Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Triple Boot on MacBooks Working

Posted by CowboyNeal on Sat Apr 15, 2006 08:45 AM
from the os-challenge dept.
Operating Systems Software Businesses Windows Apple Linux
MikeTheMan writes "By now, everyone probably heard that Apple's recently-released Boot Camp software allows users to install Windows XP alongside OS X. But now, people at OnMac.net have discovered how to triple-boot OS X, Windows XP, and Linux. There are instructions on the Wiki for getting Gentoo running, but it is probably trivial to get other distros working as well."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Triple Boot on MacBooks Working 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • ... but does it run OS/2? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 15 2006, @08:48AM (#15135187)
    (or whatever other OS might be fashinable, *BSD, ...)

  • What a waste of money (Score:4, Funny)

    by Quick Sick Nick (822060) on Saturday April 15 2006, @08:51AM (#15135193)
    I'm not going to buy a macbook until it can run all the major OSes and emulate Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2 and PS3. And it had to have a cell phone built in, as well as an iPod.

    And it has to have an awesome case mod too. Because products are never good the way they are released, we always have to mess with them!
    • When it happens it will probably be on Emulation.net [victoly.com].
    • I'd like to see laptops have an "MP3" player feature. Where you slap it in your shoulderbag or backpack and plug in your headphones. A certain directory on the harddrive will be designated the "mp3 file storage" directory and there will be a set of basic external controls on the side of the laptop, say play, next, back, stop, shuffle.
      The laptop battery will provide power to the hard drive to spin and to operate the head phones. It would be an awesome use for the person on the go who doesn't want to go gadg
            • And why exactly did you format your Windows partition as NTFS and not FAT?

              Are you seriously asking this in 2006? Wow.

              Yes, I am seriously asking this in 2006. I know that FAT is a sucky file system, but at least it can be read by Mac OS X. Maybe in 2010 when there's a reliable Free driver for NTFS, I won't ask this. I'm not suggesting you install the operating system and applications on FAT; I'm just suggesting you map your home folder, in Windows and in Mac OS, to something on a FAT partition.

              Do you have a

  • Boot windows (Score:5, Funny)

    by backslashdot (95548) on Saturday April 15 2006, @08:56AM (#15135217)
    While you guys with macs are looking to boot into windows, I'm looking to boot windows OFF of my laptop.

    Sometimes I think I should be in comedy. Funny, yes i know.

  • Sweet, but what about dual boot? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by fak3r (917687) on Saturday April 15 2006, @08:58AM (#15135222) Homepage
    This is cool, I like it, but I want to dual boot on the Mac Mini; and by dual boot I mean like I have it now on my old iBook -- OS X and Linux. I don't want Windows on it. So, my question, when you boot holding down the 'option' key on the Mac can you make it so you'll have the option of OS X or Linux instead of having to rely on the NT bootloader to choose Linux? I'm sure after that you could hack out the Windows icon so you just have the X and Tux on the select screen.

    So, can it be done? Would it require hacking Boot Camp? Did Apple make this easy to modify? Also, I saw that the Linux ATI drivers work; do they support the graphics card in the Minis? I'm waiting for my local shop to get the Mini Duo Core's in, then I'll likely jump in, but I want to dual boot from there, like I do now.

    • This is cool, I like it, but I want to dual boot on the Mac Mini; and by dual boot I mean like I have it now on my old iBook -- OS X and Linux. I don't want Windows on it. So, my question, when you boot holding down the 'option' key on the Mac can you make it so you'll have the option of OS X or Linux .. ?

      I've played with Boot Camp, but haven't done much with it. [freedos.org] But from what I understand by reading the wiki, you can create a dual-boot MacOSX/Linux system. However, the BootCamp Assistant seems (infer

      • Re:Sweet, but what about dual boot? (Score:5, Informative)

        by WhiteWolf666 (145211) <moornblade at gmail.com> on Saturday April 15 2006, @10:40AM (#15135562) Homepage Journal
        Do NOT mess with the partitions. Seriously.

