| Turning PC into Apple Macintosh: Hackintosh |
| Articles - Featured Guides | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Written by David Ramsey | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sunday, 10 October 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Turning PC Into Apple Macintosh: HackintoshEven the most jaded Microsoft Windows fan will admit, grudgingly, to an occasional bout of "Mac curiosity". Since Steve Jobs' return in the late 1990s as part of Apple's acquisition of NeXT, Apple's trajectory has risen, and they currently sell several million Macs per quarter, representing (depending on whose analysis you read) about a 10% share of the domestic PC market and landing them in the top 5 computer companies in terms of U.S. sales. Their market capitalization current ranks them as the second largest company in the world, and they may overtake Exxon this year. A "Hackintosh" is a computer that runs Apple's OS X operating system on non-Apple hardware. This has been possible since Apple's switch from IBM's PowerPC processors to Intel processors a few years ago. Until recently, building a PC-based Mac was something done only by hard-core hackers and technophiles, but in the last few months, building a Hackintosh PC has become much easier. Benchmark Reviews looks at what it's possible to do with PC hardware and the Mac Snow Leopard OS today, and the pros and cons of the building a Hackintosh computer system over purchasing a supported Apple Mac Pro.
Before we get started, I'd like to mention a few warnings and caveats:
(While Apple is routinely derided for its "proprietary" attitudes, Hackintoshes probably wouldn't be possible without Darwin. Darwin represents the core operating system functionality under OS X, and Apple releases a new version of the Darwin source code under the Apple Public Source License with each major update of OS X. The current version of Darwin, 10.4.0, was released on June 15, 2010, to correspond with the OS X 10.6.4 upgrade. Darwin source code is an invaluable resource for those working in the Hackintosh trenches.) That said, getting a Hackintosh going is kinda fun. This article describes my experience doing so, and the pros and cons of this approach. Full disclosure: I worked for Apple in the late 1980s and am the author of "MacPaint 2.0". I use Macs for all my serious work and consider PCs to be best suited for video games. EDITORS NOTE: Benchmark Reviews has also published an updated Apple Hackintosh: Moving to Intel Sandy Bridge article, as well as our Budget Hackintosh PC Build Project, Hackintosh OS X Software Installation, and Hackintosh Performance Hardware Options. The Real DealSome of the earliest Hackintosh work was done on netbooks, but I'll be working with desktop components since you have more freedom to design your system this way (and a netbook is hardly a replacement for a Mac Pro, either). There are two classes of desktop Macs: the consumer machines are the diminutive Mac Mini and the all-in-one iMac, both with limited expandability, while the professional system is the Mac Pro. As a programmer, I've used Mac Pros since they came out with the IBM PowerPC G5 processors in 2003, and my current system is a 2006-vintage machine with two dual-core Xeon processors running at 2.66GHZ and 9G of 667MHz DDR2 error-correcting FB-DIMM memory. While obscure now, FB-DIMMs were the memory Intel specified for these processors in 2006. The basic appearance of the Mac Pro hasn't changed in the past 7 years: they're workstation-class computers in thick-panelled aluminum cases. Internally, the computer's layout is almost supernaturally neat, with almost no visible cables. On my machine, memory resides on pull-out cards for each processor; modern Mac Pros use ECC DDR3 memory and the processors and memory all live on a single pull-out tray for easy upgrades. The closest PC equivalent to these heavy-duty systems would be something like an HP Z800 series workstation.
2006 Mac Pro interior showing memory cards and hard drive caddies. However, since we're building a Hackintosh, we needn't worry about exotic workstation-class hardware; we can, within some limitations (well, to be honest, quite a few limitations) use generic PC hardware. For the software, I'd recommend the latest Mac OS X 10.6.3 "Snow Leopard" since it's the first version of OS X to be a "pure Intel" release, and is available for a mere $29 online from Apple or at your local Apple store. Another alternative is the "Mac Box Set" available from Newegg for $119: it includes Snow Leopard, the iLife software suite (iPhoto, iWeb, iDVD, iMovie, etc.) and the iWork office suite. The RoadblocksBut while the latest "Snow Leopard" version of OS X runs on Intel-based Macs, it doesn't mean it's easy to get it running on other computers. Modern Macs may use "standard PC hardware", but they're still different enough to make running OS X on anything else rather tricky. There are several impediments to running OS X on non-Apple hardware:
My own impetus for building a Hackintosh was curiosity: I've been using Macs since they came out in 1984, and have been using the Mac Pros since their introduction in 2003. I'd casually investigated the idea for a year or so, but it seemed dauntingly complex (even though I'm a programmer) and online reports of compatibility and usability problems and overall system reliability deterred me. But the state of the art has advanced since then, and while it's still hardly "plug and play", it seemed as though it could be fairly easy...if you started with the right hardware. There's also the cost issue. While Mac Pros are competitively priced compared to other workstation-class machines like the HP Z800 and Dell Precision series, the starting price of $2,500 for a single quad-core processor model running at 2.8GHz (and going up past $5,000 for a dual hexacore processor model) is still pretty high. The problem is that the iMac and Mac Mini have very limited expandability, so if you want more than one internal hard drive or optical drive, more than two memory slots, discrete video cards, and so forth, the Mac Pro is your only choice in the Apple lineup. And while it's possible to upgrade a Mac Pro, the single processor and dual processor models use different motherboards (so your single-processor model can't be upgraded to dual processors). Also (frustratingly for hackers) it's difficult or impossible (depending on the model) to overclock a Mac. After some research I determined that I had hardware— specifically, a