Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mac OS X Running on Non-Apple Hardware

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the mac-of-borg dept.

MacBeliever writes "Inevitably, Mac OS X for x86 has been hacked to run on a non-Apple PC. Is this the beginning of the fulfillment of the Dvorak prophecy?" RetrogradeMotion also writes "The OSx86 Project has posted a how-to guide telling how to run OS X on any Windows or Linux-based PC using VMWare." Not 100% corroborated, so ingest with salt.

17 of 962 comments (clear)

  1. Random thoughts on Apple by bigwavejas · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Ok I'm naïve on the politics of this, so my post is more of a question than a answer. I know this is an argument that has gone back and forth, but here goes again...

    Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands? Sure, it might detract from them selling hardware (short term), but I can honestly say for me (average Joe) I've never purchased a Mac because they simply don't have the software titles I'm interested in and Windows does. I mean sure, they've got great stuff, but they lack in GAMES, yes games... I've said it, gotten it out. I'm a gamer and so are all of my friends. I'd venture to say a good chunk of those purchasing PC's are in the same group as me (surf the web and play games). So if the Apple OS became more popular, wouldn't more developers consider making a version of their game in the Apple OS flavor?

    --
    "Simplify, simplify, simplify!" Thoreau
    1. Re:Random thoughts on Apple by Radres · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ya' know, it's not unlike Steve Jobbs to say one thing and then end up turning around and doing the exact opposite, perhaps with the intent of throwing off his enemies. I can't find the sources right now and get a top post, but as an example, he specifically said that there would never be an iPod cell phone, and a few weeks later there was talk of one. Doesn't surprise me one bit that Apple is taking their OS which is vastly superior to Windows and trying to take on that huge market.

    2. Re:Random thoughts on Apple by pootypeople · · Score: 3, Interesting

      At least with regards to video, they're not working on *known* hardware as much anymore--you can get plenty of add-on video boards. They don't have to deal with processor/motherboard combinations they are unfamiliar with, but even that shouldn't give them that much trouble. Everyone makes a big deal about apple's "control" of hardware and how "good" their hardware is... Okay- I've owned both and my macs have lasted longer; however, there are reasons.

      My orginal Mac Plus would not be running today if I hadn't bought an additional fan to cool the power supply--alot of Mac Pluses had this problem.

      My Power Mac 6100 blew up a week after the warranty ran out- Apple was nice enough to fix it.

      I've had one PC stop working on me- the rest have been retired so quickly they didn't get to die.

      The one thing I will say for my macs--they lasted longer. Not longer as in "they were more reliable" but as in "the software didn't get so slow on older hardware it was unusable." That, and I don't remember the old "six months and your computer acts like it's geriatric" thing that windows does so well. I want mac os x... but have nothing but an sse only machine. Gotta go buy a P4 i guess..
      james

    3. Re:Random thoughts on Apple by gcondon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Perhaps Apple doesn't want to change into a software company.

      Perhaps they like building computers and maybe, just maybe, their legions of aficionados would like them to continue doing so.

      In my opinion, the most significant characteristic of Apple, as a company and a culture, is that they clearly love computers and it shows in everything they build - hardware and software.

      Very few other technology companies exhibit this same exuberance that has been an Apple hallmark for many years (esp. under the leadership of the norotiously persnickety Steve Jobs).

      I rarely walk away from using a Microsoft product thinking that this was created by someone who loves computers as much as I do.

      Not every company needs to (or should) try to maximize sales and market penetration like Microsoft - just like every person doesn't need to try to be as rich as Bill Gates, as musical as Mozart, as tall as Shaq, etc.

      Is it inconceivable that Apple might have success criteria that are different from Microsoft? Is it impossible that we, as users, can understand and embrace that kind of diversity of thought in the marketplace?

      Hey you, Ferrari - why aren't you selling as many cars as Toyota? Slackers!

    4. Re:Random thoughts on Apple by Kaa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you're that into games, why don't you just get a dedicated game machine, e.g., PS2, Xbox, etc., for games and a Mac to do the rest of your stuff?

      I am not the original poster, but games you play on a PC are very different from the ones you play on consoles. If you like MMORPGs (e.g. World of Warcraft), FPSs (e.g. Unreal), RTSs (e.g. Rome: Total War) then having a console does not help you at all.

