OSX - Panther on a pc?? newb

[frankieee]

Hi gang, I dont have a MAC but can Panther be run on a pc or is that something that will be available in Leopard? I've heard people talk about the concept and wondered if that is something I can do... I want to play a bit with it and decide whether I want to spend the money...

thanks

[MacBoobsPro]

Originally Posted by frankieee

Hi gang, I dont have a MAC but can Panther be run on a pc or is that something that will be available in Leopard? I've heard people talk about the concept and wondered if that is something I can do... I want to play a bit with it and decide whether I want to spend the money...

thanks

Not possible. It may be possible to hack it. But illegal and HIGHLY unrecommended. BTW we are on Tiger now. Panther was before Tiger.

10.2 Jaguar
10.3 Panther
10.4 Tiger
10.5 Leopard
10.6 Barry

[Chundles]

Originally Posted by frankieee

Hi gang, I dont have a MAC but can Panther be run on a pc or is that something that will be available in Leopard? I've heard people talk about the concept and wondered if that is something I can do... I want to play a bit with it and decide whether I want to spend the money...

thanks

Your PC has a MAC though...

Panther (Mac OSX 10.3) can't be run on a PC. Tiger has been hacked to run on PCs but it's a pain in the arse as far as drivers and hardware support goes.

Leopard will not run on PCs - Apple will never support running OSX on anything but a Mac as to do otherwise would mean losing about half their income as Mac sales plummet. They couldn't make up the shortfall with software sales because they'd be taking on Microsoft directly and you just can't win that fight unless you can take ~30% overnight. Not going to happen, the majority (even a large minority) of PC users will never switch to the Mac.

So there are no versions of Mac OSX that will run, legally or otherwise, on a generic PC.

If you want to use Mac OSX, you have to buy a Mac.

[frankieee]

Ya I dont have Tiger unfortunately... I have a really old mac laptop but it doesn't take OSX, its on OS9...
Can't afford one at the moment... I just thought I'd heard that it was possible.
Is open source comparable to OSX? (ie. Kubuntu) I've put that on my generic laptop and have played with it a bit but as for the wireless they've just recently come up with a solution for it.

Any suggestions?

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by frankieee

Is open source comparable to OSX? (ie. Kubuntu) I've put that on my generic laptop and have played with it a bit but as for the wireless they've just recently come up with a solution for it.

Bluntly no, though I'm probably biased, IMO it's worse than Windows too, i've used it but maybe Warwick doesn't care enough to make it good.

If you have an old Mac laptop you could probably run OS X if it's Power PC, using a special program (can't think of the name right now), though it'll be slow.

[dylan]

Actually you can run Panther on a PC. I did it with PearPC before buying a Mac to test the waters. It is very slow but it works.

[dpaanlka]

Originally Posted by frankieee

Is open source comparable to OSX? (ie. Kubuntu)

Is a free OS made by a loose band of developers to run on any generic PC comparable to a $129 OS made specifically to run on only very specific hardware and is developed (and tightly controlled) by a major corporation with 30 years of history?

No...

I don't get what your PC's MAC address has to do with Mac OS X, though.

You should tell us what old PowerBook you are talking about, and let us decide if it can run Tiger (or any other version).

[afornander]

YES! go to pearpc.net, its a ppc emulator that runs mac well enough to run simple apps and surf the web. i ran it on my pc to see if it worked a few months ago, you can get panther really cheap on the internet!

[Cassie]

Originally Posted by stuartluff

Not possible. It may be possible to hack it. But illegal and HIGHLY unrecommended. BTW we are on Tiger now. Panther was before Tiger.

10.2 Jaguar
10.3 Panther
10.4 Tiger
10.5 Leopard
10.6 Barry

Barry?

[DXoverDY]

Originally Posted by dpaanlka

Is a free OS made by a loose band of developers to run on any generic PC comparable to a $129 OS made specifically to run on only very specific hardware and is developed (and tightly controlled) by a major corporation with 30 years of history?

No...

I don't get what your PC's MAC address has to do with Mac OS X, though.

You should tell us what old PowerBook you are talking about, and let us decide if it can run Tiger (or any other version).

Don't be dense. By MAC he meant Mac. Talking down to him is just stupid to so let's not do that either. Respect goes both ways.

Secondly. Many will argue with you that Linux and their favorite distribution and window manager are comparable or more convienent for them. It's merely an opinion. Don't try to make it a technical one.

Ease of use? Sure, OS X _MIGHT_ be easier for some. OS X might be too limiting for some, thus they want the power and configuration that comes with X11 and their favorite window manager. It's all an opinion.

[dpaanlka]

Originally Posted by DXoverDY

Don't be dense. By MAC he meant Mac. Talking down to him is just stupid to so let's not do that either.

I thought the smiley gave it away as me being cheeky. I was well aware of what he meant. I didn't mean to be mean.

