Mac OS X 10.4.4 Intel Patch for PCs

[(L)]

Safari doesn't detect that it is running on a non-Apple computer.
How can Apple detect if it's non-Apple computer?

Even if there is, and if it's non-encrypted software, just re-write that part and kext it. if it's encrypted software, there're always higher-skill hacker can reverse engineer and crack it. if it's hardware check (which seems like it doesn't), then you might as well re-write the driver, and if it's just at hardware itself that consistently send information to Apple~ well, first, it's illegal, and second, it can be capture by packet reciever and still can solve the problem.

Also, now iMac Core Duo doesn't seal the CPU... ... That means we can change CPU... so if I change to 2.16Ghz one if I can buy it, will Safari (in your logic) pop up and say: Oh~ There is no such spec on our Mac list, you're using OS X on non-Apple Computer blah blah blah...???? and if CPU is ok, can I flash the EFI by using some other source??? It's still "Apple Computer"! will it catch it? If I change CPU, flash EFI, change RAM, change HD, and you definally can change video card in Intel PowerMac (or Mac Pro)... how can Apple define your computer is Apple brand or not!?

Honestly, Apple can stop spending hundred of thousands of dollar on thinkink "How OS X cannot be cracked"! The easiest way is to have a new update everytime there is hacker crack the older update... and later on the hacker will just get tired of keep re-write the mach_kernal... and by that time left the PC user decide if the older version is OK for them or they need a better cooler feature and correct more problem on the newer version.

Like 10.4.5... we've been hearing 10.4.5 coming out for many days... but they don't release at all until Maxxuss release the crack for 10.4.4...

OK, you seem to be missing a few letters here and there. I'm not sure from reading your post - is there or isn't there a detection mechanism through Safari? "Definally"? Or definitely?

"How can Apple define your computer is Apple brand or not!?" - Hey, where there's a will, there's a way, with or without grammar.

"Honestly, Apple can stop spending hundred of thousands of dollar on thinkink "How OS X cannot be cracked"! The easiest way is to have a new update everytime there is hacker crack the older update... and later on the hacker will just get tired of keep re-write the mach_kernal... and by that time left the PC user decide if the older version is OK for them or they need a better cooler feature and correct more problem on the newer version." - Umm, yeah. Honestly, Apple may find it beneficial to secure Mac OS X. Running some race with a criminal hacker who could sell illegal copies to people that don't care to have the real deal but just want the cheap stuff? And why sould a PC user who went so far as to illegally install OS X, content with an illegal copy with no official Apple support suddenly turn around and buy the real product just for "a better cooler feature" and stability? Anybody from that poopy bucket would rather try to hack it further or wait till someone else does. Cute, but Apple will have to do more than just come up with updates every other week. Seems like it would be possible to sneak in hardware detection tools or something.

 

[KickRideFly]

?????????

People who buy Macs buy them for the image, the allure of the system - of what it symbolizes. Some people are making the analog to this argument: "Well, I can get as good of coffee at Dunkin' Donuts as I can Starbucks, so why bother going to Starbucks." That's wrong - Starbucks has based their entire business on a premium product with an image. A girl seeing the same guy on the same street corner carrying either Starbucks or Dunkin' will generally have a better impression of the guy with the "gourmet coffee." That's all image.

Mac is no different. It's a premium product with an allure. What that allure is personal; they've achieved attraction to their system with a number of concepts: iPod integration, Mac OSX, Hardware Design, Software Design. If you want to buy OSX to run on your Dell, they probably figure they are getting - at the very least - incremental sales from the OS. The person that hacks away at their OSX is not the type of person who buys into the image of Macs - and therefore, was not part of the target audience. In essence, most people who go down this path weren't going to buy a whole Apple "system" anyway.

So the whole Apple idea isn't about price parity. It's not about cost competition. It's not about individual components. It's not even really about cutting-edge or technological breakthroughs. It's really a new business model for the personal computing world that attracts fans due to the whole concept - not just the sum of all its parts.