        Use diskutil's resizeVolume command to create (up to 4) the partitions you need. You cannot have more than 3 "real" partitions on your system (OS X uses #1 for the EFI stuff).

        BootCamp works by having an MBR and a GPT partition table simultaneously. There are no partition tools out there that correctly edit both at the same time. Doing it by hand via's OS X's GPT/FDISK tools often fails, as well. I have no idea why.

        I'm one of the people who started messing with this triple boot first. Trust me; you don't want to mess with parted or fdisk (in Linux/FreeBSD/whatever). If you do decide to, go to mactel-linux.org, and get the parted patch, and then make sure you use the GPT tool in OS X to create a set of matching MBR/GUID partition tables.

        But I promise you; you'll have to wipe your disk if you start messing with these partition tables. Nobody knows the correct way to handle them, yet. More experimentation is needed, and there's a good chance that at any given point in the process you'll corrupt your disk.

  • I, for one... (Score:3, Funny)

    by SheeEttin (899897) <sheeettin@@@gmail...com> on Saturday April 15 2006, @08:59AM (#15135226) Homepage
    I, for one, welcome our new triple-booting overlords.

  • OS X... why Linux (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DiscoNick (743960) on Saturday April 15 2006, @09:10AM (#15135250) Homepage
    Why would one bother using Linux if OS X offers all the features (well ok, most) of Linux, and the only feature Windows has -- some games (WoW anyone?). I've finally made the switch to Ubuntu on my work PC, but would be just as productive in the OS X environment w/o the need to ditch Aqua. Besides, XOrg can easily be installed in OS X...

    WoW Mod:Speed up World of Warcraft Load Times! [filenuts.com]

    • Why don't you use a real sig instead of comment spamming? There's a reason they're optional.

      • Re:OS X... why Linux (Score:2, Informative)

        by compm375 (847701)
        Since when is a Intel Mac a $20 thrift store pc. It might be in several years, but I believe the grandparent was asking why someone would want to run Linux on an Intel Mac now.
      • Sounds a little defensive to me. I think the point of the grandparent is that there's little point in rebooting to get to Linux if you already have an OS X capable computer. A good load of free software works on OSX as UNIX and X11 programs. Last I heard (last year) Linux on a laptop isn't likely to sleep or hybernate well, and doesn't necessarily have good hardware support for features typically found in a laptop. I know a few people that have Linux desktops and servers, but have a Mac laptop because o

      • Re:OS X... why Linux (Score:3, Informative)

        by Neoprofin (871029)
        So if you had a brand spanking new Intel Powerbook why would you need to triple boot it?

        That was his actual question.

        The answer of course, much like putting linux on an iPod even though the Apple firmware offers better MP3 playback, is becasue you can.

  • Perfect opportunity for NetBSD. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 15 2006, @09:26AM (#15135294)
    This is a perfect opportunity for the NetBSD crowd. They're experts at creating an OS that runs very well on very specific machinery. With some effort and direction, they could produce the premiere alternative UNIX for these Mac systems.

    We haven't seen a comparably standardized system since the SGI Indy, and that was over a decade ago. This time around the system is far more affordable, too. It'll lower the participation barrier for your average Joe and Jill Developer.

  • MacIntel - CHRP? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Ralph Spoilsport (673134) on Saturday April 15 2006, @09:34AM (#15135319) Journal
    From my perspective, the Macintel computer is the fulfilment of the CHRP dream from the mid-1990s. For those too young to remember, CHRP (pronounced Chirp) was an idea from Apple that stood for Common Hardware Reference Platform. Such a computer would exist outside of Operating Systems - it could and would run anything. It never really got off the ground, for obvious reasons.

    I always thought CHRP was a great idea, and it seems to me that the MacIntel platform running bootcamp IS the reincarnation of CHRP. I think that if Apple can run the price of their hardware down enough and incorporate things like card readers etc. into the front panel, they could really increase market share in a big way. For example:

    Here's an interesting idea, that could save a company vast sums of cash:

    Buy apple hardware, and triple boot the suckers, and wave bye bye to the vast collection of test boxen that clutter the labs.

