The Merged Hackintosh Thread

[Muncher]

I tried it once with an old sony (I owned a mac at that time). It was meant as a hobby project, and to hold my dad over until he got his own. Needless to say, the sony used a lot of proprietary hardware, so it failed.

I support Hack macs for (temporary!) experimental purposes.

That sony is now running Ubuntu 8.04, which in my opinion is better than it running leopard; leopard would lag horribly.

 

[teksurv]

I tried this briefly, and it took quite a bit of work to get OS X to run on my PC laptop. It did however interest me enough to purchase a used Macbook.

 

[alphaod]

I've install OS X when it was first announced for x86 on a regular PC; Installed it for the heck of it and people would give me looks; now I'm totally for a hacintosh as long as people buy a copy of Leopard when they install.

 

[benzslrpee]

i don't really have an opinion either way...you have a real iMac good for you. you built your own iMac equivalent good for you.

 

[nateDEEZY]

I don't believe in the hackintosh.

Lol, it's not about belief.

Anyways I'm typing from my newly built Hackintosh, atm. No issue what so ever It definitely was a b!tch patching the leopard dvd. Geekbench scores 4664 and xBench scores were quite impressive. When I initially got it installed on my "back up" 500gb drive xBench scores were 218~220 after I decided to do the install on my terabyte drive score went down to 180~190 the 1TB drives show poor performance on the random write section.

This desktop effectively pushed my Macbook Pro into the living room. If this wasn't originally intended as a gaming rig (Wolfdale Dual Core), I can't Imagine how it would run with Yorkfield Quad Core.

My thoughts on it is, this whole Hackintosh "community" makes it clear (to me at least) that there is still a market for mid-range/level desktops running OSX. Faster than iMac's but not quite as fast as Mac Pro's.

Just my .02 cents.

 

[mithrilfox]

Well, just to clarify, Mac software and hardware are not created by the same people per se, but they are very comfortably linked. For example, Apple didn't make the ATI RADEON card series, for instance. In fact, they don't make most of the hardware, but just rely on carefully selected manufacturers, which means their system works without a hitch on the hardware you get.

Hackintoshes are dangerous for serious work. Would you ever want to build one and run FCP with a huge video project? Of course not, because if that system were to hiccup on you, you could lose all of your work, fail to meet a deadline, or waste a lot of time. Also, each new OS update could "break" your current system. Any firmware updates would be dangerous to say the least. Additionally, if Apple introduced a new software feature into the OS to detect and disable Hackintosh use, you could find your time and money all for naught. And, it's also illegal.

Aside from that, I think it's interesting and it fascinates me. If I had lots of money to spare, I might try to do it, using my family license version of Leopard (which currently installed on only two computers, leaving three available).

But herein lies the problem: why would you? If it were to make a cheap machine to do daily tasks with the Mac OS (internet, mail, random games, media), not a big deal. But the real reason you would do it, I imagine, is to build a super machine without spending the big bucks on a Mac Pro. If you are building a super machine, you must be doing something super with it. Games on Mac OS X is ... well... they just aren't really there. So, if you're not gaming, you must be doing some sort of serious graphics/video work. In that case, you would be creating a very risky setup for such serious work. Sure, any system can crash and burn, but we gotta admit that a hacked system like this is definitely going to have a higher chance of doing so.

 

[nateDEEZY]

Well, just to clarify, Mac software and hardware are not created by the same people per se, but they are very comfortably linked. For example, Apple didn't make the ATI RADEON card series, for instance. In fact, they don't make most of the hardware, but just rely on carefully selected manufacturers, which means their system works without a hitch on the hardware you get.

Hackintoshes are dangerous for serious work. Would you ever want to build one and run FCP with a huge video project? Of course not, because if that system were to hiccup on you, you could lose all of your work, fail to meet a deadline, or waste a lot of time. Also, each new OS update could "break" your current system. Any firmware updates would be dangerous to say the least. Additionally, if Apple introduced a new software feature into the OS to detect and disable Hackintosh use, you could find your time and money all for naught. And, it's also illegal.

.....

But herein lies the problem: why would you? If it were to make a cheap machine to do daily tasks with the Mac OS (internet, mail, random games, media), not a big deal. But the real reason you would do it, I imagine, is to build a super machine without spending the big bucks on a Mac Pro. If you are building a super machine, you must be doing something super with it. Games on Mac OS X is ... well... they just aren't really there. So, if you're not gaming, you must be doing some sort of serious graphics/video work. In that case, you would be creating a very risky setup for such serious work. Sure, any system can crash and burn, but we gotta admit that a hacked system like this is definitely going to have a higher chance of doing so.

