Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
From a hardware perspective.... it does leave a lot to be desired. It is cheap plastic. So definitely after using a unibody laptop you know that these two computers are in different leagues. Also, the screen resolution is not great (1024x600) but I can live with this.

Good god, not again....
I suppose all the Apple laptops prior to the Uni were **** because they were plastic too, eh? Just because something is plastic doesnt instantly make it inferior to the unibody. Last time i checked, Apple was still selling "cheap plastic" macbooks and the Mini still has quite a bit of "cheap plastic" on it.
 
Why use OSX for a HTPC? Does it have some advantages over Win 7 in this dept? It definitely sounds more challenging (or in other words, destined for head-aches! :( )

Well I've got an AppleTV in the bedroom. All my computers @ home are now Macs (Mac Pro, Powerbook G4 [12"]). I figure why not have everything the same. Plus, I watched a screencast from screencastsonline.com about PLEX and it blew me away. That's the main reason for wanting to go OSX for the HTPC.
 
Well I've got an AppleTV in the bedroom. All my computers @ home are now Macs (Mac Pro, Powerbook G4 [12"]). I figure why not have everything the same. Plus, I watched a screencast from screencastsonline.com about PLEX and it blew me away. That's the main reason for wanting to go OSX for the HTPC.

I'll check it out... the only computer that's still running Windows in my household is the HTPC... hmm....
 
To make a long story short, for the time I spent working on this computer to get it to even boot and the money I spent on parts, I would rather just get a job at mcdonalds and buy a mac mini.

But the mini is limited in so many ways. Even an iMac is limited compared to what's available in the desktop market. Most hackintosh people are interested in having the xMac or an xNetbook - areas where Apple has voids.

Hackintosh supported hardware is a crapshoot, at best.

Not if you buy the parts with OS X in mind. Heck, you can even build a nice i7-based hackintosh system for under $1200 that'll give you Geekbench scores around 13,000. What does an 8-core Mac Pro score?

And since time is money, and I value both, I don't want to tinker around getting a system working and would rather spend some more money and get a system I KNOW will work.

Unfortunately, there are instances where an Apple system won't work. For example, concurrently playing high bit rate Blu-ray rips and transcoding Eye TV recordings (needs a Mac Pro or top end 3 gHz iMac). Or trying to get Aperture to run on a GMA950 mini. (There are plenty of others.) So, it really depends on an individual's needs.

I'm tempted to build a hack Mac Pro Nehalem quad, because it can be done for about $1000 vs Apple's [absurd] $2500. And it will have better graphics too. :D

The Mac Pro is actually very competitive. Remember, it's built on server-grade components, not desktop components, and thus is inherently more expensive. Where Macs are deficient is that zone between the iMacs and the Mac Pros. I have no problem with the current pricing of Mac Pros - but they are far more of a computer than I need.

I now loath the headaches associated with all of them and prefer for my computers and related devices to "just work" which is why I've moved exclusively to Apple products...

Here are the OS X boxes I currently own/use:

Q6600-based 3.2 gHz Hackintosh
Q8200-based 2.33 gHz Hackintosh
2.16 gHz C2D iMac
2 gHz C2D GMA950 Mini
2.4 gHz C2D MacBook Pro (nVidia 8600, lucky me :mad: )
2 gHz C2D MacBook
2 gHz G5 20" iMac
1.7 gHz G5 17" iMac

The Mini and 2.16 iMac have both failed and needed repaired. Neither of my Hackintoshes has crashed or had other operational problems (except wake from sleep early on). So, any computer can fail at any time. "It just works" is but words only.

Why use OSX for a HTPC? Does it have some advantages over Win 7 in this dept? It definitely sounds more challenging (or in other words, destined for head-aches! :( )

Yeah, it runs Plex. :) The biggest issue IMO is the lack of Blu-ray disc support for HDCP and decryption in OS X. Hopefully, that'll change, but I'm not holding my breath. Otherwise, OS X makes a fabulous HTPC OS, so long as you don't use Front Row, iTunes or Quicktime as your front end, as they pretty much suck.
 
Well I would not start building a hackintosh for a time-critical project right now. I think people build these things to overcome the challenge of doing it and just finding out how the systems work. And it can be fun. The people who make these things also save the rest of us some money by showing how to get PC hardware working in regular Macs, as I found out with the graphics card game recently.