    Granted: specific software that is dependent on specific hardware that doesn't fly with the mac platform won't be testable, but some huge vast percentage of what is out there doesn't operate that way, and this would especially be true of internet based applications.

    So, instead of using a old Intel box that's been re-grooved to do Linux (initial cost, say, $1000) and ANOTHER Intel/AMD box for Windows (say, another $1000) and an Apple computer to test the Apple build (say, $1500), you now just buy the MacIntel box, ($1500) and install Windows and Linux and you're done.

    This multiboot thing will be especially impressive as Microsoft continues along this idiotic path of multiple flavours of Windows. God ferbid they just make one REALLY GOOD version that does the job properly (a la OSX).

    But this Bootcamp thing could save some companies millions of dollars. They could upgrade their labs to Apple computers, run bootcamp, and say bye bye to HP/Dell/Gateway/etc. forever, fulfilling the beautiful vision of CHRP.

    Works for me.

    RS

    • Thats not bad, but virtualization is coming and that will be better.

      Imagine, instead, an 8-core Mac, possibly with a handful of drives attached, running OS X as its primary OS, with some subset of {Win98, Win2000, WinNT, WinXP, Linux (your choice of distribution), *BSD, etc.}, simultaneously each in a window of its own. Ideally, you could even virtualize another layer of OS X as a testing sandbox. If any OS goes down, you kill the process and load from some previously saved memory state. Screw rebooting.

    • Re:MacIntel - CHRP? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Maserati (8679)
      Macs have always been good in multi-bhoot configurations. Way back in the dotcom days our QA department handed us a list of 45 PC configurations (OS and browser combos) and 14 Mac system. This request was made in all seriousnous, as if even a dotcom could come up with the office space for an extra 60 machines. We got the PC test builds done with removable hard drives (Orb drives - easier to swap than IDE removables) . For the Macs I just partitioned the drives 8 ways, named them appropriately and installed
    • Lets see:
      * CHRP was an attempt to replicate PC-Clone economics for PowerPC
      * CHRP cratered
      * PowerPC became uneconomic
      * Apple belatedly switches to PC-Clones
      * You claim that Apple PC-Clones are reincarnation of CHRP.

      No, that doesn't add up.

      (I will agree that Apple will sell a lot of dual-boot boxes, espciallally when they start bundling Windows.)

    • Re:MacIntel - CHRP? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Florian (2471) <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de> on Saturday April 15 2006, @10:12AM (#15135456) Homepage
      Such a computer would exist outside of Operating Systems - it could and would run anything.
      You must have got something wrong. CHRP simply was a specification for an open standard PowerPC hardware platform, just as the IBM PC is an open standard for x86-based hardware.
      • just as the IBM PC is an open standard for x86-based hardware.

        If by open you mean, "Dammit! They found out how to reverse engineer the BIOS," then no, they're not similiar.

  • ...why might one need to triple-boot three OS's?

    I'm not trying to flame or anything, but it seems like you can get pretty much anything you want out of simply dual-booting OSX and Windows without throwing Linux or BSD into the batch.

    • Some people (*raises hand*) aren't big fans of either OS X or Windows, but want/need some apps on both. I'm much more productive and happy in KDE than in either MacOS or Windows. I'm really considering buying a new Mac, using Linux or FreeBSD for my serious work, MacOS for GarageBand and other stuff, and Windows for development and maybe games. It's a dream come true.

      My only concern is that, last I heard, there are still no AirPort Express drivers for Linux/BSD, due to legal threats from Broadcom.

  • "Get it Working" (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BoRegardless (721219) on Saturday April 15 2006, @09:55AM (#15135386)
    For life to get easier, we get OUR tools RIGHT for the job and "Get it Working", meaning efficiently.

