Tech journos far and wide have been quick to jump on the story that while Apple says it isn’t doing anything to specifically prevent people from installing Windows on an Intel-based Mac, the new Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) that Apple is using on the new Macs won’t work with current generations of Windows.
EFI is the next-generation replacement for the 20-year-old BIOS, the oldest part of modern PCs which is in desperate need of an overhaul. EFI allows devices in the PC to be initialised before the operating system boots, and has features like full network support before the PC has even booted, allowing drivers to be downloaded and updated before an operating system loads.
However, Intel Australia, while being careful not to comment on Apple’s hardware specifically, says motherboards based on the Intel 945 chipset already support EFI and can boot Windows with no problems.
This cryptic statement can’t be taken as full reassurance though: it may be that 945 boards support EFI but do not come with it installed by default.
Officially, Microsoft says it will support EFI natively with Windows Vista, so it’s almost certain that Intel-based MacBook Pros and iMacs will be able to boot Vista when it is released later this year.
But a year is a long time in computing and there would be great utility for many users in a notebook that could run Windows XP during work time and OS X at home, or one that could easily be rebooted to Windows to play the latest games.
Apple is typically cryptic in its response on the issue of whether Intel-based Macs can run OS X: the official line is that “Apple has no plans to sell or support Windowsâ€. But notably, this answer doesn’t rule out running Windows on a Mac. Indeed, Apple’s vice president of Worldwide marketing, Phil Schiller, said as much following Steve Jobs’ keynote announcing the Intel Macs. “That doesn’t preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will.â€
Some clues on legacy operating system compatibility with EFI might be found in Intel’s EFI mini-site, specifically the part about a new compatibility framework that it created recently. From page four.
“For IA 32 systems, the Framework loads itself above the 1MB real-mode memory boundary to accommodate an optional Compatibility Support Module (CSM). CSM implementations can be tailored to platform requirements. A typical CSM is approximately 60KB (~38KB compressed) of firmware that is specific to each Participating Vendor and is based on that Vendor’s latest BIOS code base. A contemporary implementation of the Framework on a PC includes a CSM for supplying services to operating systems that do not boot using EFI and for supporting legacy option ROMs on add-in cards. For legacy boot the Framework initialises the platform’s silicon and executes EFI drivers. Then control is transferred to the CSM, which supports the legacy OS boot.â€
So, as long as Apple has included a Compatibility Support Module, Intel-based Macs should be able to boot XP.
It seems unlikely that Apple would have left this out. It has already said it isn’t doing anything to prevent Windows from booting on a Mac.
A Mac that can legally run Windows/Linux/OS X on the one box is the ‘ultimate PC’ in compatibility terms, which should further drive hardware sales. Considering Apple includes the operating system with every Mac purchase, its OS revenue isn’t endangered by allowing people to install Windows on a Mac post-sale. And it seems very unlikely that US Department of Justice will force Apple to sell Macs without an operating system anytime soon.
Of course, Apple can’t condone or encourage running Windows on Macs, because that would cause Mac developers to question whether they should continue investing in the OS X platform if Apple is not fully committed.
It’s a ‘wink wink, nod nod’ situation, where Apple must know that allowing users to run Windows on a Mac can only help boost Apple’s bottom-line.
New Mac users can only hope that the hints on Intel’s web site about the compatibility layer for EFI pan out in favour of users who want to run Windows and OS X on their shiny new box.
APC is awaiting an official response from Microsoft USA on how Windows XP works with EFI. We’ll update this story when we hear back.
EFI is the next-generation replacement for the 20-year-old BIOS, the oldest part of modern PCs which is in desperate need of an overhaul. EFI allows devices in the PC to be initialised before the operating system boots, and has features like full network support before the PC has even booted, allowing drivers to be downloaded and updated before an operating system loads.
However, Intel Australia, while being careful not to comment on Apple’s hardware specifically, says motherboards based on the Intel 945 chipset already support EFI and can boot Windows with no problems.
This cryptic statement can’t be taken as full reassurance though: it may be that 945 boards support EFI but do not come with it installed by default.
Officially, Microsoft says it will support EFI natively with Windows Vista, so it’s almost certain that Intel-based MacBook Pros and iMacs will be able to boot Vista when it is released later this year.
But a year is a long time in computing and there would be great utility for many users in a notebook that could run Windows XP during work time and OS X at home, or one that could easily be rebooted to Windows to play the latest games.
Apple is typically cryptic in its response on the issue of whether Intel-based Macs can run OS X: the official line is that “Apple has no plans to sell or support Windowsâ€. But notably, this answer doesn’t rule out running Windows on a Mac. Indeed, Apple’s vice president of Worldwide marketing, Phil Schiller, said as much following Steve Jobs’ keynote announcing the Intel Macs. “That doesn’t preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will.â€
Some clues on legacy operating system compatibility with EFI might be found in Intel’s EFI mini-site, specifically the part about a new compatibility framework that it created recently. From page four.
“For IA 32 systems, the Framework loads itself above the 1MB real-mode memory boundary to accommodate an optional Compatibility Support Module (CSM). CSM implementations can be tailored to platform requirements. A typical CSM is approximately 60KB (~38KB compressed) of firmware that is specific to each Participating Vendor and is based on that Vendor’s latest BIOS code base. A contemporary implementation of the Framework on a PC includes a CSM for supplying services to operating systems that do not boot using EFI and for supporting legacy option ROMs on add-in cards. For legacy boot the Framework initialises the platform’s silicon and executes EFI drivers. Then control is transferred to the CSM, which supports the legacy OS boot.â€
So, as long as Apple has included a Compatibility Support Module, Intel-based Macs should be able to boot XP.
It seems unlikely that Apple would have left this out. It has already said it isn’t doing anything to prevent Windows from booting on a Mac.
A Mac that can legally run Windows/Linux/OS X on the one box is the ‘ultimate PC’ in compatibility terms, which should further drive hardware sales. Considering Apple includes the operating system with every Mac purchase, its OS revenue isn’t endangered by allowing people to install Windows on a Mac post-sale. And it seems very unlikely that US Department of Justice will force Apple to sell Macs without an operating system anytime soon.
Of course, Apple can’t condone or encourage running Windows on Macs, because that would cause Mac developers to question whether they should continue investing in the OS X platform if Apple is not fully committed.
It’s a ‘wink wink, nod nod’ situation, where Apple must know that allowing users to run Windows on a Mac can only help boost Apple’s bottom-line.
New Mac users can only hope that the hints on Intel’s web site about the compatibility layer for EFI pan out in favour of users who want to run Windows and OS X on their shiny new box.
APC is awaiting an official response from Microsoft USA on how Windows XP works with EFI. We’ll update this story when we hear back.
