backtop


Print 72 comment(s) - last by rippleyaliens.. on Jan 26 at 11:04 AM

$29 for the option to dual boot OS X and Windows

A report at MacScoop claims that according to leaked report from Apple, the final release of Boot Camp when released will cost users roughly $29 USD. Boot Camp has been available as a free public beta since early 2006 when Apple made its first transition to Intel processors. The software add-on allows x86 Mac users to install a fully working copy of Windows XP, which ran natively on their x86 Macs. Users who use Apple's Boot Camp are able to install and separately boot a fresh copy of Windows.

While the report says that the source of the leak is not entirely sure about the final cost of Boot Camp, they are sure that Apple will be charging for the download. Those who have Boot Camp now can still continue to use the software, but Apple apparently will cease driver support for those who do not upgrade. The report also claims that Apple will officially support Windows Vista via Boot Camp when it is released.

Boot Camp is expected to make its official debut along with Apple's next generation operating system, codenamed Leopard. The report also claims that Apple will be providing Leopard users with Boot Camp free of charge. Apple did make a comment in 2006 that Leopard will have Boot Camp fully integrated. Leopard is expected to make an official showing this coming spring.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

First 802.11n....
By protosv on 1/22/2007 11:57:47 AM , Rating: 2
and now this. While I understand Apple has invested money in developing boot camp, I think it's bad business to give the public a free beta for as long as Apple did, and then take it away unless you pay for it. You have to pay for something you've been able to do up until now for free. Unfortunately, this is a trend for Apple, as it already included 802.11n support in their newer Macbooks, and is now making you pay (albeit only $2) to activate that capability too.
As for the argument that Apple needs to recoup their additional expeses from driver support, I don't understand this argument, as the hardware is all native X86 by now, and many stable drivers are currently available. Apple shouldn't (do they?) have to port these drivers over any longer, especially if they're being used in a native WinXP environment.
Let's keep in mind that, technically speaking, Gmail is still a "public beta" from Google, as is Google maps. Imagine the outrage if Google decided to start charging for that! They'd make a lot of people seriously angry.
Apple's installed user base is large enough (from their perspective) at this point that they actually need to worry about how future policies and decisions will affect current users. Let's say I want to buy a new Mac with Leopard on it, but I don't need to dual boot. Does this mean I'll get a $29 discount? It doesn't make sense to charge $29 for this feature if you want to continue having it, and at the same time not charge for it if you're buying a new OS.




RE: First 802.11n....
By rklaver on 1/22/2007 12:12:37 PM , Rating: 2
So I guess since Adobe is giving away a free public beta of Photoshop CS3 then I should expect to get that for free too? Cool.


RE: First 802.11n....
By Oregonian2 on 1/22/2007 2:27:35 PM , Rating: 2
Adobe going to have the production version of Adobe Lightroom free too (like their beta is)? Double cool!


RE: First 802.11n....
By Tyler 86 on 1/23/2007 1:34:14 AM , Rating: 2
Alright, it's obvious you and the guy above are Boot-Camp dropouts...

Adobe Photoshop & Lightroom are both commercial products, from introduction, throughout testing, to completion.

Boot-Camp was a feature, not a product... untill now.


RE: First 802.11n....
By Oregonian2 on 1/23/2007 6:15:41 PM , Rating: 2
Don't think so. To be a "feature" means that it was already a supported piece of software that Apple provided as part of their product. It wasn't that at all. It was at best something "below" beta in the rating of things. A "beta" is something unsupported that has expectations of becoming something supported. Boot-Camp only wasn't a beta because there wasn't that expectation of becoming something supported. Had it been known to become something supported, it'd have been called a "beta", that's the only difference.


"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki