EFiX Allows Mac OS X to Boot on a PC

[slick50zd1]

I am going to go out on a limb here, but I am not sure that Apple officially introducing OSX for a standard PC would be such a bad thing.

One thing I have noticed is that apple seems to have a pretty loyal fan base. I mean, Say they did allow this... Other than the initial disappointment that some may express due apples decision, I just can't see any of them leaving for windows. Correct me If I'm wrong here. Granted it opens up this to a lot more people. I'm sure there are quite a few who would install OSX in a heart beat on their PC's. Myself being one of them. And yes for the record I can build it cheaper. As I don't have to pay 500$ for an extra 2 Gigs of ram. But I digress, This immediately opens up a whole new revenue stream from the sales of the OS. Now in addition, I am sure, this will convince many more to switch after having experienced OSX... say those who are now in the market for a laptop, and decide that they want a Macbook. I think there are an infinite amount of scenarios that could help Apple.

I just wish that some of you hardcore apple guys would at least hear the argument about Apples pricing. And even if we agree that they may be close, certain things just make an apple desktop so inaccessible to people like me who want a good strong tower... and the iMac is too little, and a MacPro is just over the top (not too mention how much they charge you to change any little thing)

but I'm done now...

 

[bplein]

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.

What game will you be playing? A Windows game? You don't need OS X to play a Windows game, and you don't need a Mac Pro to play a Windows game. Mac Pro applications are designed to use multi-core machines and will scale with the extra cores.

Mac Pros are for professionals. Getting work done. Sure, they can also play games, but that is NOT why people buy them. Do you get it?

???

 

[Joe The Dragon]

Someone has to say it so I'll bite

They're not. Compare equivalent hardware between Apple and other name brands--looking at ALL the specs for an honest and complete comparison--and Macs are right in the same price range. Sometimes more than a given competitor, sometimes less.

What they ARE is:

a) More expensive than building your own or getting a cheap (for a reason) brand like an Acer. The same is true of Dell, HP, Sony, etc., so you can't call Macs relatively expensive on that basis. Rather, you should say that ALL name brand PCs are expensive. (Or even that any PC you didn't build at home is expensive.)

and

b) Available in fewer configurations. So you might find a particular name-brand PC config that meets your needs for cheaper--but you have to admit that it does so by omitting some things. Things you don't personally want, so that's perfectly reasonable to take into account--but it doesn't make the Mac overpriced.

This new product addresses b) rather than any price difference between comparable Macs and PCs.

no a $600 to $800 dell , hp and others will be faster, come with more faster ram with more slots then the mini and a bigger and faster HD, better video, then the mini with room to add on.

 

[BaldiMac]

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.

You are not legally buying OS X. You are buying a license to OS X. If you violate the terms of the license agreement, then the license is void. It's not a complicated concept.

 

[Small White Car]

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.

It's "stealing" in the sense that if this becomes normal, Apple will have to raise the price of OSX. The current price assumes a hardware sale occurred at some point, either now or in the past.

It's just like how the iPhone is less because AT&T knows they'll get the monthly fee from you. They can kick in some of the price because they know they'll make it up. A (hypothetical) unlocked phone would have to cost more.

Likewise, an "unlocked" OSX would cost more, no about. So you're getting an unlocked OSX for a locked price.

Not exactly "stealing," but it is cheating, in a sense.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

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.

Good point, however I do not see why it would not be possible for a firmware update later on when OS 10.6 SL is released.

Good point nonetheless.

 

[bplein]

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.

Thank you for proving my point. TFA says that you can build a Mac Pro for under $800, when it's patently false. It compares desktop CPUs to workstation/server CPUs. It compares dual core to 8 core.

This is the cheap solution for the missing expandable desktop solution, not a replacement for the Mac Pro for under $800 as claimed.

Again, thanks for proving my point.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

You are not legally buying OS X. You are buying a license to OS X. If you violate the terms of the license agreement, then the license is void. It's not a complicated concept.

