Is it worth putting the Windows OS on my new Imac with the intel chip?
450347
If you regularly use programs that are only available for Windows then fair enough.\n\nPersonally I wouldn't bother.  Windows XP is dated and full of security issues so you would still need to protect Windows from viruses as you would on a PC.  Besides Windows is nowhere near as advanced as OS X.
470979
If you bought a Macintrash to use Windows you wasted a lot of money.\n\nBuy a cheap PC, install Linux and Windows.  Not only will you have a *nix much better than MacOSX, but it's free.
93216
it looks like they're not rushing to release this too soon.  According to the following content I found on microsoft's site, probably next year at the earliest.  performance on programs like this probably won't suffer as much as graphic, layout or video-editting software that is running in the emulation module: rosetta, however, so I wouldn't necessarily let the lack of a new office delay you too much.\n\n"Q. Will you re-release Office 2004 for Intel-based Macs?\n\nA. No. There are no plans to re-release Office 2004. With Rosetta, Office 2004 runs well on Intel-based Macs.\n\nQ. When will the next version of Office for Mac be available?\n\nA. The next version of Office for Mac is under development, and we typically release a new version every two to three years. Although we are on track, making sure that our next version will run on the Intel-based Macs will likely require additional time in our development schedule. We will know more about our release date after we’ve thoroughly evaluated the Intel-based Macs, and have identified any changes we need to make so that Office for Mac runs smoothly on both PowerPC-based Macs and Intel-based Macs. "
1019776
Soon? No - I do like their chances of doing that someday though.  The new bootcamp that allows windows to be installed is a great leap in that direction.\n\nThe biggest hurdle for them now is their prices.  Macs are too expensive right now to do anything more than trickle growth in market share.
632312
It depends largely on your needs. As of right now power pc will have more apps than intel since intel just came out at not al developers have made universal binaries. On the oher Hand intel chips run faster than the power pcs and you can also run all your window apps. If you have mac software you need to use right away a power pc would probably be better if you xcan wait a little than intel is the way to go since it will run faster and power pc is slowly being discontinued.
684511
I guess it all depends on what you wish to use it for...\n\nI've had many different computers in my time, and by far the most impressive and one requiring the least maintenance has been any of the newer Apple machines with Mac OS X operating system, ie MacMini or iBook/iMac.\n\nThey're very compatible with Windows machines, MS Office is available, but so is OpenOffice which supports MS document formats if you wish to have a free alternative.\n\nOS X machines are also not susceptable to viruses or hacks in anywhere near the magnitude of Windows machines, so are far more stable and secure at present.\n\nDon't get me wrong, I love MS Windows & PCs, but Macs have really changed my perception of what a computer can be. \n\nHope this helps\nMJS
146356
I have a Windows PC but a iMac notebook, and I've never regretted my decision to have a mac notebook. Truth be told that you need to use the mac's equivalent softwares - sometimes you can't find a particular software because there's only a windows version, but other than that, there's a lot of things that macs do right and I like!\n\nI like the fact that should something go wrong with the OS, and you need to re-install, you don't need to lose your software, only the kernal gets replaced...I once installed the whole OS and didn't have to load a single app or file after that!\n\nI like the way a lot of functions are made smart and easy. Connecting to wireless networks, something you'll do often with a laptop, is very quick and painless with a mac, don't have to open network connections, type passwords twice, or anything like that.\n\nI like how macs have no registry, to uninstall an app you simply move its icon to the trash. Want to move the app to a new directory, no prob, just move the file. \n\nAnd then its the little things, the way that the explorer equivalent has folder favorites, probably the feature I would like to see most in Windows...I'm tired at the office trying to go to a folder I use every day! Expose, quick searching... \n\nI found if you're going to do lots of programming its restrictive...thats why I have a windows desktop for that and everything else I can't do with a mac, but for a laptop, I think I'll stick with macs.
594932
I have spent a lot of time using both, and there is no doubt that macs are much much better. Especially now you can run windows on one if you feel the need.
555016
It will work on any Intel or Amd as long as it is a sse2 or sse3 instruction cabable. Also no apple intel restore disk for like iMac will work on your pc you must find the os on the web. I will not discuss where.
78856
Windows has many more security vulnerabilities than the Mac OS. This is not just because Windows has a larger install base; the underlying OS in Mac, FreeBSD, is much harder to hack.\n\nI find the Mac OS user interface far more pleasant to use than Windows as well, but that's a matter of personal preference. As far as software, most business productivity titles are available for both platforms, and the multimedia offerings from Apple, at least at the consumer level, are unparalleled in the Windows world.
974576
I use a windows based laptop.  It is a Dell D610.  I have been doing a little bit of homework on the MAC vs Windows question because we have folks in our company (in marketing, and in product design ) who want Mac.  What I have found is that the people who are attached to the MAC are attached to it because of perception and maybe the style.  Today there isnt a piece of (necessary) business software on the MAC that cannot be matched on the Windows platform.  Additionally, if a company needs to manage both platforms the cost will not be double, it will be a bit more...
199182
I have an Apple G4 17 and I absolutely love it because of all the reasons you said, and then some. Norm's answer was excellent because Apple is a better operating machine but Microsoft is bigger, which in new this world means better. Depending on what you're into you may need both machines to take advantage of both systems strengths. \n\nTheBoss?Yess!!!
19144
Depends on what you need it for. \n\nIf you can afford it and don't need specific windows software, I would say the mac is the better computer. \n\nBecause Apple controls both the hardware and the operating system it just works and is more stable. Besides they look good.
509558
I agree...  it should.\n\nApple has a habit of abandoning anything that is more than a few years old.   Your next computer won't be Windows 98; but the whole iPOD family of products are not designed for Windows 98.  \n\nHere is my prediction.  When Apple completes the switch to Intel chips, all of those non-Intel computers will be totally unsupported.  This will probably happen just 3 years from now.\n\nHECK, Ford, GM and Chrysler extend their waranttes to 7 years and more now.  Why can't APPLE support their product for at least that long. \n\nWindows 98 is NOT dead.   An 8 or 9 year old computer is not dead, just old.
78221
There reallyisn't any known disadvantages yet.  Do you know anyone that has one.  But honestly, I think that intel makes good chips.  At least in a mac they will be able to run better without crashing as much.  \nBut you always take a risk when you are the first person to buy something.
90969
Depending upon the chipset and support for the Mac, it is possible that the new ones can support Windows XP and definitely Windows Vista.  This came from information provided by Intel Australia after several other sources reported it as a "no go".\n\nLink to the story is below.
67510
Nope, but Apple has software available that lets you run Windows on an Apple computer.