What is with guys like you? You really think I buy a Mac for some kind of snob appeal? It is possible that some people are willing to spend more for a superior product simply because it is a superior product? I do agree that anyone who gets involved with this type of hack has a whole different motivation. However, the idea that the primary reason a person buys a Mac boils down to some kind of symbolism is ludicrous.

 

[demallien]

What matters to me is that technically speaking, your Intel Mac's hardware isn't much different than every other P4 3ghz system on the market. Therefore, hardware isn't much of a selling point for Apple.

You are kidding right? Show me a PC that is as beautiful, as reliable, as small, or with as many features such as WiFi, bleutooth etc etc as a Mac, but significantly cheaper...

Now, if Apple had any business sense about them, they would be selling this OS to other manufacturers and competing directly with Microsoft. But they'd rather stay proprietary. This is dumb because every time they update the OS, someone will crack it. Either they accept that painful fact or they patch the OS every week. OR (click light bulb) they sell it to companies like Dell and HP!

And that would be why it took a genius like Steve Jobs to turn Apple's fortunes around. In case you've missed the single most bleedingly obvious point in the whole OS wars at the moment, it's that Microsoft, as a provider of software, is in big trouble. Its two flagship products, Windows and Office, now have Open Source competitors that are approaching them in quality (Linux/BSD, and OpenOffice). It won't be too long before these products completely catch up to Mictosoft's offerings (after all, how many new features do you really need in a word processor).

When that happens, in the next 3-5 years, Microsoft will be out of the software game. That's why Redmond is running so hard on XBox and its services offerings. It needs to shift it's products to something that is not threatened by cheap collaborative efforts. You can't make an XBox with Open Source, you need a manufacturing plant.

Apple of course has had the privileged position of ALWAYS having a hardware component to it's offerings. They have consequently never felt threatened by Open Source, and have infact done much to help the Open Source community. They aren't going to commit economic suicide by becoming a software only shop, hence exposing themselves to Open Source.

My prediction: Apple will continue to innovate, especially with it's hardware. It's no coincidence that we have had all of those rumours recently talking about Tablet PCs, and Gesture. My guess is that Apple is about to release an entirely touch-based interface, with the physical implementation patented to death to make it difficult for clones to copy. I <pause/> can't <pause/> wait!

 

[BenRoethig]

You are kidding right? Show me a PC that is as beautiful, as reliable, as small, or with as many features such as WiFi, bleutooth etc etc as a Mac, but significantly cheaper...

Show me a Mac which is powerful, Expandable, and affordable. Two grand on a PowerMac isn't a valid answer. There are two sides to this coin and Apple doesn't seem to get that.

 

[MacPhreak]

I am not talking about downloading Mac OS X Tiger from P2P, i can buy brand-new OS X... new mac is still so expensive for me

Ummm, you CAN'T buy a "brand-new" boxed copy of OS X for Intel yet. And probably not until 10.5. Why? Because all MacIntels come with 10.4, so what's the point in selling it retail?

If you have 10.4 on your non-Apple PC, it's pirated. Sorry. Buy a Mac. The G4 Digital Audio's and Quick Silvers are sickeningly cheap now.

 

[CheezyLlama]

You are kidding right? Show me a PC that is as beautiful, as reliable, as small, or with as many features such as WiFi, bleutooth etc etc as a Mac, but significantly cheaper...

That type of discussion is a sink hole. All features (wifi, bluetooth, firewire etc) are available on any new system so its a moot discussion. The point I made was that the core of the Intel Mac is the same as my computer I custom built. Hardware is no longer the selling point. This is proven by the fact that I can install your OS on my computer and it will run just as fast maybe even faster.

The rest of your comments didn't really discuss what I was saying.

When that happens, in the next 3-5 years, Microsoft will be out of the software game. That's why Redmond is running so hard on XBox and its services offerings.

Thats just silly. Microsoft will be out of the software business in 3-5 years? Thats like saying that Apple will stop making portable media players in the same time frame.

They aren't going to commit economic suicide by becoming a software only shop, hence exposing themselves to Open Source.

