# Windows to MAC



## sethanie88 (Apr 3, 2006)

I've just had a thought ( weird, I know ). I have an HP Pavilion PC and am running Windows XP. I don't have much experience with MAC, so forgive my naivity, but is it possible to switch my PC to the MAC operating system? Does that make sense? To put it simply, I want MAC instead of Windows, but I don't want to buy new hardware, is it possible?


----------



## DoubleHelix (Dec 10, 2004)

No, it's not possible.


----------



## kalisun (Aug 6, 2003)

Well...yes and no...you can run MAC OS in an emulator, so you'll still need XP to boot from. There's I think two emulators..but I think Cherry is defunked now...

PearPC: http://pearpc.sourceforge.net/


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

you can run windows on a mac with boot camp, but you can't really run mac on windows


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

that PearPC runs mac on top of windows so it is slower and sometimes can't take full advantage of all hardware. if you want to try then get it.


----------



## remaja (May 15, 2006)

I don't want to post a new thread. So the question is simply why?
How are Macs and PCs Diferent
is it the Chipsets? the hardware they are using?


----------



## remaja (May 15, 2006)

What so good about MAC compare to the PC?
I know that there are not many security problems like hackers and viruses, but what about the reliability and stability compare to windows?

I am using ME and I'm sick of it. I am interested to know more about Macs.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

Its hardware, I think, that makes Macs not Run on PCs


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

Also there is not nearly as much software for Macs as there is for Widows


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

Of Macs were compatible with Windows hardware/software I would DEFINITLY have one


----------



## remaja (May 15, 2006)

I'm sorry but i don't think the question is answered.

I wanted to know specifically how macs are diferent.

I wanted to know if macs are more reliable and stabil than PCs


----------



## remaja (May 15, 2006)

ferrija1 said:


> Also there is not nearly as much software for Macs as there is for Widows


honestly how many softwares do we use everyday?
probably not many. And chances are, you can find similar application for the MAC

there are more than 15,000 applications available for the mac. If you do encounter that rare program which isn't available for the Mac you can still run it from vitrual PC


----------



## linskyjack (Aug 28, 2004)

The major difference between Macs and PC's is the operating system. Its that simple. You are using Windows ME so you are definately using an inferior OS that isn't even supported anymore. Windows XP is much better if you decide to stay in the Windows world.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

How many software programs do people use a day?? I use about 20 and a lot of them are free, but there isn't nearly as much free software for Macs.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

I think Macs are more stable than PCs


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

here's a PC vs. Mac link: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/10/1065676145670.html though it may not help


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

the difference, like linskyjack said, is the Operating System. Mac OS [version] "talk" to their hardware/software in different ways than Windows. It's like different languages


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

This Mac (note that it's _not_ in ALL CAPS) from which I am typing is capable of natively booting into the Mac OS or the Windows OS. It's a MacBook Pro with dual Intel processors. So to the person that said s/he would own a Mac if it could recognize and properly utilize Windows soft/hardware, the time is today. Go right out and get yourself one, download BootCamp, install Windows onto your Mac and live with one foot firmly planted in both camps. I'm doing it, and I have no complaints.

As for the question about what is the difference between the two platforms, there are many answers. Mac purists will tell you that Apple has _complete_ control over every component that goes into a Macintosh computer. This means that Apple can _guarantee_ that the hardware will be 100% compatible with software that is Mac OS compatible. You'll never get a hardware error. You'll never have any problems with the hardware other than those that come from normal wear and tear on the hardware.

There used to be significant differences in the processors, and, consequently, the code that was written for them. Macs (of relatively recent lineage) used RISC processors, where Windows machines used CISC processors. Windows CPUs were required to do much more math with every passing nanosecond than were Macintosh CPUs. This has all changed now that Macs are Intel-based.

There are (still) differences between the two, even with the native ability to run Windows on the new Macs. Windows computers utilize BIOS, whereas Macs utilize Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI). You can do a Google search to learn more about this, as I don't want to waste bandwidth with info available elsewhere.