I agree you have a valid argument. With that sad I know several music producers who's systems range from Dual G5's to Mac Pro's that once they get there software running they use there systems solely to do those functions. Most of them don't even bother to connect them to the internet, hell I know one that still runs panther on a dual g4 and refuses to upgrade his OS. Pro Tools works perfect with it, why bother updating something that isn't broken.

At the moment, it's my understanding that the x86 community likes to push the lines and boundaries and see how far they can keep up with apple updates till it officially breaks there system.

I'm perfectly comfortable with 10.5.3 on my Hackintosh, at the moment there is no issues that I have come across. *Knocks on wood* But I'll continue using it daily/normally to see how it performs and test it's stability. It's an overclocked system, so that even adds more fun to the equation. >;P

 

[jeremy.king]

I don't think it's right to blatantly ignore the restrictions placed on one's own intellectual property and make a profit on it.

This is how the Personal Computing turned from hobby to mainstream. Without these rogue companies, Apple included, the industry would stagnate...For a good read, google Apple Xerox Microsoft

I only have beefs with people using non-legitimate licenses, as long as you buy OS X, do what you want with it. Apple is still profiting.

 

[brand]

I only have beefs with people using non-legitimate licenses, as long as you buy OS X, do what you want with it. Apple is still profiting.

Not like if you had bought a computer from them instead of completely disregarding the EULA.

 

[johngardiner]

I don't have a problem with people building their own hackintoshes either. Especially if it's just to try the OS. From reading this thread you can see a number have people have done it, then bought Mac's right after which is promising!

As for companies like Psystar, I also don't have a huge problem with it. They don't advertise their computers as hackintoshes, instead as open souce computers that can run any OS... and after you configure one you can choose which OS to buy with it. It's also a good way for people who can't afford the quality premiums on Macs to get into OSX and try it out. Competition is a great thing, and once the legality issue is sorted out (note that if it is in fact illegal I won't support Psystar) this kind of company could bring down the cost of buying an authentic mac... because let's be honest in the end we all want an authentic Mac not a clone!

 

[spamdumpster]

This is a very interesting discussion. I'm typing this on a Thinkpad x60s, running Leopard. It runs side by side with my XP machine at work. At home, I have two computers -- an aluminum iMac 20", 2.4 GHz and a Thinkpad T60.

1. I agree with the posts that say that a hackintosh is an excellent way for users to try out OS X, with the intent to buy a real mac if they like it. I wouldn't have bought the iMac without first using Leopard and convincing me and my wife that it could replace our windows machines. Now we're mac fanatics and would never consider going back to windows. Also, because I'm the tech savvy one in my family, I've also convinced others to get macs.

2. I also agree with the posts that say that the hackintosh experience pales in comparison to the real mac experience. Getting everything working can be extremely difficult and takes a long time. Software updates are huge problems. Installing any application can replace necessary extension files and render the hackintosh unusable.

3. I also agree with the posts that say that you should buy a real copy of Leopard even if you're going to install a downloaded/torrent hacked version. All of us -- hackintosh users and mac users -- have an interest in apple making money from their software so that they continue to develop it.

4. I completely disagree with posts that claim that running a hackintosh takes money away from apple. I firmly believe that Apple makes money buy people trying (and liking) OS X and then buying a real mac. See point number 1 above. My installing Leopard on my old thinkpad from work has directly resulted in sales of at least 4 real macs in the last 6 months.

5. I think that people who dislike hackintoshes because they violate the EULA are liars and hypocrites. These folks likely do not read the EULAs that come with all of the products they buy, and I guarantee that they violate some of them.

 

[nateDEEZY]

5. I think that people who dislike hackintoshes because they violate the EULA are liars and hypocrites. These folks likely do not read the EULAs that come with all of the products they buy, and I guarantee that they violate some of them.

To quote how some EULA's are ludicrous,

You also agree that you will not use these products for any purposes prohibited by United States law, including, without limitation, the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons.

straight from iTunes.

I mean seriously, what were the lawyers thinking?!

Half the time the crap they put in there is to cover their own ass's. Like many have said, so long as you're buying a legitimate copy of the OS, all is well.

 

[vansouza]

Use of OSX breaks the law between the User and Apple; and the User will still want Apple to provide support through updates and such... not very fare for Apple.