Actually you are legally buying Mac OS X, if you are considering the Apple Hardware and Mac OS X as Mac OS X then you are running the risk of a monopoly and locked in solution, something that got Microsoft in trouble a while back.

At best you are violating the usage agreement, however in that case when you return Mac OS X in an open box do they give you a full refund or take out a stocking fee or better yet not take it back at all.

 

[sharp65]

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.

Yea good luck with that...

 

[Joe The Dragon]

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?

they are not stealing it they are paying for mac ox at $129.00. vista home premium oem is just about the same price.

The power g4 and g5 when for $1200 to $1900+ now the mac pro start at $2300 with a weak video card.

 

[Xavier]

Now why didnt Psystar think of this?

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Not exactly "stealing," but it is cheating, in a sense.

Cheating sure, I can agree with you on that. That being said it still does not allow Apple to play with its loyal customers like fools by overcharging for outdated hardware and not fulfilling a void in its product line.


Who wants a MacPro for thousands of dollars when all I want it some of its functionality scaled down. Amazing how you are fueling Apples greed and to rip its customer base.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Now why didnt Psystar think of this?

Something tells me that Psystar was going for an End-to-End solution, basically similar to Apple however without the designer casing.

 

[winmacguy]

I just don't understand people's obsession with running OS X on PCs, especially if it's not saving money. ...Bragging rights I suppose.

That's easy to answer - its NOT built by Apple which means that you CAN build a tower cheaper (well outside of the US you can) than a Mac Pro tower since you don't have any profit margins to worry about- and - you can still run OS X on it with no worries at all - so you can game away and run OS X happily.

 

[MacOSX86User]

From a former Peecee user

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!!!

I installed Leopard onto my PC about 8 months ago, and I have to say, hardware had very little to do with the Mac experience - from my point of view that is. It was OS X that sucked me in.

Of course, it helped that I had an AMD Radeon HD3870 (512MB) video card - a heck of a lot better than the standard HD2600 XT on the Mac Pro base config, certainly at par with nVidia's 8800 with most apps. Probably won't match the $2850 Quadro FX, but my vanilla PC with the $150 video card runs Maya, WoW, Age of Empires, Command and Conquer, Sims, all the Adobe apps, Final Cut and just about anything you throw at it. It won't match the Mac Pro, of course (what with those Quad-core Xeons), but it handily beats my buddy's iMac when rendering my animation.

There is a real demand from former peecee users like me, who lack the cash but appreciate the superiority of OS X. I have been trying to move to the Mac platform for years, and cash was always the only issue.

I was only able to finally buy my first Mac (G4 Cube) on eBay for $75 (yes, you read it correctly) 2 yrs ago, then I upgraded the video card for $75, and there I was--happy with my Mac. I never ever bothered buying from other peecee makers like Dell, HP, etc. so I can't really comment on how their hardware compares with Apple's. Though I still use WinXP, I have since used my homebrew Mac as my main machine.

The point is there is a market for the mid-range Mac for the pro-sumer, and I'm sorry, the iMac just doesn't cut it for me, especially when running Maya. That's why EFi-X has appeal, because it will allow an easier install of OS X on vanilla hardware (not the kind of drama I had to go through to make OS X work on my hardware).

It's not about bragging rights. We like Apple's work. That's why I saved enough cash and buying the next Macbook Pro rev. And keeping my OS X peecee as my main power cruncher.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

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.

no it's not and in the EU it may be illegal to have that kind of lock in.

 

[Small White Car]

Who wants a MacPro for thousands of dollars when all I want it some of its functionality scaled down. Amazing how you are fueling Apples greed and to rip its customer base.

Give me a break. You asked a question. I tried to answer it. That's "fueling Apple greed?"

What does that make your response? The same as "kicking puppies?" Sure, why not...that makes sense too.

Heck, this whole forum is the same thing as "robbing a bank." Yeah, I like the sound of that too!

