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.
The Merged Hackintosh Thread
- Thread starter ease718
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As soon as my course finishes, I'm building one just for the sport... MP is too much for me and I want the option of upgradeability.
Right
, sorry I forgot that Apple fully tests all software updates against every conceivable hackintosh configuration prior to release. The more 3rd party hardware or software you have coupled with any OS the greater the likelihood of problems with updates.
Didnt realize this thread was still going.
updates
i have updated to 10.5.3, via netkas instructions.
also i installed an extra hd for time machine, works great.
i installed achi drivers on my xp drive and i can now r/w all my mac drives in xp.
next i want to replace the 7300gt graphics card with one of the new gen coming out this month. i'll wait till someone has a confirmed driver solution.
also there is no reason not to oc a stock cooled q6600 to 3.0 ghz
8x400 for 3.2 at 1600fsb should also work without much system stress, watch the ram multiplier though
updates
i have updated to 10.5.3, via netkas instructions.
also i installed an extra hd for time machine, works great.
i installed achi drivers on my xp drive and i can now r/w all my mac drives in xp.
next i want to replace the 7300gt graphics card with one of the new gen coming out this month. i'll wait till someone has a confirmed driver solution.
also there is no reason not to oc a stock cooled q6600 to 3.0 ghz
8x400 for 3.2 at 1600fsb should also work without much system stress, watch the ram multiplier though
I would wait until IV. Q (Nehalem). If Apple do not make something which would suit my needs I go Hackintosh for sure.
The reason I have a hackintosh is because apple do not make a machine that I actually want to buy. Mac mini - cute but not good enough. iMac - I don't want an all in one and I want choice over my screen. Mac Pro - just can't afford one. Laptop - not good for the heavy use it will get.
Why can't apple realise that people want a mid range desktop? If they did then I would never buy a windows based PC again. Simple.
Why can't apple realise that people want a mid range desktop? If they did then I would never buy a windows based PC again. Simple.
I built one for the heck of it, but I found it frustrating to deal with all the hacks necessary to get my gear recognized. Combine that with no easy system software updates, and it wasn't worth it. Besides, I have real Macs to use.
If I'm honest- when I decided to switch and was saving for my iMac I wanted to try Leopard and I tried to set up some old PC parts as a Hackintosh- it didn't work properly. I'm glad in a way because when I did get my iMac I got the whole Apple Experience (TM) in one go.
For me now having an Apple's a two-parted experience- the hardware and the software.
For me now having an Apple's a two-parted experience- the hardware and the software.
Well, I will freely admit, that, despite owning two different Macs, I wanted to try a Hackintosh, only because I wanted to find out how well it would run. Surprisingly, it was actually pretty impressive, but was really buggy, and lasted less than a day before I removed it, because I couldn't stand it anymore.
Well, the poll seems to have stabilized. Since about 50 votes, the percentages have been about where they are now at 172 votes, plus or minus a couple of points.
I'm rather surprised that most respondents are, at least, considering a hackintosh in the next three months. I suspect this is because of Apple's hole in its lineup - particularly a lack of a Mini update or the desire for a headless iMac with an additional 3.5" drive bay. For me, the latter is what I'd prefer.
I also think that the OSx86 project has matured quite a bit in the last 3 or so months. I would not have considered building one before. But there seems to be a remarkable success rate with boards from two vendors: Asus and Gigabyte. I have had no problems with my machine, other than I haven't tried the upgrade from 10.5.2 to 10.5.3. It is, by far, the best computer I've owned (not to mention relatively inexpensive for a $1,000 machine).
I'm rather surprised that most respondents are, at least, considering a hackintosh in the next three months. I suspect this is because of Apple's hole in its lineup - particularly a lack of a Mini update or the desire for a headless iMac with an additional 3.5" drive bay. For me, the latter is what I'd prefer.
I also think that the OSx86 project has matured quite a bit in the last 3 or so months. I would not have considered building one before. But there seems to be a remarkable success rate with boards from two vendors: Asus and Gigabyte. I have had no problems with my machine, other than I haven't tried the upgrade from 10.5.2 to 10.5.3. It is, by far, the best computer I've owned (not to mention relatively inexpensive for a $1,000 machine).
If Apple doesn't release what they want, expect a lot of Hackintoshes this year.
Somehow I find it more likely that Apple would release a MacBook Air without screen and with HDMI output than a "traditional" computer.
Anyway, what are the OS X specific apps we'd like to use and cannot with our current Windows and Linux boxes? iLife?
Anyway, what are the OS X specific apps we'd like to use and cannot with our current Windows and Linux boxes? iLife?
