Homebuild MAC?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Definitely, you can build a simple PC (AMD or Intel), and install the MAC x86. It's a hack add-on for MAC OS X to bypass the Apple BIOS opcodes.
You only need to research for the most compatible parts, especially the network card, otherwise you can't surf the web to fix other things.
Another problem is the SATA interface that is not natively supported by some versions of MAC x86.
 


Thats easy: Its named after cats
 
duno, but linux sure is comming a long way. I still await the day when microsoft APIs become fully available to the open source community. This will be a day to rejoice.

To the mac lovers: Unix is getting really old by the way. Its starting to get wrinkles :)
 
Linux can't run:
- decent office
- decent photo/video/music editor
- decent 3d design/cad
- decent games
- decent html editors

what I can do with a OS like this? Scream whole world that it's FREE?

And the original topic question?
 
Decent Office? Dude, Open Office is a great office package, and has some features Office 2007 doesn't even offer like the ability to save directly to PDF. Decent Photo? The GIMP is a a great photo editor, but it's no Photoshop. Still, for the basic and a lot of the advance stuff, it rocks! Audacity is a great wave editor. I don't do video besides watching Youtube, so can't name one there. I heard QCad is a great program, but again, never ran it. Decent HTML Editor? I'm sorry, if you can't write HTML correctly without an editor, you shouldn't be doing websites. I just use Gtext to write HTML.

 
Openoffice is far better than M$ Office. Linux can run decent games, blame the developers for not compiling it for Linux. Oh yea, and it's free, as is all the software that goes along with it. Some people don't like spending $400 on an OS and another $250-300 on an office program. I use Open Office on XP for that very reason. Free, and it's decent software.

EDIT: Oh and I'm not a linux fanboy, I don't even use linux.
 
Save to PDF is a great feature that any program for windows can have for free with the PDF Printers. I use Ulead PhotoImpact besides Photoshop, and GIMP don't even touch 10% the features off a photo editor. I know Audacity and it lacks a lot of features.
To understand the need of a great HTML Editor, try to make a real site and be produtive without one like Dreanweaver.

ps.: my sites are only 10% from HTML editor, 50% comes from the initial design in Photoimpact and rest comes from php coding.

this topic is going to a trash
 
I have a MacBook Pro, and I run both Vista Ultimate and Mac OSX on it. I am not a huge fan of Mac OSX, but I will admit that it does have some good things going for it. It's fairly easy to use and is dumbed down enough and has everything needed for the average computer user to use the internet and upload/edit some photos. What is absolutely ridiculous is that there no way the average user could possibly afford most Mac computers, which are overpriced to the point of ludicrousness (and it obviously has severely limited game and complex application use). Also, the **** about OSX not getting viruses is completely stupid. Sure, it's a different architecture but that doesn't mean it's invincible, it just means that no one bothered to design viruses for an OS a tiny fraction of the population is using. I mean, five years ago, how many people did you know used a Mac?

The prices Apple is charging in order to have one of their computers, are, how should we put it, absolutely insane. Configure a PC laptop with specs equivalent to the MacBook Pro and the price will not come near $2000. Buying this computer was one of the least cost effective decisions in my life. Furthermore, Macs do not have "better hardware" and are not "built or designed better" (other than aesthetically, I will grant that). For example, one of my sticks of RAM failed and I got a replacement under warranty. Had I not been covered, that stick of 1 gig RAM would have cost $150 (Apple Store's retail price). We are talking about some **** Samsung DDR2 667 MHZ notebook RAM, when you can go buy better Corsair or Kingston RAM from NewEgg for $21.99.

The point is that while the OS is decent, Apple makes overpriced computers with oftentimes inferior specs than PC equivalents, then sells them for hundreds or thousands more. Only a fool would spend that money for aesthetic appeal or simply for an easy to use OS not nearly as versatile as Windows.

The point of this little rant is that I sympathize completely with the OP's desire to build his own system, since he has chosen to use OSX.
 

Is this like the difference between Kirk and Piccard, kirk never had to point where to go but Piccard always did?
 
