Mac OSX Leopard on PC Rig?

  • Thayk
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 480
  • Loc: Durianburg, Philippines. Spent time in South Pole

Post 3+ Months Ago

Being among the millions who are getting excited to taste the OS of the future, i fumbled to ask: Do Leopard run on PCs intended for Windows? The question emanates from the fact that new breeds of Mac are already Intel-based. Do my questions holds ground? If the new OSX do run on PC rigs, would it be as easy as flushing my Windows Vista-run rig then install the Leoprd seamlessly? Any knowlegable opinions would be highly appreciated.
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post 3+ Months Ago

  • bleepnik
  • Professor
  • Professor
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 971
  • Loc: South Jersey, US

Post 3+ Months Ago

People have been known to get OS X running on Windows-based Intel machines, but it's piracy and you won't find info about it here. Even if the OS were technically cable of being run on non-Apple hardware, doing so violates the EULA.
  • Thayk
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 480
  • Loc: Durianburg, Philippines. Spent time in South Pole

Post 3+ Months Ago

why? does the EULA provides that Leopard should only installed in Mac? if that's so, Apple may have missed the opportunity of a bigger potential market.

Experience in installing OSX on PC is not that smooth. Drivers is the big problem.


But then i deduce, buying an OSX and installing on PC rigs is not a piracy. It may violate EULA, but its not piracy.
  • bleepnik
  • Professor
  • Professor
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 971
  • Loc: South Jersey, US

Post 3+ Months Ago

Leopard has to be hacked to be installed on non-Apple hardware. Whatever you want to call it, it's illegal.
  • kc0tma
  • o|||||||o
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 3318
  • Loc: Trout Creek, MT

Post 3+ Months Ago

http://www.informationweek.com/shared/p ... =202603020

But yes, when you buy Leopard, you are agreeing NOT to do that kind of thing.

I am kind of looking forward to leopard. I am going to wait a couple months before I buy just to be safe. I've got a couple third party x11 programs that apparently run a little rough under 10.5, so I think I will let those get fixed before I buy.
  • spork
  • Brewmaster
  • Silver Member
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 6251
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Post 3+ Months Ago

My roommate just bought it. It's gorgeous. Nearly every part of the OS (visual-wise) uses Core Animation now, and it's spectacular.
  • kc0tma
  • o|||||||o
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 3318
  • Loc: Trout Creek, MT

Post 3+ Months Ago

I am very very tempted to do it. Other than that X11 third party software thing, the only other problem I've heard of is pretty stupid. Oh no! The firewall is turned off by default! It's insecure, everybody panic! ...so then why don't you just turn it on? Duh!
  • Thayk
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 480
  • Loc: Durianburg, Philippines. Spent time in South Pole

Post 3+ Months Ago

Again, another temptation to slash my budget for an 800cc bike im planning to buy this dec. A friend introduced a new desktop supercomputer in the name of Mac PRO 8 cores which is bundled with the new leopard. Simply irrestible!
Hope Apple would offer free hot fixes for that minor glitches, kcotma, so i wont regret opting for a lesser displacement bike in favor of a leopard running on an 8 core machine. Whew Leopard! Why cant Microsoft create a better Os?
  • kc0tma
  • o|||||||o
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 3318
  • Loc: Trout Creek, MT

Post 3+ Months Ago

I have been reading a bit about those x11 things, and it seems to be a bug in the Leopard X11 itself, but there has already been a patch released. So maybe I will think about putting $130 aside and get myself a birthday present next week. That 8 core mac pro...holy cow! I've spec'ed that one out more than once in the mac store, but I just don't have the thousands and thousands of dollars to get it. It's getting to the point with hard drive speeds and memory capacity and processor throughput that the computers are soooooo fast, us humans are the bottleneck now.
  • Thayk
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 480
  • Loc: Durianburg, Philippines. Spent time in South Pole

Post 3+ Months Ago

kc0tma wrote:
That 8 core mac pro...holy cow! I've spec'ed that one out more than once in the mac store, but I just don't have the thousands and thousands of dollars to get it. It's getting to the point with hard drive speeds and memory capacity and processor throughput that the computers are soooooo fast, us humans are the bottleneck now.