They will commit economic suicide by depending on an MP3 player to bring in all of their profits every year. My entire point from the beginning is that they need to expand their customer base. They can do this by licensing the OS out to other manufacturers. They make money and invested almost nothing into hardware. They have a greater presence in the corporate world and barely lifted a finger to deliver computers. It just makes sense and I'm all for an alternative to Windows. I just want it to be more streamlined and not full of weekly cracks and hacks to make it work. As soon as Jobs wakes up and realizes there are many IT administrators (such as myself) in corporations waiting for a viable alternative, he'll continue to ride on the coat tails of the mac faithful and iPod users.

Again, I am wanting to see X available on a wider variety of PC's. Not Apple specific hardware. I like being able to shop around and pick whatever I want and build it myself. Jobs doesn't want me to do that and he doesn't want you to do it either. Wish I could smack him

 

[asphalt-proof]

You are kidding right? Show me a PC that is as beautiful, as reliable, as small, or with as many features such as WiFi, bleutooth etc etc as a Mac, but significantly cheaper...



And that would be why it took a genius like Steve Jobs to turn Apple's fortunes around. In case you've missed the single most bleedingly obvious point in the whole OS wars at the moment, it's that Microsoft, as a provider of software, is in big trouble. Its two flagship products, Windows and Office, now have Open Source competitors that are approaching them in quality (Linux/BSD, and OpenOffice). It won't be too long before these products completely catch up to Mictosoft's offerings (after all, how many new features do you really need in a word processor).

When that happens, in the next 3-5 years, Microsoft will be out of the software game. That's why Redmond is running so hard on XBox and its services offerings. It needs to shift it's products to something that is not threatened by cheap collaborative efforts. You can't make an XBox with Open Source, you need a manufacturing plant.

Apple of course has had the privileged position of ALWAYS having a hardware component to it's offerings. They have consequently never felt threatened by Open Source, and have infact done much to help the Open Source community. They aren't going to commit economic suicide by becoming a software only shop, hence exposing themselves to Open Source.

My prediction: Apple will continue to innovate, especially with it's hardware. It's no coincidence that we have had all of those rumours recently talking about Tablet PCs, and Gesture. My guess is that Apple is about to release an entirely touch-based interface, with the physical implementation patented to death to make it difficult for clones to copy. I <pause/> can't <pause/> wait!

Ummm, Office is in no way giong to be supplanted by OOo. OOo is slow, bloated and even uglier then Office. Exchange is an absolute must for businesses and there is no openware substitute. Linux is getting less and less fiddley but has unphill battle to being ubiquitous. MS and their flagship products are not going to disappear in the foreseeable future. Will they lose marketshare? Of course. But to go from 90%+ to gone is a VERY long way.

My own feeling on the OSX-on-non-macware is that I think Apple is going to eventually dish it out to major manufacturers or start selling a boxed version of the os. For all the naysayers: We have been proven wrong by Apple too many times to think we can read their minds/business plans.

To wit:
Switch to X86. That will never happen; old, inferior hardware!! Piracy will run rampant!!! Etc.

An MP3 player!? that will over like a lead ballon!

there are a couple of other examples, I'm sure, where we have been blown away by a decision Apple makes and predicted gloom and doom. I don't think Apple sweats that people are hacking OSX on nonmac hardware. Just like MS really doesn't sweat it when consumers do the same with their stuff. They get their money one way or another.

 

[Mr. Mister]

I don't quite understand, is it only much slower when you don't have SSE3? I heard that patched configurations were slower, but wasn't sure whether this was with or without an SSE3 processor.

What needs to be hacked anyways? The TPM module?

