Running OS X on PC

darkcatt · Post by **darkcatt** » Sun May 13, 2007 10:41 pm

bencodec wrote:besides, with macs now costing less then equivilantly specced pcs, why would you pay more to buy a dell? even after you've hacked it to run mac os.

wow that is way off and remmeber that PC is not a brand. This is yet again the favorite PC vs mac debate. Linux is the real winner and HFS is vastly superior to windows NTFS or fat 32. So when OSX wich is a linux based kernal is loaded on a pc. Its runs it how it would treat linux.

In the end all the hard ware is all the same, ( although cheap Pc's give cheap results.)

noisetonepause · Post by **noisetonepause** » Sun May 13, 2007 11:04 pm

darkcatt wrote:wow that is way off and remmeber that PC is not a brand. This is yet again the favorite PC vs mac debate. Linux is the real winner and HFS is vastly superior to windows NTFS or fat 32. So when OSX wich is a linux based kernal is loaded on a pc. Its runs it how it would treat linux.

OS X is not in any way, shape or form based on Linux. Check yer facts.

Amberience · Post by **Amberience** » Sun May 13, 2007 11:57 pm

noisetonepause wrote:
darkcatt wrote:wow that is way off and remmeber that PC is not a brand. This is yet again the favorite PC vs mac debate. Linux is the real winner and HFS is vastly superior to windows NTFS or fat 32. So when OSX wich is a linux based kernal is loaded on a pc. Its runs it how it would treat linux.
OS X is not in any way, shape or form based on Linux. Check yer facts.

iirc they're both based on unix right??

noisetonepause · Post by **noisetonepause** » Mon May 14, 2007 12:05 am

Amberience wrote:
noisetonepause wrote:
darkcatt wrote:wow that is way off and remmeber that PC is not a brand. This is yet again the favorite PC vs mac debate. Linux is the real winner and HFS is vastly superior to windows NTFS or fat 32. So when OSX wich is a linux based kernal is loaded on a pc. Its runs it how it would treat linux.
OS X is not in any way, shape or form based on Linux. Check yer facts.
iirc they're both based on unix right??

No.

Linux is a a clone of Unix. It contains no code from Unix. The core of OS X is based on actual Unix code (FreeBSD), but with quite significant changes.

bencodec · Post by **bencodec** » Mon May 14, 2007 1:33 am

darkcatt wrote:
bencodec wrote:besides, with macs now costing less then equivilantly specced pcs, why would you pay more to buy a dell? even after you've hacked it to run mac os.

wow that is way off and remmeber that PC is not a brand. This is yet again the favorite PC vs mac debate. Linux is the real winner and HFS is vastly superior to windows NTFS or fat 32. So when OSX wich is a linux based kernal is loaded on a pc. Its runs it how it would treat linux.

In the end all the hard ware is all the same, ( although cheap Pc's give cheap results.)

yeah, sorry don't mean to be militant about it or anything, but just try pricing up a machine equivilant to a Mac Pro on the Dell online store. i just did it. the dell was 2.6 ghz not 3.0 and still cost over $1k more then the mac.

forge · Post by **forge** » Mon May 14, 2007 2:46 am

darkcatt wrote:This is yet again the favorite PC vs mac debate.

Ironically now that Macs are an the level playing field we actually probably need the debate more

I for one am probably going to be in the market for a new laptop soon and I love my girlfriends MacBook and keep telling her I want it, but there are some things I'd seriously miss about PCs - you seem to get stung for upgrade fees etc alot more on Mac - (like I have to pay waves another $200 US just to get WUP to get the intel update so I can use my waves plugs on the mac

I also have Komplete 2 and I havent checked but I'm guessing there wouldnt be an intel version and I'll have to pay there

so I have to think about whether it will be worth the hassle for all the stuff I use

now we're on a level playing field the issues arent really about hardware, they're about what benefits you get with either OS

leedsquietman · Post by **leedsquietman** » Mon May 14, 2007 3:03 am

where do you live bencodec

in canada apple machines cost significantly more...

Dell Dimension 9200 vs Apple Imac

both running core2duo 2.16 Ghz, 2 GB DDR, 250 GB HDD, 20 " flat panel LCD.

Graphics - Imac ATI Radeon X1600 128 MB, Dell Nvidia 8600 Geforce GTS 256 MB *Dell superior*

Apple 8 x superdrive DVD/CD r/rw, Dell 16 x DVD/CD r/rw.

Apple warranty - 1 yr with 90 days 'complimetary support'. Dell has a minimum 2 yr warranty as default next business day onsite.

cost - Apple imac = CDN$ 1909.00
cost - Dell D9200 = CDN$ 1688.00

Dell is 221 dollars cheaper (about 12%) and has a better graphics card, faster DVD/CD burner and a year extra warranty.

I really like Apple computers but wish they would do something about their prices. Here in Canada, they are usually about 20-30% more than equivalent machines by Dell, HP, Toshiba etc.