motherboard, processor, and video card— that seemed to be well supported. So I decided to give it a shot. Hardware RequirementsBefore you start a Hackintosh project, you need to spend some quality time on the Web researching your hardware. While AMD systems can be used as Hackintoshes, there is much more support and information available for Intel systems. And unless you like writing your own drivers, you should choose a motherboard and processor that others have successfully used as the basis of a running system. Graphics card support is spotty: NVIDIA cards seem better supported than ATI cards, with many boot loaders (we'll get to those in the next section) providing drivers that will work with most NVIDIA cards made in the last few years. ATI cards are less well supported, but experimental support for the 5xxx series has just become available and seems to work. Much of the existing knowledge and support in the Hackintosh world is for older hardware; LGA775 motherboards based in Intel P45 chipsets and older netbooks are well represented. However, in the last few months, support has been growing for the newer Intel chipsets such as the P55, H55/57, and X58 motherboards. Since Apple has never produced AMD hardware, getting OS X running on an AMD system requires modifications to low levels of the OS X kernel and I wouldn't recommend it for most people. What you build your Hackintosh on depends on what motherboards you have available or are willing to buy. But if you plan to buy new hardware, remember that there's no guarantee you'll be able to get anything running, or that it will be reliable enough to be useful if you do. For this project I chose an ASUS P6T V2 Deluxe motherboard (since I happened to have one available), an Intel Core i7-920 processor, and an NVIDIA GTX 280 video card. The memory, hard drive, optical drive, and power supply you use don't matter much, but it's best to stick with SATA drives. Although the ASUS motherboard I used has an IDE port, IDE support is less than perfect and as of this writing I've not been able to get an IDE optical drive to work (an optical drive connected to a SATA port works fine). And while you can use multiple video cards to drive multiple monitors, NVIDIA SLI and ATI CrossFireX don't exist in the Mac world, so don't plan on using these features. For my case, I used an HP Blackbird chassis with its Topower 1.1kW power supply and ASETEK water cooling system. The Blackbird chassis is one of the few PC cases that's in the same class as a Mac Pro case: the massive aluminum structure weighs over 50 pounds and incorporates a full SATA backplane for up to five plug-in 3.5" drives. A pop-up panel on the top of the case opens to expose an integrated card reader and USB and audio ports. The Blackbird computer was the first fruit of HP's acquisition of Voodoo PC and while the case was never made available as a separate part, you can occasionally find them on eBay for very high prices ("very high" = ">$500").
Funny, it doesn't look like a Macintosh... OK, let's take a look at what we have to do from the software side... The InstallationThe software problems start at boot time: Macs use EFI to boot from GUID-partitioned hard drives, whereas Windows PCs typically boot from a BIOS to an MBR hard drive. The GUID Partition Table (GPT) and Master Boot Record (MBR) are two different ways of designating the partitions on a hard drive, and forcing a BIOS-based system to boot from the Snow Leopard installer DVD is the first hurdle. This is where the "boot loader" comes in. I'm oversimplifying this a bit, but basically the bootloader "catches" the BIOS boot and redirects to an EFI boot, and also "injects" the patched drivers necessary to use non-Apple chipsets, networking interfaces, audio, and video. There are several boot loaders available, but the Chameleon bootloader is the most popular, and it's open-source too! Chameleon consists of several files that must be installed in specific places on your disk ("specific places" being short for "I hope you're familiar with Unix disk partitions and devices"). There are two basic ways of creating your initial bootable Snow Leopard volume:
There are also the "manual" installation methods described on the Chameleon home page, but those are best left for the experts...the ones familiar with "Unix disk partitions and devices." I started with the myHack installer, created a bootable USB key, used it to create a bootable OS X hard disk, and then applied the "P6TV2Deluxe" package installer as the final step. This package installs the specific drivers for the various components (audio, networking, etc.) on the ASUS motherboard. The difference between the myHack installer and the P6TV2Deluxe installer is that the former tries to create a generic bootable system that will work on a range of PC hardware, while the latter is optimized specifically for that model ASUS motherboard. If you're using an ASUS P6T series motherboard, you can skip the myHack installer and just apply the P6TV2Deluxe package, but I'd originally set it up for a different motherboard and applying the P6TV2Deluxe package overwrites any changed files it needs to, so the end result is the same.
In the image above, note the check boxes for the processor DSDT files. DSDT stands for Differentiated System Descriptor Table, and is a file containing low-level information about your processor and other hardware. For example, no current Macs use the Core i7-920 processor, so OS X doesn't know how to invoke its low-power or Turbo Boost features without a corresponding DSDT file. Your Hackintosh will run without this file, but not as well as it could otherwise. Separate DSDT files are available for most current Intel processors. And that was pretty much all it took. The newly-created volume booted and ran (almost) perfectly on my hardware. Once you're done, you'll notice a new folder, named "Extra", at the root level of your hard disk. This contains driver and configuration files that are loaded at boot time, so don't remove it! The bulk of the bootloader code resides in a file at the root of your hard disk labelled simply "boot"; obviously, you shouldn't remove this file, either. So what does OS X think it's running on? Some weird quad-core Xeon, apparently...
The more detailed analysis is in the System Profiler application, invoked by clicking the "More Info..." button in the dialog above.
Interestingly, the System Profiler app thinks I'm using ECC (error-correcting) memory: notice the "ECC: Enabled" notation in the screen shot below.
