Fun Stuff > CLIKC
Windows XP on an intel mac
nihilist:
--- Quote from: Matteh99 ---Apple isn't stuck with 1.1 forever. There is nothing stopping apple from using the 2.x standard in their later computers. All they have to do is make sure osx also supports 1.1 as well as 2.x.
Since UEFI 2.0 just got released march first what was apple supposed to do? use standard BIOS? Delay releasing the iMac till EFI 2.0 came out? They can make 1.1 do everything they need it to and they don't have wait for it to happen.
--- End quote ---
OS X x86 has been built to work with EFI 1.1. If they rev to 2.x already, they're going to be paying a fat load of cash to support two different standards, plus they'll have to rev the OS itself.
Remember that the Intel switch wasn't supposed to have happened yet, they released "early". (Not really, but that's what they like to say...) Point is that they worked on their system to use 1.1, not 2.x It was done specifically, since the world+dog has known that 1.1 wouldn't really make it, and that 2.0 was going to be out shortly. This was a conscious decision.
Matteh99:
I see your point.
I suppose how good of an idea it was to use EFI 1.1 depends on how backward compatable EFI 2.x is and if there are any licening costs for using the EIF standard. If 2.x is backward compatable and there is no licencing then there isn't much of a downside to using 1.1. It gets their product out sooner and with all the features they need.
I honestly have very little idea of what makes 2.x better than 1.1 or what it takes to adopt a standard.
edscoble:
--- Quote from: jhocking ---Didn't you know, Macs don't need fans for cooling?
--- End quote ---
tell that to my G5 iMac, which's currently cooking the radiator.
yes, cooking the radiator as if it not hot enough.[/i]
jhocking:
I meant to post a link to information about the failed mac design without fans, but I forgot. At one point Steve-o decided he didn't like fans and told his engineers to come up with a design that didn't have any fans in it. The resulting computer often went nuclear while people were using it.
nihilist:
--- Quote from: Matteh99 ---I see your point.
I suppose how good of an idea it was to use EFI 1.1 depends on how backward compatable EFI 2.x is and if there are any licening costs for using the EIF standard. If 2.x is backward compatable and there is no licencing then there isn't much of a downside to using 1.1. It gets their product out sooner and with all the features they need.
I honestly have very little idea of what makes 2.x better than 1.1 or what it takes to adopt a standard.
--- End quote ---
How very polite of you. Are you sure you belong on these forums? :p
From what I read, 2.x will not be compatible with 1.1 in any way. Hence the manufacturers bypassing 1.1 and going straight to 2.x. EFI 1.1 was an Intel-only deal, whereas UEFI 2.x is by a group of companies. Lots of changes/enhancements. Finally, Vista's UEFI implementation will only support 64-bit processors, which current Apple x86 chips are not.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version