Another point is that if you want a big tower with massive expansion, e.g. for many GPUS, hard disks and so on, the Mac Pro does not do it and you have to build a hack.

If you are going to go down this route, you must not be the sort of person who either gives up easily or does everything on the basis of costing your own time. Do you charge your children to spend time playing with them?:( This is now my least favourite thread since I started reading MacForums.

I agree with you. I could not say it any better!!! Thanks.
 
Dell Mini 9

I purchased a Dell Mini 9 about 6 weeks ago for the sole purpose of seeing if I could get OS-X to run on it.

The truth is, for many things it is fine. Surfing the web, listening to itunes, etc. It is reasonably fast, though I am sure I wouldn't want to run photoshop on it.

And it is so small, it almost fits in your pocket.

I guess the fun part about it was actually doing the required Mods and trying to figure out why they work.

It is also at least as robust as the original MBA and other than the odd resolution screen, works just as well. 2 pounds and you can slip it under the couch if you want. Perfect for IMDBing things while watching tv :)

Overall, I would NEVER use it as a first computer, but as an additional it is fine. It generally travels with me now and my Alum MB stays home-just because of the size/weight difference.
 
The Mac Pro is actually very competitive. Remember, it's built on server-grade components, not desktop components, and thus is inherently more expensive. Where Macs are deficient is that zone between the iMacs and the Mac Pros. I have no problem with the current pricing of Mac Pros - but they are far more of a computer than I need.

Oh OK, the $700 Xeon, extra QPI link fee. You got me. And don't forget that fabulous GT 120 "server-grade" video! ;)
 
Oh OK, the $700 Xeon, extra QPI link fee. You got me. And don't forget that fabulous GT 120 "server-grade" video! ;)
The Quad core parts (W35xx), have the same quantity pricing as their Core i7 counterparts at the same clock speed. The W35xx has ECC capabilities. That's the only difference between them. Definitely cheaper than the single processor model from '08 (E5462 @ $862USD at release IIRC).

The DP Nehalems (55xx series), is a little different, but perhaps not what you'd expect either. The base Octo's 2.26GHz (E5520 @ $373 quantity pricing at release) parts are cheaper than the E5462 used in the base '08 by a substantial margin. Same external case, only the guts were adapted to fit the new boards. Now the daughter board and coolers are different and make an impact on pricing, but enough to justify the current pricing?

Perhaps some combination of multiple factors came into play, including higher margins. ;)
 
Hackintosh, jail breaking, overclocking... I lump them all together into a hobby focused on doing more with less (or for less). It's a great learning experience and fun to tinker and tweak but I've had my fill of it over the years. I now loath the headaches associated with all of them and prefer for my computers and related devices to "just work" which is why I've moved exclusively to Apple products for their elegance, simplicity, and seamless integration. It's rewarding to not be fighting against the grain now... and just using something as it was intended! (What a concept! :D :p)

I think that this is probably a pretty good description of why many people build Hackintoshes. I fit this category pretty well myself. Last October I wanted a new Mac to replace my G5 iMac. I was getting tired of waiting for an Apple upgrade and I convinced myself that I needed/wanted a quadcore processor since I was doing some basic video encoding. I was also not satisfied with the external hard drives that I was using for Time Machine backups. I just hated turning them on and off and didn't think my backups were as current and routine as I wanted.

The niche I think I fell into was someone who wanted a little more than an iMac, but didn't need a Mac Pro. So I spent some time a did some research on the Hackintosh front. I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was really quite advanced and stable, so I put together a bunch of parts that appeared to work with a standard install, made sure I had the Leopard Family Pack so I was good on licenses, and did the install. I got a nice system with the ability to have many hard drives. I have Time Machine running on a second internal drive (which is on a tray so I can pull it if I want). Everything came in at less than $1000. My only serious complaints are the sound on the monitor (Acer) isn't as good as my iMac and I went and bought a video camera that would have been standard in the iMac. However, I got a Q6600 system which is something you couldn't really do with Apple at the time - or even now.