The ProblemsMy original Hackintosh attempt was with an ASUS Rampage II Extreme motherboard. Although I was able to get it running, hard disk performance on anything except the boot disk was very slow. This seems to be a problem with AHCI mode on the SATA ports of some motherboards, and the only solution anyone has been able to come up with is switching to IDE mode, which I didn't want to do. This lead me to switch to the ASUS P6T V2 Deluxe motherboard, which didn't have this problem. Although most things were working perfectly, there were two problems with my new system. One of them I've managed to address; the other I have not. The problems were very slow OpenGL performance with my NVIDIA GTX280 video card, and the fact that the optical drive attached to the motherboard's IDE port wasn't recognized by the system. The OpenGL problem is widely known but its causes remain mysterious. Some NVIDIA cards such as the GTX 280 and GTX 285 return much slower OpenGL performance than other cards such as the older 9600 series. It seems to be chipset-specific (i.e. people report that cards that are slow on X58 systems return much better performance on P55 Hackintoshes). Nobody seems to be sure what causes the problem or how to address it. If you don't plan to do any gaming or professional rendering on your Hackintosh, this isn't a concern, since the Mac's native rendering system ("Quartz") runs at full speed, so all your user interface, QuickTime, and other features will work just fine. However, this is an excellent example of the type of problem you'll see on a Hackintosh: subtle, poorly understood, and (at least in the short term) unfixable. Half-Life 2 was almost a slide show on my system with the NVIDIA card. What I did was switch to an ATI Radeon 5870 video card; there are no OpenGL problems with ATI cards. However, since the system I'd built didn't contain any ATI drivers, booting with this card produced a black screen. I had to re-install the NVIDIA card, get a patched version of the bootloader with experimental ATI 5x00 drivers here, and install it (which consisted of simply replacing the "boot" file at the root level of the hard disk). However, booting still resulted in a blank screen, and it took me some time to figure out why... Inside the "Extra" folder mentioned above is a file named "com.apple.Boot.plist". This "property list" file contains parameters that are read in at boot time. There's a parameter for the graphics mode your Hackintosh will boot with, which in my case looked like this: <key>Graphics Mode</key><string>1280x1024x32</string> This default resolution works with most monitors, but my monitor is 1920x1200, and that's what my Mac environment is configured for. With the NVIDIA card, the resolution switch occurred during the boot process just before the desktop was displayed; but the (admittedly experimental) hacked drivers for the ATI 5870 couldn't handle the switch— I'd see the initial boot screen, but it would go black before the desktop was displayed. The fix was replacing the line in com.apple.Boot.plist with: <key>Graphics Mode</key><string>1920x1200x32</string> Having the final resolution in the boot configuration file means that the resolution switch that caused the problem doesn't occur. This is another good example of the fun you'll have with a Hackintosh. However, despite my success with the video cards, I've never been able to get the system to recognize the optical drive connected to the IDE porft. Hackintosh PerformanceI wanted to update my 2006-vintage Mac Pro to get better performance. The hardware I used for my Hackintosh should provide a significant performance boost relative to my old Mac Pro:
For benchmarking, I used CINEBENCH 11.5 (yes, there's a Mac version), Handbrake video encoding, and GeekBench to compare the performance of the Hackintosh with my existing Mac Pro. CINEBENCH R11.5 BenchmarksMaxon Cinebench is a real-world test suite that assesses the computer's performance capabilities. Cinebench is based on Maxon's award-winning animation software, Cinema 4D, which is used extensively by studios and production houses worldwide for 3D content creation. Maxon software has been used in blockbuster movies such as Spider-Man, Star Wars, The Chronicles of Narnia and many more. Cinebench Release 11.5 includes the ability to more accurately test the industry's latest hardware, including systems with up to 64 processor threads and the testing environment better reflects the expectations of today's production demands. A more streamlined interface makes testing systems and reading results incredibly straightforward. The Cinebench R11.5 test scenario uses all of a system's processing power to render a photorealistic 3D scene, "No Keyframes" the viral animation by AixSponza. This scene makes use of various algorithms to stress all available processor cores. The OpenGL graphics card testing procedure uses a complex 3D scene depicting a car chase with which the performance of your graphics card in OpenGL mode is measured. During the benchmark tests the graphics card is evaluated by way of displaying an intricate scene that includes complex geometry, high-resolution textures, and a variety of effects to evaluate the performance across a variety of real-world scenarios. The chart below summarizes the benchmark results.
With a modern video card, faster processor, and faster memory, the Hackintosh thoroughly trounces the Mac Pro. The CineBench rendering test uses Hyper-Threading if it's available, and the eight virtual cores from the i7-920 CPU have a decided advantage over the four real cores from the pair of Xeons in the Mac Pro. GeekBench 2.1.6 BenchmarksPrimate Labs' GeekBench is a "one-click" benchmark utility that performs a number of processor and memory tests; it does not test video cards or disk I/O. There are 12 integer CPU tests, 14 floating-point CPU tests, 5 basic memory tests, and 8 memory bandwidth tests. All tests comprise a mixture of single-threaded and multi-threaded versions. It produces a weighted composite score based on the individual scores.
"Pure synthetic" benchmarks like GeekBench are generally poor predictors of real-world performance. However, the results here seem to be roughly in line with what we're seeing in the other benchmark tests. Handbrake 0.9.4 BenchmarkFew consumer applications will make good use of a six-core processor, or even a four-core processor. Extra cores can give you a system that remains responsive when performing a computationally-intensive background task, but will rarely accelerate the execution of an individual program. There are several reasons for this:
All that said, media transcoding (converting to a different format) is something that does scale well with the number of available cores, and the free and open-source Handbrake 0.94 video transcoder is an example of a program that makes full use of the computational resources available. For this test I used Handbrake 0.94 to transcode a standard-definition episode of Family Guy to the "iPhone & iPod Touch" presets. The encoding times are in seconds; lower is better.
The Core i7-920's eight Hyper-Threaded cores easily beat the old-school Xeons, encoding the video in less than half the time. PC vs Mac Cost ComparisonI built my Hackintosh with components I had available. Using the configuration utility at the online Apple Store, I configured a real Mac Pro to match as closely as possible the hardware I used. I selected the base 2.8GHz quad-core Xeon "Nehalem" processor (although Apple does not name the exact model Xeon used, the specifications are those of a Xeon X5660), 12G of error-correcting 1333MHz DDR3 memory (3x4G), an ATI Radeon 5870 video card, and accepted the standard "Superdrive" optical drive and a 1T hard drive of unknown provenance. The total cost for this configuration from Apple is $3,974.00. Below is a list of the parts I used in the Hackintosh, with current Newegg prices where available. A couple of caveats: first, although I used an Intel Core i7-920 processor, it's no longer available, so I substituted the closest thing, the Core i7-930; and since the HP Blackbird case is not a retail item, I substituted a high-end Lian Li case to approach the quality of the Mac Pro case, and an Antec Signature SG-850 power supply as my "best guess" for a match to Apple's custom Mac Pro power supply, whose specs I couldn't determine. These matches aren't perfect, and you could choose a much less expensive case and power supply for your Hackintosh. I also included the cost of OS X and iLife, since this software is included with every Macintosh.
