Slashdot Mirror

and since you have to buy the hardware to use the OS, screw it, I'm not using the OS.

Yeah, that bothers me too a little

Not matter what Apple says into the matter, in fact, you can. Just make sure you have purchased a OS/X license at the shop to be in the clear.

Because Apple only supports a subset of the PC hardware, you need to be a bit choosy, but I have had no trouble on a 3-y-o AMD64 setup. I prefer Linux on that box though, but it was nice to be able to try :-)

(Ignore my previous post that's what I get for messing with my settings without my glasses on.)

There are lots of ways to install OS X on any hardware. So you can do it right now, if you're serious. Stability or features or not guaranteed.

Here is one place: http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
and their forum: http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showforum=85

http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/964/install_osx_tiger_on_intel_usb_drives_windows

http://www.uneasysilence.com/os-x-proven-hacked-and-running-on-an-ordinary-pc/

http://asendure.wordpress.com/2006/10/01/osx86-how-to-install-mac-os-x-on-vmware-server-amd-64/

So, go install it already. It is what I will probably do with my next machine. OS X/Linux and XP for games/Vista for games with DX10.

There are lots of ways to install OS X on any hardware. So you can do it right now if you're serious. Stability or features or not guaranteed. Here is one place: http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page and their forum: http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showforum=85 http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/964/install_osx_tiger_on_intel_usb_drives_windows http://www.uneasysilence.com/os-x-proven-hacked-and-running-on-an-ordinary-pc/ http://asendure.wordpress.com/2006/10/01/osx86-how-to-install-mac-os-x-on-vmware-server-amd-64/ So, go install it already. It is what I will probably do with my next machine. XP/ OS X/ maybe Linux /Vista for games with DX10.

Find out how to do it here.

Looks like a PITA, but a possible one if you really know what you're doing.

I guess you get what you pay for with them...

A dissenting opinion, for what it's worth - a friend of mine has an Acer still going fine after about two years. Indeed, I have just installed Mac OS X on it, thanks to those wonderful people over at the OSx86 Project, and it does a very good job. Admittedly, it wasn't one of their cheapest models, but with a Pentium M and a "proper" graphics card (i.e. dedicated memory; none of that shared crap), at least it's got a decent set of components.

Frankly, I can't see the point of buying anything other than cheap brands like Acer when sourcing PC hardware, as you're only going to be running Windows on it anyway. What is the point of paying a fortune for some Sony crap when at the end of the day, what's on the screen is just the same as what you get on a machine that costs half the price? At least when you buy a Mac, the higher price (although even that is debatable) gets you some decent software, which from a day-to-day use perspective is what matters more in the long run anyway.

iqu :|

It's not even that hard. People were running OSX on generic hardware almost as soon as the x86 version was released. http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_P age

Keep OS X and just run linux in VMWare Fusion. OS X has its perks... if Apple releases firmware updates, you'll get them. If you're running linux, you won't.

A better solution is to run OSx86 (OSX hacked to run on non-Apple hardware) under VMWare on Linux :

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_P age

I'm not saying it's necessarily technically better, but when you tell Mac zealots what you're doing a lot of them will get so angry that a heart attack or cerebral hemorrhage becomes quite likely.

Can I have a +5 Informative Troll, please?

The difference between mac notebooks and hp notebooks? About $1000.

The major difference is price, you are not paying for hardware, you are paying for the pretty plastic box and the operating system. You should go with the HP notebooks and explore the MacOSX86 project. I have seen several triple-booting (Windows/MacOSX/Linux) laptops (HPs, Acers, etc.). Ie. you can run MacOS on your AMD64 or Intel notebook (albeit not 100% legally).

In response to the original story, I don't really get why they wouldn't just dual boot... Have a common ext3 or ntfs-3g partition for doing all your work, storage, etc. If you want to use iMovie one day, boot to MacOSX, if you want to use Kino, boot to linux. The same movie could be accessed by both OSes. Why delete MacOSX? That is what you paid the extra $1000 for in the first place!

But will it run Li- Oh. Right. Never mind.

