Mac OS X x86 on any PC

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Aug 10, 2005.

  1. MacBytes macrumors bot

    Jul 5, 2003
  2. Mudbug Administrator emeritus


    Jun 28, 2002
    North Central Colorado
    I'm curious to see how long this page stays up.
  3. outerspaceapple macrumors regular


    May 23, 2004
    Minnetonka, MN USA
    well its in french, so he's probably under different laws. Anyways, he doesn't host anything illegal there, and last time i checked we still have the freedom of speech, so he should be alright.
  4. wowoah macrumors regular

    Jul 16, 2003
    Berkeley, CA
    This was bound to happen eventually. I'm curious to see how Apple will prevent it in the final incarnation of the Mactels.
  5. Gizmotoy macrumors 65816


    Nov 6, 2003
    Really, I'm surprised it took as long as it did... though I've heard rumblings around that people have had semi-functional versions running on Intel hardware for some time now. It looks like they've had enough time to figure out what works and why (hence the patches).

    Like the previous poster, I'm curious how Apple plans on preventing this for the final release. I'd guess their short-term survival could hinge on if they can keep people from using it on budget PCs. I hope they've got some tricks, these guys are pretty crafty.
  6. suntzu macrumors regular

    Sep 20, 2003
    Edit: Reread it. TPM is enabled but cracked.

    Still, they could simply revision the TPM again. After all, from what I understand, it's programable.
  7. jkhanson macrumors member

    Jun 17, 2003
    Not sure it really matters

    if it can't be stopped. Probably even be a good thing. People with enough tech savvy to make this work are a very small part of the marketplace. I doubt that it will cost Apple many sales, if any at all. Anyone who wants to be sure they get a stable system with support from Apple will need to buy an Apple system.

    Some people will enjoy the challenge of installing the Mac OS on a non-Apple system. They will expect some problems. Moreover, they are probably the type who serve as the "computer guy" for their family and friends. The more of them that grow to use and love the Mac, the more the Mac will be recommended to typical users.
  8. dloomer macrumors regular

    Nov 3, 2003
    One would think this would have been Apple's first and foremost concern in going through with the Intel switch, and they wouldn't have even considered it without Steve being 100% convinced this couldn't happen once the Intel Macs are released to the public. As long as Steve is convinced, I'll humbly withhold judgment. There must be something up his sleeve...
  9. eric67 macrumors 6502


    Oct 17, 2002
    France, Europe

    well it is in english, macbytes was linking to the english version of macbidouille, known as ;)

    for the rest you are right, there is no illegal piece of information, and the screenshot is quite nice, especially the explanation of the blue colored application name corresponding to non-fat binary coded applciation

    you are absolutely right, those so called "protection" are probably not really the definitive one that we will find in our MacIntel in 2006. I will even go further, I speculate that Apple/Intel have released a semi-protected hardware system to evaluate/study the way hackers will crack software/hardware DRM.
  10. nagromme macrumors G5


    May 2, 2002
    Apple doesn't need to to make it impossible, just not easy/mainstream

    Even if Apple can't TOTALLY stop it, one of the main blocks to putting OS X on a non-Apple box will be that it wasn't designed for that--as this article shows--and so it will need some--probably LOTS--of hacking and tinkering. Some people will get it to work--on a limited set of hardware--and instructions for that will probably continue to be available, with a small but active community of pirates wasting their time keeping it going.

    But OS X on generic PCs won't be simple, it won't be universal, it won't be supported, it won't meet the stated reqs for most Mac SOFTWARE (so that too will be unsupported), it won't be advertised or sold, it won't be a reviewed product, it won't be possible on every machine, and it won't be legal... and therefore it WILL NOT be for the average computer shopper, that's for sure. It will be for pirates, few of whom were ever going to be valued Apple customers anyway.

