even if it was always part of their plans, I personally have little doubt that the release of a solution on this site has prompted them to push Boot Camp out the door sooner. But whether any of that is true or not is irrelevant. We still need an alternative to Apple's solution. And we need people like you guys on this site to keep the pressure on and ensure that we are getting the highest performance, most stable version of Windows running on MacIntels.

I really appreciate the work that is done here, and hope that those of you who have contributed don't abandon ship. This thread really scares me:
http://forum.onmac.net/showthread.php?t=708

I have followed the contest, and these forums, since the beginning, but I finally registered on the OnMac Forums today, just to make this one post. There was no reason for me to post in the past because most of the people here are so far beyond my technical skill level that I couldn't have ever hoped to add value. But I thought it would be worthwhile to register and state my opinion on this non-technical issue because I really don't want to see this project die. I realize that some of the issues I have raised have been discussed in other posts already, but not right up front on the main forum page.

Regards.


As a non-technical user, I would hope that this project results in:
1) An easy to use Windows installer that works with:
- XP Home - 2nd AND *1st* edition
- XP Pro - 2nd AND *1st* edition
2) Supports all the drivers needed.
3) Works with Mac Software Update and Windows Update
4) Windows bootable from an external USB or Firewire disk.

Anything else is icing on the cake.

[docbrody]

what I'd like to see is an implementation of BIOS support on the EFI level, rendering any bootloader and/or dual-boot solution unnecessary.....

You should post that here:
http://forum.onmac.net/showthread.php?t=149

My Post was meant to be more about the fact that I am afraid contributers to this project will lose interest and abandon ship.

[will]

Second of all, we need an alternative to the "official" Apple solution. Having a 3rd party "unofficial" open source solution is the best way to keep the pressure on Apple and make sure that they are not just throwing together a sub-standard hack job that gets the job done.

Um, where is the source?

[docbrody]

From Wiki:

"Currently the code is being cleaned up so that others can understand it. An hour spent now will save two hours explaining in the message boards."

http://wiki.onmac.net/index.php/Developers/Project_Direction

But again, my original post was about my concern that people who have contributed to this project will loose interest and abandon ship.

This is an worhtwhile project for them to stay involved with.

[anderkh]

While Apple's solution is for a short period, it's because the technology will be included in 10.5 (Leopard).

I agree, this would not have been released were it not for the efforts of OnMac.Net. In fact, during the install, it's pretty clear that some parts of the solution are the same, like having an extra partition for who knows what.

Regardless, I have rebuilt my MacBook Pro, and I have to say, the results are stunning. Full graphics support, WiFi, Bluetooth - you name it. It even has a control panel item for setting your default boot OS from Windows.

Ken

[docbrody]

While Apple's solution is for a short period, it's because the technology will be included in 10.5 (Leopard).

Yeah, I know WHY its short term, but its short term none-the-less. No time limits is just one of the benefits of the OnMac solution.

[cnakeitaro]

Yeah, I know WHY its short term, but its short term none-the-less. No time limits is just one of the benefits of the OnMac solution.

That's just stupid. Buy Leopard when it comes out and you won't have any problems with your current setup. I didn't bother with the OnMac solution, but kept an eye on it while it progressed. As it is programming genious on the part of blanka and narf, it still required too much, such as formatting no driver support. Now we have it. This is worth buying Leopard alone.

[docbrody]

@ cnakeitaro
whatever idiot. you clearly have not really been following these boards.

Re: Complex install procedure:
If you really have been following these forums as you claim, then you would know they are working on a simple install, i.e. version 1.0

When does lepord come out?
August at the soonest.

How long do a lot of us need XP?
Non-stop until then (time limit is an issue)


Don't try to stroke narf and blanka, then shit on their work. Just go away.

[teamhot]

hey docbrody, don't even bother making a topic if all you are going to do is flame and shut people down

[thebalaa]

enough guys.

[maflynn]

The pronouncement of apple with boot camp certainly floored me and to be honest I wondered what would become of onmac.net.

I've been lurking here for a while as I've tried to cull as much infomation as possible to put xp on my mini.