PC Hackintosh total cost: $2,048.05 Apple Mac Pro total cost: $3,974.00 So, my PC Hackintosh cost $1,925.95 less than an Apple Mac Pro, and, although I wasn't able to test it directly against a current Mac Pro, is probably significantly faster due to the overclock. EDITOR'S NOTE: While some of the components used in this article were necessary for compatibility with Snow Leopard, items such as the video card, hard drive, power supply, and computer case are all flexible. Builders should consider the best option to fit their project and budget. Hackintosh: Final Thoughts and ConclusionMac Pros are expensive, but obviously there are people who feel they're worth the money. Apple works hard to provide their customers with excellent support and service, and the result of their efforts is a consistent top ranking in customer satisfaction, which has been steadily increasing over the years. If you're not the type of person that other people call with their computer problems, a real Macintosh can provide some peace of mind. Right now, I've been running my Hackintosh for about two weeks. Once past its initial teething problems, it's been as stable and reliable as any Mac I've ever owned, and so far every program and device I've run has worked just as it would on a regular Macintosh, including Microsoft Office, Adobe CS5, a Fujitsu ScanSnap scanner, and even older PowerPC programs that require Apple's "Rosetta" emulation layer. Syncing my iPhone to iTunes works perfectly. And Windows 7 running under Parallels 6.0, allocated 4 cores and 4G of RAM, is very snappy, with none of the stutters or slow performance I noticed on my Mac Pro. But getting everything working this well took a lot more effort than simply plugging in a retail Mac and starting it up. Even with the hold-your-hand installers for specific motherboards being created by enthusiasts, problems like the ones I mentioned in the previous sections are still all too common, and require diligence and some degree of expertise to overcome.
There's another problem: software updates. Like Microsoft, Apple releases frequent software updates, and OS X will alert you to them as they become available. You can even set your Mac to download them automatically (although they won't be installed without your specific direction). But updates have the potential to render your machine inoperative, since they can replace some of the patched components your Hacktintosh needs to run. In general, application updates (for Office, iWork, and other programs) are safe, while OS and security updates are less so. You should be especially cautious of "OS version" updates. For example, the update from OS X 10.6.3 to 10.6.4 disabled the audio on many Hackintoshes, requiring a patch script to restore the previous audio driver. No problems have been reported with security updates, but the possibility still exists. The Hackintosh community is pretty good about staying on top of this stuff, and you'll generally know within a couple of days of the release of an update whether it's safe to install it, so it's a good idea to wait before installing any OS level updates until they've been vetted by the community. But since disaster can strike anyway, I'd strongly recommend a couple of things: first, keep a bootable OS X installation volume (USB key or DVD) around, preferably the one you used to create your system. This disk contains programs like Terminal and Disk Utility which can be very useful in resuscitating a non-booting Hackintosh. Second, dedicate a second hard disk to Apple's "Time Machine" built-in backup feature. Time Machine backs up any changed files on your system hourly, and should your boot volume be toasted for whatever reason, the OS X Installer will offer you the option of restoring the entire disk from a Time Machine backup. I've used this feature to migrate my Hackintosh to a larger hard disk, and it worked perfectly. The last thing to keep in mind is how hardware-dependent a Hackintosh is. Most Hackintosh setups are hand-tweaked to run on the specific hardware in a single computer. If the Radeon 4870 video card in your Hackintosh dies in a couple of years, you probably can't simply swap in the current equivalent Radeon without some extra effort and boot loader updates, which will be difficult to do with no video. If you remain aware of these issues, and adjust your expectations accordingly, a Hackintosh might be a viable option for you. When I started this article, I told my editor that even though I had gotten everything working, I'd never recommend a Hackintosh for daily use in a production environment, or as a main computer. But I'm starting to change my mind... ConclusionThe rapid advancement in the Hackintosh field over the last year or so had made what was once a hacker's toy into a real option for some people. The drawbacks of the Hackintosh approach— spotty hardware support and the requirement for hand-tweaked software, no support from Apple, and the vulnerability of the system to software updates— are countered by the lower cost, greater performance, and versatility in selecting components that it affords. EDITORS NOTE: Benchmark Reviews has also published an updated Apple Hackintosh: Moving to Intel Sandy Bridge article, as well as our Budget Hackintosh PC Build Project, Hackintosh OS X Software Installation, and Hackintosh Performance Hardware Options. Pros:
+ Potentially faster than a real Mac Cons:
- Still not a real Mac Would you build a Hackintosh? Leave your comment below, or start a thread in our Forum. UPDATE: Readers may be interested in our follow-up editorial: The Apple Hackintosh Experience
Related Articles:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments
This is such an interesting article. I've been tempted to build a hackintosh for years, and I've even downloaded all the software for my needs, but never finished the project as I don't see why should I use OSX (other than curiosity, for now).
You said you use Macs for all your serious work, but, should I ask which kind of work is it? I expect it to be something like design or similar, but it might be just me with a generic idea (many people think so) which could be wrong.
##folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Evolution_of_a_class ic.txt&topic=MacPaint&sortOrder=Sort%20by%20Date&detail=medium
Try to match this performance w/ a MAC Pro:
CPU: Intel 920 C0 stepping OC: 3.8 181 x 21
RAM: OCZ Gold 7-7-7-22-80 x12GBs @ 1448Ghz (Lots of headroom still)
vCore at load: 1.29
Ram v. 1.65
MB: Gig X58 U5 v.2 | BIOS FA
PSU: Kingwin 1000wt Mach 1 Modular
VIDEO: BFG GTX295
CASE: CMS 830 Stacker Aluminum
Note this build is almost two years old now.
