'OpenMac' Promises $399 Headless Mac... But Not From Apple

[hiptobesquare]

Aside from games and a few video editing programs, what are you doing that requires a dedicated video card let alone a bleeding-edge video card?

A Media Center PC based on a Mac.

In light of the previous "want" list, I'll buy the best product that offers this:

Fast Intel Core 2 duo or better, maybe quad-core. Octo seems like overkill.
Upgradeable RAM, at least 4GB max capacity, and as fast a bus speed as possible.
Multiple hard drive capability (I'd love a convertible 1x3.5" or 2x2.5" drive tray in the machine) e-Sata external port would be welcome, too.
optical and copper-based multi-channel digital audio in and out, home-theater grade.
HDCP compatible video hardware, dual DVI (convertible to HDMI) output, fast enough, with dedicated VRAM to render 1080p suitable for TV playback, or BluRay playback. Connect HD monitor and digital audio and go.
IR remote reception, FrontRow integrated.
2xFW800 or better, several USB2 or better ports for peripheral TV tuner, radio antenna, control interfaces, etc, and external drive interfaces.
802.11n, Bluetooth 2.0 or better, gigabit ethernet port.

With some peripheral pieces like DVR-capable HDTV and HD/analog radio tuners, external digital audio processor/5.1 or 7.1 amp unit, and an external TimeMachine-compatible backup drive or TimeCapsule, with wireless bluetooth keyboard, mouse, and bluetooth or IR remote, and a gigabit ethernet download line and FrontRow/AppleTV-like console as default front interface that integrates those features, it could be a full-function Apple HTPC. No second box AppleTV device required. I don't want more boxes, I want "one box to rule them all," and replace most of them.

If I could get that, the audio processor/Amp, and a good LCD 1080p monitor, I could replace my whole analog-grade Home Theater with digital, and be ready for the final Digital TV and continuing HD up-conversion in the industry.

IF that isn't a REALLY good use for a headless, multi-monitor capable Mac Mini, or mid-tower system, I am at a loss. Mac Mini has most of that, except a few crucial points. A Mac Mini, Mac mid-tower, or a third party mid-tower that was configured as such, could do just as much or more than a Mac Mini, iMac, MacBook, and even nearly a base MacBook Pro could do, and successfully underpin the Apple computer hardware lineup under the expensive Mac Pro, and be a multi-monitor alternative to the iMac, rather than a red-headed step-child. (I like red-heads, though so I hope they do well, too. )

This 3rd party headless mac could perform well as an HTPC, with it's expandability, although the Mini's optical audio ports, and other things might be better. So still no complete solution.

I want my home theater as simple, slick, and versatile as my iPhone. With Mac OS, and useful well-designed software at it's center.

 

[rmwebs]

If you read through this thread, the general consensus is that people WANT this...the ones that dont seem to mainly be saying its ugly or not powerful (even though its clear its meant to be a budget system). Theres also the other people that dont want it...the fanboys Those ones who "hope Apple crush them" for no apparent reason other than a good product being offered at better prices than Apple provide.

If you dont agree with me....so what...you know I'm right....read the thread....if you still dont agree, you didn't read the thread.

 

[troller]

Reducing...cognitive...dissonance....

Believing will make it so. I don't care what you say.

So many new trollers today. It'll take months for most of them to leave...summer school and all...

Your post just shows that I am just called troller but it seems you are more troller than I will ever be.

 

[Clive At Five]

Your post just shows that I am just called troller but it seems you are more troller than I will ever be.

Troller, though you've had some good points here, I feel you will have endless trials on these boards from fanboys who will see your username and flame you without reading a single word you've said. You're still a "newbie" so I'd suggest switching now before you're "invested."

-Clive

 

[troller]

Troller, though you've had some good points here, I feel you will have endless trials on these boards from fanboys who will see your username and flame you without reading a single word you've said. You're still a "newbie" so I'd suggest switching now before you're "invested."

-Clive

Clive, I just try to show some points what most people just don'T want to see because they are BIG Apple Fans. Don't think I hate apple but I just think there are more colors than black/white. Why some people start here to make a discussion about my simple stupid nickname shows, that they are just not better than my stupid name.