    Lots of different work is out there for different people.

    For me, Boot Camp simply means efficient work with one fewer laptops being paid for, maintained & carried around, while still being able to run at virtually native hardware speed...no more, no less.

    End of Subject.

  • very nice (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Tom (822) on Saturday April 15 2006, @10:12AM (#15135453) Homepage Journal
    This is an excellent step. Now if only someone can get the overcomplication down a little, maybe so that Linux boots directly from EFI and I don't have to choose "windos" first each time I actually want to boot Linux - that's just torture, isn't it?

  • MacIntel without OSX? (Score:4, Funny)

    by delire (809063) on Saturday April 15 2006, @12:35PM (#15135953)
    I'd be interested to know if it is possible to buy a MacIntel without OSX preinstalled.

    OSX doesn't fulfill my needs as a primary OS, but the CoreDuo Mac Mini has appeal as a low temperature SFF Linux box. If Apple do reach even half the market share they once had, I wonder if we'll be seeing an increase in demand for the hardware they distribute without the OS tax? Given that Asustek and Quanta make all of the Apple hardware, my next best bet is that Asus simply put out a blank SFF box with the same spec as the Mini.

    • Re:FAT32? (Score:3, Informative)

      by mAIsE (548)
      Since when is any major OS vendor's security reached through obscurity of its file system ? I would contend NTFS is much like th binary word format, a format that helps microsoft alot more than the people that use it.

      BTW apple does not required that the partition be FAT32, it is just more compatible and mountable with other OS's.

      • Re:FAT32? (Score:3, Informative)

        by colinrichardday (768814)
        Perhaps the GP believes that a file system with actual file permissions (such an NTFS) might be more secure than one without (FAT32). True, one still has to get the users to stop running as Administrator.

        • Re:FAT32? (Score:4, Informative)

          by rikkards (98006) on Saturday April 15 2006, @09:24AM (#15135291) Journal
          Unless you are creating file shares on the machine itself going with NTFS is moot. Assuming the user gets physical access to the machine and yanks the drive, it doesn't matter if you are running Fat32 or NTFS. NTFS permissions are trivial, unless you are using EFS encryption in XP, but then you could always use PGP or Truecrypt or any other 3rd party encryption.

    • Re:FAT32? (Score:4, Informative)

      by GweeDo (127172) on Saturday April 15 2006, @09:04AM (#15135232) Homepage
      I created an NTFS partition no problem. Mac OS X even mounted it for me to read from (I didn't try writing though...)

      You really should research what you say before spewing lies.

        • Re:FAT32? (Score:5, Informative)

          by MustardMan (52102) on Saturday April 15 2006, @09:30AM (#15135305)
          Apple doesn't "want you to" use fat32. They helpfully suggest using it, as mac os x cannot natively write to an ntfs partition, but it can write to fat32. It's a simple practical consideration, not some conspiracy.

    • Re:FAT32? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Odiumjunkie (926074)
      Exactly what kind of security is file-system supported on a Macbook? If you're using your Macbook as a multi-user Windows server, using NTFS support of user private data - well, perhaps you should worry less about filesystem insecurity and more about hardware selection. NTFS support of private user data is pretty useless anyway, it's fairly trivial to work around, especially on a windows box.

    • Re:FAT32? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by WhiteWolf666 (145211)
      There's no non-Windows write support for NTFS, barring captive NTFS (which uses Window's DLL) and the latest linux NTFS driver, which does NOT support changing file sizes or creating new files (frankly it barely qualifies as write support).

      NTFS is a moving target. Reading is not a big problem, since it won't corrupt the disk. Writing to the disk is very difficult.

      Don't blame Apple, blame Microsoft. HFSplus is properly documents, NTFS is not. .....

      Look at it this way; you say that NTFS support is limited on

        • Re:FAT32? (Score:3, Informative)

          by WhiteWolf666 (145211)
          Yet hundreds of millions do it every day.

          Using secret, closed-source software developed by the file system designers.