I have no idea how far into to the future the expiration goes. I'm also concerned that apple may pull the plug on it.

As far as I've seen it is a nicely polished fully packaged solution and time issues aside, that will be onmac's biggest challenge. People would rather use the one stop shopping of apple.

Mike

[sdavis]

i was also suprised at the announcement, and hope that the project will stay up and running, but for those institutions or businesses who would like to use XP and OSX, they kind of need some sort of option that is supported by apple.

if i did the xom.efi setup and called apple with a problem with sometihng they could just say "you set it up wrong, remove the partition and reinstall OSX" and i would have to... also there are vendors who dont have to support the dual boot option. now that Apple has released the options they have to support it...

i think onmac.net is good, hope it stays and understand that first guys posts and reasons for being mad at stupid posts...

i also think that a lot of people will stick with onmac.net for the triple boot options and other options...

but who wins the driver contest? Apple?

i vote that onmac.net gets the money to buy more... server stuff? ipods?

good work and good luck

[dirtymatt]

As a non-technical user, I would hope that this project results in:
1) An easy to use Windows installer that works with:
- XP Home - 2nd AND *1st* edition
- XP Pro - 2nd AND *1st* edition

Why? XP SP 1 has SERIOUS security problems, as in will most likely be compromised within 15 minutes of connecting to the internet. And yes, that means if you install XP SP 1 it most likely will be compromised before you finish downloading the SP 2 upgrade. SP 1 should not be supported.

[docbrody]

@ teamhot

sorry you read it that way, maybe I have been a bit "off" but how have I flamed? only replied. haven't shut anyone down. and only got "hostile" when someone claimed "thats stupid"

I am a bit surprised at all the off topic replies though. only 3 -4 on topic so far.

Just want to express the need for the onmac solution to keep getting attention. worried that the valuable work done here will languish now that boot camp is released.

My original post was a reaction to people on these boards saying goodbye to the project in this post:

http://forum.onmac.net/showthread.php?t=708

[docbrody]

@dirtymatt
Well, the only reason is that so you dont have to slip stream sp2 if you don't have the disk. But only if windows update works as well, then you can install and update to sp2.

So its just to make it easier to install XP for people who don't know how to slipstream and make a bootable install disk.

[jnjgriff]

Delete docbrody for comments out of bounds. he's off his meds.

Apple has rung the bell, it can't be unrung. Bootcamp is beta and time limited until Leopard is available, then you'll buy Leopard not just to get Bootcamp (or whatever final name it gets) but to get all the other supercoolgroovy stuff Leopard will have. Bootcamp is beta and will be developed into a larger more useful tool - I'm willing to bet that Bootcamp is just the first step to fast on the fly OS switching without rebooting - in Leopard. Impressive work was delivered here to get Dual-boot, BUT no-one should kid themselves that this forced Apple's hand. Dual-boot as developed here was only possible because Apple already had the trick developed into the Intel version of Tiger - and held it back for the right time. Which is now - just in time to get a good buzz going for the new iBooks, Macbook Thins or whatever are going to be bought for the back to school or off to college bunch - And the Educational Market Order Season - What school system couldn't feel good about buying hardware that can go either way? Dual-Boot as developed here will never be as easy as Apple's solution - why? - Because Apple knows their own source code more intimately than any hacker. Right off the bat, Bootcamp creates a partition without having to wipe out your entire drive - You keep your existing Mac OS partition. Apple offers the interesting tip in their instructions that if you format the new partion as FAT32 and less than 32GB, you can read/write your windows files from OSX.
Bootcamp is out in the open, it's not going away, it's going to get better (but you'll have to buy Leopard to get it). However, don't expect Windows drivers for Apple Remote or especially iSight. Apple will keep those strictly to OSX

[LiXy]

Please excuse me if I missed this in an earlier post but what exactly is the time restriction on Boot Camp?

[LiXy]

Apple has rung the bell, it can't be unrung. Bootcamp is beta and time limited until Leopard is available, then you'll buy Leopard not just to get Bootcamp (or whatever final name it gets) but to get all the other supercoolgroovy stuff Leopard will have.