 

[snowmen]

Running some race with a criminal hacker who could sell illegal copies to people that don't care to have the real deal but just want the cheap stuff? And why sould a PC user who went so far as to illegally install OS X, content with an illegal copy with no official Apple support suddenly turn around and buy the real product just for "a better cooler feature" and stability?.

cheap stuff?
The neat thing about a PC is not only it's cheap, but also it has a lot of choices.
MacTower will have Conroe CPU; but hey, I really want to put a Kentsfield CPU in my computer! Cheaper than Mac? I don't think so. So far I have two PCs, to be honest, one of them I use it to test OS X86, but another one (for work) is more expensive then the equiv. PowerMac.
Another reason?
I owned a PowerMac G5 DP 2.0Ghz, but I sold it. Why? Motherboard problem, RAM problem, etc... Apple might be stable at software, but sux at the hardware site. If those problem will be solve by moving to Intel, yes, I will go buy a MacTower. If not? I will not go buy a MacTower, BUT I will go buy a OS X because even though I don't follow EULA, but I didn't break any copyright law. And DMCA won't apply to me neither. However, for the laptop part, I will still go buy a MacBook Pro since there are not much hardware choice for laptop anyways. Desktop part? I will only consider MacTower for my desktop PC if 1) their hardware is stable and 2) the CPU is not seal that I can put any CPU I want to upgrade or motherboard.

Now you said that "why sould a PC user who went so far as to illegally install OS X, content with an illegal copy with no official Apple support suddenly turn around and buy the real product"... Well~ There is no legal Intel version of OS X on sale in Apple Store right now. All Intel OS X are shipped with the Intel machine. At least many members (of course not all) in OSX86 or Win2osx has said that they will purchase OS X Intel version when it hits the street. I don't know if they really mean it or not, but if Leopard is not hard to crack, there be some buyers owning a PC will like to try the official version of it. If I end up not buying MacTower for my Desktop, I will pay for the official Intel version of OS X.

 

[whocares]

Yes, but if I own the f***ing store, it is my every right to walk into the store, point at the camera, and quietly request that it be turned off, please. Failing which it is also my every right to pull out an axe, and hack the camera into pieces.

So your argument is:
If your next Mac comes with this privacy-invading OS installed and you can't turn it off, you're going to axe the Mac into pieces?

 

[jsnuff1]

Basically, there would be nothing worst than seeing someone running Mac OS X on a non-optimized Mac.

If you can't afford a Mac (come on now, you're telling me that you couldn't have given up Starbucks for a month and save an additional $100.00 and get a Mac Mini) then you do use one.

Am I an elitist, you bet. Just because some one can't afford what I can, doesn't mean that they have the right to ruin what I can afford, but cheapening it's value!

I'm glad to hear that you're in college, but please try to work on both your grammer and spelling (and don't give me any lame ass excuses either!).

Whatever!

Well, my problem is not that I only need something cheap that I can go on the internet and check my mail...I need something fast as well. Yea if thats all I needed then I could have easily gone for the mac mini and been happy.

Im a CS major, and do expensive computational tasks in Matlab which require lots of memory and a fast processor. Can you get a 400 dollar mac with the equivilent of a 3200+ Athlon 2 gigs of ram and a x800 (for gameing, I am a college student after all ) ? No you cannot. And on top of this I can get OSX to run on it? Hell yeah im gonna go for it!

Your an elitest, and I go for the best bang for the buck. Might not be a complete or stable solution as yours, but it works and I can now have the best of both worlds for a fraction of the cost

oh and BTW im to lazy to copy and past forum posts in word and spell check them

 

[sjk]

I dont understand why APPLE is being so bullheaded about this-the faithfull-and a LOT of newcomers will STILL want to buy a superior Mac Box-and for those who dont-it cant hurt APPLE to sell a few million MORE copies a year of OS X for the PC users who want it...

Selling it would be easy; supporting it could become complicated. You can find thousands of previous posts about the issues or just think it through yourself.

 

[snowmen]

So your argument is:
If your next Mac comes with this privacy-invading OS installed and you can't turn it off, you're going to axe the Mac into pieces?

well~ maybe we won't axe the Mac into pieces, because Mac will become antique very soon if they really did the privacy-invading OS.

 

[BenRoethig]

Selling it would be easy; supporting it could become complicated. You can find thousands of previous posts about the issues or just think it through yourself.