          What's your point?

          NTFS is an overly complex file system, with incomplete documentation. Making small changes to it tends to break it and/or corrupt data.

          Furthermore, why not just run NT/2000/XP on Ext2? Use a small FAT32 boot partition, and keep all your data on Ext2.

          File system driver here. [72.14.203.104] You can get read/write support on Ext2 on all major operating systems, and Linux will journal Ext2(Ex
    • some people just don't like OS X or Aqua. To each their own. I personally prefer it. It is well integrated. Finder kinda of sucks, but hey nothing's perfect. At least it's better than windows. and keeps KDE on it's toes. Now if i was running non mac hardware then it's Linux and KDE.

      With Apple now shipping x86 computers people are starting to realize that yea Apple hardware really is higher than average PC quality. Apple x86 machines are jumping to the top of the list for performance vs price. Someth

      • Re:Why boot linux here? (Score:4, Informative)

        by n8_f (85799) on Saturday April 15 2006, @09:36AM (#15135329) Homepage
        Finder kinda of sucks

        Two words: Path Finder [cocoatech.com].

      • With Apple now shipping x86 computers people are starting to realize that yea Apple hardware really is higher than average PC quality.

        Actually that is a misperception due to the fact that Apple hardware + Apple software has fewer problems. With a limitted number of video, audio, ethernet, etc chipsets to support it is far easier to offer a more reliable system. The overall reliability colors the perception of the hardware. When you pop open a Dell you find a rather well designed and assembled system, co
        • Um I only bought my first Mac with in the last year. I had been switching myself out of windows hell and into Linux for years, so the switch wasn't all that hard. When my last to machines(a custom built athlon and a dell) both died I decided to stop wasting money trying to cobble to together random hardware and let the experts do it for me. As I said I tried Dell but the only thing they have going for them is price. frankly one dell machine my roommate is afraid to reboot(and hence patch) it. it only b
        • People like you just gloss over it because it comes in a fancy package. It feels better even though it isn't. Shallow is what you are.

          Surprisingly, my first impression of taking my Mac Mini (PowerPC) out of the box was all tactile. The weight, the construction, and all the surfaces felt "different". I'm not holding another piece of electronic equipment, but a masterpiece of computer engineering. That was a significant "wow" factor for me. Less than two months, I was completely switched over to the Mac. I

    • Developers/ISVs? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by BeanThere (28381) on Saturday April 15 2006, @10:23AM (#15135505)

      It sounds ideal for cross-platform application development --- you only need one machine, and just need to reboot when porting/compiling to your 'non-primary' platforms. Combine with a decent cross-platform API like wxWidgets for best results. Make it a MacBook and you're portable too, and with all three platforms available to give product demos depending on who you're selling to.

    • I'm a linux noob, but i'm not clear why you'd WANT to boot Linux in this case, other than maybe if you are a multi-OS admin.

      Not admins, you can admin Linux boxes from BSD or Windows systems. Balmer offers the non because-it-is-there answer: developers, developers, developers. The Linux and BSD APIs differ enough that you really need to build and test your software on both platforms on a pretty regular basis. This is less of a problem on more traditional BSD systems since Linux emulation is generally off

        • Re:Why boot linux here? (Score:3, Interesting)

          by NickFitz (5849)

          I do a lot of development on a Mac (in Eclipse, XCode and SubEthaEdit) and I've never found it necessary to look at the Finder for 10 minutes.

          Similarly, when developing on a Windows box, I spend very little time gazing upon Windows Explorer.

          What exactly is your strategy for development? Browsing the file system does not a developer make.

              • If you have no experience of developing on a Mac, why do you feel the need to comment on it?

                I don't know if the gp has experience on Macs, but this has been a problem for many years, and I don't see it going away. People will make comments on things they know nothing about any chance they get, either to spread FUD, or simply because they like the sound of their own voice (or text equivalent). Hence entire companies will believe whatever their clueless IT dept tells them when it comes to Macs.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.