Thank you very much for clearing that up!

[maflynn]

Please excuse me if I missed this in an earlier post but what exactly is the time restriction on Boot Camp?
Many beta programs build in time expiration logic. That is the program stops working after a certain date. This gets people who use the beta to buy the full product

[infinitespecter]

Phew... for a second I thought everyone meant it would stop working every few hours, kind of like a demo.

[DeathChill]

How long before Boot camp expires anyway?

[sdavis]

http://forum.onmac.net/showthread.php?t=731

check out that post...

somethin like September 30th 2007 or the next release.. whichever is first...

[aqsalter]

docbrody, OK, I agree with your initial post, but as has been said you're being a little over-zelous.

The time limit is not good, true. Waiting for Leopard is also not a solution (I mean honestly).

We need a non-Apple solution for many reasons. Linux/Open-source is full of answers to this question. There has to be more than one way to do this - even if the Apple solution "just works". We need the freedom to experiment or even improve it....

The major issue seems to be that the efi code is still not available... There must be heaps of people ready to have a go at hacking it if they could.

Of course it will have to be rejigged to work alongside the Boot camp as a first issue, but without the code we're a bit stuffed.

[rxcited]

How about disassembling Apple's CSM/EFI code? Is this in the firmware update? How do we get at that? :D

Maybe this would give help to XOM developers to make it better than the Apple solution. Like maybe supporting multiple boot volumes with many different versions of Windows and Linux?

[aqsalter]

Actually I've just reread all the posts and I can see why docbrody is getting so heated up. There are people posting who are basically saying "Apple's given us the solution - give up, go home". WTF?

In the same sentence they say "iSight, IR not working, Apple will never release those". So should we go home or not?

No there has to be an open solution. It's the same as it ever was. This contest has given us a great base of code. Apple has just given their official solution to stop the tech support calls I'd guess. The real hackers can keep going (and they will - true multi-boot is not working yet as I understand) and the people who just want to play games can get their "unsupported" XP install.

[photomaniac]

Delete docbrody for comments out of bounds. he's off his meds.

Apple has rung the bell, it can't be unrung. Bootcamp is beta and time limited until Leopard is available, then you'll buy Leopard not just to get Bootcamp (or whatever final name it gets) but to get all the other supercoolgroovy stuff Leopard will have. Bootcamp is beta and will be developed into a larger more useful tool - I'm willing to bet that Bootcamp is just the first step to fast on the fly OS switching without rebooting - in Leopard. Impressive work was delivered here to get Dual-boot, BUT no-one should kid themselves that this forced Apple's hand. Dual-boot as developed here was only possible because Apple already had the trick developed into the Intel version of Tiger - and held it back for the right time. Which is now - just in time to get a good buzz going for the new iBooks, Macbook Thins or whatever are going to be bought for the back to school or off to college bunch - And the Educational Market Order Season - What school system couldn't feel good about buying hardware that can go either way? Dual-Boot as developed here will never be as easy as Apple's solution - why? - Because Apple knows their own source code more intimately than any hacker. Right off the bat, Bootcamp creates a partition without having to wipe out your entire drive - You keep your existing Mac OS partition. Apple offers the interesting tip in their instructions that if you format the new partion as FAT32 and less than 32GB, you can read/write your windows files from OSX.
Bootcamp is out in the open, it's not going away, it's going to get better (but you'll have to buy Leopard to get it). However, don't expect Windows drivers for Apple Remote or especially iSight. Apple will keep those strictly to OSX

Just now, I registered with this site just to say that what you said is word for word perfect! I completely agree with you.

[dirtymatt]

@dirtymatt
Well, the only reason is that so you dont have to slip stream sp2 if you don't have the disk. But only if windows update works as well, then you can install and update to sp2.

But windows update does not work properly. A machine that does not have the RPC patch or LSASS patch, ie a stock SP1 install, will be infected within minutes of connecting to the internet. Yes there are steps you can take to protect the computer, but the average user will know nothing about this. Windows XP pre SP2 should not be considered a safe operating system to use ever, not for any amount of time.