Hope this is of some help. Prob'ly not, but you never know. It might be a jumping off point for further learning.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

> This Mac (note that it's not in ALL CAPS) from which I am typing is capable of natively booting into the Mac OS or the Windows OS. It's a MacBook Pro with dual Intel processors. So to the person that said s/he would own a Mac if it could recognize and properly utilize Windows soft/hardware, the time is today. Go right out and get yourself one, download BootCamp, install Windows onto your Mac and live with one foot firmly planted in both camps. I'm doing it, and I have no complaints.


Clarification: I would have a Mac if the Mac OS could run Windows hardware/software. I already know about BootCamp.


----------



## remaja (May 15, 2006)

thanks vegasAFC. I've learnt a lot. that is really my style of info. Detailed and easy to understand.

is the BootCamp free?


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

I think it is still in Public Beta so its free, but you have to buy XP/ME/95/98/...


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

That is correct. My understanding is that BootCamp will be included with the next major revision/release of the Mac OS (whatever its feline name will be--ocelot?), but for now it is a Public Beta, and I have to say it's rock-solid.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

yeah... they could change it from beta to regular version any time now


----------



## MacAdict (Apr 14, 2006)

ferrija1 said:


> How many software programs do people use a day?? I use about 20 and a lot of them are free, but there isn't nearly as much free software for Macs.


Yes, but how much of the Windows freeware contains spy/adware? A lot.

How many ad/spyware apps are out there for Mac? None.

Give us 3 good pieces of free Windows software that contain no ad ware and there is nothing similar to for Mac.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

Ok here are 5 Photo Filtre, First page, CD Burner XP Pro, WavePad, Gimp, and much more.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

And I'm not disagreeing with you MacAdict, there are lots of Windows programs with spyware/adware because Windows is the most popular so virus writers, ect. go for Windows.

But I wouldn't say there are no programs for Mac that don't have spyware/adware.



...Wait -- MacAdict why are you/we talking about Mac spyware/adware???...


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

ferrija1 said:


> Ok here are 5 Photo Filtre, First page, CD Burner XP Pro, WavePad, Gimp, and much more.





MacAdict said:


> Give us 3 good pieces of free Windows software that contain no ad ware *and there is nothing similar to for Mac.*


(emphasis added)


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

well then you tell me programs for Mac that are similar to those


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

VegasACF said:


> This means that Apple can _guarantee_ that the hardware will be 100% compatible with software that is Mac OS compatible. You'll never get a hardware error. You'll never have any problems with the hardware other than those that come from normal wear and tear on the hardware.


Vegas this one takes the cake buddy. Who is Apple? God? To place such guarantees on things that China men make across the globe then ship it over seas, they must be GOD.... Get a grip dude. If that is so true then why do they sell AppleCare separately? Apple guarantees Apple Vegas, not 3rd party software. So consider rephrasing compatible.

As for this Windows vs Mac goofball thread. I've said it a million times in here and Vegas will attest to it. WINDOWS DOES NOT MAKE HARDWARE! IT IS A SOFT, SOFT NOT HARD LIKE YOUR HEADS, SOFTWARE COMPANY!

Now how can you compare the two? You want to compare Dell vs. Macintosh? That's valid. You want to put OS X vs. Windows? that's valid. YOU CAN NOT COMPARE MACINTOSH TO WINDOWS THEY ARE NOT EVEN REMOTELY IN THE SAME CATEGORY!

On a positive note, why debate? You can run both now on a Apple computer, I don't get the reason people even start these never ending goofball threads. I don't want a laptop with a intel processor, I want the real deal, bring on the PowerMac, I'll be Apple's best customer again.


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

[email protected] said:


> Vegas this one takes the cake buddy. Who is Apple? God? To place such guarantees on things that China men make across the globe then ship it over seas, they must be GOD.... Get a grip dude. If that is so true then why do they sell AppleCare separately? Apple guarantees Apple Vegas, not 3rd party software. So consider rephrasing compatible.


As usual, your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired.