Back on topic.....the 7200 makes some more heat but not that much that you will ever feel it that bad on a MB.

 

[milo]

maybe a server?

Does a server really benefit from eight cores? Especially if it's just being used in someone's house?

A Media Center PC based on a Mac.

And why would that need eight cores? Sounds like a dual core would be fine.

Aside from games and a few video editing programs, what are you doing that requires a dedicated video card let alone a bleeding-edge video card?

I hate to say it, but even apps like Logic have slow screen redraws on systems with integrated graphics. Apple even recommends a video card for Mainstage, which is just an app for midi sample playback.

 

[Roderick Usher]

And I repeat that Apple can make an xMac look just as good as a MacPro, if not better... not that I care as much about the appearance of my computer as its performance.

-Clive

Yep. Folks that condemn an xMac as something that would "destroy the Mac experience"... they underestimate Apple, I think.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Yep. Folks that condemn an xMac as something that would "destroy the Mac experience"... they underestimate Apple, I think.

Supposedly, it would "destroy the iMac's marketshare", and that's why Apple/people are afraid.

 

[zap2]

I'll stick with a Mac Mini.


I like my nice looking computer, I spend a lot of time on it, so looks are something I'd consider here. I here people complain about the specs are the Mac Mini, but my need are fine with the CD Mac Mini. I know some want a headless Mac with more room to upgrade, but for me, Mac Mini is great.


Personal, if I was going to hack OS X on a PC, I wouldn't require this type of solution, I'd build a PC/ buy one from another hardware maker.


Still, a interesting idea, although not they way Apple wants things to happen, and for good reason, see clones of the 90's

 

[apsterling]

I'd like to see a notebook of this sort, to take on the go. Apple's laptops are sadly overpriced, too much so for what I need on my budget.

I'd need either a Blackbook, which would take my ability for games out of the picture, or a bottom-end Macbook Pro, which would run me $1500-$2000, which is about $300-$600 more than I really want to pay.

Granted, when it comes time for a notebook, if there's no alternatives, I'm still sticking with a Mac.

 

[compuguy1088]

This IS a long post, so if you're planning to whine about it and aren't interested, then skip it and move on. It covers some opinions (STAND BACK, PERSONAL OPINIONS ABOUT TO BE OFFERED) and some background info from the guy that released OSx86 on the world at large, somewhat...

I read through about 22 pages of this now 33 and probably 33 page thread (before I hit Submit Reply, of course) and I gotta say, good lord kids, take a break.

I'll toss out my opinions and see what happens.

[SNIP really long post...]

Could have been Psystar, but they're already on the way out, it seems. We'll see what happens, and I'll be keeping an eye on things.

Have fun, always...

I think I recall your release of that working generic installer. Heck...I may still have the DVD with the test applied laying around. It was the starting point of what has become the OSx86 community. I never really got into it (lack of any computers around with SSE 2 or 3 back then) but I did tinker with it once or twice in a VM.

 

[Roderick Usher]

Yeah, power sold the computer the customer wanted at a competitive price and was always upgrading to the latest and greatest. Apple, on the other hand offered the computer they wanted you to have at the price they wanted to sell it at and would update at their schedule. The more Apple changes, the more they stay the same.

Coarsely put, but I generally agree. Nothing in Apple's entire history has shown that they have the stomach to compete in an open market. The closed way, the way you describe, is much easier - outside of larger technological trends (which are more transparent now that they've hooked up with Intel and can more easily be compared with PC-side counterparts in price/performance), they can really just sit back and do their own thing. It's as much of a free pass as any company can get in the ruthless, fast-moving tech world... and I don't think it's going to hold out forever.

 

[whynot83706]

That was fast...there removed OpenMac section.....

 

[zap2]

lly"? Isn't competition healthy in a capitalist system? /QUOTE]

Yea, don't get me start on that issue

Maybe Apple now will have to do something about their insane prices.

Why, because some half arse solution is out? Please, this is just a hackintosh, and the owner of the machine will be geeks(mostly), and I'd imagine a large amount of OSx86 could just build a PC.

Apple prices, while not amazing(in the low end) are terrible. Compare the Mac Mini to other small PCs, and its decent. Same thing with the iMac to other all-in-ones.