Again, I really don't need OS X for my work, and I doubt I'll need it soon. But I still can do "serious work" in my PC as many other people do. I do documents, write articles, do calculations and algorithms , program on ASP, C++,C#, edit photos, etc on my PC. That's just MY serious work.
Mac pro's destroy your current set up.
Dont get me wrong here, I love MacOSX, its a lovely operating system, but I also use Ubuntu and Windows 7 on an almost daily basis and I have one conclusion: no one operating system is all things to all people. Pick what you like, just expect to pay more for the shininess of a Mac.
Motherboard: ASUS rampage III ROG extreme edition
CPU: i7 980 xe OC to 4.3 ghz
GPUs: GTX 480s in dual sli settup sc edtion by EVGA
Drive: crucial real ssd drive c300 sta 6gig/sec sata connection 256gigs
corsair 6 gigs 2000 mhz 7 8 7 20 timings
case: corsair obsidian 800d (+ 3 coolermaster 2000 rpm @ 19dpi )
cooler: corsair H50
PSU: Anetc quad 1200 watt
OS: win 7 64 bit
for $4k
Dells configuration with similar specs not as good on the on the SSD, OCing,and memory, $5749 before shipping and taxes
ASUS P6X58D-E Premium
i7 920 (stock clock - CM V8 Air Cool)
GTX 480 (stock clock usually, sometimes an O.C.)
OCZ Gold 6GB 1600mhz
Antec 1200
Corsair TX 850W
win7 pro 64
ASUS 25.5" LCD (1920x1200) dual w/ Vizio 26" (720p) HDTV
Mine cost about 2500...after the mods I did (added cold cathodes, a modded military switch to the front of the case, and filled up the optional fan bays with good fans).
##anandtech.com/show/3969/apple-mac-pro-mid-2010-review
@David Ramsey nice find!
1. Open Office
2. WinAmp +full function plugins
3. ISO tools of many flavors
4. Gaming 3rd party apps
5. Encoders/converters/VOBs
6. Utilities, such as CPUz, SpeedFan (and the like)
7. Millions of things I could never do w/o
8. What software runs more efficiently or faster under MAC than under Win7 x64?
I think people buy Macs for the very reason people who buy PCs will never use MACS--options.
What do you gain buy using the MAC OS that you do not have with Win 7 Ultimate x64?
1. Open Office is a Java-based system and has been available for the Mac since day one. The Mac version is mentioned on the home page of OpenOffice.org, fer crissakes.
2. iTunes is free for every Mac. There are dozens of free plugins for iTunes.
3. Standard OS X handles ISOs just fine. Imaging, burning, etc.
4. Gaming. OK, I'll give you that one. But we're getting there...Steam for the Mac!
5. Encoders/converters/VOBs. You did read the article, right? Handbrake? Not to mention VLC and others.
6. There are lots of utilities available for the Mac. iStat, smcFanControl, etc.
7. Dunno what things you could "never do without", so I can't respond here.
8. Professional video and audio software for one.
1. Apple doesn't use a TPM for OS X. Several currently supported machines don't even have them, IIRC. Here's a good detailed explanation: ##osxbook.com/book/bonus/chapter7/tpmdrmmyth/
2. Open Office uses a little java, but it not "java-based" for most sane definitions you could apply to that term. The vast bulk of it is written in C++. And it hasn't been around for Mac since day one by any stretch. That port took a couple of years once the source was released.
3. The earliest hackintosh work was definitely not done on netbooks. People started building hackintoshes practically as soon as an intel build leaked from one of the transition kits, late 2005. The netbook craze started sometime in 2007.
These are definitely just nits, though. I like the thrust of your article.
Took your advice and started doing some updated research, and I was really happy with the changes in the MAC OS.
I've never liked Windows as a platform, and liked it only as a OS because of the multitude of software options available for it--that's the ONLY reason. I was under the wrong impression that the MAC OS was another Windows type platform, but with much less options for Open Source and 3rd party software. Using BSD is just a no brainer, and I never understood why Gates or Jobs didn't adopt Unix as a core in the 70s. If I were Bill Gates, this is what would scare me the most--BSD! Windows core can never compete with BSD.
I don't want iTunes--Yucki. Thanks for slapping me.
OS X is a fully certified Unix operating system. And because it is, there are 10's of THOUSANDS of *nix applications available for it. MacPorts.org has specific ports of thousands of popular unix utils and apps that run great under OS X.
Bart
I do use Windows 7, XP, OS/X and Linux and don't find any of the OSs that much better. I do like that that ISO tools are not needed for the most part on Linux or the mac since they are baked in.
As to the millions of things you can not do without? Like what?
Really I would have to say your post comes from a point of ignorance and arrogance.
OS/X is a very good environment it is just different from windows 7. Windows 7 has gotten much better and is a better OS than XP or that stinker Vista.
Final Cut Pro
Logic Pro
You know, the good production programs!
I brought 3 Dell mini 10 computers for members of my family. I work on computers 9 to 10 hours a day and would like to rest when I get home. I do not want to remove viruses, or be bothered with other issues with windows.
I installed OSX on all three and have not had any problems at all. Recently my wife received a toshiba running windows 7 and the feces hit the fan. Now I have to deal with her computer randomly disabling her wifi card and the annoying av warnings. WTF?
I can't see me ever giving up my Windows based gaming PC's, but having a Mac around is nice.
You can not compare a dual-xeon platform by comparing it with a platform corei7.
You can not compare a 8800GT with a 5870!
everything is just ridiculous!
does not say anything about the performance difference to the level that is if using hardware and software other than the official macintosh but with similar performance characteristics may change.
It 'obvious that if you prepare a configuration much more handsome than the official Macintosh, the first will be better!