Apple can guarantee hardware compatibility with software that is fully compatible with its OS, as they design the OS and approve the hardware. This is something Microsoft, HP, Dell, Compaq, et cetera can not do.

AppleCare is just an extended warranty, meant to protect against hardware failures (though it does offer some tech support for Apple-created applications such as the iLife suite, QuickTime, et cetera). All hardware eventually fails. This is just the nature of the universe.


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

come on vegas are these not your words? "You'll never have any problems with the hardware other than those that come from normal wear and tear on the hardware." Hence the question about AppleCare. You're the one with the reading problem. I understand what you said perfectly. So if I call Apple and repeat your words, they're going to back that up right? Oh, your going to twist this around and say I'm the one who can't read. Right? Maybe you are referring that you'll never have a hardware conflict with any software made by anybody other than those from "normal wear and tear". That's a mighty bold statement. Do you work for Apple? 

You're not going to make me look like a retard here. Just say it.... My statement is wrong. Say you're sorry and be a man. Don't attack somebody else's intelligence when you can read your own writing is whacked. I admit I have insulted you before and I said I was sorry after I did. I think you owe me one now.


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

[email protected] said:


> come on vegas are these not your words? "You'll never have any problems with the hardware other than those that come from normal wear and tear on the hardware."


When read in the context of the entire post, my statement makes perfect sense, and is entirely true. You will _never_ have Apple hardware problems with Mac OS-compatible software, except for hardware failure. It couldn't be more clear. I made no claim about Apple guaranteeing third-party companies' software. Why you think I did is beyond mystifying.



[email protected] said:


> Hence the question about AppleCare.


Which has no bearing on my original post. AppleCare is a warranty covering hardware failure and an offer of technical support for Apple-created software. Nothing more. Hardware fails, and end users have trouble using software. Thus, AppleCare.



[email protected] said:


> You're the one with the reading problem. I understand what you said perfectly.


It doesn't seem so.



[email protected] said:


> So if I call Apple and repeat your words, they're going to back that up right? Oh, your going to twist this around and say I'm the one who can't read. Right? Maybe you are referring that you'll never have a hardware conflict with any software made by anybody other than those from "normal wear and tear". That's a mighty bold statement. Do you work for Apple?


That's not at all what I said, and you know it. I'll say it one more time. Maybe it will sink in this time. Apple hardware is 100% compatible with Mac OS-compatible software.



[email protected] said:


> You're not going to make me look like a retard here. Just say it.... My statement is wrong.


I already said your statement is wrong. But if you'd like to see it again, okay: Your statement is wrong.



[email protected] said:


> Say you're sorry and be a man. Don't attack somebody else's intelligence when you can read your own writing is whacked.


I didn't attack your intelligence. I said your reading comprehension left something to be desired. That still appears to be the case.



[email protected] said:


> I admit I have insulted you before and I said I was sorry after I did. I think you owe me one now.


I disagree. You're doing the exact same thing now that you did then: misrepresenting what I said. But, in the interest of disposing of this needless interaction, I'm sorry I said your reading comprehension was lacking.


----------



## kalisun (Aug 6, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> WINDOWS DOES NOT MAKE HARDWARE! IT IS A SOFT, SOFT NOT HARD LIKE YOUR HEADS, SOFTWARE COMPANY!


 hard like your heads...lol


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

kalisun said:


> hard like your heads...lol


It's especially funny since Windows only makes _life_ hard. Windows is a product. _Microsoft_ is a company. And last time I checked, Microsoft _does_ make hardware. They make human user interface products and a video game platform that seems to be _vaguely_ popular. A full listing of their hardware offerings can be found here.


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

touché.... I'll rephrase.... I have no problem admitting my errors.... Unlike others...... Microsoft does not make computers for their OS Windows..... Apple makes computers for their OS.......Happy?


----------



## remaja (May 15, 2006)

Guys, there no need to argue about this. your'e just doing advertisement forMicrosoft and Apple for free.

I can just never understand about this MAC vs Windows thing. 
It's all over the net 
From my point of view they both have pros and cons.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

Yeah really you guys are proving -- basically nothing -- so stop fighting.

