EFiX Allows Mac OS X to Boot on a PC

[Saladinos]

I wonder why they only support internal USB. They all go through the asme controller, so it shouldn't make a difference if it was an external USB stick.

I wouldn't be surprised if we saw an image for standard USB sticks soon. I'd do it that way - I was thinking about getting a netbook, and installing OSX without the hassle would be fantastic.

 

[caprica]

Just a conspiracy theory, but ... it sounds like some PC manufacturers are getting concerned that thier market share is under threat by apple so they are providing the gateway to allow for mac compatibles

I reckon if apples market share gets to much bigger this is just the tip of the ice berg. we could see some antitrust lawsuits in the pipeline.

 

[MacTheSpoon]

Go, go, Apple legal.

Lots of parasites coming out of the woodwork and trying to attach themselves to Apple.

In the long run, this is no good for us, the consumers. Apple makes its money by selling hardware. In the long run if people can run OSX on PCs, Apple will lose its revenue stream, go belly up, and then NOBODY gets to run OSX any more.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

So do Apple sue?
Or do we get the expandable desktop computer we have been begging for?

Money on door one?

Hell, If apple will not build the mythical Midrange Mac, I may as well consider this option.

I ain't buying a Mac Pro Tower without Blu-Ray and HDCP compliance....

so i may as well consider this!!!

 

[macintel4me]

Wow. This could have 1000 times the impact of Pystar.

 

[Cromulent]

How could it not save money? You have no idea do you?

I could build a $3000 mac pro for $1200 tops.

No you couldn't.

 

[bplein]

Since when is a dual-core 3.0GHz machine more powerful than a 2-by-quad core (read: 8-core) Mac Pro?

The CPU test shows how fast a single 3.0 core is vs a single 2.6 core.

So start comparing a dual-quad motherboard with 2 quad core CPUs and see what the price is going to be. It won't be $400.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Hell, If apple will not build the mythical Midrange Mac, I may as well consider this option.

I ain't buying a Mac Pro Tower without Blu-Ray and HDCP compliance....

so i may as well consider this!!!

You said it m8, if refuses to build a Mid-Tower then this is the next best thing. The Mac Pro is great an all, however for some its overkill and don't even mention the Mac Mini. Let me clear things up:

Mobile Processors:

iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro and, MacMini

Workstation/ Server Processors:

MacPro and, Xserve


Something is clearly missing and if not filled this is the solution.

 

[PCMacUser]

In the long run, this is no good for us, the consumers. Apple makes its money by selling hardware. In the long run if people can run OSX on PCs, Apple will lose its revenue stream, go belly up, and then NOBODY gets to run OSX any more.

Yes, Apple does make a lot of money by selling hardware. Particularly iPods.

Note, that this product is NOT designed to run on your non-Apple branded music player. Please do not attempt this as it may void your warranty.

But seriously. This is evolution at work. Apple have a product people want, but refuse to package it in a way that a lot of people want. So, nature finds a way. It's how the universe works.

If Apple make OS X available for PC, then they can stop these upstarts in their tracks.

 

[Saladinos]

Just a conspiracy theory, but ... it sounds like some PC manufacturers are getting concerned that thier market share is under threat by apple so they are providing the gateway to allow for mac compatibles

I reckon if apples market share gets to much bigger this is just the tip of the ice berg. we could see some antitrust lawsuits in the pipeline.

Very unlikely.

1. If OSX becomes a selling point for those products, Apple has a hold on their business without any contracts. Once people are using OSX, Apple can lock it down.
2. If that comes out in court, those companies will be fined heavily for sabotage of Apple's business model. It's anticompetitive, and really not worth the risk.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Since when is a dual-core 3.0GHz machine more powerful than a 2-by-quad core (read: 8-core) Mac Pro?

The CPU test shows how fast a single 3.0 core is vs a single 2.6 core.

So start comparing a dual-quad motherboard with 2 quad core CPUs and see what the price is going to be. It won't be $400.

It is about controlling and selling outdated technology for initial release prices. Gimme a break, with every quarter Apple should comply with the market and lower prices. This is what happens when Apple was against IBM to begin with and now they are becoming the ones they disliked. How ironic?

Either give your consumer base more choice and smarter pricing or let someone else fill the void, if there is no demand then this company will fold if there is then Apple is the clear loser.

 

[PCMacUser]

Since when is a dual-core 3.0GHz machine more powerful than a 2-by-quad core (read: 8-core) Mac Pro?

A dual core 3.0GHz machine (that's what I have), is faster than many quad and eight core machines when it comes to games. Check out any hardware website for verification, eg. Tom's, Anandtech, etc.

They are also much better for the environment (not to mention your power bill), as they consume far less energy.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Yes, Apple does make a lot of money by selling hardware. Particularly iPods.

Note, that this product is NOT designed to run on your non-Apple branded music player. Please do not attempt this as it may void your warranty.

But seriously. This is evolution at work. Apple have a product people want, but refuse to package it in a way that a lot of people want. So, nature finds a way. It's how the universe works.

If Apple make OS X available for PC, then they can stop these upstarts in their tracks.

Why do you think Apple has shifted its focus from the Mac to iPods and iPhones, since they knew this day is coming and even if they fight it, it will be drawn out.