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

That's easy to answer - its NOT built by Apple which means that you CAN build a tower cheaper (well outside of the US you can) than a Mac Pro tower since you don't have any profit margins to worry about- and - you can still run OS X on it with no worries at all - so you can game away and run OS X happily.

For VAT customers this is a hugh deal.

Heck being Canadian we still get ripped off.

 

[BaldiMac]

Actually you are legally buying Mac OS X

No. You are not. You are buying a license to use OS X under the terms of the license agreement.

if you are considering the Apple Hardware and Mac OS X as Mac OS X then you are running the risk of a monopoly and locked in solution, something that got Microsoft in trouble a while back.

Microsoft did not get in trouble for being a monopoly. They got in trouble for abusing monopoly powers. But Apple has a market share around 7% which is nowhere near any definition of a monopoly.

At best you are violating the usage agreement, however in that case when you return Mac OS X in an open box do they give you a full refund or take out a stocking fee or better yet not take it back at all.

If you return software because you do not agree to the EULA, you are entitled to a full refund.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Give me a break. You asked a question. I tried to answer it. That's "fueling Apple greed?"

What does that make your response? The same as "kicking puppies?" Sure, why not...that makes sense too.

Heck, this whole forum is the same thing as "robbing a bank." Sure, why not?

Supply and Demand, Apple does not supply a Mid Tower for it's demanding customer, and you are willing to upsize to a MacPro due to a lack of is greed on Apples part. Locking you into they hardware choices and specification is even worse. When you boil right down to it, Apple would not be perceived greedy if there was a choice other than the MacMini and iMac for a decent upgradable Tower. As mentioned some people are not looking for a workstation which is the MacPro.

So if Apple wants to be greedy and you don't mind paying them for it then you are fueling it.

 

[Durendal]

$155? The hell with that. I'll take my chances with a plain vanilla Hackintosh before I blow that much money on something that can be done essentially for free, even if it is more of a pain.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

No. You are not. You are buying a license to use OS X under the terms of the license agreement.

This falls under anti-competitive laws, considering the country you reside in.

Microsoft did not get in trouble for being a monopoly. They got in trouble for abusing monopoly powers. But Apple has a market share around 7% which is nowhere near any definition of a monopoly.

So you are suggesting it is alright for a company to have a monopolistic practice as long as they do not get too big.

If you return software because you do not agree to the EULA, you are entitled to a full refund.

Again depends on the country you reside in. I have never been able to return any software purchase when opened for a full refund if any.

 

[stainlessliquid]

Boot-132 does the same thing as EFI-X but you burn it to a cd-r and its free. Granted you have to do some work like get all the drivers you need and burn the cd (or just download an iso someone else made for their motherboard) and it doesnt have a fancy graphical boot loader, but it still allows you to install from retail Leopard discs and 10.5.x updates.

 

[kresh]

This is just an extension of the DRM issue.

Just like the content providers with multimedia; with OS X, Apple is leasing rights and not selling ownership of anything.

I am in the anti-drm camp. I want to own the things I purchase and not lease the rights to use it as the provider sees fit. So long as I only use the content I've paid for (music or OS) on one device it should not matter which device it is.

 

[BaldiMac]

Supply and Demand, Apple does not supply a Mid Tower for it's demanding customer, and you are willing to upsize to a MacPro due to a lack of is greed on Apples part. Locking you into they hardware choices and specification is even worse. When you boil right down to it, Apple would not be perceived greedy if there was a choice other than the MacMini and iMac for a decent upgradable Tower. As mentioned some people are not looking for a workstation which is the MacPro.

So if Apple wants to be greedy and you don't mind paying them for it then you are fueling it.

Who do you consider more greedy - Apple or Microsoft? Apple's profit margin is consistently in the 20%-25% range. As a small business owner, I think that is a very reasonable profit margin.

"They don't make what I want" is not the same as "greed."

Microsoft's profit margin is in the 80% range for Windows and Office.