PS 


[email protected] said:


> Now how can you compare the two? You want to compare Dell vs. Macintosh? That's valid. You want to put OS X vs. Windows? that's valid. YOU CAN NOT COMPARE MACINTOSH TO WINDOWS THEY ARE NOT EVEN REMOTELY IN THE SAME CATEGORY!


You can compare then by how many programs they have, how more features the OS has and how fast they are.
FYI: They are in the same category (computers).


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

Windows and Macs are different and always will be some have better parts about their OS's. Windows is more widely used so it is easy to ask a neighbor if they know how to fix a problem and Apple has good tech support but you sometimes have to call and wait. For the amount of programs Windows wins though many of the programs can be found for Macs but not as many free programs are for Macs. When it comes to better interface Macintosh wins. With cool widgets and effects using the "F" keys combined with the easy to use, sleek interface Mac definitly wins, though Windows may be catching up. Windows wins in a landslide in the bugs/viruses/spyware category. Many viruses/spyware makers target Windows computers because they are more of them. 

I could go on forever but my real point that they are very different and its an opinion on which is better.


----------



## tedwinder (Sep 7, 2005)

Basically, the difference between Windows and OS X is that OS X has a different user in terface and is generally easier to use. Apple are obviously 1 - step ahead of Microsoft becuase look at the huge computer box on a PC and then to an iMac!


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

remaja said:


> Guys, there no need to argue about this. your'e just doing advertisement forMicrosoft and Apple for free.


Our "discussion" had nothing to do with Mac v. Windows. It had to do solely with Apple hardware compatibility with Mac OS software.



remaja said:


> I can just never understand about this MAC vs Windows thing.
> It's all over the net
> From my point of view they both have pros and cons.


Yeah, me neither. Particularly when that's not even what was being "discussed".

:shrug:



ferrija1 said:


> Yeah really you guys are proving -- basically nothing -- so stop fighting.


Yeah, I pretty much covered that 1.5 days before your post by saying:



> But, in the interest of disposing of this needless interaction, I'm sorry I said your reading comprehension was lacking.


But thanks!


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

Ted, have you ever seen a PowerMac? Computers come in all shapes and sizes. PowerMacs are huge! Apple's engineering is more advanced to any other "computer company", I think that is what you meant

WINDOWS DOES NOT MAKE COMPUTERS. Why does everyone think that Windows is a computer? Why? Seriously! The interface on my playstation is way different than the interface of my car, I mean look at how small my playstation is.


----------



## tedwinder (Sep 7, 2005)

I was talking about the iMac G5


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

tedwinder said:


> Basically, the difference between Windows and OS X is that OS X has a different user in terface and is generally easier to use. Apple are obviously 1 - step ahead of Microsoft becuase look at the huge computer box on a PC and then to an iMac!


I know what you said. I think that you are saying that look at the huge computer boxes on Windows PCs. I said, "Have you seen a PowerMac G5?" They are as big as a server and twice as large as any dell home PC except for XPS. I also said, "computers come in many sizes." For instance, Pocket PCs are smaller than iMacs. That doesn't mean they're better and then I made a smart alec remark about a car and a playstation because you are comparing Windows, which is a operating system and a iMac G5, which is a computer. Windows is not a computer. Further more, PC stands for "personal computer" and guess what your iMac G5 is a PC.


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

[email protected] said:


> I know what you said. I think that you are saying that look at the huge computer boxes on Windows PCs. I said, "Have you seen a PowerMac G5?" They are as big as a server and twice as large as any dell home PC except for XPS. I also said, "computers come in many sizes." For instance, Pocket PCs are smaller than iMacs. That doesn't mean they're better and then I made a smart alec remark about a car and a playstation because you are comparing Windows, which is a operating system and a iMac G5, which is a computer. Windows is not a computer. Further more, PC stands for "personal computer" and guess what your iMac G5 is a PC.