    So even if OS X continues to be pirated into the future, it's not a killer for Apple.
  11. DeathChill macrumors 68000

    Jul 15, 2005
    It is definitely not a killer for Apple, HOWEVER it is not as hard as you make it sound. To get it to install on a machine with SSE3 and SATA drives all you do is replace one of the files and it boots as if it were on a development machine. EVERYTHING works perfectly (or so I hear ;)) once you have it installed (on an SSE3 machine, SSE2 support is being worked on) so it's not as if it's unstable or anything.
  12. plinden macrumors 68040


    Apr 8, 2004
    Meh ... I don't think Apple need to be concerned at all. I'm fairly computer literate and I'm certainly not going to try to hack my PC to do this. There will be a small number of enthusiasts who'll do this. Apple will go after any small computer makers who'll try to sell Intel Mac clones.
  13. greatdevourer macrumors 68000

    Aug 5, 2005
  14. Lacero macrumors 604


    Jan 20, 2005
    Which page, this page or Hardmac's page? BTW, I love their french to english translations.
  15. Yvan256 macrumors 601

    Jul 5, 2004
    Well, it'll boost Intel's motherboards and processors sales, that's for sure. ;-)

    As far as running OS X on other platforms, here's my GameBoy and GameBoy Advance screenshots. Enjoy. :D

    Attached Files:

  16. csubear macrumors 6502a


    Aug 22, 2003
    There is no way that Apple can stop OS x86 from running a generic hardware, but they can make is hard.

    It boils down to the simple fact that the only way to tie OS X to Apple hardware is by implmenting some sort of check in the kernel level, but since the kernel is open source, people will always be able to re-compile the kernel and kernel extensions to support. What they can do to make it harder is implement some custom southbridge,and create some custom non-open source kext to support it. Then you would have to reverse enginner the new southbridge ASIC and the non-open source kext to get OS X running on now Apple hardware.
  17. eric67 macrumors 6502


    Oct 17, 2002
    France, Europe
  18. cgratti macrumors 6502a


    Dec 28, 2004
    Central Pennsylvania, USA
    Anyone who thinks that OS X wont be cracked to run on an average PC is nieve.

    OS X (for Intel) will be cracked within days of it's release to run on any PC.

    There is ALWAYS someone smarter than you. Bill Gates even knows that. Look at XP, everyone is laughing at the activation, it's useless. I can find 10 copies of XP PRO cracked to work around the activation. And they work flawlessly and can be fully updated.

    It's just going to be a matter of time...
  19. Yvan256 macrumors 601

    Jul 5, 2004
    Steve Jobs knows that too. Maybe he's planning for a "Apple Certified Hardware" licensing way of doing things in the future (kind of like there's "Nintendo Approved" stuff, and generic "GC stuff" (they won't even say "Nintendo" or "Gamecube" on their packages).

    The first partner being, of course, Intel. They make processors and motherboards, after all. I'll assume Asus and Abit are the two others (they're the ones making the current Macs, aren't they?)
  20. adam1185 macrumors regular

    Apr 30, 2004
  21. Fabio_gsilva macrumors 6502


    Apr 14, 2005
    São Paulo - Brasil
    Well, everybody knew that it was just a matter fo time... Maybe it'll have a positive side efect for Apple Macs. Maybe people start using OSX in their grey PC and them, amazed by the power of the tiger, they start wondering how it would be great using a Mac...

    Could be a very powerfull way to convert people, making them switch.

    Or not...
  22. iMacSE500 macrumors member


    Jul 8, 2005
    Why does it matter if someone can put OS X on a PC?
  23. number61 macrumors newbie

    Aug 8, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    It matters because Apple doesn't want their OS to run on non-Apple packaged machines.

    That's telling the world, "just try and do it."

    Sadly, the world answered their call. I wasn't suprised. When Apple made the annoucement official, my first comment was:
    "Now that they moved to Intel, Apple will spend more time patching OS cracks to make their OS run on non-Apple hardware then actual OS advancements."

    Maybe if they went with AMD for their x86 switch over Intel I wouldn't be as pissed.
  24. rendezvouscp macrumors 68000

    Aug 20, 2003
    Long Beach, California
    That's the thing: if it works, then why switch to an actual Mac? This is not good, and I'm sure that Apple will do something about an actual released version of Mac OS X, but it's not good that they already have Mac OS X running on generic PC's. An update could disable it, but even then, there will be PC's out there running Mac OS X.

    Why is it bad? Because Apple needs to be able to make money off of their computers. Without the computer, Apple won't make much, and that'll hurt Apple, perhaps even hurting us as the real Mac users. This is not a good development, but it was bound to happen.
  25. Erendiox macrumors 6502a


    Oct 15, 2004
    Brooklyn NY
    If OSX could run on any budget PC, then apple computers would lose their edge of being the only computers that run OSX. Amazing software is one of the only things keeping apple in the buisiness, and if OSX were to become compatable with every computer, Apple computers, apart from excellent form factor, wouldn't be so special anymore.

Share This Page