      As for the "rest of your stuff" it very much depends on what kind of stuff this is. For my purposes I am quite happy to have a Windows machine as a gaming/Photoshop/MSOffice box and a Linux machine for heavy lifting. No need for a Mac.

      Aside from that, I really don't think Apple cares about the gaming market segment, i.e., teenaged-or-twenty-something males.

      The gaming segment by now includes 30-something males and I bet the 20-40 year old demographic has Apple marketers drooling.

      --

      Kaa
      Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
    5. Re:Random thoughts on Apple by pcidevel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      1. Apple would have to support a massively larger amount of hardware.

      Due to the lack of formatting (probably not your fault) and because I happen to know quite a bit about the subject, I stopped reading at this sentence..

      My nick, pcidevel, comes from the fact that I've spent the last 5 years developing device drivers for pci devices in Windows (as well as Linux, HP-UX, Solaris, etc).. I've never worked for Microsoft that whole time. Microsoft does not develop the device drivers for Windows, the third party manufacturer of the device does. I've written, probably close to a dozen drivers, from niche products to ethernet drivers for Intel (if you use a IBM or Intel ethernet card, you've probably encounterd my code.. yeah it's the shit that made your box BSOD, sorry about that)..

      If Apple increases their market share and opens their APIs, hardware manufacturers will flock to OSX with device drivers. Hell I've had companies pay me to develop drivers for HP-UX, and there are probably around 15 people in the WORLD using HP-UX anymore. You can guarantee if there was even a fractional market for OSX using the hardware I've developed for, my boss would have me working on OSX drivers in a heartbeat, i.e. if Apple would let us, we would support them.. hardware manufacturers love cash..

      --

      I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!

  2. Dvorak prophecy? by Z0mb1eman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh c'mon.

    There are only two possible paths for Apple: continue to keep their OS working only on their hardware, or making it also work on x86.

    I'm sure everyone who knows what a Mac is has speculated at one point or another what would happen if Apple made their OS work on x86 hardware, and whether they would, and why they would take that decision. Calling it the Dvorak prophecy seems way too pretentious.

    --
    ClutterMe.com - easiest site creation on the Net. Just click and type.
  3. That's all good and well... by TheOtherAgentM · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That works fine until one of Apple's security patches screws things up for those users. The one reason I like Apple is because they can control their hardware market. Lots of times when I did Windows Updates, the patches would be incompatible just because of driver and hardware issues. I know people that still can't installed Service Pack 2 on XP, because of their video cards. I prefer to stick with the hardware Apple is going to sell.

  4. Re:MS better watch their back by TheOtherAgentM · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't agree. As someone that grew up on Windows and decided to try out Apple midway through college, it's not that simple. For us here on Slashdot, we realize the programs are similar in nature and are intuitive enough to figure out. However, I have switched many of my friends to Apple, making sure they knew how difficult it would be to unlearn what they already thought about computers. Most of them don't get very far in learning. That may be okay in a lot of cases, but if you are someone that has to be productive and you've learned to do things certain ways, switching is going to make Apple seem real inferior. Switching is not as easy as it appears.

  5. Re:So what! by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I agree. People buy Apple because they want lots of good things, one of which is seamless operation, another top of the line hardware. People who steal the OS likely wouldn't fork over the cost of buying Apple hardware anyway, so the theft will NOT hurt Apple's bottom line while it MAY help Apple advertise their system. Given enough pirating, it is conceivable that Apple could eventually switch to selling the OS separately for cheap and have an immediate and significant boost to their market share. Hopefully, we'll get some real numbers in the next 24 months instead of all of this speculation...

    --
    The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
  6. Playing it both ways by Fzz · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands?

    Apple is clearly a hardware company, and so they make most of their money from selling hardware. Thus it's very unlikely that Apple would want to support generic x86 boxes.

    But Apple has an interesting opportunity here. If they simply ignored people running unlicensed x86 copies, but prevented else anyone selling pre-installed Macs, then they probably wouldn't lose much business. The people who are willing to install MacOS themselves are unlikely to be the people who'd buy Mac hardware in the first place.

