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.
'OpenCore Computer' Launches Commercial Hackintosh in Violation of Apple's macOS Licensing Agreement [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Fragmentation of the desktop experience on Linux is its greatest strength and also its greatest weakness, which is why it will never gain any kind of dominance in the desktop market. Never has and won’t until the terminal is a tertiary way of making it work. That is one thing macOS got right.
You need to explain why you think it's more worthwhile for Apple to build the desktop you want than to build the Mac Pro.
To get this straight: You don't want an AIO, and you don't want a compact box. You want a $3.000 tower you can tinker around with. You want upgradeability. You also want more power than iMac (Pro) and Mini can offer. That means 6 or 8 core CPU and a dedicated GPU. So, basically you want a base Mac Pro for half the price.
Keeping Apple's desired margin in mind, where do all the people come from who have to buy this thing to make it attractive to Apple to build and sell it for that price?
Again, OP said they were one of the most successful companies in the world, and you said he was wrong. He isn't.
So then you ARE suggesting that Apple has to provide support for these mythical machines that would be using their OS? Because that’s the only way any of these companies are making money on Linux (and, btw, they are making pocket change compared to what apple makes selling even just their Macs)
People also want a $300 laptop with a kitchen sink. Not everything people "demand" is something Apple is willing to produce.
This has been mentioned several times in this thread before, but I'll do it again: trying to cater to everyone is part of what Apple did wrong in the 90s. Have an idea of what you want to focus on, and then focus on that. Mid-range towers clearly ain't it. It wasn't ten years ago, it wasn't twenty years ago (the last mid-range tower was the 1996 Performa 6400), and it isn't now.
Kind of a bad time to pick Intel. They're clearly recovering, and odds are they'll be out of their slump in a year or two.
Apple may not be "doing great" with Macs in particular, but in their overall line-up, they clearly are.
[automerge]1592160478[/automerge]
For consumers? No, it hasn't. Attempts to make enough money from consumer Linux, like Red Hat Linux, SuSE, Mandrake, etc. have basically failed. Instead, all of those companies have either gone away, re-focused on the enterprise, or been swallowed up. Instead, what remain as for-profit offerings are Red Hat Enterprise Linux, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server, etc.
Would you pay for an operating system? Especially in an age where you really don't need a CD or DVD, and instead can just download the ISO somewhere? Probably not. But a company might be willing to pay for support or customization. So that's where the money is.
[automerge]1592160741[/automerge]
The Apple Ax strategy is something that Apple did pull off under Cook. Jobs probably still played a role in early beginnings, like buying PA Semi in 2008, but the real execution started taking off when Jobs was already quite sick. The first Apple-designed CPU, the A6, shipped in fall 2012.
Last edited:
First of all, there are quite a lot of issues with AIO desktop.
1. Maintenance
You can't even open the case by yourself. iMac? There is no way to see internal parts without removing the display itself. Mac mini? It's so difficult to open the case. iMac Pro? Same. Why is it important? Because you need to clean the dust or replace the thermal paste. Otherwise, it will cause problems. I already checked that iMac had dust issues and some people already sued Apple for that.
2. Cooling
This is one of the worst parts of AIO. This is why desktop CPU and GPU have huge coolers. And yet, iMac's cooling design is terrible. I can not say iMac Pro is much better. At least, Apple made Mac Pro with a better cooling system which is great. I had to admit that I had terrible experiences with iMac series as I worked with huge projects but none of them worked great. They just shut down by themselves.
3. Upgradability
Look, I'm not expecting them to allow us to upgrade all parts like Mac Pro at least people can upgrade whatever they want after they buy a normal desktop if Apple makes one. Not just RAM but also GPU, storage, and more especially with PCIe slots.
4. Expandability.
PCIe slots allow you tons of things. Expanding with TB is very limited and yet you need to put a lot of money just for expanding with TB ports. Why do we need to do that since we have a simple solution?
5. Price
AIO Mac is clearly overpriced for its performance and hardware except for the display. They should've made a normal desktop which allows better cooling systems, upgradability, maintenance, and more.
[automerge]1592161001[/automerge]
He is wrong. Like I said, being one of the most successful companies in the world doesn't mean they are doing fine. How many times do I need to explain that? Still having a notch for iPhone? Less RAM? 8 years old iMac design? OS issues due to annual updates? Etc?
[automerge]1592161058[/automerge]
They just dont care too much about Mac. That's all.
[automerge]1592161146[/automerge]
Unfortunately, they are not recovering. They have to ditch 10nm cause they are not able to increase the frequency to compete with. 10nm itself already developed several years ago btw.
I highly doubt about what Apple is doing with Mac.