I don't mind tweaking things, but the installation was pretty smooth. I had to make a few fixes with audio and sleep. The www.insanelymac.com forums were very helpful. Right now the only thing not working ideally is the password on wake - which is frustrating. There is also the "hold-your-breath" factor on upgrade...Still, for $1000, I have a pretty nice system that will probably hold me for about five years. If I want, I can upgrade the processor and get more kick for a pretty small investment. I also have three empty 5.25 bays and three or four 3.5 bays internally in case I decide to go wild with hard drives. And, if I want, I can move up to a more robust graphics card. I have high confidence that Snow Leopard will work with it when released.

This February, I bought a Dell Mini9 after some research and about $400 (including larger SSD and more memory). It is very handy for when my wife or I am on the road. The forums at www.mydellmini.com are extremely useful and that hardware package is quite well understood. I added a 32GB SSD into it and everything works great. I use it primarily for Internet and some word processing on the road. It is quite small. I do wonder if Snow Leopard will work on it, but it will be more than satisfactory even with "just" Leopard. I never would have bought a laptop or netbook except that I could put Leopard on it for less than $400.

I do like tinkering with my computer and having the ability to add things like a card reader or more drives in one package is appealing to me. The iMac is really quite fine for most of my uses, but for a little less money, I could get some flexibility and the appeal of a small hobby. In that respect, I've been quite pleased.

A Hackintosh is simply not for everyone, but for many people who are willing to make the time investment and assume some hardware reliability risk, it gives a good return on computer power and flexibility for the price. I agree with all the comments about not using this as something for a contract or business solution. You do not want to go down and not have a lot of recourse in terms of support. The premium you would pay for Apple equipment in such a case would quickly overcome the lower price point and architectural flexibility of a Hackintosh. I also wouldn't pursue this if you aren't comfortable taking apart computers. I'm not comfortable working with cars and have a lot of respect for people who are. A similar situation applies to Hackintoshes. My mother and sister both have Macs because they don't want to worry about anything. And they don't. I'll certainly get more Macs in the future, but right now I'm enjoying the novelty (as mentioned earlier) of having unique capabilities...
 
Hackintosh, jail breaking, overclocking... I lump them all together into a hobby focused on doing more with less (or for less). It's a great learning experience and fun to tinker and tweak but I've had my fill of it over the years. I now loath the headaches associated with all of them and prefer for my computers and related devices to "just work" which is why I've moved exclusively to Apple products for their elegance, simplicity, and seamless integration. It's rewarding to not be fighting against the grain now... and just using something as it was intended! (What a concept! :D :p)

Yawn ;)
 
There are few reasons I am using a Mac for years and I am not going to switch.
I am not paying for the OS only, but also the hardware, the sexy design and outstanding services.

I can trust its hardware and software.
I am still running 9.22 on my G4 Cube and I am happy with it. I am using a Mac Pro and a G5 for my Audio and Video editing and I am happy and rely on it.
Yes, I can possible get a Mac wanna be PC but do I want to take any chances?

Life is too short for bad hardware and I don't want to deal with it.
 
There are few reasons I am using a Mac for years and I am not going to switch.
I am not paying for the OS only, but also the hardware, the sexy design and outstanding services.

I can trust its hardware and software.
I am still running 9.22 on my G4 Cube and I am happy with it. I am using a Mac Pro and a G5 for my Audio and Video editing and I am happy and rely on it.
Yes, I can possible get a Mac wanna be PC but do I want to take any chances?

Life is too short for bad hardware and I don't want to deal with it.

Exactly. Even if Apple licensed OSX to Dell tomorrow and you could buy a high-end OSX box from Dell for $1500 I would want nothing to do with it. You either get what Apple is doing or you don't I guess. :confused:
 
Exactly. Even if Apple licensed OSX to Dell tomorrow and you could buy a high-end OSX box from Dell for $1500 I would want nothing to do with it. You either get what Apple is doing or you don't I guess. :confused:
True. I dont get that apple wants to charge more for the same hardware, has only one real desktop model, has no quad core options under $2500, and requires me to drive 30 minutes each way to get a mac looked at if its broken.
Nope, i dont get that at all.
 