[sdavis]

they are probably just going to wait on the iSight driver and the infra-red driver until 10.5 comes out... or someone creates their own, then they will make it available to have an "official" apple driver...

[docbrody]

Actually I've just reread all the posts and I can see why docbrody is getting so heated up. There are people posting who are basically saying "Apple's given us the solution - give up, go home". WTF?

Phew... I was beginning to think I was the only one. I really do hope the project continues and that we have an alternative to boot camp to choose from. Unfortunetly it seems the general consensus is the opposite.

And look guys, I appologize if I stepped on some toes, but I think if you read through the thread, you will see I only reacted to hostility with hostility (comments like "thats just stupid" etc). And initially I provided a link to the relevant thread when off topic posts about what to include and support in a dual boot solution (for example SP1 vs SP2). But I suppose it is my fault for even putting my thoughts on what to include at the end of my original post.

But its not about me or my style of posting (or lack there of). Its about all the hard work that has come out of the contest. I hope the regulars stay with the project. I think their work is worth commending and worth continuing.

[inkhead]

Bootcamp is a limited beta because at WWDC in June apple is going to announce that they have partnered with Xen to replace the Mach hardware abstraction layer. (Which is a very, very good thing) Apple will preview running multiple OSes concurrently, in different windows, and also in virtualdesktops (much like fast user switching)

[flurby]

From what I can tell, Boot Camp is a just a nice front-end that lets you repartition your drives, choose a default boot drive, and burn a CD of drivers.

The important thing Apple released yesterday was the updated firmware that supports BIOS. That's not going to expire, and eliminates the need for the whole XOM-based approach.

This project could continue - it could replicate/expand the Boot Camp functionality - allow non-destructive partitioning for more than one partition, provide drivers for things like the remote control, etc. But I think continuing to promote the XOM-based approach, messing with partition tables, etc is pretty irresponsible when the new firmware is so much cleaner, and officially supported.

[dirigible]

im with docbrody. some of u all to sensitve. he is actually right. not on all details. so what. anyway i vote for XOM to keep going. boot camp will only make it better (drivers hopefully) and open source is good for everyone. but is it on sourceforege yet?

[diamondsw]

My only argument against XOM is simply - why?

If you didn't notice, "BootCamp" doesn't actually do anything except repartition your drive on the fly (and that is a feature I'd like to see in Disk Utility [EDIT - it's there! (http://www.macgeekery.com/tips/cli/nondestructively_resizing_volumes)]). BootCamp is just a great marketing name to wrap around the whole package, but the BootCamp software itself does very little. All of the magic here is in the firmware update - Apple provided the legacy BIOS emulation for EFI. That's why things like video drivers work properly now, and Windows XP "just works".

This means that any x86 OS should run. Once the Macs are shipping with this updated firmware (should be within a month or so), you could open a box and load up XP or Linux on your first boot, and never touch BootCamp. The hardware now acts as "just another PC".

So what does XOM provide? We don't need BIOS emulation - it's in firmware. We don't need a bootloader - it's in firmware. We don't need custom drivers; they're being supplied by the OEM (Apple), just like any other PC. So... what is the point of XOM anymore? As far as I can tell, it provides zero functionality over what is built into the firmware now.

(To put it another way, XOM now makes as much sense as writing our own firmware and bootloader for an EFI-based Gateway, which also has legacy BIOS support. As far as the OS is concerned, there's no difference.)

[moo083]

I think that any work done on XOM from this point forward is wasted effort and wasted talent. There are things that still need to be done from the Boot Camp front. Go make drivers for things Apple didn't. That is the best way to be helpful...

Or if your really skilled, work on Darwine.

Just my $0.02.

[DarthOverlord]

But windows update does not work properly. A machine that does not have the RPC patch or LSASS patch, ie a stock SP1 install, will be infected within minutes of connecting to the internet. Yes there are steps you can take to protect the computer, but the average user will know nothing about this. Windows XP pre SP2 should not be considered a safe operating system to use ever, not for any amount of time.

Does this mean if you are sitting behind a firewall (off your router), you will get infected running SP1? Or do you have to be DMZ'd on the net?