 

[ZiggyPastorius]

This is how the Personal Computing turned from hobby to mainstream. Without these rogue companies, Apple included, the industry would stagnate...For a good read, google Apple Xerox Microsoft

I only have beefs with people using non-legitimate licenses, as long as you buy OS X, do what you want with it. Apple is still profiting.

I still don't think it's right. The computer industry will grow and expand whether or not Mac OS X continues to grow, flourish, exist, or whatever. There is more competition than just Apple, even if other companies cannot run Mac OS X on their hardware. Apple makes a product, they sell the product, that doesn't give you or me the right to sell their product (whether we think it's better or not) in a different package. I agree with you on the second point, I just have a problem with companies doing that kind of a thing for profit. Want an operating system for your computer? Get an open source kernel and build off it. Want Mac OS X? Buy a Mac or make your own, but don't sell others your hacked computers as a business.

 

[mithrilfox]

I'm perfectly comfortable with 10.5.3 on my Hackintosh, at the moment there is no issues that I have come across. *Knocks on wood* But I'll continue using it daily/normally to see how it performs and test it's stability. It's an overclocked system, so that even adds more fun to the equation. >;P

Setting aside legal issues for a moment, I'll say that leaving your system as is, and never upgrading the OS, is your best bet for continued success. You know that, however.

 

[NT1440]

As long as that scumbag company Pystar isnt involved im all for people making their hackintoshes. I of course, will stick with apple tho

 

[mithrilfox]

5. I think that people who dislike hackintoshes because they violate the EULA are liars and hypocrites. These folks likely do not read the EULAs that come with all of the products they buy, and I guarantee that they violate some of them.

I wouldn't say they are liars, but it's very likely that EVERYONE is violating numerous intellectual property right laws and licenses on a regular, daily basis.

I want to find a video that a friend told me about, but haven't found it yet. It was one guy's attempt to seriously, but humorously, show how the average person violates intellectual property laws numerous times everyday. I think the average was something like 3-7 violations per day, but I am totally guessing at what it was... can't remember.

The more you read up on intellectual property right laws (copyright, trademark, licenses), the more you begin to say, "Holy crap, you can't do ANYTHING without violating something!"

The only way society can live with the current laws is by intellectual property owners ignoring countless violations. The court systems would be utterly helpless in most countries if every owner attempted to pursue even a fraction of the violations of their material. The case backlog would range in the hundreds of years (wanna prosecute? sure, you gotta wait about 134 years for them to catch up).

Most owners choose to willingly ignore violations, even ones that are brought to their attention. Why? Cause numerous violations work in their favor. They're willing to turn a blind eye and pretend it isn't there, but they don't want to encourage a rewriting of the laws because they want every power on their side to do whatever they want, when they want. They want that opportunity to litigate there at all times, just in case they feel they need it.

It's another discussion for another thread, but many violations of intellectual property right law lead to incidental advertisement of the material, and thus to further exposure and purchase. After all, one of the most popular comments on any YouTube video is frequently, "What's the name of the song?"

 

[KurtangleTN]

I'm not sure, on one side I'd love to build that Lifehacker $800 Mac that's quadcore and a pretty big beast, on the other I don't see that seamless just works experience I've had with my prior Macs (except 10.5.3), I'd constantly feel like I'm hiding from Apple, and in the end things like fan noise, control over the computer, aren't near as good as the real deal.

On the other hand, it's perfect for the gamer Mac. Most of the time the CPU is secondary to video cards to them, and the iMac certainly isn't suitable, but the Mac Pro is overkill.

People will continue to build them as long as Apple fails to see the people want a mid ranged tower, it's like fighting piracy, Jobs himself said you can't fight it, you just have to compete with it.

 

[BillyBobBongo]

I think it's great personally!

My Windows XP 'fell over' a few months ago and I just saw red for the last time with it. I researched into my hardware (some of it is a bit old) and set about putting OSX onto it. I had really good fun learning about different kernels and how to change drivers on a system that I don't normally have to worry about. I even had to dive into learning about terminal....so it's all been a fun, if a bit geeky, experience.

It's been running flawlessly for me for quite some time.....and I'm sure it will for much much longer. My joy now is that I can utilise the vast amount of storage space on it, as well as my Airdisk for storing data.

Of course I like to play games too, so I ended up having to bite the bullet and put Windows back on to my system (curse those 'Games for Windows' titles). I have a spare HD that I set it on and with a bit of tweaking to the boot system it now dual boots.

It was all much much easier than I had anticipated....and the first time I booted up was a real giggle.