    However, Apple would gain a lot of mindshare with the kids and with the technically savvy who are happy installing their own OS. In the long run, this will bring many more people to Apple hardware, and to influence their parents/family/employers to buy the supported Apple products.

    Seems like Apple can't lose here.

    -Fzz

    1. Re:Playing it both ways by rbanffy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Fzz got it right.

      By letting OSX be pirated Apple is following the winning strategy of Microsoft. The only difference is that the cheapest way to run MacOS is buying a Mac mini and I am notsure whether the cheapest way to run Windows is to buy a PC pre-installed with Windows or to buy a box with a CD inside.

      By allowing PC users that would never buy a real copy of Windows, Microsoft used "virtual dumping" to get rid of any competition (by offering an "unsuported" version of its OS for free) and to increase its market share. When MS got rid of the competition in the OS arena, it had a healthy user base software writers were happy to make software available for.

      Apple is using exactly the same strategy. By making OSX "unsuported" available to current PC users, Apple increases its user base, making it more attractive to build software for it and, at the same time, makes people try Apple software in the hopes they get the next PC upgrade.

      In the meantime, they pretend that's not what they are doing.

      Brilliant

      --
      http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
  7. All part of Jobs' plan... by bshroyer · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Well, perhaps not, but if I were Jobs, it would be going something like this:

    1. Develop OSX for x86, in secret
    2. Announce it to a stunned audience
    3. Seed dev Intel boxes
    4. Wait for image to leak
    5. Anticipate hackers discover image will boot on SSE3 procs
    6. ???
    7. Gain market share
    8. Profit!!!

    The trick is in step 6:

    Insert the following code into Aqua:
    aqua_speed=1.0;
    if (!genuine_apple_hardware_bit) aqua_speed=0.25;
    Thus, OSX runs natively on non-Apple hardware, but the GUI runs at quarter speed. If you want full-speed Aqua, you'll need the branded hardware. It's the crack dealer's approach: your first taste is free. There'll be time enough to get your money once you're hooked.

    --
    The cure for cancer is coming: Reovirus
  8. White Box vs. Apple Hardware... by BawbBitchen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have built maybe 30 or so white box intel/amd hardware computer over the years, starting back with the 386. I have also owned a Dual 500 Mac, and 2 iBooks. At the end of the day, I would pay $400 more for the Apple hardware vs. building it myself. My Apple hardware just works, never breaks (and that goes for my friends that have about 20 Macs between them). I cannot say the same thing for any of the PC hardware. Sure I have had some systems, PC, that just keep working, but in the end the quality of the PC systems (not to mention style!) was just not there.

  9. Dangerous Game... by Run4yourlives · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There's no guarantee that the code in question won't also be hacked, so that would be a bad business move. The risk is too high.

    What's more likely is that the hardware compatibily has been completely ignored in the plans, and that the "hacked", freely available OS has been factored in to a certain percentage of lost hardware sales, and it's still deemed to be a profitable move.

  10. Re:Pretty easy solution by akuma(x86) · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It'd be far harder for a hacker to find a way to optimize the binary than change some constant

    Then it's time to bust out the dynamic recompiler

  11. Return of the clones ? by Pierre-Arnaud · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But then, if Apple can make a Macintosh compatible with Windows, why couldn't they quietly create a new platform based on that, with machine specs defined by them, and let other assemblers slowly propose a new breed of clones ? Couldn't integration be as good as in a genuine Apple Macintosh ? And then let start a market for compatible/checked/approved only peripherals and parts ?

    Besides the economic model of Apple being a hardware manufacturer with no competition on OS X... I personnaly think Apple hardware division maintains a quality which would assure them to be competitive in the upper margins sections of a more open market.

    The first Mac clones were not compatible with Windows, so the market was for MacOS only, to be divided, and Apple lost shares of what was entirely his before. But with Windows and Linux compatibility, the sharing would be on a potentially much larger market...

    Perhaps the launch of their Windows compatible Macintoshes is only the first step... Sell them to new users, assuring recognition and new fidelities, creating a larger market for Macintels (with more potential customers, so more demand for compatible peripherals,accessories and parts), and when this growth field is saturated anew, quietly open the platform with such a plan...

    Just questionning.

    Note : excuse my english, I'm french...