Snow Leopard: Great news for Windows 7, too

I'm going to be writing about the Windows 7/Snow Leopard/Boot Camp experience soon as part of my recently revived Mac-to-Windows Switcher Guide, but I see I'm not the only one noticing the improvements in the latest Boot Camp release. Sadly, this particular review, while decent, gets a number of facts wrong. I'd like to correct them here.

As [Snow Leopard] is now a pure 64-bit operating system, expect the application performance to improve over Leopard as you add RAM or use it with a high-end desktop.

Snow Leopard is not a "pure" 64-bit OS. It is a hybrid 32-bit/64-bit OS, and it actually boots into a 32-bit kernel by default. That's a 32-bit OS, folks, even if it does have certain 64-bit capabilities. Imagine the mocking Microsoft would get from the Apple fan base if they advertised a 32-bit OS as a 64-bit OS. And now observe the total pass Apple gets for doing it.

The new Boot Camp includes all the drivers necessary to run both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Windows 7 smoothly on the Mac hardware.

Sadly, you can only run 64-bit Windows versions, arbitrarily, on certain Macs. My Macbook gets support for 32-bit versions only.

[From within Windows,] Boot Camp 3.0 can be installed from the Snow Leopard DVD. Then, without further ado, you got yourself a great Windows computer.

In this case "without further ado" means 15-20 minutes of driver installs. It takes a shockingly long time. Fortunately, you only need to do it once, of course.

The last major improvement of Boot Camp 3.0 that I am very happy about is the battery life. Windows 7 now has much improved battery life compared with what it had with Boot Camp 2.1. I haven't tried Windows Vista or Windows XP, but Windows 7 now has about the same battery life as Snow Leopard.

This is absolutely not the case on my mid-2008 Macbook. In my experience, Windows is still at about two-thirds the battery life of Snow Leopard.

The MacBook's keyboard doesn't have two separate "Backspace" and "Delete" keys, which come in handy when you want to remove text.

As has been the case since the first beta of Boot Camp, fn + Delete works as "Backspace." Works great, in fact.

There's no separate "tab to click" options for the right and left clicks.

Well, assuming you mean "tap to click," one tap is right click and a two-finger tap is now right-click. I think this works very well.

Overall, I have to say Boot Camp 3.0 takes the Windows experience to a new high on Mac hardware. To me, this is about as exciting as the release of Windows 7 itself.

Settle down. :) Actually, the ability to run Windows 7 on your Mac is pretty exciting. Certainly, it's more exciting than Snow Leopard.

Anyway, it's a good review, I don't mean to be snarky.

