Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MacBook / Parallels Desktop / Win Vista Question  
User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1279 times:

Hi all,

someone I know is getting a MacBook (the white one with 2.16 GHz) and I'm trying to be a bit helpful. She got a bundled deal for a Leopard upgrade and a substantial discount on Parallels Desktop, so for that reason she will install that VM. We are however not quite so sure which Windows version to run through PD. XP or Vista? As there will be a proper OS  Wink on the machine at all times anyway, we lean towards Vista. Is there any fundamental reason against it? The prices for OEM versions on both eBay and Amazon weren't that far apart, hence not an issue.

The other issue is 32-bit or 64-bit? I've done a bit of reading up on the issue and it appears that 64 is too much of a resource hog for a MacBook, even with Boot Camp as opposed to a VM. Compatibility seemed to be a problem as well. Any info on that?

Any help is much appreciated!


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineN231YE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1256 times:

From what I know, if it has the Intel Core Duo, it is the 32 bit version of XP or Vista.

If it has the Intel Core 2 Duo, then it is the 64 bit version.

My former college roommate had a white MacBook 17" (I think that was the size), and since it had just the Intel Core Duo, he had the 32 bit version of XP Pro installed, via Bootcamp.

Personally, I'd tell you to go with either XP or Vista Basic. Since I assume you will be running OSX for most of your needs, don't drop down the extra money of the added features of the premium versions of Vista.

Wait for Klaus to chime in for a better answer.


User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1246 times:

Quoting N231YE (Reply 1):
If it has the Intel Core 2 Duo, then it is the 64 bit version.

 checkmark  That one. I read though that this wasn't a "proper" 64 bit CPU, but rather something along the lines of glueing 2 32 bit ones together...  confused 

Quoting N231YE (Reply 1):
a white MacBook 17"

Wouldn't that have to be a MacBook Pro?

Quoting N231YE (Reply 1):
I'd tell you to go with either XP or Vista Basic.

Thanks for mentioning that one, that "Aero Glass" GUI is said to be a resource hog so you'd probably be better off with Basic where it's disabled... in a VM environment, at that.

Quoting N231YE (Reply 1):
Since I assume you will be running OSX for most of your needs

Ooooh, if only it were me...  cloudnine  But yes, the thing will run OS X mainly.

Quoting N231YE (Reply 1):
Wait for Klaus to chime in for a better answer.

I excluded him from the thread starter with difficulty...  Wink  Silly But thank you!



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21463 posts, RR: 53
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1239 times:

64 bit per se is not a resource issue, other than providing the possibility to applications to use - for instance - more than 4GB memory space. On the Intel architecture 64 bit code can also run faster since it discards the limitations of the IA32 architecture (the PowerPC never had such limitations, so 64 bit code will usually not be faster).

MacOS x 10.5 Leopard is a complete 64 bit operating system when running on a G5 or Core 2 CPU, just fully backwards compatible with existing 32bit applications and drivers.

When running on an older 32 bit CPU (such as a G4 or Core 1 CPU) it automatically runs as a 32 bit OS without the user noticing much of a difference.

On the Mac side it is quite possible that Leopard will actually run faster in 64 bit than in 32 bit.


64 bit has only become somewhat of a scare issue through the separate and incompatible Windows versions between 32 and 64 bit. Since there are numerous incompatibilities as far as I'm aware, you will probably be better off using the 32 bit version in almost all cases. If you don't know of a really compelling reason to install the separate 64 bit version, just don't. Parallels Desktop will also not run Windows 64 at this time (although that may change down the road).

Choosing between XP and Vista is again a matter of requirements. Vista comes with a whole bunch of problems at this point without actually offering that much more than XP except the hope that future service packs may improve the situation. It depends on what your friend is going to use it for.


User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21463 posts, RR: 53
Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1234 times:

Quoting Aloges (Reply 2):
That one. I read though that this wasn't a "proper" 64 bit CPU, but rather something along the lines of glueing 2 32 bit ones together...

No, it's a true 64 bit CPU. Just running in 32 bit mode under the current MacOS X 10.4 Tiger most of the time (internally Tiger does already use some 64 bit code on the system level).

Quoting Aloges (Reply 2):
Wouldn't that have to be a MacBook Pro?

Indeed. No non-Pro MacBook at 17", I'm afraid.

Quoting Aloges (Reply 2):
Thanks for mentioning that one, that "Aero Glass" GUI is said to be a resource hog so you'd probably be better off with Basic where it's disabled... in a VM environment, at that.

Oh, you can disable that one in any VIsta version as far as I'm aware. It will even do that for you if it happens to fail its "Genuine Advantage" check because MS has screwed up its servers again...!  crazy 

Quoting Aloges (Reply 2):
I excluded him from the thread starter with difficulty...

No need for special consultations before posting it!  silly 


User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3948 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1225 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 3):
On the Intel architecture 64 bit code can also run faster since it discards the limitations of the IA32 architecture

Huh? The 64bit extensions used in the Pentium 4, Core 2 Duo and the Xeon are all extensions on top of IA32, and thus have all the same legacy cruft - the extensions are based on an AMD design (yes, even the Intel implementation, called EM64T) called AMD64.