That question is answered, but a few may also wonder if they can get OS X (patched) to run on it.

Details of the chipset might help predict success or problems.

What growth market? Linux has ownzored the server market long ago and still leads. (I'm not going to bother check the numbers when I remember about 70% marketshare for Apache) The growth market is on the desktop, and possibly in embedded...

I'm not concerned anyway : I've tested Vista, it told me it wouldn't play a standard DVD because "there was no protected path for HD content." Game Over, never again. "Vista is unusable forever, it's a crapware with a shiny skin."
Then I used Ubuntu some months, and while I really enjoy read/write support for every FS under the sun or in the Turing Tar-Pit, now that I installed MacOSX 'just to see' (and use Adobe software w/o Windows malware), *I'm never going back*. I'll just migrate my data to HFS+ partitions eventually... If you have a compatible PC, just try it (Hardware Compatibility List here)

I'll quote the relevant statement again: "Nevertheless, it is important to note that Apple does not use the TPM." Yes, it's there in shipping hardware (hence the BoingBoing article about Apple not using them on recent shipping Macs, and the Singh article about using the TPM) but Apple doesn't use it.

TPM statement was added on Feb 2007, a couple of months after Apple started shipping TPM-less Macs. It's wrong.

Are you reading any of the links I'm posting? Singh isn't talking about "applications that Apple uses in general" he's talking about system binaries like Dock, Finder, loginwindow, SystemUIServer, in addition to Rosetta. And yes, the developer kit used TPM to lock down Rosetta, but not in shipping Macs.

I posted this above, but:

1. I assure you I am typing right now on a Mactel computer (Macbook Pro) which does indeed have TPM (ioreg confirms this)

2. The people who got it running on non-apple PCs claim they had to work around TPM:

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Techni cal_FAQ

3. Yes, but we're not talking about the applications that Apple uses in general, and thus has nothing to do with encrypted binaries. Again, according to their FAQ this is primarily done for installation of OS X and for using Rosetta.

According to these sources, Apple has used TPM before, though appears to be staying away from it for the most part.

1. According to the FAQ from the people who did the work (os86 group):

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/FAQ#Do _I_need_Apple_hardware_to_run_Mac_OS_X.3F

they had to work around the TPM, stating:

"The "Trusted Platform Module," or TPM, is a computer chip embedded inside Intel-based Macs to prevent the Intel-based version of Mac OS X from running on non-Apple hardware. (during installation of Mac OS X, Mac OS X interfaces with the TPM. If Mac OS X finds that the TPM doesn't exist, Mac OS X refuses to install or run.)"

They state that they bypass the interaction with TPM in the software. So Gruber seems to be correct in relaying the information. Which leaves the osx86 group being misinformed (?) or lying.

2. The apple computers are essentially just PCs with an Apple logo. In order to keep OS X from running on other PCs, Apple had to take specific steps to stop this from happening.

3. From my Macbook Pro (1st revision), ioreg returns:

        | +-o TPM class IOACPIPlatformDevice, registered, matched, active, busy 0$

One possibility is that Apple *used* to use TPM to allow their OS to only run on Apple products. Perhaps after the osx86 group made the hack, they decided it wasn't worth the money to try to stop it.

4. The claim is that the TPM is on the ARM processor itself, which means it wouldn't be obviously visible to someone taking the device apart. Again, this isn't something that Apple would've done themselves (just like they wouldn't have put the Jazelle capabilities in).

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_P age There you go

Ah, Mac fanboys... you never cease to amaze me. You protest loudly about how Microsoft makes it hard to run Windows on a Mac. What about the fact that Apple makes it illegal to run OSX on your Dell???

The barrier is just as artificial. An Intel Mac is no different from a modern PC, except that Apple has added some hardware detection to the OS so that it won't run on non-Apple hardware. Of course, this hasn't stopped enterprising hackers from figuring out ways around it.

Apple and Microsoft are both producing proprietary software and trying to force hardware lock-in as well when it suits them. Actually, Apple's hardware lock-in is much worse.

