Running OSX on your PC
The hack is out there
Friday, August 12, 2005 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize News
Thanks to a new hack, PC users can now run the beta of MacOS X for X86 on their standard PC. The first set of hacks required the user to run it via VMWare. But apparently newer hacks allow it to run as a regular operating system on a regular old PC.
Users of X86 MacOS have observed that the OS runs significantly faster on the X86 platform than on the PowerPC platform. There have been numerous explainations offered for why this is the case.
The fact that the hack exists already raises questions over the future of MacOS. It will be difficult for Apple to price their Mac-PCs at a premium if their OS runs just fine on a Dell or HP box. What has traditionally made the Macintosh "special" is its usability features -- the complete package. The Mac has had a certain mystique that is likely to be harmed if users perceive that the Mac is really just an OS that can run on any old hardware.
zxtt
Reply #2 Friday, August 12, 2005 12:28 PM
Reply #2 Friday, August 12, 2005 12:28 PM
A few people might run the hacked MacOS, but really, it isn't going to be an option for most of Apple's customers, is it? I would hope the reason for owning a Mac is that it works out of the box and stays working because of the tight control over hardware and because the user feels the OS is better than alternatives. If people only buy a Mac so that they can feel superior, then I guess there might be problems. But Mac users aren't that shallow, are they...?
Life is a Game
Reply #3 Friday, August 12, 2005 2:17 PM
Reply #3 Friday, August 12, 2005 2:17 PM
Apple should relase Mac OS X for PCs as well because Microsoft could use some real competition. I would be very happy to use Mac OS X on my PC. 
bakerstreet
Reply #4 Friday, August 12, 2005 2:41 PM
Reply #4 Friday, August 12, 2005 2:41 PM
I guess it depends on whether you think they'd do better as a hardware or software company. I've said several times over the years that I think they could do really well if they restructured and started offering their OS as competition to MS.
I mean, the division is artificial, anyway. They are opting not to compete, because they insist people buy their more expensive, though snazzy, hardware. They could have ported over to the PC years ago, though I assume they had "strategic agreements" in the form of the temporary Microsoft investment. I wonder if there wasn't a timeline involved in that agreement.
In the end, is the pride involved with being a "hardware" company worth keeping yourself down? Maybe I am overblowing it, but I think Mac would be a serious competitor with MC if IT folks could choose them without buying a building full of new hardware.
I've never bought the "works right out of the box" argument, because I think the complaints of limited software/hardware options are just as loud if not louder. I find it difficult to believe the average Dell computer is any more unfriendly "out of the box" than a g5.
The machines are beautiful, and maybe they could farm out their hardware business and keep the line going to some small extent. With designers and multimedia folks so enamored with Macs, though, and with low, low cost of PC hardware, i think you'd see lots of people make the "switch".
I mean, the division is artificial, anyway. They are opting not to compete, because they insist people buy their more expensive, though snazzy, hardware. They could have ported over to the PC years ago, though I assume they had "strategic agreements" in the form of the temporary Microsoft investment. I wonder if there wasn't a timeline involved in that agreement.
In the end, is the pride involved with being a "hardware" company worth keeping yourself down? Maybe I am overblowing it, but I think Mac would be a serious competitor with MC if IT folks could choose them without buying a building full of new hardware.
I've never bought the "works right out of the box" argument, because I think the complaints of limited software/hardware options are just as loud if not louder. I find it difficult to believe the average Dell computer is any more unfriendly "out of the box" than a g5.
The machines are beautiful, and maybe they could farm out their hardware business and keep the line going to some small extent. With designers and multimedia folks so enamored with Macs, though, and with low, low cost of PC hardware, i think you'd see lots of people make the "switch".
liquidguru
Reply #5 Friday, August 12, 2005 5:40 PM
Reply #5 Friday, August 12, 2005 5:40 PM
i must say, that given the general felling that piracy is a very bad thing on this website, to publish a story that could well encourage people to download this 'hack' seems a little like double standards...if this article had been 'a hack for adobe photshop cs2', telling everyone that you can get a 'hack' (key gen) to turn the freely avaliable trial version of photoshop into a fully activated copy on your pc this post would already be swarming with replies about what a bad thing to write about and blah blah blah piracy piracy piracy....the mac os is just software after all....
i'm confused...is 'hacking' ok if it's against mac?...does 'hacking' equate to piracy or is 'hacking' something else....i'm not trying to make a point either way, just asking...
i'm confused...is 'hacking' ok if it's against mac?...does 'hacking' equate to piracy or is 'hacking' something else....i'm not trying to make a point either way, just asking...
TexasJoe
Reply #6 Friday, August 12, 2005 6:29 PM
Reply #6 Friday, August 12, 2005 6:29 PM
I think this is simply in response to Mac fanboys and girls who claimed when Steve Jobs announced MacIntels that Mac OS X Tiger would never work on a PC. Well they were wrong. Now Apple will have to consider a little more seriously whether they want to release Mac OS X to PC users or keep them out of the Apple fan club and let them use pirated versions over and over. Their call now. There's a market to tap into and money to make.