MacBook, possibly, MacBook Air? That's purely targeted to be small and portable, not things that are highly essential for a desktop.
yeah, but as a living room computer it might not be too bad. could be the rebirth of O P Q A <space>
They are reportedly:
• Noisy as hell
• Awkward to update
• Ugly as sin
and would have little resale value, in my opinion.
• Noisy as hell
• Awkward to update
• Ugly as sin
and would have little resale value, in my opinion.
If it's one of the current "clones"
If it's one of the old "approved" clones, then it's so out of date, hardware-wise, to be not worth the effort for a daily-use machine, more like a curiosity than anything else.
- Potentially impossible to update
- From a company that may not be here very long, even shorter if a cease-and-desist and injunction are brought forward
- Completely unsupported by Apple (in fact, in violation of the EULA. Not a crime, but they could tell you to pound sand)
If it's one of the old "approved" clones, then it's so out of date, hardware-wise, to be not worth the effort for a daily-use machine, more like a curiosity than anything else.
The reasons to get one are pretty obvious:
-Cheaper
I don't agree with those that say it will be easier to expand, because:
1. The Mac Pro is one of the easiest expandable machines there is and there are notebook versions out of a certain company based in Florida getting a lot of fame
2. Expandable things that arent supported on a Mac probably arent supported on your Mac Clone. Unless there are osx86 drivers for whatever you are trying to install.
3. Things like iSight have had trouble working on clones and other perhipials that are designed for a Mac
4. Often times companies release drivers for Windows products to make them compatiable for the Mac (old printer). No matter how much the company refuses to get along with Cupertino, they aren't going to release Mac Clone drivers.
-Cheaper
I don't agree with those that say it will be easier to expand, because:
1. The Mac Pro is one of the easiest expandable machines there is and there are notebook versions out of a certain company based in Florida getting a lot of fame
2. Expandable things that arent supported on a Mac probably arent supported on your Mac Clone. Unless there are osx86 drivers for whatever you are trying to install.
3. Things like iSight have had trouble working on clones and other perhipials that are designed for a Mac
4. Often times companies release drivers for Windows products to make them compatiable for the Mac (old printer). No matter how much the company refuses to get along with Cupertino, they aren't going to release Mac Clone drivers.
I would say not to get one.
Ok, I just checked the only prebuilt mac clone I know of (as opposed to building your own). It starts at $400, then $155 to add Leopard into the mix instead of free or different operating system. Suddenly we are close to a mac mini in price. Ok, but I don't think OS X works with pentium processors, even dual core (might be wrong though.) If thats the case, we have to up the processor, which is $60. I guess we're now at $215 on top of $400, so, $615. Mac Minis run $600 new, or $500 Apple refurbished.
It DOES have a separate graphics card (as opposed to integrated, like the mini), and a bigger hard drive. It doesn't have firewire ports until you specifically add them in. Not a big deal for me, but for some it might. It also has another gig of RAM that the mini doesn't come preconfigured with.
However, the biggest thing for me is the fact that is difficult updates. Some that isn't a huge deal, some it is.
Everyone likes their own thing. I simply would prefer Apple supported hardware and software. Apple hardware also generally lasts longer in my experience (had a few logic boards go out, and a few LCD problems on ibooks). This isn't always the case, just what I have seen.
Over all, I think they're close enough in price and specs to not be worth the issues that different hardware would bring. A dedicated graphics card in the mini would be nice, but everything else isn't a huge deal for me. Or if it is, its something I can work out another solution for (external hard drive, adding my own RAM or getting it installed if I have to).
Ok, I just checked the only prebuilt mac clone I know of (as opposed to building your own). It starts at $400, then $155 to add Leopard into the mix instead of free or different operating system. Suddenly we are close to a mac mini in price. Ok, but I don't think OS X works with pentium processors, even dual core (might be wrong though.) If thats the case, we have to up the processor, which is $60. I guess we're now at $215 on top of $400, so, $615. Mac Minis run $600 new, or $500 Apple refurbished.
It DOES have a separate graphics card (as opposed to integrated, like the mini), and a bigger hard drive. It doesn't have firewire ports until you specifically add them in. Not a big deal for me, but for some it might. It also has another gig of RAM that the mini doesn't come preconfigured with.
However, the biggest thing for me is the fact that is difficult updates. Some that isn't a huge deal, some it is.
Everyone likes their own thing. I simply would prefer Apple supported hardware and software. Apple hardware also generally lasts longer in my experience (had a few logic boards go out, and a few LCD problems on ibooks). This isn't always the case, just what I have seen.
Over all, I think they're close enough in price and specs to not be worth the issues that different hardware would bring. A dedicated graphics card in the mini would be nice, but everything else isn't a huge deal for me. Or if it is, its something I can work out another solution for (external hard drive, adding my own RAM or getting it installed if I have to).