Not to mention that the Mac Mini is an underpowered piece of crap. Why would I pay $600 for a mini when I can get a much more powerful mini-PC, or a fully loaded desktop with monitor, for that price??? But I digress...

I'm posting this from OSX 10.4.9, fully-updated, fully-functioning, and happily running on my Averatec AV4270. It's not "beta," it's not unstable. It's my only computer and it works wonderfully. This notebook is even white, so you can barely tell the difference!

If only Steve Jobs would get a clue, I could be doing it legally, too. I've never paid for an OS, but I'd pay for OSX. Heck, didn't Michael Dell come out a year or two ago and say he would love to pre-load OSX on Dells? And he's shown recently that he's not afraid to try something new.

http://www.osx86project.org/

One word: Hackintosh

It seems those running OS X on non-Apple hardware have also had similar issues. Life is simpler with boards based on the 945 or 975x and ICH7. (945 gives a lot of bang for the buck, the 975x generally allows the bus speed to be pushed much higher which is needed for overclocking with a locked CPU multiplier)
The lack of PATA support in the ICH8 chip normally paired with the 965 is what leads to addition of the JMicrom IDE controllers for PATA.
If a board can't talk to the PATA drives without added drivers, you can't boot from it. That's a major pain for people wanting to install the OS from a PATA CD or DVD drive. People end up resorting to using things like USB to PATA adaptor cables to do an install.

You seem to be misinformed.

but Apple only provides DRM-free versions of their operating system.

Really? Apple sells a version of OS X that I can run under vmware? I guess the osx86 project can shut down now.

OSx86 project

Sadly its pretty useless for math classes.

For all my math/engineering classes, I bit the bullet and got a Tablet PC. It's really great for writing equations and drawing diagrams. Of course, my situation is a bit different because I also needed something viable for programming and general-purpose use (and thus decided against buying and hacking one of these instead), but it still works out well.

The only downside is that there's really no viable tablet software for Linux or Mac OS*, so I'm stuck with Windows for the foreseeable future. I think I'll be a lot happier when KDE/Windows comes out...

(*My laptop should be capable of running OS X, albeit in violation of the EULA. The support for the Wacom serial tablet is the only remaining concern about that.)

By using these hacks you can install OSX on a plain, non-Apple computer. The hacks circumvent Apple DRM and thus they are illegal in America (I dont know about other countries). There is a wiki about all these illegal activities, http://www.osx86project.org/. Slashtot competitor, Digg, diggs everything about it.

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Vmware _how_to

-peepers

I want a faster Mac. I want more memory, higher LCD resolution, a backlit keyboard, and the ability to run Parallels or Boot Camp. I'd be willing to pay an absurd amount for these features (are you hearing me, Steve?), but I absolutely will not take a size trade-off. Not even a marginal one. 13" MacBook? Nope. Too big. I'll stick with my G4, thanks.

Ditto for me when replacing my 12" iBook, but I wanted a tablet also. Therefore, I bought a Thinkpad x60 tablet and intend to try to run OS X on it (once it's finally delivered -- it's in Kentucky right now). Would Apple approve? No, but who cares? I don't approve of Apple refusing to make the computer I need! Besides, when 10.5 comes out I'll just get a family pack for it, my iBook, and my iMac.

Incidentally, the regular x60 is 12", lighter than even the old Powerbook was, and has almost identical components to a MacBook except without the optical drive -- and almost everything works in OS X! Maybe you should just get one of those instead of plodding along with your G4...

http://www.osx86project.org/

OS X is already virtualised - it has been for ages. Not supported, but certainly doable.

Be nice if Apple gave a bit more help to their customers however - I am not a big fan of artifical restrictions.

Apple can't run on commodity hardware.

Are you sure about that?

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Vmware _how_to

bberens, time to wake up to get schooled
http://osx86project.org/
http://insanelymac.com/

Talk to me in about a month or so (when my X60t -- ordered a week ago -- finally arrives). I'll actually be able to tell you whether OSX86 works "well enough" on it.