 

[Small White Car]

A dual core 3.0GHz machine (that's what I have), is faster than many quad and eight core machines when it comes to games. Check out any hardware website for verification, eg. Tom's, Anandtech, etc.

They are also much better for the environment (not to mention your power bill), as they consume far less energy.

He: You're wrong.

You: Not if you change the question entirely from what we were talking about!

lol - Nice work. Does that ever work for you in real life?

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

A dual core 3.0GHz machine (that's what I have), is faster than many quad and eight core machines when it comes to games. Check out any hardware website for verification, eg. Tom's, Anandtech, etc.

They are also much better for the environment (not to mention your power bill), as they consume far less energy.

Indeed for the moment, while OS 10.6 Snow Leopard will change this. Then again when that happens the price will drop dramatically and the people ringing the MacPro spec and pricing argument will lose yet again.

On the flip side, I am happy that those MacPro customers are donating a healthy profit for Apple as it keeps them in business and we all benefit.

 

[HLdan]

Maybe because they like OS X, but don't have the funds for a Mac.

Riiiiggghht! But it's interesting how these same people have an iPhone, an iPod, an Xbox 360 or a Wii and upgrade their custom built PC with the latest $300+ GPU every year....but they can't afford a Mac.

 

[BaldiMac]

But seriously. This is evolution at work. Apple have a product people want, but refuse to package it in a way that a lot of people want. So, nature finds a way. It's how the universe works.

If Apple make OS X available for PC, then they can stop these upstarts in their tracks.

Maybe de-evolution at work. Apple has a product that people want - OS X. They only want to sell it under certain conditions. They created it. They invested in it. Why do people feel they have a right to steal it just because Apple doesn't sell it under the conditions they want?

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

He: You're wrong.

You: Not if you change the question entirely from what we were talking about!

lol - Nice work. Does that ever work for you in real life?

Point being that the PC sector is always lowering prices on every component on a daily basis, can you say the same thing for Apple. You would be lucky if they dropped prices once a year.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

You said it m8, if refuses to build a Mid-Tower then this is the next best thing. The Mac Pro is great an all, however for some its overkill and don't even mention the Mac Mini. Let me clear things up:

Mobile Processors:

iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro and, MacMini

Workstation/ Server Processors:

MacPro and, Xserve

Something is clearly missing and if not filled this is the solution.

We are on the same page, it is so freaking sad Apple is ignoring this sizable market. Apple keeps getting more sales, but they are doing everything they can to avoid something midrange and upgradable. so sad!

and.... they keep ignoring Blu-Ray

 

[Small White Car]

Point being that the PC sector is always lowering prices on every component on a daily basis, can you say the same thing for Apple. You would be lucky if they dropped prices once a year.

Hmm. No, I'd say that sounds like a completely unrelated point to what I said.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Maybe de-evolution at work. Apple has a product that people want - OS X. They only want to sell it under certain conditions. They created it. They invested in it. Why do people feel they have a right to steal it just because Apple doesn't sell it under the conditions they want?

How is this stealing?

You are legally buying Mac OS 10.x.

You are buying EFiX.

You are not taking away from Mac Software sales.


Only thing you are doing is not running it on Mac Hardware and that seems more of a shortcoming on Apple behalf since the only thing they offer is a MacMini and MacPro with nothing in the middle ground.

 

[twoodcc]

i wonder if apple will respond to this? i guess it will depend on how this sells

 

[williedigital]

Since when is a dual-core 3.0GHz machine more powerful than a 2-by-quad core (read: 8-core) Mac Pro?

The CPU test shows how fast a single 3.0 core is vs a single 2.6 core.

So start comparing a dual-quad motherboard with 2 quad core CPUs and see what the price is going to be. It won't be $400.

To be fair, "equivalent" motherboards are not so expensive really. Dual-quad server boards can be had for $200-$300. Slap in some bsel modded clovertowns and you're well on your way to the expensive part of a mac pro...

I actually built a "real" mac pro from used mac pro parts off of ebay, and the total cost was around $1500 for an 8-core 2.0 ghz machine, 2gb ram, equivalent superdrive, etc. The only "feature" it is missing is the apple heatsinks (I have my own installed), but otherwise, someone on the outside would not be able to tell the difference.

It serves my needs well:

1. Use apple's built-in raid for a very fast/large system drive (the primary reason I could never use a laptop as my main machine)

2. Drive two 30" monitors

3. Lots of processing power for encoding videos.

----

If I could do it over, I would probably go with the efi-x solution (which I am highly impressed by), but I would be concerned that apple could kill the workability of the solution through a system update, especially as part of the jump to snow leopard. If I could be shown some solid evidence that efi-x could definitely make that jump to 10.6 I would think long and hard about it.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Hmm. No, I'd say that sounds like a completely unrelated point to what I said.

The OP already mentioned that it works for him/her, so I don't see what the problem is.

If (s)he is happy with 2 or 4 processors rather than 4 and 8, then that is they preferences. Besides OS 10.5 does not completely utilize more than 2 processors anyhow and only a select app base are multi core/processor aware.

Snow Leopard will change all this, however by that time the hardware would have decreased dramatically in price. A Null argument.

 

[jbrenn]

it is illegal to install osx on any non apple branded hardware. no matter how you manage to get it to work. my prediction is this company will be sued by the end of the week.