I just reinstalled my Dell 600m with Windows XP Pro 1.2 for my friend and then ran updates.

[Steve1496]

Bootcamp is a limited beta because at WWDC in June apple is going to announce that they have partnered with Xen to replace the Mach hardware abstraction layer. (Which is a very, very good thing) Apple will preview running multiple OSes concurrently, in different windows, and also in virtualdesktops (much like fast user switching)


Yes this is correct from what I got when I spoke with Simon Crosby, cofounder of Xen. He hints at details but only says they are working with Apple to use Xen instead of Mach. Xen, as you mentioned, allows to Operating Systems to run simulatenously with 1% or so performance loss (in other words hardly any).

Very exciting times, these are!


Steve

[bboucher790]

While I agree supporting 3rd party software is great for everyone involved, there is no need to use XOM any longer. It's not like narf is complainin.....$13,000 to be happy about. The only one who is disgruntled here is doc and his inability to realize that no one is going to use XOM, cept for a few hardcore users. While they provided a great solution for the community, their hack is no longer needed. No one will forget who pushed Apple to do this and to that I tip my hat to them. The reality is: bootcamp is here, Leopord is coming. Adios XOM, twas nice meeting you.

[jbouklas]

This is a funny thread. There are some good opinions that I agree with- because they happen to be grounded in reality. Like the fact that the OnMac project, should there be any impetus left for people to contribute to it, is going to take a completely different direction. Forget BootCamp for now- it's a HD partitioning tool that also makes a driver CD. The magic is in the BIOS support.

This project site is the place to talk about getting Linux up and running with all the adequate drivers; triple and quadruple booting; loading Vista and finding the proper drivers. There's nothing that stops us from working on a nicer looking bootloader- I like the interface by Narf.

If BootCamp expires, MY XP SYSTEM STILL WORKS, by the way. To my knowledge, I can install XP on my own right now without ever touching BootCamp. So... yeah.

-Jim

[diamondsw]

This is a funny thread. There are some good opinions that I agree with- because they happen to be grounded in reality. Like the fact that the OnMac project, should there be any impetus left for people to contribute to it, is going to take a completely different direction. Forget BootCamp for now- it's a HD partitioning tool that also makes a driver CD. The magic is in the BIOS support.

This project site is the place to talk about getting Linux up and running with all the adequate drivers; triple and quadruple booting; loading Vista and finding the proper drivers. There's nothing that stops us from working on a nicer looking bootloader- I like the interface by Narf.

If BootCamp expires, MY XP SYSTEM STILL WORKS, by the way. To my knowledge, I can install XP on my own right now without ever touching BootCamp. So... yeah.

-Jim

Okay, I can't tell if you're advocating continuing work on XOM, or just working on other projects like Linux and getting Vista et al up and running.

BootCamp cannot expire - everything you really need for Windows is right there in the firmware (as you said earlier). Even the partitioning can be done using diskutil. All of the drivers on the Windows side are from their various manufacturers. Windows is installed on your Mac right now like it would be on any standard PC.

As I posted earlier - there is no reason to continue XOM. Everything it did, while very impressive, has now been done better and more elegantly by Apple. This is not to downplay what Blanka and Narf did - I actually think it's more impressive in many ways, because they don't have access to the firmware code, the existing bootloader, and assistance from ATI and others.

[SiliconAddict]

Yeah, I know WHY its short term, but its short term none-the-less. No time limits is just one of the benefits of the OnMac solution.


Sounds like you want to reinvent the wheel or at the very least have a wheel that may work but will probably be more of a hack job then anything else. There was one and only one reason why I didn’t jump on the initial release of the WinonMac thing. It wasn’t because I don’t know what I’m doing in windows, I do. It’s because Apple will continue to update, tweak, and generally mess around with the firmware and the OS in the future. You can go ahead with your own implementation. I’m all good with that. But many of us would rather stick with an officially supported implementation that virtually guarantee’s that anything Apple releases in the future won’t dick up Windows. More then anything else it sounds like you’ve just pissed that Apple release a solution. Not sure if this is the case or not but it sure sounds that way. It sounds like a pep-rally. A battle cry: don’t forget us! We are still relevant! When in actuality this project will be irrelevant within a year. Think about it. Once this is built into Leopard with support for Vista, XP, Linux, etc. Such hacks will become meaningless and unnecessary. The entire point of this site was to get Windows running on Mac hardware. Mission accomplished. I believe I was one of the first people to lay out cash for the contest. I believed that someone would get XP running on a MBP. But I’m not going to go all zealot over a solution if a better one is out there which is what bootcamp is.