2. If you're really concerned with how many different wave form generators you can play with, then so be it.
3. Disk Utility handles all drive imaging functions
4. Meh, I make money with my Mac.
5. OSX can read and produce any video format
6. Meh again
7. oooo, burn
8. Mac OSX. nuff said
so, as some1 state earlier, if this is not the "road to awe" for mac (and maybe it's not) it is clear a proof that if u know what u're doin' u can achieve better results by yourself, scr*win' the "brand machines" either mac or pc.
yes it has drawbacks. but to me the more important is that IT WORKS. the gap between Win and OS is smaller every day. from my professional POV, mac has FCP. the only big deal nowadays. but that's just me.
And yes there are still reasons to do this hybrid. the best one is to research, to find out, to solve to know how. this way we'll be out of the blurry minds republica who pay only cause they can't. or don't know how. and companies LOVE that. apple, windows, etc.
Ah, and if u disagree with this i have the perfect solution: buy a notebook mac AND a console. u'll be happy like an sheik (no offence) with an S-klasse. and never know what's inside. seems fair to me.
That was a deal finalized in 1996, with Jobs taking CEO position at Apple in 1997. So that would be late last century, not the early part of this one.
Whither journalism.
Mac OS is built on BSD not Linux.
To me, it isn't so much running Mac OS on non-Apple hardware. It's getting a midrange, expandable hardware platform. I don't need raw horsepower for what I do but want to poke around, add drives, RAID etc. that isn't possible on Macs lower than the MacPro. I have preferred a U*ix based OS to Windows (and pre-OSX Macintosh). When OSX came out, I though I was in the land of milk and honey. As Linux has matured, it is getting closer and closer to a 'no brainer' OS which has the open source and U*nx capabilities of OSX. So, to me, it's a case of a Hackintosh or running a U*nix workalike on midrange hardware. Right now, if Apple doesn't bring out expandable midrange hardware, I might be going Linux/NetBSD/OpenBSD/FreeBSD....
Apple Mac Pro total cost: $3,974.00
This in itself is crap -- the $3,974 refers to the 12 core version, the Hacintosh is only using a 4 core processor. The actual price for a 4 core Mac Pro is £1999 (although it does say 'starting at', maybe you don't get as good a graphics card.
Anyway, it's a frigging apples and oranges comparison. Also, the benchmarks are comparing a Hackintosh against a 4 year old Mac Pro.
I never made any secret about the Mac Pro being four years old. In fact looking for upgrade options for this machine is kind of the point of the article.
Now, add in the cost for your time to build it and maintain it every time a new update comes out or you want to change the config, and the difference between this particular Hackintosh config may or may not be worth it to you. I earn that difference in about one to two days, so it just isn't worth it to me. Plus I earn my living on my Mac so I can't afford to have it go flaky because of a software update.
1) I do cross platform development. On a Mac, with the help of VMWare (or Parallels, or Virtual Box), I can run just about any OS I want, including OSX, all at the same time. Can you run OSX inside Windows or Linux? Not that easily.
2) I want to work, not fiddle with the OS all the time. For the most part OSX requires much less of my time in this regard.
3) In order to develop with multiple OSes, I needed a system with plenty of memory capacity to run the VMs which are fair memory hogs. At the time I bought my MacPro, it was one of the few systems that could be configured with up to 32 GB of RAM and have both the host and guest OSes use all of that RAM. Others (like Dell) were pretty close to the same price, but didn't run OSX. It saves me a lot of time and effort to have such a system.
I'll admit, I paid the price to get my MacBook over a windows laptop, and I'd do it all over. I am not an Apple fan boy, I really get annoyed at their politics and policies. BUT, they make great products! Yes, from a total hardware point of view, Macs are more expensive. But the OS is LIGHTYEARS more capable. FreeBSD at the core, awesome user interface, bundled with all kinds of GREAT software (not stupid crapware OEM vendors tend to include). And the best reason of all, no headache. Although I am a developer, I rarely enjoy making my computer work. I just want it to. Printers, scanners, cameras, networking - all worked with very little effort.
With all that being said, I have considered a Hackintosh. Mostly for geek cred, but also to save a little dough. Seeing how it keeps getting easier, it might not be long.
But after about a month of use you really get used to it, and the price/performance comparison is totally mad.
I can do video & music, run programs and play all the games I want.
No problems no hastles. (No need to be a rocket scientist just yet either) And yes viruses do exist but its not safe out there, we all need to be vigilant PC or no PC. And last but not least, Happy Anniversary Windows 7! Love ya!
I believe that a Hackintosh can be fun to build, if you just consider it as a hobby, or if you have some components lying around. Perfect as a cheap alternative for a Mac Mini. For Pro users, the benefits are far outweighed by the lack of support, lack of resale value, and the fact that in the long run it won't be that much cheaper.
About the Apple Store Prices, I just received my new 6core Westmere 3.33GHz and very happy with it. Fitted it with 4x 2TB Hitachi's for 1 big RAID volume, an OZC 90GB SSD boot drive in the spare Optical Drive bay and 12Gb of Kingston Ram. Total price 4600$ and I still have a spare 1TB disk :-) On the Apple store this config would sell for +6300$.
I think some of you, if performance is what you are after, should consider learning to overclock CPUs like the Intel 920 series, preferably the D0 stepping flavor. My rig smokes some Xeons rigs in benchmarking utilities. I run at 3.8Ghz and can run 24-7 in Prime 95 under HEAT at 70C at am ambient of 22C all day long. The performance of this type of rig is simply no joke, even when using server type benchmarking tools. The CPU and Motherboard cost around 550USD. RAM is, well, RAM and prices vary.
EFI is an Intel technology just like everything else in the Mac. Apple uses it because it creates a more formidable barrier to using OS X on non-Apple hardware. There is no technical reason that OS X shouldn't run on any x86 hardware, but it doesn't simply because Apple doesn't want it to, because then Apple loses its >50% hardware margins, etc.
Ramsey's experience dates back to a time when there were material differences between the the hardware in a Mac and the hardware in a PC. As he has discovered, such hardware differences no longer exist and today's "Mac" in indeed a 100% PC.