Discuss this Article 83

panache1023
on Aug 31, 2009
Paul, Lying again? Snow Leopard does in fact support a "pure" 64-bit kernel...on some machines it boots into 32-bit kernel by default, but can be overridden by (ridiculously) holding down the 6 and 4 keys...OR an entry can be added to a boot file to cause it to start in 64-bit mode by default. If you're going to call Apple out for only having a 32-bit OS because that's what it boots into by default (for legitimate reasons), AT LEAST MENTION THE OTHER HALF OF THE STORY!
panache1023
on Aug 31, 2009
"This is absolutely not the case on my mid-2008 Macbook. In my experience, Windows is still at about two-thirds the battery life of Snow Leopard." Maybe because Windows is a processor hog so it drains the battery since it's inefficiently using the CPU.... Disclaimer...I actually really like Windows 7
animositysomina
on Aug 31, 2009
Yeah, Paul kinda lied about 64-bit Mac OS. pancahe is right, Mac OS 10.6 indeed has two kernels and on the modern Macs you can use 64-bit kernel. Mac OS is very much like Windows which also has two kermels, except that Windows 32-bit kernel doesn't have the ability to run 64-bit apps like Mas OS one does. As always, Mac OS wins on technical/software elegance front and loses on hardware front. Nothing has changed.
jtdennis
on Aug 31, 2009
I really like the added HFS driver, even if it is read only.
chipwinter
on Aug 31, 2009
So what can a "pure" 64-bit OS do that a hybrid 32-bit/64-bit OS cannot? Anyone know?
Ocean
on Aug 31, 2009
"Certainly, it's more exciting than Snow Leopard." Again, I ask: Should gaining new features be the driving reason behind upgrading your OS? Should hardware upgrades be the most common way of gaining performance upgrades?
Ocean
on Aug 31, 2009
"It is a hybrid 32-bit/64-bit OS, and it actually boots into a 32-bit kernel by default. That's a 32-bit OS, folks..." This is an argument about semantics. Another pundit puts it this way: "The kernel in Snow Leopard is designed to load in 32-bit operation by default on most Mac systems. However, focusing on the kernel, which facilitates very low-level functions that generally don't benefit from 64-bit operation, is missing the real point of 64-bit computing in Snow Leopard. ...the vast majority of applications, kernel extensions and application frameworks in Snow Leopard run in 64-bit operation. This means that nearly all the core applications that ship with Snow Leopard (the Finder, Spotlight, directory services, the Dock, etc.) are running in 64-bit mode." "What Apple has done in Snow Leopard is to ensure that almost any part of the operating system can run in either 32-bit or 64-bit operation -- and that by default, the vast majority of components run in 64-bit mode." http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137229/What_s_the_real_deal_with...
Ocean
on Aug 31, 2009
Software compatability. "Basically, whether the machine is booted into the 32-bit kernel or the 64-bit kernel, any application that can run at 64-bit will run in that mode automatically. By having Snow Leopard boot into the 32-bit kernel, Apple improves software compatibility. That's because kernel extensions must match the kernel's mode, or they don't work. While Apple did a fine job porting over its native applications for 64-bit compatibility, there are still some third-party vendors that haven't released updates for their software (such as the aforementioned Cisco VPN software) yet." http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137110/Review_Apple_s_Snow_Leopa...
evgenij
on Aug 31, 2009
Paul, Of course you can run 64 bit Windows on your Macbooks or any other Core 2 Duo Macs that you might have. The Boot Camp drivers are pure garbage. Your Macbook has Broadcom Wireless and Marvell Ethernet adapters, the drivers for which are available in 64 bit for XP or Vista or 7. You can get them on official sites or install from the Leopard DVD manually. If you have Realtek audio then you are covered as well. The only problem you might have is graphics (that was the issue I had on my iMac 7,1). Apple shipped a shitty Radeon 2400 XT Mobility driver for Boot camp which didn't include Catalyst Center so there was no way for me to even change brightness but.. if you get the desktop driver (32 or 64) for either ATI or Nvidia cards you can run Mobility Modder and it will install just fine as well as all utilities for your Macbook or whatever. If you have an Intel integrated chip then you are covered too since both GMA950 and X3100 drivers are available in 64 bit. I have Windows XP 64 bit running on my 2006 Macbook and iMac 2007. If you want I can mod the drivers for you an email them, Paul. Specifically the Sigmatel Audio since that one is not available in 64 bit but I have modded it manually and it works like a charm on my Macbook 2006. Do Not Use Boot Camp Drivers. If you use Windows a lot, get the latest ones and if they are not compatible.. mod them.
alexbUK