I'm sure that Apple watch the OSX86 project with great interest too. They get different user experience with different hardware and their OS. I own a software license for the OS that sits on the Hackintosh and I own a MacBook too. I've given my money to Apple and I love their stuff, but I also like the freedom that a self built unit can give me.

Oh...and I bodged an Apple sticker on the case....so it's kinda Apple branded.....good enough for me!

 

[br0adband]

To those that always revert to the "It breaks the EULA" argument, have you ever driven 26 MPH or higher in a 25 MPH zone? I bet you have... I'll bet you a Hackintosh you have, and as such, it's about the same in terms of legality - it means Jack Squat. Oh, well, it means about as much as Steve Jobs' promise to not steal or copy anything he witnessed on that fateful day when he and the rest of the Apple team visited Xerox PARC so long ago.

Hey, if you can't obey all the laws, then I guess it's ok to just abide by the ones that are most convenient to you and cause the least amount of undue stress, sure.

I have a long history with OSx86 what with me being the guy that released the first generic installation DVD for it back in August of 2005. I've seen all the progress before that release, I've seen all the progress since then, and honestly, Apple isn't hurting for it. They're barely cracking 6% marketshare not that they're not trying, but they keep making the crucial mistake they've never learned from: stop advertising for the competition, which is what every single Apple commercial for Macs does and has done since the Mac vs PC ad campaign started. Idiots. I don't think the ~1% gain in market share over the past 3+ years is worth it but I'm not Mr. Steve "Deep Pockets" Jobs either.

As one person pointed out above, the fact that the OSx86 projects are doing nothing but increasing the press about Apple and OSX as well as actually increasing the mediocre sales for Macs is a positive for Apple regardless of whether anyone around here can actually see that aftereffect at work - especially Apple itself who will always turn a blind eye to that aspect. It's ok for Steve-O to steal from Xerox (don't quote that stupid "Great artists steal" BS, it's tired) but when someone actually steals an idea back and improves on it, someone gets all pissy about it. Whaaaa... whaaaa... whaaaa...

I've got a few emails from Apple Legal that I have printed out (and saved, of course) and framed telling me "We know what you're doing, so cut it out" with words to that effect. I treat 'em like badges of honor in some respects. The company that ended up creating an entire product line founded on theft, the Macintosh - make no mistake, they stole the very concept of the GUI from Xerox PARC, period - now gets angry when some kids in a garage (metaphorically speaking here) take what they can from Apple's flagship product(s) and then improve on them for their own purposes.

That's pretty ironic, I'd say.

Are Hackintoshes legal? Well, not one of us can say "yes" or "no" because a Hackintosh has never been brought before a court of law and tried for... well, I don't know what the charge would be, actually.

Is installing OSX on hardware not directly manufactured by Apple itself (they don't make it, anyway, but outsource it - another irony) illegal? Again, I can't even imagine what that would entail, but as I own a legal Apple Store purchased copy of Leopard 10.5 on DVD in the retail shrink wrapped packaging (never been opened), then I personally would say I can do whatever the hell I want with it, up to and including patching the installation files so that I can install it on a non-Apple manufactured "personal computer" for my own intents and purposes.

Do I? Nah... I can't stand OSX, really. It has nothing to offer me, never has, but I do own a legit retail copy of it just in case I get the urge to get involved in the project once more. The Wife does love Leopard, however.

 

[wildmilne]

Well if not for a hackintosh i wouldn't have purchased a macbook pro and an iphone (wanted to try Leopard before i almost bought a dell laptop)...so i think Apple shouldn't be that pissed, i can now use the hackintosh for linux.

 

[rogersmj]

I have a 2.8 GHz dual-core hackintosh that I use as my main machine at home. I also have a MacBook and MacBook Pro (and an Apple TV). Before the hackintosh, my primary machine was an iMac (first the white Intel, then the aluminum). I actually built the hackintosh because...

1) I like a project
2) There's no computer in the Apple lineup that fits my needs.

I wanted a machine that could

a) Handle two large-ish monitors (so the mini is out)
b) Have high-quality displays (bye-bye aluminum iMac...it's why I sold mine)
c) Handle at least 4GB of RAM (which eliminates the older white iMacs with good screens)

Now technically a Mac Pro is an option, but I don't need anywhere near that much power -- just nice screens and a lot of RAM -- so spending nearly triple what I would spend on an iMac just to be able to have a not-crappy screen was not in the cards.