PS- If you think whatever timeout Apple has built into bootcamp won’t be cracked within 2 months you are fooling yourself. It will be.

[sud0n1m]

Bootcamp is a limited beta because at WWDC in June apple is going to announce that they have partnered with Xen to replace the Mach hardware abstraction layer. (Which is a very, very good thing) Apple will preview running multiple OSes concurrently, in different windows, and also in virtualdesktops (much like fast user switching)

Thats what I have been saying (http://www.pintmaster.com/wordpress/index.php/20060131/mac-os-x-and-xen-optimizer-is-this-relationship-the-future-of-windows-on-the-mac/). I predicted it by 10.6, but if it is in there sooner, all the better!

[docbrody]

You can go ahead with your own implementation. I’m all good with that. But many of us would rather stick with an officially supported implementation that virtually guarantee’s that anything Apple releases in the future won’t dick up Windows. More then anything else it sounds like you’ve just pissed that Apple release a solution. Not sure if this is the case or not but it sure sounds that way. It sounds like a pep-rally. A battle cry: don’t forget us! We are still relevant!

As the original poster I guess I should let you know that I have nothing to do with XOM development. I am not part of the project at all, so it really isn't about me being "pissed" that apple released a solution (infact, I am using boot camp installed XP right now). And its definetly not a "battle cry: don't forget us!" - because I am not part of the "us".

As far as the time limit is concerned, it has been clearly pointed out by a lot of people that boot camp is valid through the end of september and/or till the next osX comes out... so I was basically off the mark on that, and its really a non issue.

But yes, I suppose it was "pep-rally" of sorts - not that the people who have been deeply involved with the project need me to encourage them (if anything, judging from this thread, it has completely backfired anyway). Not sure what is up with all the XOM haters?

At the end of the day, I can't predict the future and tell anyone specificly why continued devleopment of XOM is a good thing, but I have feeling that it is. Obviously a lot of people disagree, but I am sticking to my guns. I think that XOM is a worthwhile project and should continue.

[prethip]

i guess now the guys here in onmac should put up the contest to come up with drivers for the isight and others that dont work first rather than the display adapter since the ATI provided one and the apple provided one work fine.

[dirtymatt]

Does this mean if you are sitting behind a firewall (off your router), you will get infected running SP1? Or do you have to be DMZ'd on the net?

If you are behind a firewall you're probably fine, as long as:
a) your firewall blocks the relevant ports, or provides NAT (if your IP is 192.168.xxx.xxx)

b) No local machine on your network is infected with anything nasty

[sud0n1m]

i guess now the guys here in onmac should put up the contest to come up with drivers for the isight and others that dont work first rather than the display adapter since the ATI provided one and the apple provided one work fine.

Hmmm... for some reason that didnt cross my mind. However, I think that drivers for the iSight are not really going to be that inspiring to people. I would love them, but most people probably couldn't care a less. The remote would be cool. I have a work in progress on the wiki (http://wiki.onmac.net/index.php/How_to_build_the_ultimate_Media_Center_PC) for my Mac Mini. I would really like not having to buy an additional media center remote and be able to use my Harmony with the built in IR receiver. Still, all of these drivers would be nice, but are not that exciting, and my guess is that in time, Apple will do this. If others disagree, I would love to hear it.