Exactly. Even if Apple licensed OSX to Dell tomorrow and you could buy a high-end OSX box from Dell for $1500 I would want nothing to do with it. You either get what Apple is doing or you don't I guess. :confused:

You would likely be left standing among a tiny tiny minority. Saving $3,ooo THREE THOUSAND dollars and only having to give up that silver case? I guess everyone would do it. Thus why Apple won't license OS X like that! ;)
 
I bought a EFi-X a couple months back; that really made things very easy; of course the issue is that it costs $200.
 
You would likely be left standing among a tiny tiny minority. Saving $3,ooo THREE THOUSAND dollars and only having to give up that silver case? I guess everyone would do it. Thus why Apple won't license OS X like that! ;)

I'm already in a tiny tiny minority. :D

I just don't get why there's so much hate on for Apple's desk top line up in here. :confused: Yes, it's expensive... so are a lot of premium things in life.

I wish I could buy a new Ferrari for $25K... after all, it's just a car... if Nissan can build a car for $25K why can't Ferrari?! LOL... but I'm not in the Ferrari enthusiast forums every day bashing the product management at Ferrari for positioning and pricing their products the way they see fit. You either understand the value and buy it, or you don't?! :confused:

EDIT: I think we are having the same debate in at least two threads :p... I guess we just agree to disagree as we seem miles apart on the Mac Pro pricing, positioning, and value proposition.
 
I just don't get why there's so much hate on for Apple's desk top line up in here. :confused: Yes, it's expensive... so are a lot of premium things in life.

You completely missed the point most people are trying to make. A lot of people want something that performs between the iMac and the Mac Pro. A Core2Quad tower priced reasonably would make a lot of people happy, because at the moment there are no macs made with desktop parts unless you want to pay $2500. I dont need an i7 chip, but i would like a core2quad, and apple doesnt even offer the c2q on any model. I dont want a desktop built from laptop parts, and i dont have $2500 to spend on a computer. Its not a price issue, its a selection issue.
 
You completely missed the point most people are trying to make. A lot of people want something that performs between the iMac and the Mac Pro. A Core2Quad tower priced reasonably would make a lot of people happy, because at the moment there are no macs made with desktop parts unless you want to pay $2500. I dont need an i7 chip, but i would like a core2quad, and apple doesnt even offer the c2q on any model. I dont want a desktop built from laptop parts, and i dont have $2500 to spend on a computer. Its not a price issue, its a selection issue.

A core 2 Quad is only about $100 less than the 2.66GHz i7. DDR2 memory is only marginally less than DDR3. A X48 Chipset is only marginally cheaper than a X58. So even if Apple built a Core2Quad 2.83GHz, with 4GB of DDR2, it would still be $2000... would that make you happy? I don't think so.
 
I'm not sure what you mean? :confused: I guess it's boring... if that's what you're implying. :)

Yes, pretty much! Breaking free from Apple's silly restrictions on things you can or can't do with its hardware/software is a matter of huge satisfaction for me, and a lot of others. Part of it is getting the most out of the hardware, and getting the most compute power out of dollars spent.. And another part of it is freedom to upgrade the hardware however we want to and have a variety of choices available.

So not having that freedom, and being content what Apple thinks I should be content with is boring to me.
 
A core 2 Quad is only about $100 less than the 2.66GHz i7. DDR2 memory is only marginally less than DDR3. A X48 Chipset is only marginally cheaper than a X58. So even if Apple built a Core2Quad 2.83GHz, with 4GB of DDR2, it would still be $2000... would that make you happy? I don't think so.

You can build a quad Core i7 920 2.66 GHz DDR3 based PC in parts for around $1000-1100. If Apple had a mini tower in the $1500-1600 ballpark we'd stop complaining. They'll no doubt get to an i7 quad with an iMac chassis eventually.
 
You can build a quad Core i7 920 2.66 GHz DDR3 based PC in parts for around $1000-1100. If Apple had a mini tower in the $1500-1600 ballpark we'd stop complaining. They'll no doubt get to an i7 quad with an iMac chassis eventually.

I understand. But realize that if you can build it for $1K then most companies would sell it for $1.5K and Apple would sell it for $2-2.5K. That's Apple.

Thus even if Apple built a stripped down C2D quad system, it would still be priced significantly higher than you would be willing to pay.

EDIT: I'll stop harping on this point now. There's just a difference of opinion... I'm not trying to win an argument or anything... sorry if I sound like a broken record.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.