James Philp said:
No, the first x86 Macs will come with 10.4 (Tiger), since they will be available, at the latest, next June. 10.5 (Leopard) will not be released until late 2006 / early 2007.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
First Hand with Mac OS X on Toshiba Intel (x86)
- Thread starter MacBytes
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, the first x86 Macs will come with 10.4 (Tiger), since they will be available, at the latest, next June. 10.5 (Leopard) will not be released until late 2006 / early 2007.
James Philp said:And where did they gat this marvelous copy of OS X 10.4?
I thought it was agreed that 10.5 would be the OS released with/for x86 Macs?
Where's this leak come from all of a sudden. Apparently Apple have been developing 10.x to work on x86 from the beginning, and now all of a sudden there's a leaked version of Tiger?
Welcome to four months ago.
Another thing.
Why are the pictures an obvious mix of a laptop and desktop screen?
What's wrong with the picture below?
Wouldn't the x86 version be Processor: 1.2GHz Pentium M?
Since when are:
1. The GHz speed quoted last
2. The chip manufacturers' names included
Me thinks this may be an elaborate hoax?
Why are the pictures an obvious mix of a laptop and desktop screen?
What's wrong with the picture below?
Wouldn't the x86 version be Processor: 1.2GHz Pentium M?
Since when are:
1. The GHz speed quoted last
2. The chip manufacturers' names included
Me thinks this may be an elaborate hoax?
Attachments
Considering how sue happy Apple has been lately (not that they aren't right to do so sometimes) I find it odd that they aren't really actively going after the people who do this as much. Apple is being very smart about this. I'm sure they want to see what happens first, who can break what, and what people think. I truly believe the next version of OS X will be VERY hard to crack (though probably not impossible). But as long as it gets people interested, I guess all it can do is help Apple to have it out there. Probably.
liketom said:
ohhh ok. So, once the "OS" screen appears? That would make sence. My Mac is about 20 seconds form that screen. Most PCs I use still take longe than a minute.
You may want to go back and watch the WWDC 2005 keynote where Steve announces the Intel transition.James Philp said:And where did they gat this marvelous copy of OS X 10.4?
I thought it was agreed that 10.5 would be the OS released with/for x86 Macs?
Where's this leak come from all of a sudden. Apparently Apple have been developing 10.x to work on x86 from the beginning, and now all of a sudden there's a leaked version of Tiger?
He says that Apple has been developing an x86 version of OS X for over five years, as a shadow project within the company. He also announces the developer test machines, which come preloaded with an x86 version of 10.4.
This test as a whole was unfair to Mac OS X. The only app they ran, iTunes, was running under emulation. Emulation! The app was originally built for the PowerPC architecture. I'll be interested when it is final.
solvs said:
I think it's all about generating a buzz. Whether it's putting OSX on other then Apple hardware or this article, it is more valuable then anything Madison Avenue can put out.
First Hand with Mac OS X on Toshiba Intel (x86)
![]()
ZDNet.co.uk posted a review on installing Intel Mac OS X on non-Mac hardware.
The article describes the installation and use of Mac OS X on a Toshiba Portégé M300 notebook. There are some limitations with the test installation. Of note, there only exists support for the Intel integrated graphics chipset (915G) for 3D graphics support.
ZDNet reports that power-saving functions of the Pentium M processor is already supported and the Intel OS X shows similar power consumption as Windows XP on the same notebook they tested. They also post a few benchmarks but the results come with the usual caveats for beta software.
They also post an image gallery from the installation.
ZDNet.co.uk posted a review on installing Intel Mac OS X on non-Mac hardware.
The article describes the installation and use of Mac OS X on a Toshiba Portégé M300 notebook. There are some limitations with the test installation. Of note, there only exists support for the Intel integrated graphics chipset (915G) for 3D graphics support.
ZDNet reports that power-saving functions of the Pentium M processor is already supported and the Intel OS X shows similar power consumption as Windows XP on the same notebook they tested. They also post a few benchmarks but the results come with the usual caveats for beta software.
They also post an image gallery from the installation.
http://www.zdnet.co.uk/i/z/rv/2005/11/macos-x86-25.jpg
Is that the equivalent of BIOS or open-firmware? Is that what we're going to see now when we hold down OPTION on boot? It's not as pretty as the gray background in open-firmware!
Is that the equivalent of BIOS or open-firmware? Is that what we're going to see now when we hold down OPTION on boot? It's not as pretty as the gray background in open-firmware!
wondered how long it would take....
i'm personally looking forward to the intel OS X. there are unfortunately times when i need to run a PC, and having OS X on it would make it sooo much more bearable.
i'm personally looking forward to the intel OS X. there are unfortunately times when i need to run a PC, and having OS X on it would make it sooo much more bearable.
apple should not be happy with people doing this, I mean... this is bad... cool in a geeky way but just bad for apple... I do understand though, that people have to be able to choose their hardware and not be subject to what apple is offering... and the prices they have... but then theyd have to make the software more expensive and make it pirate-proof... heck it would be easier to globalize hidrogen as the main motor-vehicle fuel...
im gone to sleep... too much going through my brain..
im gone to sleep... too much going through my brain..
VicMacs said:
From where I'm sitting, all of this is VERY good for Apple. I mean, how good must an OS actually be for people to want to hack it to put on their machines?
For all of the non-techy people, if all they hear is this, they may wonder what all of the fuss is about and go check out an Apple computer; since they can't purchase an "OS X Dell" machine, and they certainly aren't going to be hacking to get their own OS x86 machine up and running.
That's neither, it's the boot-loader. It loads after the BIOS. Looks pretty typical. NT or lilo style.picklescott said:
Information on how to do this has been online for a long time, but the huge cahoonas of ZDNet to do it... They have money to lose, unlike Joe Blog.
Whenever I see these demos, I'm always excited, "I could do that too!" Then I realize I have a single computer which is a Mac already.
Whenever I see these demos, I'm always excited, "I could do that too!" Then I realize I have a single computer which is a Mac already.
Well, it's piracy, AND it's not likely to be nearly so simple once Apple has protections in place.
And what's the surprise here? OS X for Intel runs on Intel chips. I think we knew that already
I see it more as a teaser for the Wintel users who are starting to eye OS X. That's all good--they'll have to get a Mac if they want it, though
And what's the surprise here? OS X for Intel runs on Intel chips. I think we knew that already
I see it more as a teaser for the Wintel users who are starting to eye OS X. That's all good--they'll have to get a Mac if they want it, though
Neither. That's boot-loader code, not firmware. And it's probably place-holder code, and not what Apple will ship, considering the fact that no Mac shipped has ever used a text-mode boot screen.picklescott said:
Firmware (of any kind) is built in to the motherboard and is not a function of the OS. Whatever firmware may be on that test machine is going to be generic PC firmware (probably based on the IBM BIOS.)