[bgd]

Hmmm... for some reason that didnt cross my mind. However, I think that drivers for the iSight are not really going to be that inspiring to people. I would love them, but most people probably couldn't care a less. The remote would be cool. I have a work in progress on the wiki (http://wiki.onmac.net/index.php/How_to_build_the_ultimate_Media_Center_PC) for my Mac Mini. I would really like not having to buy an additional media center remote and be able to use my Harmony with the built in IR receiver. Still, all of these drivers would be nice, but are not that exciting, and my guess is that in time, Apple will do this. If others disagree, I would love to hear it.
First and foremost, I think the whole driver section on the Wiki and on this forum should become a section of its own, since all drivers but the video driver apply for both solutions (XOM and Apple's firmware update). The tabs representing XOM, BootCamp and Parallells Workstation would then only contain general/relevant bootloader information...

As it is currently, it's confusing to me at least that all driver information is organized in such a way that it only relates to XOM. On the main Wiki page, below the section with the three bootloaders/solutions there could be a separate driver section with "Windows drivers for Mac" and "Linux drivers for Mac" tabs. Just an idea, at least, how to organize things better...

As for possible new driver competitions, maybe it would be better to wait at least just a little while longer to see whether Apple intends on releasing any driver updates in the near future. If they do, then such a competition would be of little value. OTOH, we can only guess what Apple's plans are, I don't know if they release such information to the public, considering it's an unsupported beta product. But there definitely are things that need to be fixed, especially the sound issue...

[goodcompany]

I for one would love iSight drivers...I am not sure if I'm the only one but for some reason I don't think Apple is working on this. It's part of making the Mac running Windows feel just a *little bit* crippled I think. 500 USD might be enough to motivate someone to figure it out.

[bgd]

I for one would love iSight drivers...I am not sure if I'm the only one but for some reason I don't think Apple is working on this. It's part of making the Mac running Windows feel just a *little bit* crippled I think. 500 USD might be enough to motivate someone to figure it out.
On second thought, you are most probably right, because in the official Boot Camp FAQ (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303572#faq1) Apple uses the terms "currently not supported" on some driver issues while on most other they simply say "expect not to work". That gives a clear sign on what they themselves see as an issue (and therefore may work on a fix) and what they don't see as an issue:


Are there any Macintosh features that I should not expect to work when running Windows XP on an Intel-based Macintosh computer?

Even after installling the Macintosh Drivers CD, the Apple Remote Control (IR), Apple Wireless (Bluetooth) keyboard or mouse, Apple USB Modem, MacBook Pro's sudden motion sensor, MacBook Pro's ambient light sensor, and built-in iSight camera will not function correctly when running Windows.

While booted into Windows XP, I still hear sound coming from the built-in speaker even with headphones plugged in.

The Boot Camp Beta audio driver for Windows XP does not currently support rerouting sound.

I can't use my Apple keyboard to make the Euro symbol to appear in Windows XP.

Currently, Boot Camp Beta does not allow an Apple keyboard to type a Euro symbol in Windows XP. Consider pasting the symbol from a different document instead.


So, going by Apple's terminology these following driver issues are Macintosh-specific features that one should not expect to work in Windows:

* Apple Remote Control (IR)
* Apple Wireless (Bluetooth) keyboard or mouse
* Apple USB Modem
* MacBook Pro's sudden motion sensor
* MacBook Pro's ambient light sensor
* Built-in iSight camera

These are features not currently supported:

* Certain Apple keyboard characters/keys
* Fully working sound driver


I agree, especially after having paid attention to the terminology in the FAQ, that it's very likely that Apple will want to keep certain "cool" Mac features MacOS-only, like the iSight camera and backlit keyboard. Even if they didn't, it would be hard to see the motivation for Apple to go the extra mile to write drivers for these special features. I also agree that by not releasing any Mac-specific drivers Apple would make sure that MacOS even with this dual-boot option keeps an edge over Windows, if not by performance then at least by coolness factor...

So, I'll reverse my earlier standpoint and agree that a competition is necessary, IMO especially for the iSight, MBP trackpad (tapping/scrolling), MBP ambient light sensor (keyboard/screen) and MBP motion sensor (HDD). The Apple peripherals are not really a big deal as there are lots of standard PC peripherals that can be bought instead. As for the sound, it already works somewhat with the two drivers that are available and may be fixed completely with a new driver by Apple themselves...

So let's bring on the competition :cool: