Install Windows 7 on a Mac
Raise your hand if you remember when a Mac was a Mac and a Windows machine was a Windows machine, and never the twain shall meet. I sure do. Change has come.
Our own Christina Warren has written an exhaustive set of instructions for installing Windows 7 on a Mac over at our sister site, Download Squad. Windows 7 is in beta, so don't try and use it for any mission-critical tasks. Meant to be an incremental update to Vista (Snow Vista?), the current iteration of Windows 7 includes changes like a redesigned taskbar, enhanced touch performance and improvements when run atop multi-core processors.
While Intel Macs can run Windows 7 via Boot Camp, Christina points out that virtualization is probably the best bet for most users. She described how to set up an installation with VMWare Fusion 2.0, Parallels 4.0 and VirtualBox 2.1.2 (and the VMware team has posted a guide of their own for Win7 on Fusion).
If you're a Mac user who keeps Windows around for compatibility testing or that one proprietary Windows app you can't do without, and you're just itching to try Windows 7, this is the tutorial for you. If you're wondering what the fuss is about over on the Microsoft side, Engadget's deep dive on Windows 7 is a good place to start.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Theo said 10:53PM on 1-23-2009
Does anyone know if using the Vista drivers from the DVD will do more harm than good? I'm sure Apple would wait for the real release before issuing new ones.
Reply
Dylan said 12:26PM on 1-24-2009
I have windows 7 on my iMac and the drivers work just fine. The only problem is using an apple bluetooth keyboard or mighty mouse. It takes some work around's but it will still work.
Cowicide said 11:51PM on 1-23-2009
The article recommends 40 gigabytes of space for Windows 7. That's huge. If you are just experimenting with Windows 7 (after all, it's just a beta) and need a little space for installing some apps, etc. you can easily get away with allocating half that much space.
Reply
Peter Kazanjy said 12:08AM on 1-24-2009
@Cowicide
When you create a virtual machine, for example, in Fusion, the default is what is known as a "sparse" disk, which expands as it needs it.
So, in this case, your Windows 7 VM will start out around ~10ish GB, just for the OS install, but the VM will *think* it has a 40GB hard drive, which is nice, as you put more stuff in it.
You can read more about virtualization-centric disk concepts here:
http://blogs.vmware.com/teamfusion/2008/10/vmware-fusion-6.html
Pete Kazanjy
Product Marketing, VMware Fusion
Cowicide said 11:48PM on 1-23-2009
Thanks, but I already knew that. Parallels uses a sparse image as well. But, I'm referring to the actual article in question here and once again, it recommends the allocation of literally 40 gigabytes of actual hard drive space for Windows 7. I think for just experimenting with a beta you can expect to only use half that much at most as the sparse image expands with use.
puhsitch said 12:21AM on 1-24-2009
Yeah, 40gb sounds like a little much for a minimum. My Windows 7 image file for Fusion is a shade under 10gb with Office 2003 installed.
m said 1:07AM on 1-24-2009
@Peter Kazanjy:
Thanks, Peter. I use Fusion with XP. If you ever need a bigger virtual drive, is it possible or easy to increase the size of a sparse image?
puhsitch said 1:46AM on 1-24-2009
m, all you need to do is go into the virtual machine's settings when it is shut down. Click on "Hard Disks" and change the maximum size to whatever you want.
Steve said 5:33AM on 1-24-2009
"It's just a beta"? It is solid as a rock and ready for release. As to how many GB someone should use, that would depend on what they are going to use it for, not what you would use it for.
scarlco said 8:34AM on 1-24-2009
Windows 7 itself uses under 10 GB, but would make for an extremely tight installation. Some recommend a minimum of 20, but you'd have good breathing room with 40.
Simon Arch said 1:22AM on 1-25-2009
I installed W7 in a 20gb partition, and was left with 11gb. 20gb seems like a lot to me, but not to Windows... I think if I were going to install it again (and I probably will) I'd give it 30gb.
I was very impressed with the way it handled the hardware, too. It installed the correct video drivers, giving me the full Aero Glass UI even on my MacBook's crappy Intel GMA950 graphics "card". I could even span the desktop across both my monitors, something I could never get XP or Vista to do correctly (or at all). It seems like Microsoft is finally starting to understand that ease of use isn't a bad thing.
Alberto said 11:30PM on 1-23-2009
I know there are people that do need Windows, but still, just thinking about installing Windows on my beloved Mac gives me the creeps...
Reply
m said 1:14AM on 1-24-2009
perhaps you don't know that vmware comes with a free cootie shot. seriously, you're only limiting yourself.
gib said 12:53PM on 1-26-2009
Yeah, some of you suckers might need windows for work (my wife does), but the only reason to install a beta OS is for curiosity. SPOILER ALERT - it is just like Vista, with a few things cleaned up a little bit. M$ knows how badly Vista tanked, and they are trying desperately to move on. That is why they ran the Mohave experiment, and the seinfield and "I'm a PC" ads (which only talked about Windows, not Vista). W7 is just a way to move on and try and rebrand the OS, without great technological or design changes.
I could also put a hyundai engine in a camero body, but why would I want to do that...?
Dewey said 11:49PM on 1-23-2009
I tried doing this when the beta first came out. Only some of the drivers worked however. I'll have to take a look at this guide and see if it will help.
Reply
czpcgk said 12:42AM on 1-24-2009
I remember when Mac was on a Mac and Windows was on every other computer. But then the OSX86 project started and we get Mac either way. So I'm posting from my OSX86 machine (PC) thats on a 40 GB partition, tri-booting XP, Vista, and OS X. Works great.
So change has come. Thanks to the InsanelyMac community, us PC users can get the benefits of OS X + Windows in a dual, tri, or even quad-boot boxes and not be hampered by the tyranny of Apple (figuratively; don't want to upset the fanboys...).
Reply
John.B said 11:49AM on 1-24-2009
And all you had to do was violate the OS X license agreement or steal OS X from teh Intartubez. :shrug:
colouroflight said 12:24PM on 1-24-2009
@John.B: I own a legitimate Mac, but seriously, come on. No one cares about EULAs (not even Apple; remember Safari for Windows?), and downloading is not stealing. Get over yourself.
Nathan said 1:23AM on 1-24-2009
Thanks to Apple's refusal to offer an affordable 15" notebook, I recently bought an HP. While Vista was not as bad as everyone seems to spout off about, the Windows 7 beta is superb, in my mind the best OS Microsoft has ever made, from 3.1 and up (never used earlier versions). An actual decent challenge to OS X.
Apple needs to rethink it's overcharging on its computers. I think the desktops (iMac) were a decent price, you can get a PC with similar specs fir cheaper, but the design and OS on a mac do deserve some premium on price. Having to pay $2000 min if you want a 15" Apple notebook is obscene. Yes, the MBP is powerful, but not everyone needs that power!
If there would have been a 15" MacBook at say $999, I would have one today. Give it the same specs as my $799 HP and I would gladly pay the $200 premium to have the apple with OS X.
As it stands, Windows 7 may be good enough for my next desktop to be a self built PC, though I would be looking at doing a dual boot with OSX86
Come on, Apple, wow me again like you did back in '05 when I bought my first mac.
Reply
Keil Miller said 8:58AM on 1-24-2009
Get the 13" for 999$. There is no need to have a bigger screen. It's a laptop, not a desktop. For a quality computer, Apple has reasonable prices I think. How much does a quality pc cost? And HP is pretty much at the bottom of quality. LOL they don't even ship computers with recovery discs anymore!