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
If you're a computer "enthusiast", Apple is just not for you. We all have to come to peace with this.
If you want an "enthusiast" machine that runs macOS, you'll have to take the "enthusiast" route and build it yourself, aka Hackingtosh.
There's plenty of online info on how to do it, and believe me, if you're not an "enthusiast" it will tax you. Not in dollars, but in effort, time spent, and piece of mind.
However, the possibilities and rewards are endless if you go this route.
Again, just know that you're on your own. But hasn't that always been the case? Apple can, has, and always will pull products and/or features out from under you whenever it fits their profit margins.
Which is NOT unlike every other company out there.
FYI, this video shows an example of the Hackingtosh experience from a Machead's point of view:
If you want an "enthusiast" machine that runs macOS, you'll have to take the "enthusiast" route and build it yourself, aka Hackingtosh.
There's plenty of online info on how to do it, and believe me, if you're not an "enthusiast" it will tax you. Not in dollars, but in effort, time spent, and piece of mind.
However, the possibilities and rewards are endless if you go this route.
Again, just know that you're on your own. But hasn't that always been the case? Apple can, has, and always will pull products and/or features out from under you whenever it fits their profit margins.
Which is NOT unlike every other company out there.
FYI, this video shows an example of the Hackingtosh experience from a Machead's point of view:
You're basically repeating the same point four times here. Yes, we know what an AIO is.
The thing is, almost nobody wants a desktop anyway. They want a laptop. Which is basically an AIO by definition.
Apple has determined, whatever the reason, that the main desktop market they want to serve is AIO. Are there people who begrudgingly buy an iMac but would've preferred a mid-range tower? Absolutely. Does Apple care enough to offer that product? Nope. Most people who buy iMacs go through your points and think "nerrrrrrrd". They don't want to maintain, upgrade or expand their computer. They want it to goddamn work. If there's something to maintain, they take it to the local store.
So don't buy one.
Nothing in a forum thread about a sketchy company that accepts payment via Bitcoin is going to convince an Apple exec to think, "oh, they're right, we should reduce the price by x%!".
It's also completely irrelevant to AIO. It's simply that you aren't willing to pay that money. So don't.
Why? Just so you get the product you want? Which, just to remind everyone, is both a completely different kind of product, and also cheaper? So they have to invest into making a completely new product, and then as a thank-you on top of that reduce its price? Wow, so compelling to them!
I got my first notch iPhone this fall and… there are things I don't find great about it, like how much the bump makes it rock on a table. You know what I don't mind about it at all? The notch.
Most people who complain about the notch don't seem to have actually used an iPhone with one. They just think it's a funny thing to complain about.
Maybe not. But you don't care much about the Mac at its current product line-up or price points either, so maybe your vision of what the Mac ought to be just doesn't match theirs, and you should look at a different company.
Then too bad. This is why people bashing Mac for a long period of time. You need to admit the problem that Macs have.
I guess you don't get my point. RAM is a great example. Would you buy RAM from Apple instead of buying them separately and then upgrade? It's extremely expensive and yet Apple is using a cheap model for Mac Pro! Apple is clearly playing with us.
It seems you and others are defending Apple's stupid things and I have no reason to understand your point.
As the saying goes, but everyone seems to not understand: You can please some of the people, some of the time, but you can never please everyone all the time. But of course everyone thinks their idea of what the Mac desktop should be is the very most important idea and if it's not exactly what Apple is producing, then they suck 
As has been stated. If you don't like it, then look elsewhere. It's not "wrong"; it's just not your cup of tea. For many others, they like it just fine. Get over it.
As has been stated. If you don't like it, then look elsewhere. It's not "wrong"; it's just not your cup of tea. For many others, they like it just fine. Get over it.
That’s why I says it was glorified version of SMC.
The T2 is responsible for controlling some Macs speakers, internal microphones, cooling fans, hardware decoding, verifying firmware, including SSD controller like you said. T2 still not threatening hackintosh in many ways. In fact both SMC and T2 could be emulated using runtime SMM drivers and not even need another kext.
More exactly like Apple version of dedicated TPM chips to speed up encryption/decryption through hardware with SMC in one chips.
The more important one, Apple can ban FakeSMC / VirtualSMC which is more vital in hackintosh, but Apple looks doesn't bother.
Apple in nutshell like this :
We officially not support hackintosh. But if you wan't proceed it, we won't stop you from doing that, unless you doing commercialization that't would be different story.
TLDR: Current hackintosh scene doesn’t affected from any T-Chips, and currently doesn’t necessary to emulated.
Not an answer to the question you keep dodging.