Thought about having my case chromed the same way until I realized that it cost $5,000!
You don't know what I want a computer for. I might spend 8 hours of every day of my life struggling with a #ty corporate PC and just want a Mac for a change of view. I might specifically need Final Cut or Logic for work reasons and where other NLEs or DAWs may not suitable for the niche I might work in. Similar arguments probably apply for why you want a PC.
There is no "Apple tax." There is a price I'm willing to pay for a product I want or need, just as a Hyundai will get you from A to B reliably and cheaply, people still buy BMWs for perfectly valid reasons.
It takes all kinds, and snarking about choice of platform says more about you than the person you snark against.
Still a lot of ignorance on both sides here. I've used Windows since it's first iteration back in 1988. Since WinXP I have never had a virus. It depends on how you protect your platform, not the platform itself. My Win7 station is set up to scan on execute, before and after, automatically, and with Windows "roaming" service, and some good anti-virus programs running in the background, and configured correctly, I've never had a virus EVER since Win XP SP2.
I have the same mobo and It works for me.
PiSToL
You could try also SuperVIAATA kext found in
##kexts.com/view/337-superviaata.html
But It only works in 64 bit enviroment.
Good Luck,
PiSToL
I built it four months ago and it was my first try. It's being used in a research lab for structural protein work.
##youtube.com/watch?v=2MHQZ_Mubhk
And running an heavy Cubase project:
##youtube.com/watch?v=0iA-q0PZCss
the OSX86 community is way beyond your "Upgrading might break your system"...
because now most of your patches (mostly just one or two) now reside in a Single folder.... the only problem one would get is if they do not remove the sleepenabler kext...
also you used an Asus mb..... most hackintoshers know that gigabyte boards are just tooo good.....
look around on the forums...you will realize ppl are running and updating their "ihacks" without any problems.....
spend some more time hackintoshing ..you will realize its easy
An ASUS motherboard is what I had available, and it's working well, except for the damn IDE port. But I can live without that.
you can easily edit your dsdt file for that purpose...
I think that's still true. be happy to know if some one knows differently
#prasys.info/2009/10/boot-camp-for-hackintoshes/
Of course, it would be a lot easier to simply boot Windows from another partition or drive. The only thing Boot Camp buys you (that I know of) is easier access to files on the Mac part of the disk.
boot camp is specifically for macs....
here you are supposed to use the usual Chameleon bootloader....its really good....
otherwise use Grub from linux....
there is also a chinese guy who makes one called Bootthink...
you see booting is quite flexible ......
bbesides bootcamp works only EFI systems and most of our mobo's arent EFI ones....
ASUS P6T Deluxe V2
It's true, that it's not a real Mac. On the other hand you don't have to deal with an arrogant, unreasonable fruity company.
I bought a demo model, which I assumed would have a one year warranty. It turned out Apple have counted the warranty period from the time the retailer put it on display, not when I bought it. When I bought it I had 2 months left. The retailer was very understanding and sold me an Applecare package at cost price.
That is why I now have a Hackintosh and extremely happy with it. Also, I am not held to ransom by Apples' repair charges.
really who cares. the speeds we are talking about are near unnoticable to the average user. as one person points out unless you are operating at a high end with video/audio production, it really has little relevance.
plenty of manafacturers offer lovely aluminium and brushed steel cases to build your own systems. and for those that cant, save your money, go on holiday and use the computer , regardless of brand for what it is.. not a fashion accessory but a TOOL.
saying that.. when you need a new screwdriver, it is nice to get the one with the thick handle. and rubber grip. with that sexy yellow strip on the side, and that nice engraved logo on th............... and so it continues. x
is all the hardware made by asian factory workers, underpaid and overworked... YES
does the branding of a mechanical object on the surface define its integrity and quality ...... NO
since its intel base. a mac is only defined by its OS and CHASSIS - any system running an apple OS is a mac. anyone who has an apple chassis and puts any parts inside has a mac.
can you put a nice chassis on a turd and sell it to a gullible moron ..... YES
That said, I'm still running my Hackintosh and am quite happy with it, although I expect some teething problems with OS X Lion.
does apple manafacture its own hardware ? or is it the asian warehouse that happens to make sony chassis and samsung ram .. with the same chipsets that fit missile weapons and kitchen utilites. i mean come on DAVE !!! i know you know what im saying. and im glad for your self built machine, why wouldnt you be happy. youve saved yourself from a rip off cartel.
however. i would stick to my statement of RIPOFF, and say its not odd at all, for the simple reason that what you get for your money is not good value in contrast to the product. which is why i made the statement about the production origin.
if they used high end components that were hand built the price point would make sense. but the sad reality is they are selling often lower grade components.
why even call them hackintoshes, they arent. its a machine with an operating system on it ! as macintosh is now an Intel based system all that seperates it is the fact that the software producer has decided that to make it exclusive it will only support certain criteria out of the box !.
which is of course their perogative.
but for us. an OS is an OS it has a primary function. to drive our requirements to an output. you can do tests until the sun explodes, reality is. whatever you choose to use will do the job just fine. everything else is mindbollox.
as for sticking to companies that offer good products. i agree 100 percent.
In real world, side to side comparisons, I can accomplish every day tasks as or faster than my sister who considers herself a PC wiz. So, while the PC hardware/software system may be faster - a real person doing real tasks often is faster on the intuitive Mac than the esoteric PC.
MY FINAL CONLCUSION... PREFERENCE.... THAT's it!.. Stop Fussing over which is better.... I'm a PC... But if I was a billionaire, I'd be both
because afterall, who cares which is "better?" Since BOTH are pretty AMAZING operating systems. That's my 2 pennies, sorry about the long rant!.... and by the way, yeah, Nothing is better than dual-booting Windows 7 and Snow leopard side by side.... It's the ultimate holy grail in the world of computers.... Awesome.