 

[br0adband]

What gets me most of the time is the sheer ignorance over the "hardware" because the perspective seems to always boil down to "Apple makes great looking hardware..." and in the long run, it should be reiterated and clarified as:

"Apple makes great looking computers..."

Because inside, they're all basically the same components nowadays. Yes, the MacPro is elegant in the sense of how the system is constructed, removable slidable components, ok, sure, I'll grant you that.

But it's the same "hardware" at the guts, so... why people persist in that is beyond me. Do Macs look better? That's a personally subjective thing and not "one for all" aspect. Do I care what a computer looks like? Hardly. Do some people? Most assuredly.

Does any of this really matter? Not one damned bit.

Form, in the long run, loses out to function but the "Cult of Mac" doesn't get that, from my own perspective. Sure, it can look great (if that's what you think looks great), but when it's turned off or non-functional, it's all the same as a paperweight to me. And yes, some people pay ridiculous sums of money for "pretty" paperweights, I realize this also.

But seriously, anyone basing a purchase of several thousand dollars worth of computer equipment "because it looks better" is a bit off-kilter in the first place.

That's my opinion, of course.

 

[compuguy1088]

Yeh let's talk about Nvidia drivers in Microsofts latest and greatest. Those were pretty stellar for the first what, 6-9 months?

The drivers were fine around the middle to late 07'. It was the initial releases that were bad. Currently were in an area where NVIDIA has decided not to release ANY WHQL drivers for any of the 8xxx series of cards or below. All we have are recent WHQL drivers for the few 9xxx cards that are out .

 

[Clive At Five]

Supposedly, it would "destroy the iMac's marketshare", and that's why Apple/people are afraid.

Of course it would destroy *some* marketshare but that's because so many of us are funneled into using a Mac that doesn't fit us. That certainly doesn't mean there aren't plenty of iMac-people left out there... I asked my wife if she'd rather have an AIO, plug it in and use it computer like an iMac, or an upgradeable mini-tower. She said "an iMac."

Apple can't expect to do everything with the iMac, though it certainly tries to (save for fringe users... Mini & Pro).

-Clive

 

[compuguy1088]

That was fast...there removed OpenMac section.....

They didn't exactly remove it...its simply now known as the Open Computer..

 

[ditzy]

for those of you who think this is such a legal slam dunk in favor of Psystar, why didn't Dell or HP do it the second Apple switched to Intel? They have a team of lawyers just like Apple....

The reason is simple - it's illegal if Leopard is installed, and it will be shut down.

And for those of you who said the police is not going to come knocking down your door for this kind of thing, tell that to the woman who fought the RIAA over 24 shared songs and is in the hole $250,000.

The reason they don't do it is because they have EULA agreements too. If they break other peoples it would show that theirs was not inforceable as well. Which would be stupid of them really.

 

[Beric]

That was a fast name change. I wonder how they'll change their packaging on their computers?

 

[overcast]

That was a fast name change. I wonder how they'll change their packaging on their computers?

You honestly still believe this company exists?

 

[Rhinestorm]

Finally, an affordable mac!

Also, who cares about laws?

 

[Beric]

You honestly still believe this company exists?

Yes, I do, of course. You saying you don't?

 

[Roderick Usher]

Of course it would destroy *some* marketshare but that's because so many of us are funneled into using a Mac that doesn't fit us.

It would require a fundamental change in Apple's mindset in order to deal with the resulting flood of competition - and they've never demonstrated agility of that kind. The Mac market would change instantly from an autocratic, Apple-driven "top-down" model to a democratic, consumer-driven "bottom-up" one, and I've seen no evidence to suggest that Apple would cope well in that kind of environment, at least not on the Mac side of things.

 

[macsmurf]

Supposedly, it would "destroy the iMac's marketshare", and that's why Apple/people are afraid.

I think Apple could care less. Sure, they might throw some lawyers into the mix, but the simple fact is, that most people care more about reliability than performance. People don't want to mess around with kernel extensions even less than they want to install NVidia drivers on the Windows platform. They want something that works relatively intutively with a minimum of hassle, even if that comes at a premium. One could argue that Apple build a great big chunk of their success on that notion.

This product does not provide that, and probably never will.