I love my real Apple products to death, and the hackintosh, while mostly solid, is not without problems. It occasionally doesn't detect USB mass storage devices right after bootup (hard drives, iPods) until I run a certain terminal command to clear kext caches. Other than that, it's fine...and for saving $2k, I can live with that little inconvenience. One day I absolutely want to get a Mac Pro, but it's not feasible right now.

So it was a fun project and a temporary stopgap until I can justify the cost of a Mac Pro OR until Apple releases iMac-level hardware without a crappy display.

 

[br0adband]

Well if not for a hackintosh i wouldn't have purchased a macbook pro and an iphone (wanted to try Leopard before i almost bought a dell laptop)...so i think Apple shouldn't be that pissed, i can now use the hackintosh for linux.

After I got involved in the OSx86 project back in 2005, I left it (those damned Apple Legal bastards, I swear) for about a year roughly then got re-involved just around the time I bought a few real Macs. In a 2 month span of time I bought a black Macbook (defective, returned it a few days later), then upgraded to a 15" Macbook Pro (defective, returned it a week later), and then traded up again to not one but two 20" iMacs - one for myself, one for my Wife.

Returned my iMac about 3 weeks later, defective, bad optical drive wouldn't burn CD media at all, kernel panics galore at any random time, sound output had noise/static in it, 3 dead pixels from the factory. Returned the Wife's iMac 2 weeks after that, defective, bad optical drive, overheated, random reboots, wouldn't play retail DVDs correctly but would play my burned backups, go figure, 2 dead pixels from the factory.

Now, not everyone has these issues, and some people could blame all that on them all being "new" items (the Macbook was 1st generation, so was the Macbook Pro, both had the thermal paste gooped on the CPU core, idiots), but then the two iMacs exhibiting similar issues with defective optical drives? Has Apple not learned anything over the years and realized "Hey, maybe we need to go back to Pioneer and stop using these craptastic Mitsumis..."

I guess not.

My point here is that for the Hackintoshes that I've built myself, each and every one of them was more stable, more reliable, and more useful to me in the periods of time I had them running OSx86 than the real Macintosh computers I bought in an Apple Store and got reamed on the return fees by - but I got the fees back in the long run.

Charging me for returning a defective piece of hardware. Shame on you, Steve, shame on you.

 

[mithrilfox]

After I got involved in the OSx86 project back in 2005, I left it (those damned Apple Legal bastards, I swear) for about a year roughly then got re-involved just around the time I bought a few real Macs. In a 2 month span of time I bought a black Macbook (defective, returned it a few days later), then upgraded to a 15" Macbook Pro (defective, returned it a week later), and then traded up again to not one but two 20" iMacs - one for myself, one for my Wife.

Returned my iMac about 3 weeks later, defective, bad optical drive wouldn't burn CD media at all, kernel panics galore at any random time, sound output had noise/static in it, 3 dead pixels from the factory. Returned the Wife's iMac 2 weeks after that, defective, bad optical drive, overheated, random reboots, wouldn't play retail DVDs correctly but would play my burned backups, go figure, 2 dead pixels from the factory.

Now, not everyone has these issues, and some people could blame all that on them all being "new" items (the Macbook was 1st generation, so was the Macbook Pro, both had the thermal paste gooped on the CPU core, idiots), but then the two iMacs exhibiting similar issues with defective optical drives? Has Apple not learned anything over the years and realized "Hey, maybe we need to go back to Pioneer and stop using these craptastic Mitsumis..."

I guess not.

My point here is that for the Hackintoshes that I've built myself, each and every one of them was more stable, more reliable, and more useful to me in the periods of time I had them running OSx86 than the real Macintosh computers I bought in an Apple Store and got reamed on the return fees by - but I got the fees back in the long run.

Charging me for returning a defective piece of hardware. Shame on you, Steve, shame on you.

I have no idea what to say. I think you must hold the world record for the most consecutive defective Macs purchased ever. I've purchased an iBook G4, then another one of the same, then a MacBook, then an iMac. Never a single problem with any of them, except it seems that the MacBook's iSight cable may have gotten loose.

Never a dead pixel, no optical drive problems, nothing. That's most people's experience. If what you're saying is true, you really got the short end of the stick, and I would be investigating a way to remove the computer curse placed on you (kidding, of course).

 

[ert3]

I am both for and against it.

I want 3rd party hardware developers to make and sell macs but I like the amount of control apple exerts now as a method of quality control.

I just don't want to see mac OS go the way of windows. being installed on computers tat are so substandard the update tool recommends you not use the version of the OS you have installed is ridiculous on OEM systems (I got these read outs from several windows vista machines)