I guess my overall stance, if you really want to ask, would be:
which is better?... BOTH!.. I'm Dual booting (NO VM) Full installations of OS X SL 6.3 & Windows 7 Ultimate x64.... Flawlessly (Except only 1024 x 768 in Snow Leopard. & Reset doesn't function correctly....) hehe.. but it's fun.. keep in mind I'm using an old Acer Aspire X1200 Desktop .. I don't feel the need to install it on my notebook PC just yet... don't have time to tool with it... "THINGS ARE WORTH WHAT YOU THINK THEY ARE"?
Also, where are you getting that Macs use proprietary hardware? Open up one of these Apple Macs, and point out the proprietary hard drive, memory, processor, video card, power supply, or motherboard. All of these components are either supplied by other manufacturers or built to fit a Mac.
And yes they are less proprietary, but Macs are configuration-specific by the model.. which also reduces the possiblility of system failures..doesn't eliminate, but reduces.. But yes, you are correct..
1. The registry. That mess is a good reason so many malicious has so much power. Then deciphering what changes were made is like finding a needle in a haystack.
2. The method in which applications install. Most applications in OSX consist of one file. Windows? Crap goes EVERYWHERE when you install something. Some malware has the ability to reinstall itself if it is deleted. Could that be done in OSX? Yes, but it would be much easier to find the culprit and much harder to install.
3. UNIX. Plain and simple. UNIX is the poster-child of security and OSX is a UNIX derivative.
Another point about OSX and Windows I find interesting are resource-consuming processes. If you install programs in Windows, there is a good chance you will have processes running even when the application isn't. That is one of my biggest annoyances with Windows. "Let's have a process that makes our application start up faster"... LET"S NOT! I know I sound like a Apple fan-boy. I do like Macs and I like OSX. I have some gripes and I don't dislike Windows. But I think that as Apple gains popularity, people spit on them because they are no longer underdogs. Let's just say what it is and keep intelligent points on the table.
And "People spit on them..."???? I disagree.. I like both systems, and honestly, it's retarded as all hell that I've even posted in here, since now Mac Superfans will assume I'm bashing Apple... I'm not, I love their Operating system, both Mac and Windows have their Pros and Cons... Do you want the most stable PC possible? Then Install All 3 of these: 1) Windows 7 2)Snow Leopard 3)Ubuntu........ on 3 different partitions. Now you can do ANYTHING with your PC. It takes a good setup though.... high-end nVidia VGA card, Intel CPU (I suggest at least a fast core 2 duo or better...) compatible DDR3 RAM, etc....
do the research... and you'll have a PC capable of A straight installation of OSX and will support updates from APPLE!... AND MS!... Since the hardware will match the configuration of the desired MAC PC you are building!... that's the best way.... Just be sure you get the right hardware, since although you can install any Operating System on just about any of the new (in the last few years) PCs.. (I've beens successful with a ACER APIRE X1200 w/ a AMD CPU!)... the only problem is some hardware won't work properly, some functions might not work, etc....
All I'm saying is I like both operating systems, neither of them suck (I'm referring to OS X and Windows 7... I used UBUNTU and it's less stable than either of the other two)... but having all three and using 3rd party utilities, you can access files between them all....
So Having at least Windows 7 and OS X on one PC is better...
Which is Better? BOTH!... That's the point of having a HACKINTOSH
That's why it's fun to build, at least that's my opinion.
I would say, that if you can afford the Mac you want, don't mind paying more for the hardware (weigh the troubleshooting/support offered by mac VS Windows OS, Gaming, Specific Software, what the PC is for, etc..) then A Mac is a great PC. Now, on the other hand, if you are so inclined, Keep in mind that if you want to dual boot.. Either can be a good option as well!.. just spec out the hardware specs of the Mac or PC and be sure it's all compatible w/ both and you'll have the absolute best PC money can buy!... and remember stay about a year behind the "bleeding-edge" in hardware technology in most cases, it'll save you money and greif.
Oh, by the way, flynflip- you know the best workarounds for these two things: ???
1) onboard nVidia geForce 8200 vga
2) "reset function doesn't work (sleep works, but not on LCD
-I'm using a 40" bravia LCD
??? My "iHac" is an Acer Aspire X1200 Desktop PC.
Thanks... Have a great week everyone
I don't mean to come across as an A-hole. hehe..
my hackintosh been running for a moth now,(10.6.7)
and i love it waaaaay better then windows 7.
its a tough road but rewards are many and not to difficult.
my system is: msi x58m mobo /i7950/12 gig ddr3 /2 500gb drives/
geforce gts 240 ..
used multibeast/iboot method(tonymacx86.com)
fully functional and stable with minimum fuss.
Out of desperation I tried to install Leopard 10.5.6 on it and to my surprise I was successful. With a few tweaks I was able to get the OS working and it recognized his sound card, Wifi card, video etc.
I told my cousin to give this new (to him) operating system a try and it has now been 3 months and he has not had a single problem.
Bottom line use the tools (OS) that works the best for the job or situation you find yourself in. I cannot afford a real MAC so this was a way for me to try out the MAC OS on s budget. I have no complaints. I use windows for certain specialty applications as mentioned above and I use the MAC OS for everything else!
I'm currently working on bringing up a Sandy Bridge Hackintosh, using an ASUS P8P67 mobo and 2600K processor, but things are not going as smoothly as they did with the hardware I used in this article.
Genuine Macs are of course more reliable and less hassle than Hackintoshes, but for folks wanting expandable systems who don't want to pay thousands of dollars for outdated Mac Pros, a Hackintosh is the only real option right now.
As for 6 core processors, they'd require an Intel X79 motherboard (well, an X58 if you have an old 980X), and Hackintosh development on X79 is still in its infancy. I'd recommend sticking with a 2500K or 2600K CPU and checking on the tonymacx86 forums for motherboard that people have had success with.
I run Windows 7 under Parallels on my Hackintosh and it works very well.