Originally Posted by DXoverDY

Many will argue with you that Linux and their favorite distribution and window manager are comparable

Well, it's my experience that that would be a pretty ridiculous argument to try and make, and I've never met anybody in real life (as in, outside of forums) that tried to make it. Of course some small minority always thinks one inferior thing or idea is better than something that is clearly better, like GEOs and BMWs. There's a crazy cult out there that argues the Amish school girls deserved to die, and goes around on the news saying that. Should I respect their argument too?

I cannot possibly see how anybody could try to tell me that Linux is a comparable end-user desktop OS to Mac OS X, or for that matter even comparable to Windows. That is just... wishful thinking and denial wrapped together to form one creepy mindset that is just too geeky for my taste.

While I realize that Linux can perform some tasks satisfactorily similar to Windows and OS X, as a whole it isn't really that great of an OS to work with, especially for non-technical people, as I've come to realize with a few of my non-technical friends who I have running Ubuntu.

[dwishbone]

MacOS 10.4 Tiger will run on generic PCs with alot of work, namely applying alot of patches. there is a prepatched installer disk ISO floating around on bit torrent networks, but i wont say where to get those...just know it is out there. from what ive heard its pretty picky on the hardware, is a bit buggy, and drivers are sometimes hard to come by.

Panther would never work on a PC natively. by Jobs own admission OSX has had a PPC AND an x86 build of every single version of the MacOS, but i doubt anyone outside apple's labs ever saw the x86 version of Puma, Cheetah, Jaguar, or Panther.

as far as alternatives go there are windows skins/addons (one called "Vista"...sorry..couldnt resist the free shot) that can mimic the look and feel of the macos to a certain degree. you could also try linux. id recommend Ubuntu or SUSE for that. the newer Linux distros also use XGL which is kind of a poor man's Quartz Extreme. Linux also has skins/apps that make it appear more mac like. but, dont try Linux unless you are very comfortable in your geekdom. while its much easier and user friendly than it used to be, its still not for the average user imho.

also, how old is your laptop? how much ram/hd space does it have? MacOS X can be installed on unsupported Macs through some unofficial tools. i had Panther running on a PM8600 (300mhz 604e if im not mistaken) once. it was slow, but it worked. i have never tried to install Tiger on anything lower than a supported G4 machine though.

[dpaanlka]

Originally Posted by dwishbone

MacOS X can be installed on unsupported Macs through some unofficial tools. i had Panther running on a PM8600 (300mhz 604e if im not mistaken) once. it was slow, but it worked. i have never tried to install Tiger on anything lower than a supported G4 machine though.

I second that... I had Tiger running on some older iMacs with absolutely no problem.

[DXoverDY]

Originally Posted by dpaanlka

I thought the smiley gave it away as me being cheeky. I was well aware of what he meant. I didn't mean to be mean.



Well, it's my experience that that would be a pretty ridiculous argument to try and make, and I've never met anybody in real life (as in, outside of forums) that tried to make it. Of course some small minority always thinks one inferior thing or idea is better than something that is clearly better, like GEOs and BMWs. There's a crazy cult out there that argues the Amish school girls deserved to die, and goes around on the news saying that. Should I respect their argument too?

I cannot possibly see how anybody could try to tell me that Linux is a comparable end-user desktop OS to Mac OS X, or for that matter even comparable to Windows. That is just... wishful thinking and denial wrapped together to form one creepy mindset that is just too geeky for my taste.

While I realize that Linux can perform some tasks satisfactorily similar to Windows and OS X, as a whole it isn't really that great of an OS to work with, especially for non-technical people, as I've come to realize with a few of my non-technical friends who I have running Ubuntu.

Honestly I think the Enlightenment window manager is far superior to the dock and the OS X window manager. I'm not saying as a whole here, but it supports two major features I find missing in OS X that I dearly miss.

1) I can hold ALT+CLICK and drag a window to move it, no matter where I click in the window. Much easier than going to the title bar in OS X.
2) I can hold CONTROL+CLICK and drag the mouse to resize a window, no matter where I click in the window. Much easier than going to the one tiny corner to resize a window in OS X.

As someone who grew up using the command line, I am comfortable there and thus it is much more powerful to me. I never said everyone will be, but there are people out there that find Linux and FreeBSD to be superior in terms of usefulness. OS X gives me a nice alternataive, easier configuration (most of the time) and the command line I know and love.

There are trade-offs with either system. You're obviously looking at it as a desktop user experience. I am a developer, I like messing with things under the hood. Can't do much of that in OS X, but I can do just about anything with Linux or FreeBSD.

If you haven't, Ubuntu Linux is probably the easiest install I have ever seen. Even easier than OS X.

Trust me, your single opinion based on probably very little usage, if any, isn't going to argue with someone who used it for years and convince me that you're right.