EM64T does remove several older technologies, but it is still an extension to the original x86 line, and thus retains the same legacy. The main reason why code runs faster in 64bit mode is because of the extra registers supplied in the package, but you can target many 32bit compilers to use these registers as well for 32bit code.

You may be thinking of IA64 which was implemented from scratch by Intel with no x86 legacy, and is implemented in the Itanium and Itanium 2 - both have nothing to do with the Mac range of computers.


User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1225 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 3):
It depends on what your friend is going to use it for.

MS Office (for Mac), webmail and surfing until university starts and then whatever they require. She's getting PD through this, might be interesting for you as well: http://gravis.gravis.de/leopard/ I advised against waiting until October when Leopard will be released so she can get used to Mac OS X before things get serious at uni and so she can be sure to avoid supply shortages.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
No, it's a true 64 bit CPU. Just running in 32 bit mode under the current MacOS X 10.4 Tiger most of the time (internally Tiger does already use some 64 bit code on the system level).

Ah, that makes more sense. Of the blunders Intel have made, I didn't expect the Core 2 Duo to be one.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
Oh, you can disable that one in any VIsta version as far as I'm aware.

...and even activate it in Home Basic.  Wink If that is actually true, it's just as fascinating as Microsoft's licensing scheme.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
if it happens to fail its "Genuine Advantage" check because MS has screwed up its servers again

Oh dear... tell me about it. Or rather, please don't.  Wink

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
No need for special consultations before posting it!

 biggrin 



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineHawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3195 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1217 times:

I recall some discussion about Microsoft waffling about whether they would allow the less expensive versions of Vista to run in a virtual machine. There likely aren't any technical restrictions, just verbiage in the license agreement.

Considering Vista's resource hogging and overall annoyance to use, I'd stick with XP.


User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21463 posts, RR: 53
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1202 times:

Quoting Moo (Reply 5):
EM64T does remove several older technologies, but it is still an extension to the original x86 line, and thus retains the same legacy. The main reason why code runs faster in 64bit mode is because of the extra registers supplied in the package, but you can target many 32bit compilers to use these registers as well for 32bit code.

The crippled register set was the main problem of the IA32 architecture (next to the formerly used segmentation nightmare, of course); The 64 bit architecture introduced by AMD and thankfully adopted by Intel finally overcame that limitation. The opcode structure wasn't that much of a problem.

Quoting Moo (Reply 5):
You may be thinking of IA64 which was implemented from scratch by Intel with no x86 legacy, and is implemented in the Itanium and Itanium 2

No, I'm always trying to forget about that piece of junk. The sooner it sinks back into oblivion the better!  yuck 

Quoting Aloges (Reply 6):
She's getting PD through this, might be interesting for you as well: http://gravis.gravis.de/leopard/

Ah, neat! But since I already own Parallels Desktop it's not that much of a bargain for me.  Smile


User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1177 times:

Quoting Aloges (Thread starter):
She got a bundled deal for a Leopard upgrade

Where? What were the terms of that?

Quoting Aloges (Reply 6):
MS Office (for Mac)

Get iWork '08. Far superior, and cheaper.


User currently offlineN231YE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1158 times:

Quoting Aloges (Reply 2):
Quoting N231YE (Reply 1):a white MacBook 17"
Wouldn't that have to be a MacBook Pro?



Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
Indeed. No non-Pro MacBook at 17", I'm afraid.

Yeah, it might be a 15." I could call to find out, but I would think I am talking to a salesman telling all the pros of OSX and all the cons of Windows, and why I should invest in a Mac.

Quoting Aloges (Reply 2):
Ooooh, if only it were me...    But yes, the thing will run OS X mainly.

Well, maybe you might want to get Vista Ultimate, then through down some other dollars for other things, after all, Klaus would agree that Windows is far superior  wink   silly 


User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1133 times:

Quoting Swiftski (Reply 9):
Where? What were the terms of that?

http://gravis.gravis.de/leopard/ €129,- for the Leopard upgrade, a €25,- discount on a min 500GB Iomega external HD and a €45,- discount on Parallels Desktop.

Quoting Swiftski (Reply 9):
Get iWork '08. Far superior, and cheaper.

Another bundle, for students this time... and I might add, even better: €0,99 if purchased together with a mobile computer and you get a printer on top of it. All things combined, that was even cheaper than the substantial Apple on Campus discount I could get.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Don't Like Win Vista Beta? Try This... posted Mon Jun 26 2006 18:10:12 by IFEMaster
XP=>vista, Outlook Question posted Wed Apr 18 2007 18:12:01 by HeliflyerPDC
Win XP Desktop Prob posted Tue Jun 13 2006 21:07:06 by AirbusA346
Question On Win XP Licensing posted Sun Apr 23 2006 03:31:16 by Cadet57
Question About Laptop/Desktop Computers posted Sat Mar 26 2005 04:43:25 by TACAA320
Laptop Or Desktop? posted Thu Sep 6 2007 04:40:25 by Waterpolodan
Who Will Win The World Series (MLB) Part Three? posted Wed Sep 5 2007 06:22:43 by Boston92
Thanks For The Question, You Little Jerk, posted Wed Sep 5 2007 05:41:33 by L-188
Top Gun Movie Question.... posted Tue Sep 4 2007 09:34:03 by AirframeAS
Question About Phone Numbers. posted Mon Sep 3 2007 05:05:39 by DL777LAX