Modern 'Hackintoshes' Show That Apple Should Probably Just Build a Mac Tower (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader shares an excerpt from a report written by Andrew Cunningham via Ars Technica: Apple is working on new desktop Macs, including a ground-up redesign of the tiny-but-controversial 2013 Mac Pro. We're also due for some new iMacs, which Apple says will include some features that will make less-demanding pro users happy. But we don't know when they're coming, and the Mac Pro in particular is going to take at least a year to get here. Apple's reassurances are nice, but it's a small comfort to anyone who wants high-end processing power in a Mac right now. Apple hasn't put out a new desktop since it refreshed the iMacs in October of 2015, and the older, slower components in these computers keeps Apple out of new high-end fields like VR. This is a problem for people who prefer or need macOS, since Apple's operating system is only really designed to work on Apple's hardware. But for the truly adventurous and desperate, there's another place to turn: fake Macs built with standard PC components, popularly known as "Hackintoshes." They've been around for a long time, but the state of Apple's desktop lineup is making them feel newly relevant these days. So we spoke with people who currently rely on Hackintoshes to see how the computers are being used -- and what they'd like to see from Apple.

Comments

Why a Hackintosh?

[kaka.mala.vachva]

For Hackintoshes to become popular, presumably, there is some software on a Mac that isn't available elsewhere. What is driving the Hackintosh need? Personally (note the qualifier), I totally fail to see the need for a Hackintosh - I think all operating systems are fairly advanced and usable now, and it doesn't take long to be proficient in Linux or Windows (or FreeBSD or whatever). Why push a path that isn't supported by Apple? Just use Linux (or Windows) instead - whatever alternate platform your preferred tools work on.

Re:Pro = expandable

[ewhac]

You say "cheese grater" semi-sarcastically, but I rather liked that box. It was very well designed, solid, easy to get in to, and plenty of expansion. Its only real drawback was that it was heavy.

Hey, Apple! If you're really interested in maintaining control of the HW design -- and I mean in a meaningful way, not the cheeseball gee-whiz pretentious way where indicator LEDs are entirely absent because they disrupt the "line" of the machine -- then may I suggest you start selling... Motherboards. Yes, design a motherboard you're happy with, then stick it in an anti-static bag alongside an OS X DVD. The owner can then add their preferred CPU, RAM (quad-channel DDR4, natch), and GPU, and put the whole thing in a case that meets their needs. Hell, you'll probably be able to squeeze even higher margins out of the thing, since you won't have to design or build custom casework, which can get kinda spendy.

Re:Built One Was a Hassle

[omnichad]

It's better now. Get a good EFI bootloader (Clover) going and you can run the Apple updates directly - all the major differences between your hardware and the Mac hardware are abstracted away by the bootloader. You have to do major release upgrades by building a thumb drive with some extra tools, but otherwise it just works. That is, at least if you're buying hardware that already has OS support.