Not necessarily. Apple is using standard hardware and already has native support for Intel's 900 series chipsets. Things aren't as complicated anymore either. 95% of PCs shipped in the last year have been based on intel 900 series, Nvidia nForce4, or ATI Radeon Xpress series chipsets. Support only those chipsets (and those that come after) and require Nvidia and ATI to handle their own system drivers, but require them to meet have Apple compatibility requirements.

 

[flir67]

amen to that..

Well...
1. Maxxuss is from Russia, and so far Apple doesn't have an office in Russia. There is no way that Apple can sue Maxxuss. (apple.ru is not official Apple Russia website, it's Apple IMC Russia. Don't think it's the official Russian Apple)

2. IF Apple decide to use the ultimate method to protect (ie privacy stuff), we can sue APPLE already! Or maybe we don't really have to sue them because by the time we win the case, Apple would be bankroupt already... Look at Sony, what happened to Sony which is a company opened a backdoor to comfirm the usage of the CD in the music CD? View Sony's annual report yet? or maybe not annual one, but the fiscal one... HUGE LOST!

I stop using XP except gaming. Why?
Because when there is something happening, I always have to format my HD and use the legal XP CD to install. Don't know why, but I always cannot use internet activation, I have to PHONE them. It takes a while. But before I phone them to activate my XP, I HAVE to find my SerialNumber which I always put it somewhere on my messy table. After all the activation is done, I'll HAVE to go to Windows Update and waste 5 hrs or so to get XP SP2 and all patches... Ha! I wasted 6.5 hrs of installing legal XP while somebody using Super XP just need 1 hr and they don't even need Serial Number, activation, and it's even FULLY PATCHED! Poof....

If Mac require all un-necessary step or even more like IP Scan/Track, I will DEFINALLY NOT use Mac! There are still Linux that I can just install and use them!

3. But if #2 doesn't happen, I will of course continue supporting Apple by buying their hardware + legal software since at least I can afford to. But it doesn't mean that all people around the world can afford it.

I'm right there with you on that. the only thing is I use a legal version of super xp fully patched.....

but I love apple for the fact its based off unix...

 

[Diablohtr]

First of all let me say that I am a PC user, and by PC user I mean Windows, Linux, and well now OSX. I have been reading through this topic and I have seen a lot of people saying that the OSX x86 users are going to be spreading an idea that OSX is crappy or some way worse than Windows. I will say that from what I have seen on OSX x86 forums, that the opposite is true. People understand that OSX runs great on Macs, and they dont expect it to run perfectly on machines that it was never supposed to run on. I currently have it installed on my desktop machine, and my laptop (both dual booting with XP). There are a number of problems on each, mainly it can be sumed up with lack of drivers.

I would consider using OSX as my primary OS if my computers could be fully supported. At the very least I am now craving to own a Mac, unfortunately I cant justify a third computer (at least not right now!).

People are saying that OSX should never be made to install on any old PC because there will be lack of support. Windows doesn't write all of the drivers for every peice of hardware! Sure they write a few generic onces to get things going, but the individual component manufacturers produces their own drivers for their own products. I dont see how this would make OSX unstable or diminish its image. It would be the responsibility of the OEM (Dell, HP) to provide drivers and support. For custom machines, the drivers would come from the manufacturers (DFI, Nvidia, ATI, Broadcom....). Just a thought.

 

[Fiveos22]

Just a thought.

Be careful about thinking around here. The thread-jackers will give you no leniency.

Back on topic: How sophisticated is this hack? I own a mac, and thus have no personal computer to try this on (this I will not be checking into how to do this...its not immediately necessary to me) but for the sake of curiosity: Has Maxxuss made a [more] streamlined process for installing OSX on non-mac computers?

 

[milo]

Back on topic: How sophisticated is this hack? I own a mac, and thus have no personal computer to try this on (this I will not be checking into how to do this...its not immediately necessary to me) but for the sake of curiosity: Has Maxxuss made a [more] streamlined process for installing OSX on non-mac computers?