Yes, these are all common misconceptions, from parties of both sides. Everyone thinks that their computer is better, whether it's running Windows, Mac OS, Linux, whatever was the OS on an Atari 1040ST, or a Yamaha CS1X (yeah, I'm dating myself [while simultaneously situating myself in the "musician" category, since the CS1X couldn't do anything _but_ music {to my knowledge--_mine_ never did, anyway}]).

I find it funny that the "computer" argument is becoming inversely proportional to the "penis" argument. Maybe, once and for all, we can put to rest the "size matters" question that plagues the some members of the male of our species. (Okay, you're right--that'll _never_ happen... Know why? Because *IT'S ALL ABOUT PERSONAL PREFERENCE!!!*)

There are (by today's standards) big computers and (what will, by tomorrow's standards be laughably) small computers. Who cares. Does it do what you need it to do? My "computer" puts a smile on my wife's face, and that means it's getting the job done. If yours is not, then consider making some kind of change in whichever department you think that previous sentence falls. 

Look, my "argument" is, and always has been (a search of this very forum should bear this out) you should use whatever works best for you. If it's Windows, _GREAT_! If it's the Mac OS, _GREAT_! If it's Linux, _GREAT_! It doesn't make my choice of OS, or Doc's, or anyone else's in _any_ way inferior to your choice. It all comes down to (a) what you're doing; (b) how you do it; and (c) which OS allows you to do (a) and (b) most easily. I don't care if you're still using punch cards with a computer that takes up a doublewide trailer. If that's what works for you _*then use it*_.

Capiche?


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

Vegas I agree with you 100% on that. Good point and I liked the humor.


----------



## guitarmaniac (Feb 10, 2006)

Well Linux is even more stable than Mac or Windows, doesnt worry as much about hardware, has all the features of both OS's (nearly), has basically no virus' (your chances of getting a virus on a Linux machine are about as likely as winning the lottery) and best of all, it is completely FREE!

I recommend trying ubuntu or SimplyMepis for anyone interested in switching, both are easy to get the hang of and come as Live CD's.
For those of you who dont know, a Live CD is a CD that lets you run the operating system from the CD drive, this is good for getting the feel of an OS without actually installing it.

If you want Linux but dont want to switch due to a particular program that isnt available on Linux there are still several ways around it
First of all, Linux has THOUSANDS of programs, there is more than likely an alternative program that is just as good, if not BETTER than the one you are already using.
If it is a Windows program you can use WINE(Wine Is Not an Emulator. Here is an exerpt from the WINE website telling you a bit about it.
"Think of Wine as a compatibility layer for running Windows programs. Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely free alternative implementation of the Windows API consisting of 100% non-Microsoft code, however Wine can optionally use native Windows DLLs if they are available."
Lastly, if all else fails you can duel boot, this installs Linux in a seperate partition on your hard-drive from your other OS and gives you an option of which OS to boot into.

Give Linux a try, what have you got to lose???


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

guitarmaniac said:


> Give Linux a try, what have you got to lose???


The functionality of tens of thousands of dollars' worth of Pro Tools TDM hardware/software and plug-ins would just be the tip of the iceberg of what I've got to lose.


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 11, 2005)

Ok I will as soon as Adobe supports it. When I can run CS on ubuntu I'll have nothing to lose.


----------



## guitarmaniac (Feb 10, 2006)

What I meant by what have you got to lose is that if you use a Live CD or a duel boot, its not going to affect your current Mac or Windows setup if you don't like it.
I guess it really depends on what your using your computer for, Mac may be more advanced in some aspects, but how can Linux grow in these areas if the people who are best at this dont give it a try?
As a general desktop computer I find it to be better than Mac and MUCH better than Windows.
Naturally its a matter of opinion, I didn't mean to come on too strong, but people arent going to make the jump to Linux if they don't know that it's a really good alternative too what they are using.
https://shipit.ubuntu.com/ even ships you ubuntu CDs for FREE.
Seriously, give it a try, its free and you dont have to use it if you dont like it.

guitarmaniac


----------



## remaja (May 15, 2006)

This comes to my wonders of why GDs like to use Mac for their work


----------