on Aug 31, 2009
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there a 64bit boot camp installer that works even with unsupported macs like the MacBook? You have to find it on the snow leopard disk using Windows Explorer under 'Drivers' and 'Apple' and there should be an installer package called 'BootCamp64'.
Ocean
on Aug 31, 2009
"OpenCL is designed in a hardware-agnostic way. Code can run on whatever computing resources are available in a given system. That includes integrated GPUs, discreet GPUs, the main CPU, and even other specialized processors. Apple proposed the spec last year, noting that it planned to build it into Snow Leopard. Apple then joined with the Kronos Group to create a working group to define the spec as an open standard. That worked wrapped up last fall, and the 1.0 version was finalized last December. Apple released Snow Leopard last Friday with the first implementation of OpenCL. -- Some of the early testing with OpenCL Benchmark, though, show promise of some massive speed-ups in the kinds of calculations that OpenCL is designed for." arstechnica.com
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
animosity "on the modern Macs you can use 64-bit kernel" Well, that actually is a wildly inaccurate overstatement. The reality is that you can ONLY use the 64-bit kernel if ALL of the following are true: 1) Your Macintosh is one of the very few models ever made that support the 64-bit kernel (meaning it was a new model in 2008 or 2009 and not even in all those cases or even all the models currently being sold - see: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=1275 for details) 2) You will not use ANY 32 bit drivers or Kernel Extensions such as running Parallels other system software not explicitly rewritten for the 64-bit kernel. Of course, you probably don't actually HAVE 64-bit drivers for your hardware but... 3) You manually select the 64-bit kernel at boot time by holding down the 6 and 4 keys at the proper point in the boot cycle every time you want to get the 64-bit kernel (or find and manually tweak a *nix style config text file in an undocumented way to override Apple's default). That's quite a bit more than just "modern Macs" as a requirement to use the 64-bit Mac OS X that Apple's been saying they have for, what, 3 versions now? (By comparison, Windows 7 will be the 3rd fully 64-bit consumer OS available from Microsoft since they released their first back in April 2005) But, hey, maybe Apple will really deliver a true 64-bit experience in another year or two with Mac OS X 10.7 - Hairless Siamese Cat (see http://www.fakesteve.net/2009/08/mossbergs-official-snow-leopard-review....)
Dipsh t Admin
on Aug 31, 2009
"Should gaining new features be the driving reason behind upgrading your OS?" According to Cupertino and its shameless pundits: When Leopard was released? Yes. Snow Leopard? No.
evgenij
on Aug 31, 2009
mikegalos, You're absolutely right. And what sucks is that my 2 year old iMac HAS 64 bit EFI which means it should be able to get inside the 64 bit kernel but it can't. Apple doesn't allow it for reasons unknown. Pressing 6 and 4 won't help. Maybe it is because of the drivers but knowing Apple, they probably won't bother to try to get them working since such iMacs are "already out of date and unsupported".
panache1023
on Aug 31, 2009
Mike Galos, Since you mentioned drivers... what happens in Windows 7 64-bit if I only have 32-bit device drivers for my hardware.. How does Windows 7 accomodate this?
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
HAHAHAHAHAHAH Paul. Tearing apart someone else review. How about correction your lame Snow Leopard review. How about retracting or correcting your incorrect statements like this one.... "Exchange Server support, which is a big feature, sure, but none of them can do automatic configuration, so you'll need a slew of server information, which isn't the case in, say, Outlook on Windows." Or wait leave it there, so when Apple fans read this review the mistake above and the others in the review will show how ignorant you are to Apple and for that sake anything but a Windows client OS. I think Apple sites you stick to apple reviews, this one is close since its about Boot Camp, and MS sites should stick to MS stuff.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
Dipsh Actually that's the wrong question. The right question from Cupertino is: "Should gaining new features be the driving reason behind PAYING FOR a new OS?" To which the answer is always, "No. You should pay Cupertino any time they ask whether there's any reasonable reason or not."
evgenij
on Aug 31, 2009
rr0de74@live.com And Apple fanatics should stay on their Apple sites and Microsoft fanatics should stay on their Microsoft sites. Then the question is - what are you doing here?
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
