Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

Discussion in 'Mac OS X 10.3 (Panther) Discussion' started by hob, Feb 19, 2004.

  1. hob macrumors 68020

    hob

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2003
    Location:
    London, UK
    #1
    Are there ways of running OS X on a PC? I'm curious because my iBook's in the shop and seems to be taking forever and I miss OS X!!

    Hob
     
  2. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
  3. x86isslow macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Location:
    USA
  4. Krizoitz macrumors 6502a

    Krizoitz

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    Wakayama, Japan
    #6
    Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    ....no comment....

    actually the best you can do is find a skin out there that makes WinXP look like OS X. Probably have to pay for MS Plus to use it though...
     
  5. iMeowbot macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #7
    Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    This is about as close as you'll get.
     
  6. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #8
    Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    Now, now, folks...

    The reason it won't work is OS X is designed to be run on a specific type of processor chip (Power PC), while Windows is designed to be run on a different type of chip (x86). The basic instruction sets for the chips are not compatible.

    So it's also not possible to run Windows on a Mac - at least not without some sort of emulation layer (like Virtual PC). But that's REALLY slow by comparison.

    Now if you had the source code for either of these, it'd be possible to create a "port" of the program onto the other type of chip. While Apple has released the source for the underlying OS itself (Darwin, which indeed has been ported to x86), it hasn't released the source for its graphical interface.
     
  7. HexMonkey Administrator

    HexMonkey

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #9
    Re: Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    From what I've read in other threads, Apple did, at some stage, write a version of Mac OS X that would run on the x86 architecture (presumably when they hadn't decided what architecture they'd use in the future, before the G5), but it was never released. I see this as a good thing though, for two reasons.

    1. If you could run Mac OS X on a Wintel machine, it would be less stable because Apple would have less/no control over hardware and it is harder to program an OS when you don't know what hardware it's using.
    2. People would have no incentive to buy Macs since they have the software anyway. I understand that Apple's profits are mostly from hardware sales, so Apple would likely to bankrupt fairly quickly. :eek:
     
  8. hob thread starter macrumors 68020

    hob

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2003
    Location:
    London, UK
    #10
    Re: Re: Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    I believe this was called "Marklar"? Reminds me of an episode of South Park...!

    I realise that some of you may have found my question funny or stupid but I was curious as to why it wouldn't run... Would be nice if I could emulate it...

    Hob
     
  9. hvfsl macrumors 68000

    hvfsl

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2001
    Location:
    London, UK
    #11
    You can run Mac OS 8.1 on a PC using emulation, but thats about it at the moment.
     
  10. hvfsl macrumors 68000

    hvfsl

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2001
    Location:
    London, UK
    #12
    Re: Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    Thats pretty cool, I am getting an old iMac 400DV from someone who is getting one of the new G4 iMacs. They are giving it to me for free because I have helped them a lot with their computers in the past. But the screen seems like it might be going, so I might try and do what that guy did.
     
  11. strider42 macrumors 65816

    strider42

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    #13
    Re: Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    the other reason is that even if apple and windows used the same chip architecture, apple uses a proprietary boot rom. You can buy powerPC motherboards from vendors other than apple, but they still won't run an apple OS despite being actually capabale of doing so. The boot rom prevents this. this is why you don't see any apple clones (and why apple was able to stop the clones they had previously allowed in th early 90's)
     
  12. janey macrumors 603

    janey

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Location:
    sunny los angeles
    #14
    marklar, yeah that was it.

    but actually there's another one too. Darwin (core of Mac OS X) is available for x86 PCs too. :)
    If you dont mind having a gui-less thing, ya know it's always cool to install darwin :p :p
    http://developer.apple.com/darwin/
     
  13. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #15
    Re: Re: Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    No! No! No!

    If Apple were to release an Intel-compatible version of OS X, it would still only run on a Mac. It would simply be a Mac with an Intel CPU. It would not be possible to run OS X on a generic PC.
     
  14. HexMonkey Administrator

    HexMonkey

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #16
    Re: Re: Re: Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    I guess I worded my post badly. What you say is true, but what I meant by those two points was that if OS X could be run on a PC, like the original post was asking about, then these would be the problems. I didn't mean that if Apple decided to use the x86 architecture then these problems would occur (even though it seems like I did in my original post).
     
  15. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #17
    Yep, you're right there, if it did run on a generic PC then your points would be correct.
     
  16. iMeowbot macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #18
    Re: Re: Re: Mac OS X on an IBM-Compatable?

    The boot ROM thing was true in the 680x0 days, but not any more.

    Note however, that while it works, the OS X license contains the following:

    So make sure to slap an appropriate sticker on the front of your PC after you put in the AmigaOne board :p
     
  17. spook macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    #19
  18. iMeowbot macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #20
    Rhapsody on intel was pretty much NextStep with an OS 8 GUI on top of Display PostScript. Yellow Box was pretty close to current Cocoa, but there's no Classic or Carbon there so you aren't going to be running or recompiling much Mac software on it.
     
  19. FattyMembrane macrumors 6502a

    FattyMembrane

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Location:
    bat country
    #21
    try searching the forums. this question pops up about every 3 weeks or so, along with "what's a good irc client?", "do macs get spyware", "do i need to defrag in osx", and "is counterstrike ever coming to the mac?". however, they do give us geeks the chance to flex our geekieness and feel super smart :D
     
  20. Petrus macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Location:
    new jersey
    #22
    since ibm is coming out with servers using the same chips as the g5, wouldn't os x run on that?
     
  21. spook macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    #23
    my personal opinion is it be wonderful if Apple would bring out a OSX-lite, say a OS9 look-a-like that would run as a Linux distro on a x86 machine, not only would it open the Mac experience to a whole new audience, provide a very polished OS for Linux once and for all (don't forget Linux is the OS operating most web servers) but it might tempt people to migrate onto the full OSX and buy a PPC Mac
     
  22. janey macrumors 603

    janey

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Location:
    sunny los angeles
    #24
    it might work. but they're servers. they're expensive. it'll probably be more cost effecient to run something other than OS X.

    btw dont forget that the reason why OS X is so awesome is because Apple designs all their hardware and software. Microsoft doesnt have and cant afford that luxury.
     
  23. Petrus macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Location:
    new jersey
    #25
    I get what you're saying, but I think it's just a matter of time before IBM starts using these chips in their consumer line (i.e. desktops, laptops)
     

Share This Page