I used PCs way back since the 8086 machines and watched Windows appear and grow from 3.11WFW and up. I work in graphics and web design, and have worked on Macs for a long time at work, but always had PCs at home, simply because I was more comfortable with them.

Once OS9 dropped away and I saw some of the UNIX capabilities and robust core features of OSX, I figured it was time to get a mac of my own. I'd been using them at work with pleasure for a long time, and had a feel for the power and ease of use on Macs.

Another thing that annoyed me about PCs (and I'm sure many other people feel this way too) is the huge commitment required to keep it working. I can't tell you how many friends I have whose cases are forever pried open because of all the tinkering under the hood. So much of my career was as a technical support guy, simply because keeping a PC working properly requires so much attention.

I got into computers to work in design, and found my reputation was as a "computer guy" and found most conversations became about how to fix computers, or installing drivers, or virus protection, or some such trick to get the PC working, but never about actual using programs or doing design or using applications or whatever. Even gamers would go on about optimized video drivers and the newest card technology, FPS etc, instead of the game itself.

Mac users rarely if ever talk about all the shoehorning techniques they use to get their machine going, because it just works. If they want to sit down and design, then that's what they do. That's why talking with mac users about design is truly about design and not about "clever" ways to get it to work in the first place. Sure there aren't as many games on the Mac yet, but there is definitely a lot catching up now that they are Intel.

So when I bought my first Mac, a Mac Mini, I thought I would plug it in and tinker around a half hour or so, and then go back to my PC. I checked to see if my files worked etc., and everything did. My MP3s, my video files, my word docs, pretty much EVERYTHING. I didn't get around to plugging my PC back in for a full MONTH, and that was just to get access to more of my files! I since bought a second Mac Mini, the intel version, and have had a mixed computing environment since.

As for building an OSX86 machine, it's amazing how great a machine you can build for very few dollars. You can make a leaping Leopard machine for a fraction of the apple counterpart, and you will find it outperforms windows on the same hardware. Crashes are virtually nonexistent (though not 100% absent) and usability is over the top.

The only problem is, you are back to the same scenario where you have to tinker and "shoehorn" OSX into your PC. You might find the screws to your case are kept off, and you get paranoid about running software update. That being said, once you find a good configuration for OSX86 (for example iPC osx86 or XXX OSx86 installer) with the right install options (and it can be tricky depending on your hardware), you will have a solid machine.

Now that OSX is going 100% Intel with Snow Leopard, I think it will only be a matter of time before Apple starts licensing their OS for other PC manufacturers. The main obstacle that I would agree with is the can of worms that comes out of supporting multiple hardware platforms. How many times have you bought a piece of hardware and read the install instructions that tells you to "continue anyway" despite unsigned drivers?

How much grief will Apple take on if they open themselves up to an open platform? If they at least firmly insist on hardware partners being 100% qualified, then I think they have a shot at remaining the same rock solid platform without performance or quality compromises.

Oh, and of course the other side of it is, the entire legal issue. There is a lawsuit between Apple and Psystar over that very thing, but as a consumer, the most optimistic look you should have about making a "hackintosh" despite the Apple EULA, is to treat is as an experimental platform. No matter how much I love the speed and cost savings of a 3.0GHz C2D machine running OSX, I think the cost of an actual Mac is worth getting rid of the hassles and leaving the case unopened, because it just WORKS.

 
Just a Query, What is the best Configuration For a Decently Powerful PC on which OSX (Hackinthosh) can Be installed.
 
Calling OSX inferior is indeed funny. Even parts of Windows have been 'borrowed' from UNIX source under a BSD-license. And let's not forget they needed the help from DEC engineers to make a stable running kernel (NT).
 


That is the most stupid reason why you would get a mac. I hope you know the reason why Mac has no viruses is because NO ONE uses them, also the safari browser and mac osx has more security flaws then windows xp, vista and server.

I think the iPod Touch is pretty cool, but I can get the same thing from a different company for much less. Everything else by them is over priced and somewhat stupid (like the Mac Book Air)