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

> So Macintosh hardware can do everything a Mac can do and everything a PC can do, making the Mac the superior hardware choice. News flash. PC hardware can do everything a Mac can do and everything a PC can do, making crippled Mac operating software the inferior software choice.

BWA HA HA HA HA... you're joking right? No?

Oh, so you're just stupid then. OS X is the second-best OS on the planet (behind Linux), and the easiest to use.

> Please review the thousands of posts to the OSX86 project immediately after Apple released MacIntel hardware, and before they tightened down the screws on their software interface to TPM authentication.

What are you, some sort of retard? You can still run the latest versions of OS X on PCs. See http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Instal lation_Guides for help.

Is that why they reason why they include a TPM chip on the motherboard so you can't run OS X on other computers?

"It is a interoperability hell from a competition perspective and a interoperability paradise from a plattform perspective. Happiness in proprietary slavery?"

"Hypocrite much? Microsoft pushes Trusted Computing on you, is threatening to lock users out of hardware space altogether, and you're going to talk to us about Open Standards and Proprietary Slavery?"

You sir are the hypocrite. Apple's Intel Macs already contain a Trusted Platform Module chip, currently used by Apple to make sure that OSX doesn't run on a non-Apple Intel system.

With Macs, Apple knows that the customer is "stuck". Quality isn't as important, as the customer has already invested in software and training that is Mac-specific.

Just so you know, since even before OSX Intel was publically released, you've been able to run OSX on most standard PCs supporting SSE2 (SSE3 is much better as Rosetta apps will actually run).

You can run it natively, or inside VMWare either under Windows, or Linux. This should get you started: http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Vmware _how_to

In my opinion, moving to intel hardware is the smartest move Apple has made since... well... the Apple IIe. Yes even smarter than the iPod IMO.

I think a lot of what keeps people stuck using Windows, is not an inherent love for Windows itself, but rather a reliance on the software base, and ease of use / maintenance. I also believe that a lot of Windows success is directly related to software piracy. I can see piracy really helping Apple.

I would never pay the extra money for an Apple... but if I am given a choice between using OS X and Windows without having to pay extra money for one over the other, I'll choose OS X any day.

It IS possible to virtualize OS X on Windows, it's just not legal because of the whole OS X licence thing someone mentioned above. You can even do it inside of VMWare.

Check out the OSX86 Project.

Intel VT is codenamed vanderpool, here's a link to a pdf with a list of which processors have it. It's mainly the core duo's, and some of the pentium D and EE 9xx series. Core 2 Duo's will also support it.

AMD's VT is codenamed pacifica, and as far as I know, no processors have actually launched with it yet, though it's due soon. I stand to be corrected on that point, all AMD's articles press releases say yet is 'due first half 2006'

www.osx86project.org.

2005 called and wants their joke back.

Seriously though, people have been doing it since the first verrsion of 10.4 x86 was released to developers.
-Ed

The idea of giving a corrupt corporation (or anyone for that matter) control over my computer, my data, my work, and all that imporant stuff just makes me want to hurl. I won't tolerate it. I think my windows partition is about to get deleted... oh no... ooh I can't hold back my finger much longer! Oops, good bye, Bill. Good thing there is now another viable alternative on the Intel-based platform, in addition to Linux/Unix of course.

this guy tried it using these steps, and it seems to be working nicely for him. He had to delete his EFI partition, which i guess is not really used on x86 macbooks.

As always your mileage might vary i guess.

Doesn't run OSX? I'd say check out http://www.osx86project.org/

If your VAIO has at least SSE2 and a few gigs of hard drive space, it can run OSX.

OSX86 Project for more information.

Hmm.. I've heard otherwise.

Be sure to wear your asbestos pants, and earplugs.

Not every Macbook Pro "whines", but many do, so much so that Mac users are organizing an End the Whine - May 20th, 2006 in which every one with the problem calls Apple support on the same day to get Apple to address the problem (Apple's been ignoring it so far). ("End the Whine Day" also concerns the heat issues.)

If you're willing to hack around a bit, these guys can probably help you with getting a real OS on there.