Panache Since Microsoft has been making 64-bit consumer operating systems for over 4 years now that's not much of an issue with even reasonably modern hardware. Now, it was a valid problem back in the early days of Windows XP 64-bit back in 2005 which is where Apple users find themselves today. Give Apple a few years and they'll probably make it reasonably easy to get 64-bit drivers. Say around the release of Mac OS X 10.7 (Hairless Siamese Cat) or 10.8 (whatever tabby it gets named for) So, to be fair to Apple, why don't you ask again in 2013 (2 releases and $258 in upgrade fees from now) when Apple's 64-bit driver support will hopefully be up to where 64-bit Windows support is in 2009.
panache1023
on Aug 31, 2009
Mike Galos, Actually that's the wrong question. The right question from Redmond is: "Should gaining new features be the driving reason behind PAYING FOR a new OS?" To which the answer is always, "No. You should pay Redmond any time they decide they screwed up the last release so majorly, that they need to recover the money they should have made had they done it correct the first time."
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
The Apple 64bit approach is so much better for the user. Under Windows If you are running XP64bit, Vista 64bit, or Windows 7 64bit and you have a piece of hardware that works perfectly but does not have a 64bit driver your choices are: 1. Throw away that hardware, and buy new hardware that is supported in Windows 64bit. 2. Format your hard drive and reload a 32bit version, provided you have a key for the 32bit version. Backup all your data before you attempt this at home. Its a WIN, WIN for the user:( In Snow Leopard if your driver/software does not work in 64bit mode, reboot into 32bit. Most users would hate that because its so easy. Imagine if Microsoft sold a single version of Windows 7 (Ultimate) that was a hybrid 32/64bit that cost $29. This single $29 hybrid, ultimate version would upgrade a Vista machine, with or with out a OS on the drive. It will never happen, but go ahead for a moment and imagine that.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
evgenij, You're supported by Apple. Why if you want 64-bit support all you have to do is go down to your local Apple Store and say, "Hi, I'd like to throw away my old Mac and buy a new one." They'll be happy to support you doing that.
Ocean
on Aug 31, 2009
"The reality is that you can ONLY use the 64-bit kernel if ALL of t the following are true:" But you can run 64 bit apps with either kernel.
Ocean
on Aug 31, 2009
"According to Cupertino and its shameless pundits: When Leopard was released? Yes. Snow Leopard? No." Companies will say what they have to to market their wares. What do *you* think: "Should gaining new features be the driving reason behind upgrading your OS?"
panache1023
on Aug 31, 2009
Weird how you can't even answer a simple question. My question to you didn't even MENTION apple.
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
"Now, it was a valid problem back in the early days of Windows XP 64-bit back in 2005 which is where Apple users find themselves today." That was a valid problem in 2007 when Vista shipped. Heck its still a problem today. Greatly reduced of course but its still a problem.
evgenij
on Aug 31, 2009
mikegalos, You're right again. Too bad that won't happen. My next purchase will be a PC which I'll be happy to build myself.
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
I bet next version of OS X will only boot in 64bit kernel mode, say 2 years from now 10.7. I also predict Mike will moan, even though he does not own any Apple hardware, that users of 32bit (core solo/core duo) Macs wont be able to upgrade to 10.7, in 2011. Lastly I predict that it will be a huge hit, bigger than Snow Leopard.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
rr0de And I'll predict that whenever Hairless Siamese Cat ships the Mac fanatics will say it's fine that their overpriced two year old hardware won't support its features.
Waethorn
on Aug 31, 2009
"So what can a "pure" 64-bit OS do that a hybrid 32-bit/64-bit OS cannot?" Run 64-bit threads in native-mode on the CPU, which is faster than hybrid mode. A 32-bit kernel requires the CPU to always be in hybrid mode. WOW64 makes the CPU switch modes for 32-bit threads. 64-bit threads still run in native mode. That's why Microsoft chose to use that option. The bigger question here is: Why didn't Apple just update the firmware to be 64-bit EFI if that's all it took to make those systems bootable into a 64-bit kernel? The answer? They didn't think to put enough storage space on the flash ROM for a 64-bit firmware. Apple's EFI is a joke.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
