Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: mactel-linux.org

Stories and comments across the archive that link to mactel-linux.org.

Comments · 14

  1. Re:The Tenuous EULA Claim Apple May Make by nawcom · · Score: 1 · on Second Mac Clone Maker Set To Sell, With a Twist

    The only difference between the hardware OpenTech uses and the hardware Apple uses is.. well... just the Apple logo on it. I don't wan't to go through hardware comparisons as I've done in a previous osx86 article, but all of the hardware - wireless card (broadcom/atheros, aka "Airport Extreme"), intel motherboard (aka apple "logic board"), realtek audio chip, marvell ethernet card, toshiba bluetooth card, synaptics touchpad, ageres firewire card, all inside a quanta laptop casing. All of them have the Apple logo on them, of course. I guess you can point at the fact that they use EFI compared to BIOS, though as of now you can buy PC motherboard with EFI.

    http://www.mactel-linux.org/wiki/Lspci

    Do you see my point yet? it's okay if you haven't. I don't know about you, but I personally think that using the term "Mac Clone" isn't correct anymore, especially with open source devs porting drivers to OS X as of now. Perhaps some hardware vendors may be using the term "Mac OS X-compatible" 5 years from now. I guess it all comes down to Jobs changing his ways.

  2. Re:Remember this is the same Apple that ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1 · on iPhone SDK Rules Block Skype, Firefox, Java ...

    Jobs handed down an Edict with the release of the mac that any and all companies wanting to write software for apple machines had to write buisness software (as jobs didn't want his apple machines to be thought of as game machines, plus he wanted to take over the buisness market from IBM) or he would pull their licences to write software for apple. Are you on drugs or something? You don't need a license to write Mac software. The APIs are public. Every single copy of MacOS X ever shipped has a full featured set of developer tools and documentation on the disc, the same tools used by Apple to build the entire OS and all of Apple's own apps.

    (Or are you talking about the original 1984 Mac? If so I think you're still smoking crack.)

    This caused all the game companies to jump from writing games for apple to writing games for pc's which had no such restrictions. This was a major mistake that apple has had to live with since and though apple has made several atempts to lure gaming companies back to putting games on the mac they have refused because of fear that jobs may pull such a stunt again when he thinks it suits him. There are many companies which write and sell games for the Mac. There are fewer titles than on PCs but this is due to economics. Nobody cites fear of Jobs closing off the Mac market to games! And there are major gaming companies which treat the Mac as a first-class citizen. Blizzard is the most prominent example. id Software has also been friendly, to the point that Jobs has had John Carmack demo new game technology at MacWorld Expo.

    Up until recently windows was also restricted from running on the mac as well as linux, Beos etc. I could be wrong but as far as i know Linux and other such open source OSes are still unable to run on even an intel mac.

            At least I havent heard of any cases of linux on a mac have you? You are grossly ignorant. I ran Linux and BeOS on my (PowerPC) Macs 12 years ago. I could've run several BSD variants as well, had I wanted to.

    There are no artificial restrictions on what operating systems you can run on Mac hardware. Especially not today. The only reason there is any difficulty running other operating systems on Intel Macs is that Apple chose to use EFI instead of classic BIOS.

    That was why Apple released Boot Camp. BC is nothing more than a driver pack and a set of tools needed to overcome Windows' lack of support for EFI. BC consisted of firmware updates to add a BIOS emulation module to Apple's EFI implementation, a tool to create a partition for Windows to live in (which requires the creation of a fake DOS partition table so Windows can actually see the partition correctly, since Windows doesn't understand EFI's native GPT partition table format), and a driver pack. You'll note that none of this is software to crack open a closed platform -- it's just adaptation layers to let an OS which is lagging in support for EFI work, plus some hardware drivers.

    In fact, people hacked up a crude version of those adaptation layers well before Apple released Boot Camp. There was nothing there to stop them and no legal threats were ever made. They only stopped development because Boot Camp eliminated the need.

    As for Linux: http://www.mactel-linux.org/wiki/HOWTO
  3. Re:Big and bulky by Anubis350 · · Score: 1 · on February 2008 Hardware Roundup

    oh, you may be interested in this

  4. Re:Mac on Linux on PPC yes, Intel? Nope Won't Work by Anthony+Baby · · Score: 1 · on Run Mac OS X Apps On Linux?

    Thanks for the response. My iMac uses an NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT. I need audio to work, and I need the interal iSight camera to work as well. I have seen a few HOWTOs on getting Ubuntu working on a MacBook. Sleep was brought up in a few places as being spotty. There was also some talk about Airport support and Airport Extreme support having issues as well.