This hack is pretty complicated, definitely for serious tweakers only. But 10.4.3 had a really basic installer, boot from the DVD just like installing it on a real mac. I assume there will be another one like it once he's done.

 

[Diablohtr]

I installed this striaght off of a bootable DVD. It seems like it is the same as with the real OSX (DVD anyways).

Most things seem to work fine except my desktop (opteron 170 dual core, 1gig ram, nforce4 mb, motorola wireless, and 7800gt) stutters and runs terribly slow, not to mention that I have no keyboard support half of the time. Also, it has no accelerated video support what so ever. My laptop is a HP TC4200, most everything works, exceptions being Wifi, ethernet, and the graphics is unaccelerated. I was very suprised at the speed of OSX on the laptop (had it only on the desktop for a while). So, the "Hacintosh" world just needs driver support.

 

[sjk]

Not necessarily. Apple is using standard hardware and already has native support for Intel's 900 series chipsets. Things aren't as complicated anymore either. 95% of PCs shipped in the last year have been based on intel 900 series, Nvidia nForce4, or ATI Radeon Xpress series chipsets. Support only those chipsets (and those that come after) and require Nvidia and ATI to handle their own system drivers, but require them to meet have Apple compatibility requirements.

I'm aware of hypothetical scenarios like that, which is why I wrote "could" instead of "would" re: support complications. Of course there are solutions for support issues, some mentioned here and elsewhere.

I haven't seen any convincing reasons that would support even a rumor that Apple is currently considering licensing OS X to run on non-Apple hardware and somehow handling support for it. That possibility seems very unlikely to me until after they've completed the Intel transition and when 10.5 (or later) is released. Anyone who hopes it would happen sooner (assuming it ever does) seems to be engaging in premature wishful thinking.

 

[milo]

I installed this striaght off of a bootable DVD. It seems like it is the same as with the real OSX (DVD anyways).

If you installed it off a bootable DVD, you probably installed 10.4.3 or earlier. At this point a version of 10.4.4 that can be installed that way doesn't yet exist.

 

[Diablohtr]

yes it is 10.4.3

 

[Maxx Power]

What is with guys like you? You really think I buy a Mac for some kind of snob appeal? It is possible that some people are willing to spend more for a superior product simply because it is a superior product? I do agree that anyone who gets involved with this type of hack has a whole different motivation. However, the idea that the primary reason a person buys a Mac boils down to some kind of symbolism is ludicrous.

If you can't define what is "Superior" in your statements to exact terms, then you have just became a victim of symbolism, that you just bought a Mac because it is supposedly better. If it's design, then please, indicate what design specifics, how you made your comparisons, and to what you are comparing to, if it's the OS, then please point out what it is that you are comparing once again. I'm not standing up for either his point or yours, I'm pointing out what you said is not accurate.

 

[Eric5h5]

So, the "Hacintosh" world just needs driver support.

"Just", eh? Look how far behind Linux still is in that area, and you can expect it to be much worse for OS X on generic hardware. Writing functional drivers can be hard, tedious, boring and it's nowhere near as "cool" as hacking an OS. It's hard to find people to do that sort of thing for free, never mind doing it well. And without real driver support, OS functionality leaves a lot to be desired, as you noted. Witnessing how worked up people got over things like whether the Mac Mini would be able to do the "ripple" effect or not, I think the driver issue pretty much kills the idea of OS X on generic hardware for most people.

--Eric

 

[ssj300]

racist

Ok.. here we go again.

The dev. builds have all been patched in order to run on most "generic" newer PC's.
Now the final version, too.

I must admit I have done it too, just to find out how well the dev. builds of Tiger worked on a 3.6 GHz Prescott..... and I was amazed. It screamed.

I wonder if 3rd parties are going to make drivers for grfx cards for instance. Or maybe even for SoundBlaster cards....

Thing is, I just hope these patched versions of x86 Tiger only get distributed between the geeks around here (and there), and not become mainstream by some Asian who sells copies of it for around $ 2,- each....