Let's compare and see who is worth trusting with a 64-bit OS Apple: 2003 - Mac OS X 10.4 (Panther) - Announced as the new 64-bit platform 2005 - Mac OS X 10.5 (Tiger) - Announced as the new "enhanced" 64-bit platform in the first of several "now we're doing 64-bit for real" announcements 2007 - Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) - Announced as the new 64-bit platform along with an admission that Tiger wasn't "true 64-bit" 2009 - Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) - Announced as the new 64-bit platform along with an admission that Leopard wasn't "true 64-bit but only supports 64-bit as a non-default option available only on a few models made within a year of release. Microsoft Developed but not shipped: Windows 2000 ported to 64-bit Alpha - project killed by DEC during RC2 testing Developed and Released: Windows 2000 Server (Intel IA64) Windows XP (Intel IA64) Windows Server 2003 (Intel IA64) Windows Server 2003 R2 (Intel IA64) Windows Server 2008 (Intel IA64) Windows Server 2008 R2 (Intel IA64) Windows XP (X64) Windows Server 2003 (X64) Windows Server 2003 R2 (X64) Windows Server 2008 (X64) Windows Server 2008 R2 (X64) Windows Vista (X64) Windows 7 (X64)
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
panache "My question to you didn't even MENTION apple." Seeing that this is a topic about Apple, you're actually bragging about being completely off-topic.
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
You are probably right Mike. At the same time Windows 7 SE will still ship in both 32bit and 64bit versions, 5 each that is. Upgrade pricing will be $199 for the Pro version. There will be a cheaper pre-order price for digital downloads (while supplies last????) The winsupersite will post thousands of screen shots of every build leading up to release. Paul will tell everyone about the Killer new feature, "Live Products Pre-Installed" and will remind everyone he was the first to break this news, for 5 years after that post.
Waethorn
on Aug 31, 2009
Dude, where's my ZFS?
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/08/31/apple_confirms_annual_ipod... The day the Zune HD gets kicked in the nuts. Mike G has promised to post a review of the iPod Touch that you can actually buy on that day, to the Zune 120 since the HD wont be out.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
Waethorn "Dude, where's my ZFS?" At Sun or Oracle or whoever they are this week (but not, apparently, at Apple despite it being on the list of features not just for Snow Leopard but for Leopard itself - although strangely then only in a read-only mode) But, hey, I'm sure Steve Jobs minions will happily tell you why you don't need a modern file system.
panache1023
on Aug 31, 2009
Mike, I think you may be slightly retarded. You were talking about drivers. I had a question regarding your statement. You can't follow that? Explains why you can't answer simple questions.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
rr0de So are you predicting that Apple will release: A drop in iPod pricing to make it compatible with Zune HD (which you can order today) A subscription model that let's you get unlimited listens for $15 and includes 10 song purchases per month An increase in screen resolution True HD out HD Radio (and, for that matter radio at all) Tegra chipset OLED high-res screen An iTunes that actually works I actually predict that on the 9th you'll be back here telling us why any of those shipped by Apple are incredible Apple innovations and any that aren't shipped by Apple are stupid things nobody needs. (But you won't know which until Cuptertino tells you what to think) Or do you want to go on the record now (beyond something like "whatever Apple does is good and whatever anybody else does sucks") Didn't think so. That would require thought rather than being a loyal follower.
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
Apple is waiting to make sure their version of ZFS is compatible with WinFS:)
panache1023
on Aug 31, 2009
Mike, And what does MS have to say regarding modern filesystems? Just curious. I meant, NTFS is such a piece of crap, it still requires defragmentation....talk about being in the stoneage. What every happened to WinFS? I'm sure Steve Ballmer will tell you why you don't need a modern file system
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 31, 2009
rr0de Feel free to compare and contrast the current version of NTFS with whatever bag on a bag Apple has built on top of HFS It'd be amusing.
yoshipod
on Aug 31, 2009
Mike - How easy it is to switch between all those various Windows versions. When I install 64 bit Windows 7 on my core duo laptop in October...oh wait, I won't be able to install that on my two year old machine....it does not support it. :) A two year old machine cant run 64 bit Windows 7. Microsoft left behind. When I install 64 bit Windows 7 on my computer and need to boot into 32 bit windows to use an older piece of hardware, can I do that simply by restarting the machine and holding down two keys? Do I need to buy a new version of the OS? Do I need to reinstall the entire OS? So while you may mock 10.6 for being a hybrid, it actually offer MORE flexibility than Windows 7 will.