Machinesworking · Post by **Machinesworking** » Mon May 14, 2007 3:12 am

forge wrote:see I dont get all this "supporting PCs with OSX" stuff as an argument against - I would think these days it's beyond question that OSX PC version would sell millions of copies - it should more than pay for the infrastructure to self manage AND make a billion along the way

That is entirely based on our own musician bias. No secret that certain things Apple has done with OSX make it desirable for music, (Audio/MIDI set up etc.), but office types aren't about to run out an buy OSX for their PC, have tech support issues that might possibly not be free, (could Apple really afford the tech support for office types who clog tech lines?), and expect to keep their reputation as the "premiere OS"? Considering they would be invading an established territory, with billions of dollars spent supporting various hardware variations etc. It seems to me the only way to really do it would be to offer it unsupported, and that leads back to the user base being very small. Otherwise it's sell OEM to Dell, Gateway etc. and that simply isn't going to happen.
There is no real difference in hardware, true, but they test the crap out of the hardware they use, and it's very possible that some hardware would be incompatible etc. It's what they ran into with the clones; they were forced to trouble shoot hardware configurations for Power Computing etc. simply to save their reputation, and it wasn't worth the hassle.
The only way OSX will ever be released into the "wild" is as an unsupported instal, which would be fine to people like me, and Jackal I assume. Linux already has lists of compatible hardware etc. it wouldn't take long for an OSX86 version to appear.

look how much Gates has made from just an OS for any old hardware

I think it's more to do with Microsoft owning a fair chunk of Apple (wasnt it 200 million?) and Gates just not wanting it because he knows people would prefer it

Nope, Gates 100 million shares of OSX were sold with the requirement that they not be voting shares. It makes sense.

forge · Post by **forge** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:44 am

I just tried the OSX86 on my intel new laptop and I am coming round to thinking Apple will do a port

I base this on the huge buzz going on out there with people using the hack - it's pretty damn popular

at the end of the day people will want it and I just think they will ultimately do it because they'd be mad to miss out on the dollars

sweetjesus · Post by **sweetjesus** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 2:55 pm

forge wrote:I just tried the OSX86 on my intel new laptop and I am coming round to thinking Apple will do a port

I base this on the huge buzz going on out there with people using the hack - it's pretty damn popular

at the end of the day people will want it and I just think they will ultimately do it because they'd be mad to miss out on the dollars

they dont need to do a port.. this is the port...

forge · Post by **forge** » Sun Aug 19, 2007 10:09 pm

sweetjesus wrote:
forge wrote:I just tried the OSX86 on my intel new laptop and I am coming round to thinking Apple will do a port

I base this on the huge buzz going on out there with people using the hack - it's pretty damn popular

at the end of the day people will want it and I just think they will ultimately do it because they'd be mad to miss out on the dollars
they dont need to do a port.. this is the port...

bit ragged around the seams though

be nice to have proper official driver support etc

djadonis206 · Post by **djadonis206** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 1:43 am

Money's on

they will

and vice versa

really piss some die hards off but 'meh' its for the better of man kind down the road

a matter of time - wouldn't surprise me if they're Already working on it

curious, remember "The thong song"?

what ever happened to Sisco?

that's totally unrelated but he just popped in my head for a sec there

my tech writing professor advised me to stay away from "Train of thought" writing and stick top the subject at hand

forge · Post by **forge** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 2:10 am

djadonis206 wrote: my tech writing professor advised me to stay away from "Train of thought" writing and stick top the subject at hand

Ableton should put that in a sticky on here

The only doubt I have at this stage is the comments timothyallan made about XP being about 30% faster on his macbook and Jackall&Hyde saying similar, if XP is that much faster I'm really not sure what I would need from OSX other than the non-windows programs

with the move to vista it looks like I have lost my NI Komplete 2 as I just trashed my XP partition to put on OSX86 (I decided I just couldnt see myself booting into it to just use Absynth or reaktor - pro53, battery and FM7 all work on vista and that's about all I've ever used really anyway

I did like using absynth and reaktor now and then, and maybe vokator, but I just dont think it's worth the hassle and now that NI has made K2 almost Kompletely worthless by removing the upgrade path and at the same time not making it UB or Vista and no longer supporting it I dont think I will ever give them another cent

in fact I'd almost be tempted to find cracks because they deserve it with that unbelievable move - their corporate slogan should be "we take your money then roll it into a cigar and smoke it while we piss on you!"

even if they'd just kept K2->K3 upgrade it could have been useful

cant afford it anyway though, and as i said I dont think I would out of principle now

and besides, Live 6 + instruments pretty much does everything I need now - I really dont miss any of it that much

occasionally it's nice to have something else just to contrast the overall sound though

so anyway, I'm keen to check out metasynth 4 and some other mac only things, but overall I'm pretty damn happy with PC and the 568 billion options it gives me

if anyone has some suggestions for freeware mac things please let me know

condra · Post by **condra** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 5:03 am

Im very interested in installing OSX on a non apple machine, but am too lazy to put effort into making a computer from scratch and getting all the components together.

Somebody mentioned Chinese clones with all the required components. Can anyone tell me the make and model of these?

forge · Post by **forge** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 5:13 am

condra wrote:Im very interested in installing OSX on a non apple machine, but am too lazy to put effort into making a computer from scratch and getting all the components together.

Somebody mentioned Chinese clones with all the required components. Can anyone tell me the make and model of these?

thing to do is have a look on osx86project.org and insanely mac and people have listed all their success stories - there is HEAPS of info out there by now and alot of threads on hardware