Tominated
Reply #7 Friday, August 12, 2005 8:11 PM
Reply #7 Friday, August 12, 2005 8:11 PM
You wouldn't know where to get it would you? It would be great if someone could tell me, i love OSX 
Island Dog
Reply #8 Friday, August 12, 2005 8:18 PM
Reply #8 Friday, August 12, 2005 8:18 PM
I really believe they will offer OSX for the PC.
Jafo
Reply #9 Friday, August 12, 2005 8:54 PM
Reply #9 Friday, August 12, 2005 8:54 PM
| i'm confused...is 'hacking' ok if it's against mac?...does 'hacking' equate to piracy or is 'hacking' something else....i'm not trying to make a point either way, just asking... |
Discussing the ramifications of a 'hack', the morality, etc ....is fine. The only time it'll be censured here is when it actually includes a blow by blow description of how to do it.
Saying "photoshop 6 has a crack" is one thing...."the PS6 crack is imtoopathetictopay123456" is not....
starkers
Reply #10 Friday, August 12, 2005 8:57 PM
And so would I, but without the hack to enable it. If Apple were to support PC compliant OS X, I would most certainly give it a try, but not otherwise. With 'authentication' and other anti-piracy measures becoming a factor these days, it would eventually become an obsolete OS because updates and security patches were not available, so surely it's a better thing to be honest from the start, anyway. I can well imagine some would say that it's not an issue because there'll always be hacks to apply patches and updates, but to me, it seems like a whole lot of work and effort to be dishonest and the alternative is preferrable.
Yes, it seems to me that Apple could have its cake and eat it too if Steve Jobs would bite the bullet and develop OS X for Intel based PC's while continuing to produce OS X on Mac hardware. Of course there will always be purists on both sides of the fence who disagree with this, but in putting the OS wars mentality aside, it would become a win, win situation for end-users of both persuasions, in a competitive market that must work harder for consumer dollars.
Reply #10 Friday, August 12, 2005 8:57 PM
| I would be very happy to use Mac OS X on my PC. |
And so would I, but without the hack to enable it. If Apple were to support PC compliant OS X, I would most certainly give it a try, but not otherwise. With 'authentication' and other anti-piracy measures becoming a factor these days, it would eventually become an obsolete OS because updates and security patches were not available, so surely it's a better thing to be honest from the start, anyway. I can well imagine some would say that it's not an issue because there'll always be hacks to apply patches and updates, but to me, it seems like a whole lot of work and effort to be dishonest and the alternative is preferrable.
| There's a market to tap into and money to make. |
Yes, it seems to me that Apple could have its cake and eat it too if Steve Jobs would bite the bullet and develop OS X for Intel based PC's while continuing to produce OS X on Mac hardware. Of course there will always be purists on both sides of the fence who disagree with this, but in putting the OS wars mentality aside, it would become a win, win situation for end-users of both persuasions, in a competitive market that must work harder for consumer dollars.
Xira
Reply #11 Friday, August 12, 2005 9:11 PM
Reply #11 Friday, August 12, 2005 9:11 PM
It's slower than PearPC in VMWare.
Not a lot of device drivers.
Good luck, kiddies.
Not a lot of device drivers.
Good luck, kiddies.
bakerstreet
Reply #12 Friday, August 12, 2005 11:38 PM
I don't think Brad or anyone else is suggesting anyone use this, though I'm sure he's gonna love being called a kiddie.
What this could be is a hint that they are building in the ability to quickly get a x86 PC version of their OS on the market without much time and effort if they later opt to do so.
I'll say again that I think we are dealing with a timeline that was agreed upon several years ago when MS injected that cash into Apple. Their investment is long since over, and now maybe we are seeing the "waiting period" they bought come to an end.
Call me paranoid, but it seems plausible to me.
Reply #12 Friday, August 12, 2005 11:38 PM
| "Good luck, kiddies." |
I don't think Brad or anyone else is suggesting anyone use this, though I'm sure he's gonna love being called a kiddie.
What this could be is a hint that they are building in the ability to quickly get a x86 PC version of their OS on the market without much time and effort if they later opt to do so.
I'll say again that I think we are dealing with a timeline that was agreed upon several years ago when MS injected that cash into Apple. Their investment is long since over, and now maybe we are seeing the "waiting period" they bought come to an end.
Call me paranoid, but it seems plausible to me.
