I think it should be noted that all PCs share one common design element... they are all designed to be Windows compatible. Microsoft puts out a specification of what qualifies as a Windows compatible system, and these companies build their systems with that in mind.
On that note... Apple Computer is not a maker of Windows compatible PCs. They had no reason to make a Windows compatible PC... and it would have been an extra step to make Macs Windows compatible.
What most people based their judgment on when predicting if the new Macs would run Windows was two cases... (1) the fact that people were able to install Windows on the developer kit systems from Apple, and (2) pretty much all Intel based systems are able to run Windows.
The first case was a bad basis because those systems were based only on what hardware that version of Mac OS X for Intel was able to run on at the time... and Mac OS X for Intel was maintained on PC (Windows) compatible systems up to that point. Why? Because Apple had never made an Intel based system and the original software Mac OS X for Intel was based on was designed for PC compatibles. Once Apple had a chance to design new hardware based on Intel processors, Mac OS X for Intel could be ported over pretty easily.
The second case ignores the fact that the makers of all these other systems set out to be Windows compatible. When Apple made systems based on Motorola's 68040 processor and NeXT was making systems based on the same processor, were we able to run System 7 on a NeXTstation and NEXTSTEP on a Quadra? No. Why? These systems had no reason to be compatible with the other company's operating systems and they took no steps to be compatible.
Further, it is to Apple's advantage to make non-Windows compatible systems. Why? Because if Mac OS X for Intel will only run on systems that are not compatible with Windows, and all other PC makers are making Windows compatible systems, then Mac OS X wouldn't be pirated and run on other maker's hardware.
The fact that the developer kit systems were Windows compatible, and that people pirated Mac OS X for those systems, was incentive enough to make sure that Apple hardware was different enough from PC compatibles to protect Mac OS X.
ElDiabloConCaca said:
Yes, you can install Windows XP on an Intel Macintosh...
To date, I have seen no credible evidence of anyone running any version of Windows as the main operating system on an Intel based Mac. But I have seen plenty of reports of people killing their systems trying to hack them.
As it stands right now, the EFI software on Macs is looking for specific files on a certain type of volume. There is no evidence that a version of Windows design for EFI is going to work on a Mac where EFI is configured to boot the Mac OS. In fact, EFI on Macs is set up to provide many of the same boot features that Macs had under Open Firmware... I know of no PC using EFI that has the boot options that Intel based Macs have.
Also, Microsoft has stated that Apple could have followed their specifications for Windows... I think it is safe to say that Microsoft is not going to be altering Windows to meet Apple's hardware specification any time in the near (or distant) future.