What the hell are you talking about? The only person constantly messing up "one of the most successful companies in the world" (as in, satisfied customers, financial health, sales volume, exceptional stock market performance - which is what the OP said and what is a fact) with "I don't like what they do and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong!" is you.
Porsche charged me $140 for four valve stem caps with colored Porsche logos on them. Porsche is clearly playing with us.
Or, Porsche, and Apple, use the money they get from those sorts of upgrades to accept a little less money for the base purchase, in order to make the level of profits they want to make.
lol seriously? You are the one who keep dodging my answers. Gosh...
IMO. Clearly, you dont understand what you are saying.
[automerge]1592163089[/automerge]
Haha, they aren't that different and at least Apple is well known for doing that for a long time.
For those asking for a cheaper Mac Pro, think about it like this.
The 2013 Mac Pro was in the single digits of Apple‘s desktop unit shares, probably between 1 and 4%. Their desktops only count for 20% of their Mac sales as of 2017. It’s probably less now.
The majority of people buy iMac.
If Apple made a cheaper Mac Pro, they would also have to make a cheaper display for a small user base.
So, it’s just easier for them to include the computer, the display, and everything all in one. So if you want a cheaper Mac Pro, the iMac is what you’re looking for. yes, it’s not very accessible to open and customize after the fact, but you can still upgrade the RAM if you absolutely have to, and with EGPUs on the rise, the need to open a computer to replace it’s graphics card is less and less.
As for SSDs, either get the highest storage you can when you buy it, or store all your stuff externally.
The 2013 Mac Pro was in the single digits of Apple‘s desktop unit shares, probably between 1 and 4%. Their desktops only count for 20% of their Mac sales as of 2017. It’s probably less now.
The majority of people buy iMac.
If Apple made a cheaper Mac Pro, they would also have to make a cheaper display for a small user base.
So, it’s just easier for them to include the computer, the display, and everything all in one. So if you want a cheaper Mac Pro, the iMac is what you’re looking for. yes, it’s not very accessible to open and customize after the fact, but you can still upgrade the RAM if you absolutely have to, and with EGPUs on the rise, the need to open a computer to replace it’s graphics card is less and less.
As for SSDs, either get the highest storage you can when you buy it, or store all your stuff externally.
It's totally different. I guess you don't understand the difference between AIO and normal desktop. Also Mac Pro is a workstation, which isn't a common computer that people would use.
Probably a public service - absent the analysis on here, some people might have actually parted with their money without understanding the risks.
Macs have plenty of problems. "high heaven doesn't get this pet computer at his favorite price tag" ain't one of them.
I get your point just fine. Yes, Apple charges a lot for components.
But how does that relate to OpenCore Computer? Why would Apple be compelled to license their OS to someone else when one of your arguments is "that way, Apple could make less money!"? Seems like you're shooting yourself in the foot with that.
I'm bringing Apple's position into context. Licensing macOS in the 90s was a bad idea. Doing so now isn't a better idea.
Maybe licensing a select few products that don't compete with Macs would be an option. Allowing Promise to make a 1U rack-mount Mac, for example. But letting someone make a cheaper Mac Pro alternative? That'd be down the same path that was already a bad idea in the Power Computing era.
Then too bad if you still dont understand my point.
This isn't about OpenCore computer. It's about a desktop computer that Apple isn't making while Hackintosh does.
I'm talking about a regular and normal desktop. How many times do I have to say that? You better check the Hackintosh community and see why they hate Macs that Apple is currently making.
Do you realize that "understanding a point" isn't the same as believing a point has merit?
I think you may be in the wrong thread, then.
You still haven't made the pitch on why Apple should do it.
Who cares why a community of 35 people doesn’t like what Apple is making? Or even 3500 people?
Speaking of nonsense... "Professionals" are served just fine. I have no complaints nor do my engineering/creative colleagues and friends who continue to use Apple products in both engineering and creative fields, some going back to the 1980s. The same is true for professionals in all sorts of disciplines.
Last edited:
That's just theft plain and simple. Pisses me off as a software developer because stealing software devalues what I create for a living. This idiotic "linux" mentality (& no disrespect to linux) of software is free you should only pay for hardware is to blame.
People moan about Apple prices but it is the only (non-free) platform that provides a solid several years of free, and regular, software updates. People only think in terms of hardware costs. Should all software engineers be just hobbyists?
I'm pleased Apple is moving to ARM because that'll cut this **** off at the knees.
People moan about Apple prices but it is the only (non-free) platform that provides a solid several years of free, and regular, software updates. People only think in terms of hardware costs. Should all software engineers be just hobbyists?
I'm pleased Apple is moving to ARM because that'll cut this **** off at the knees.