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
Mike I am not predicting anything. The FACT is you cant touch a Zune HD. Yet you were asking to have it compared to the current iTouch the other day. I am just asking that you do the same, compare the new iTouch on the 9th to the best Zune you can buy on that day. Now I might be wrong, Apple might say the new iTouch will be available at the end of the month. They usually hard launch but sometimes they do so with in 30 days. As to all that other stuff, I honestly dont care. There is NO way I would buy a Zune. I dont think its a bad product, but at this point I have had nothing but a great experience with iPod products, including iTunes and I have invested $$$ in devices like the Bose sound station that works with my iPods. Anyhow I stand by my prediction, the Zune HD gets kicked in the nuts, buy a cheaper iTouch, that you can have sooner. Amazon will see a huge spike in Zune HD pre-order canalizations.
EricoF3
on Aug 31, 2009
@All: And again, NEAR NOBODY NEED 64BITS OS!!!! Only certain specific software need it so... This is a false problem...
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
Wow this blog went down. NTFS fragged? I agree with you EricoF3 98% of users dont need more than 4gig or more than a dual core.
SPiotr
on Aug 31, 2009
@mike galos Sorry OT but refers back to the howling anti-trust at Apple post. I am really surprised at how hard it is to find OS market share figures for the period when Microsoft was in hot water with the DOJ .... however I found these:http://www.wgss.com/models/win95.htm Are they even remotely close?
UnnDunn
on Aug 31, 2009
rr0de74: I HAVE touched, played with and throughly fondled a Zune HD (at the recent Best Buy sneak preview event.) As a music and media player, it completely destroys the iPod Touch. It's not even a contest. And I own an iPod Touch (first-gen.) From a media playback standpoint, the only thing iPod Touch has that Zune HD doesn't is a loudspeaker. By contrast, Zune HD has HD Radio (which sounds fantastic), can play and output 720p movies and has an extremely well-done UI. Once Microsoft gets the Zune HD app store going, it will be quite a formidable competitor in the PMP space.
TEAMSWITCHER
on Aug 31, 2009
First off, this is not a site about religion or politics, its about computer software. Unlike religion of politics, different approaches to the same problem (like the 32 to 64 bit transition) are useful and can be compared and contrasted. Future transitions could benefit from studying the Microsoft and Apple solutions to the same problem. One feature I like in Snow Leopard is the ability to see a list of the installed applications in the System Profiler utility. It also shows if they are 32 or 64 bit apps. Does Windows 7 have a feature like this? Apple's focus was clearly set on getting applications recompiled for 64-bit operation. The OS, while important, was left at 32-bit to provide maximum compatibility.
Ocean
on Aug 31, 2009
"Let's compare and see who is worth trusting with a 64-bit OS" This is what Mike does when he loses an argument...changes the subject. You know, facts really annoy him.
rr0de74@live.com
on Aug 31, 2009
@UnnDunn is "completely destroys" a technical term? How does this Zune HD "completely destroy" the iTouch? Please tell us. How did your 30 seconds with the Zune HD compare to your review of the iTouch that will be released on Sept 9th? Please do tell. While I wont discount the radio completely, as some people probably use it, I dont listen to radio and have not for some years unless I am in a rental that cant jack my iPod, but that means nothing. I will discount the 720p output. I will discount it on any device of that size right now. I will bet you that less than 1% of users will buy such a device and actually use 720p out. How many 720p movies can you fit on even the largest Zune HD? I know when I rip a movie, and normal wide screen SD movie at 2000bit rate its about 3gig per movie. I bet a 720p movie would be 8-12gig. So on a 32gig Zune HD I could get 3 maybe 4 HD movies on it? How long would it take to sync 3 12gig movies, hour, maybe 2? That said I bet the new iTouch will have 720p out. There are youtube videos showing the 3GS doing 1080p right now. http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/20/iphone-3gs-totally-capable-of-1080p-v... Since the new iTouch will basically be a 3GS minus the phone (faster CPU, better camera, compas etc.), I am betting Apple will support at least 720p officially just to take the thunder from the Zune a week before its available. I also bet they will offer a 64gig iTouch for $399 so you can fit 7-8 HD movies on it:( Some day when these devices have 128-256megs of storage, and you can readily download compressed HD movies from iTunes/Zune then it might be a feature that is wanted. Right now its a bullet point on a powerpoint slide, like squirting.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use