I was quite happy in Linux land for years, I wanted a nice laptop that allowed me to do a lot of different things and still be able to run Word... thus, I bought my first MAC... ha... how do you like them apples? I am thoroughly happy with it, and I just added a big brother to the line up with a Mac Pro on the way. But you can't tell me it isn't a better user experience if you've never used it. It just so happens that OS X is a nice "median" for me... for others Linux or FreeBSD will be the better choice. For others, OS X. We have choice here... choice is good, how would you feel if your only option was Windows? not much of an option is it? Different operating systems work for different people... and Linux has a big enough following to have huge companies behind it... bigger than Apple. Obviously millions can't be wrong on their choice of what is better for them now can they?

[dpaanlka]

The original question was is Linux comparable to OS X. NO, it isn't. Nobody cares if developers really like to hack away at their systems and have tons of experience with text commands and configuration techniques. When it comes down to being a desktop OS, for every reason you can name (such as dragging a window from anywhere) I'm sure I could name 20 or more reasons why normal people would not want to use Linux if I wanted to. And maintaining two of my friend's Ubuntu computers for a year now, I think I can safely say that Linux is crap in the easy to use, out of your face, get work done sense.



Sun spends millions on Solaris, does that mean it's a good desktop OS too? Of course not! That would be ridiculous! The companies spending millions on Linux are not spending millions to make it a desktop OS, so it's sooo far off to say that using Linux is comparable to using OS X (or Windows) when it clearly isn't even close.

EDIT: I've Installed Ubuntu a couple of times and it's installer is merely OK. It is not, in my opinion easier to understand than OS X's. Of course that doesn't matter, because after Ubuntu is running, getting it to actually do things my friends want to do with a computer has proved very difficult, and in some cases (viewing flash movies that are like, everywhere, for example) completely impossible.

[RacerX]

Originally Posted by dxOVERdy

Don't be dense. By MAC he meant Mac. Talking down to him is just stupid to so let's not do that either. Respect goes both ways.

I think dxOVERdy is right. Why should we worry so much about the capitalization of a name?

[RacerX]

Originally Posted by dxOVERdy

Trust me, your single opinion based on probably very little usage, if any, isn't going to argue with someone who used it for years and convince me that you're right.

I was quite happy in Linux land for years, I wanted a nice laptop that allowed me to do a lot of different things and still be able to run Word... thus, I bought my first MAC... ha... how do you like them apples? I am thoroughly happy with it, and I just added a big brother to the line up with a Mac Pro on the way. But you can't tell me it isn't a better user experience if you've never used it.

Hey dxOVERdy, what happen to your respect goes both ways... or was that strictly for everyone else but you?

[2ndPath]

Originally Posted by frankieee

Is open source comparable to OSX? (ie. Kubuntu) I've put that on my generic laptop and have played with it a bit but as for the wireless they've just recently come up with a solution for it.

If you want to get an impression of the overall behaviour of the system Linux distributions are only comparable to OSX as basically any other graphical operating system. You can theme Windows or Linux to look like OS X but the will not behave the same way. So the can't really be compared at all.

If you work with the text console, Linux systems are very similar to OS X though.

What I like about OS X is the nice and usable GUI with a good driver support combined with the Unix structures below including all the nice console utilities.

[dpaanlka]

Originally Posted by RacerX

I think dxOVERdy is right. Why should we worry so much about the capitalization of a name?

Well, again, I'm not hung up on it, just pointing it out. When people capitalize all the letters as MAC, that looks like they think the letters M-A-C are an acronym for something, when they're not. It's just short for Macintosh as I know you know and don't even have to tell you, but others might not know.

Besides I wasn't the only one:

Originally Posted by Chundles

Your PC has a MAC though...

It's just a pointer, not meaningful in any serious way. Just good practice because MAC as an acronym does actually mean something other than Macintosh..

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by DXoverDY

1) I can hold ALT+CLICK and drag a window to move it, no matter where I click in the window. Much easier than going to the title bar in OS X.
2) I can hold CONTROL+CLICK and drag the mouse to resize a window, no matter where I click in the window. Much easier than going to the one tiny corner to resize a window in OS X.

Seeing as 50% of home PC users don't even use antivirus and people at uni cannot get the hang of two finger scrolling on my touchpad, and others don't like using my iMac's two button MS mouse (they keep getting the context menu when they don't want it), clearly they needed a one button mouse, which as I hate one button mice, was an eye-opener for me, they weren't a Mac user either.

I don't think you can say that for MOST users alt-clicking to move a window is easier. I think us geeks often forgot how challenging using a computer is for many people, it's similar to expecting most people to think finding the determinant of a 2x2 Matrix easy, just because (as a second year Uni mathematician) it's easy for me.

[Bobdude161]

Originally Posted by Eraserhead

I think us geeks often forgot how challenging using a computer is for many people

Yeah i get those reality checks every so often. Someone comes over and i let them use my Mac. By the time they are done using it, my teeth have been all grinded out. "No, click there. Right there. NO, RIGHT THERE IT'S IN PLAIN SIGHT!!!"

Ugh why can't everyone be geeks?