TexasJoe
Reply #13 Saturday, August 13, 2005 5:09 AM
Reply #13 Saturday, August 13, 2005 5:09 AM
Having read accounts of folks who successfully installed OSx86, I wouldn't recommend venturing out that way to anyone who doesn't have a SSE2 AND SSE3 processor (those w/o SSE3 can still install it with the hack but a lot of stuff needing Rosetta won't function, a workaround is in preparation). The main problem right now is that a lot of your devices won't work because Apple didn't make kernel drivers for them. Therefore unless you have specs similar to the MacIntel Dev Kit (there's a compatibility list somewhere) you won't be getting a functional build. The installation is hard and may be dangerous to your current Windows installation if you don't know what you're doing. A VMWare image of the build all patches applied seems to be now available in certain places. I would personally like to wait until Apple releases a $129 Mac OS X version for PC's that works pretty much Out Of the Box, where I can get sound, network, 2D/3D capabilities...
starkers
Reply #14 Saturday, August 13, 2005 11:18 AM
It makes better sense, doesn't it. Given the various issues being raised, a hacked version of OS X could never offer peace of mind.....not like the genuine artice with full Apple support. The hacked version in a PC would be akin to putting a moped motor into a Cadillac...incompatible design, don't belong. It might run, but not with the same efficiency or stability.
Besides, I've lived 'til now without OS X, so waiting a while longer for Apple's blessing isn't gonna hurt me
Reply #14 Saturday, August 13, 2005 11:18 AM
| I would personally like to wait until Apple releases a $129 Mac OS X version for PC's that works pretty much Out Of the Box, where I can get sound, network, 2D/3D capabilities... |
It makes better sense, doesn't it. Given the various issues being raised, a hacked version of OS X could never offer peace of mind.....not like the genuine artice with full Apple support. The hacked version in a PC would be akin to putting a moped motor into a Cadillac...incompatible design, don't belong. It might run, but not with the same efficiency or stability.
Besides, I've lived 'til now without OS X, so waiting a while longer for Apple's blessing isn't gonna hurt me
thecat2000
Reply #15 Saturday, August 13, 2005 11:56 AM
Reply #15 Saturday, August 13, 2005 11:56 AM
no hacking and piracy these days seem to go hand in hand - but its not the same thing, just often used to circumvent software for full use. Hacking in general can really be anything to hacking your registry settings to tweak the settings or changing the system settings to further the use of your system. Hacking is also unauthorised access and use of some thing. So not sure the word hacking is really correct when referring to certain things. But the word hacking in this case is appropriate - but doesnt nessarily mean Piracy ! 'Piracy'= illigal distrobution and use of copyrighted material and infringements of intellectual properties.. 
TexasJoe
Reply #16 Saturday, August 13, 2005 5:50 PM
Totally! I think getting Mac OS X to work on a PC was more of a challenge in the first place and does not purport to offer a functional OS to anybody, thereby hurting Apple's business.
well there's a little bit of Monica in my life, a little bit of Erica by my side, and a little bit of piracy in OSx86!
Reply #16 Saturday, August 13, 2005 5:50 PM
| It makes better sense, doesn't it. Given the various issues being raised, a hacked version of OS X could never offer peace of mind..... |
Totally! I think getting Mac OS X to work on a PC was more of a challenge in the first place and does not purport to offer a functional OS to anybody, thereby hurting Apple's business.
| but doesnt nessarily mean Piracy ! 'Piracy'= illigal distrobution and use of copyrighted material and infringements of intellectual properties.. |
well there's a little bit of Monica in my life, a little bit of Erica by my side, and a little bit of piracy in OSx86!
starkers
Reply #17 Saturday, August 13, 2005 10:38 PM
I beg to differ....the current version of OS X is not licensed to run on standard Intel based PC's, so to hack it to do other than what Apple intended for ITS OWN product is a form of piracy and contravenes the license agreement.
Hacking or piracy...in any event it's dishonest and harms honest end users as well as the manufacturer
Reply #17 Saturday, August 13, 2005 10:38 PM
| But the word hacking in this case is appropriate - but doesnt nessarily mean Piracy ! |
I beg to differ....the current version of OS X is not licensed to run on standard Intel based PC's, so to hack it to do other than what Apple intended for ITS OWN product is a form of piracy and contravenes the license agreement.
Hacking or piracy...in any event it's dishonest and harms honest end users as well as the manufacturer
bakerstreet
Reply #18 Saturday, August 13, 2005 11:14 PM
...and it wasn't supposed to be released into the wild, anyway, if I understand the situation correctly. The one thing that they could rip MS a new one with, at least at first, would be their licensing. As someone with 3 PCs here in one room, I could really stand paying for one box and using it on all of them.
Reply #18 Saturday, August 13, 2005 11:14 PM
| "But the word hacking in this case is appropriate - but doesnt nessarily mean Piracy !" |
...and it wasn't supposed to be released into the wild, anyway, if I understand the situation correctly. The one thing that they could rip MS a new one with, at least at first, would be their licensing. As someone with 3 PCs here in one room, I could really stand paying for one box and using it on all of them.
gfcentral002
Reply #20 Friday, September 2, 2005 8:50 PM
Reply #20 Friday, September 2, 2005 8:50 PM
wish this stuff (OSX) would work on my amd athlon xp maybe i'll just get a new laptop and it be an apple *i'm in need of a new one anyways, mine is getting old and slow*
maybe i'll just get a new laptop and it be an apple *i'm in need of a new one anyways, mine is getting old and slow*Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
Reply #1 Friday, August 12, 2005 12:25 PM