    My theory so far... if a MacBook can run Linux fine albiet with some hiccups, then an new gen iMac can as well. And sure enough, there are pictures here.

    But yes, this is the nature of depending on proprietary software for a closed system. Honestly though, this wasn't any different from the headaches I had trying to get Linux on my old HP PC and supporting all the freaking DirectX and WDM-based video equipment I had. Can someone recommend a current generation personal computer that was *made* just for Linux, PPC preferably, and that isn't totally spartan. ;-)

  5. yeah, it's sad you can't run linux on macs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Intel's Single Thread Acceleration

    http://www.mactel-linux.org/wiki/Main_Page

  6. Re:Forget stolen (ok-unlicensed) OSX; Where's Myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Hacker Turns $300 Apple TV into Cheapest Mac Ever

    it already runs linux.
    http://www.mactel-linux.org/wiki/AppleTV

  7. Re:Not true by entrylevel · · Score: 3, Insightful · on Opening Zune Sales Flaccid

    Wrong, wrong (1|2), and wrong.

  8. Re:SUSE does it better by Jonny_eh · · Score: 1 · on A Mac Fan's Take On Vista

    You cannot run it on a macbook, or any intel based mac. At least not yet.

    Work is still ongoing: http://www.mactel-linux.org/

    Too bad Apple doesn't help us open-source lovers as much as they helped MS with boot camp.

  9. Re:Sweet, but what about dual boot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Triple Boot on MacBooks Working

    Because Fdisk tools only edit the MBR. But yes, you can boot linux using Boot Camp, or you could head on over to http://www.mactel-linux.org/wiki/Main_Page and start poking around. 3D acceleration works with the ATI drivers if you install using Boot Camp. :-)

  10. Re:Sweet, but what about dual boot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative · on Triple Boot on MacBooks Working
    So, can it be done?
    Yes. It has been done. You can find info to dual boot Linux on IMacs (that's Intel Macs) here and here.
  11. Re:Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Apple Officially Releases Beta Dual Boot Loader

    Maybe this helps http://www.mactel-linux.org/wiki/Main_Page

  12. Re:The Good, the Bad and the Ugly by eklitzke · · Score: 2, Informative · on Windows XP on Intel Mac Confirmed

    You mean like this? http://www.osxbook.com/book/bonus/misc/knoppix/
    Or perhaps this? http://www.mactel-linux.org/wiki/Main_Page

  13. Why is everyone bitching? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful · on No EFI Support for Vista

    EFI may have some advantages but *REMEMBER* EFI is part of the Trusted Computing design. Interestingly, I had to dig through to an old January 11 version of the EFI page at wikipedia that details this. It seems like someone has edited out this information:

    The Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) is an updated BIOS specification developed by Intel. Designed for use with trusted computing, it allows vendors to create drivers which cannot be reverse engineered. It also allows operating systems to run in a sandbox, delegating networking and memory management to the firmware. Hardware access is converted to calls to the EFI drivers. The EFI BIOS is used to select the operating system, replacing boot loaders.

    I'm not for conspiracy theories but reading the Intel EFI 1.1 spec and looking at how Apple has resorted to locking out XP and requires a separate HFS+ partition to get dualboot Linux on a MacTel. Luckily Linux can be booted from HFS+ but do you think this will always be the case? EFI could be used in the future to prevent untrusted file systems, operating systems, kernel-level (not just EFI) drivers or apps from making use of a computer. So where are we on this /.? I find it stupid that people are chiding Microsoft for failing to include a feature like this. Yet when a real threat is shown that *IS* going to be included, there is very little coverage of the boycott. As much as I hate Microsoft, I'm not giving them crap for not including another device that will take the keys away from MY hardware.

  14. elilo? by Ledsock · · Score: 4, Interesting · on No EFI Support for Vista

    I guess this means that someone is going to have to hack a Linux bootloader to boot Windows. Maybe something with elilo. It's be kinda cool for these guys to say, "Sure. You can run Windows on an Intel Mac. You just gotta install Linux first!"