You are right kcotma, "we humans are the bottleneck now". Software developers have a grand time pacing up with those hardwares. where are the voice recognition technology? the mathematical modeling algorithm for hurricane predictions? simulation forecast for global virus outbreak? c'mon! Mac Pro has given us the power tool, we need those applications fast.....

by the way, I have just realized this machine isnt for my bedroom. the price tag is soooo much out of my budget. maybe the best way to get a touch of this machine is to prod my office to buy one. New 8-core Mac Pro would be great in Remote Sensing and GIS solutions....
  • kc0tma
  • o|||||||o
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 3318
  • Loc: Trout Creek, MT

Post 3+ Months Ago

Yeah, we got a cool machine with two dual core processors for one of our civil engineers at work, 4 gigs ram, SLi video cards, and dual 24 inch monitors. He doesn't totally need that much power just for running autocad, but his department was willing to pay for it so we got quotes and ordered it (something like 4 grand I think). And as far as the hurricane modeling goes, there is already stuff to do that...if you can afford an IBM Blue Gene supercomputer. I remember playing around with 3d modeling of weather system stuff on the national weather service website not too long ago. And there is the Boinc thing too, you sign up with them and install their software, and while your computer is idle, it downloads raw data and processes it and uploads it when ever it finishes. Thats basically just cloud computing. That 8 core mac pro would be sooo cool, I'm drooling just thinking about it. And you'de have to get at least two big monitors to go with it too.
  • kc0tma
  • o|||||||o
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 3318
  • Loc: Trout Creek, MT

Post 3+ Months Ago

Step by step:
http://lifehacker.com/software/hack-att ... 321913.php
  • AnarchY SI
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2521
  • Loc: /usr/src/MI

Post 3+ Months Ago

Thayk wrote:
Why cant Microsoft create a better Os?

because they're microsoft..? lol the first product they make that doesn't suck will be a vacuum cleaner..
  • JasonStanley
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • JasonStanley
  • Posts: 124
  • Loc: London, England

Post 3+ Months Ago

AnarchY SI wrote:
Thayk wrote:
Why cant Microsoft create a better Os?

because they're microsoft..? lol the first product they make that doesn't suck will be a vacuum cleaner..


I would say you have a very narrow minded view. Apple design's its operating systems for specific hardware and thus it is optimised for the systems it is running on. Windows will run on anything. Thus windows will always struggle to compare to the mac OSX.

The mac is more secure but this is down to the fact that only like 3% of people have a mac. There are less viruses for it and thus it is less vulnerable to attack. If the mac was the main OS then perhaps apples security record would be a little more patchy.
  • kc0tma
  • o|||||||o
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 3318
  • Loc: Trout Creek, MT

Post 3+ Months Ago

JasonStanley wrote:
Windows will run on anything. Thus windows will always struggle to compare to the mac OSX.

There are less viruses for it and thus it is less vulnerable to attack. If the mac was the main OS then perhaps apples security record would be a little more patchy.


Windows don't run on an PPC macs, and it only runs on the intel macs because apple made bootcamp and has appropriate drivers. Something interesting-when I was shopping for a laptop, I did a part for part comparison between the macbook and other laptops, the only one that had a pretty-darn-close hardware setup was a sony vaio, and it costed quite a bit more money.

And as far as the mac OS being less vulnerable, that is a pretty big bad misconception that everybody seems to have thanks to the mac vs. pc commercials. It just has different vulnerabilities than a windows pc. Lets imagine that a hacker is a cowboy, and that cowboy is out in the wild west (the internet) hunting, he see's a bunny rabbit (the macs) and a buffalo (PCs), which is his easiest target to shoot? The buffalo is bigger than the bunny and has more meat for food (more people usually equals more money), so he hunts for the buffalo. Since there are only 3%(?) of people using macs, that other 95-97% is an easier target, and the hacker can just do a huge mass attack, and he is bound to get what he wants out of at least a few victims.
  • AnarchY SI
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 2521
  • Loc: /usr/src/MI

Post 3+ Months Ago

JasonStanley wrote:
I would say you have a very narrow minded view.

how can you tell that when i haven't expressed my point of view? its a joke.. lrn 2 laf.
I dont use nor do I own a mac. i have a pc that runs - tah dah! winblows.. and linux. i've been using windows since i started using computers (aside from playing games when i was little on the commodore >.<) and i've been using and experimenting with as many of distros of linux that i can get my hands on since 2004. i've worked on, setup, and done troubleshooting on macs when i worked for the IT department at the college, and i created countless images for ghosting the new pc's we'd get in and those images were - of windows :] and a butt load of software that would always slow every computer we'd get. no matter how much ram, how fast the hard drive, how speedy the proc with a zillion cores.. etc. so obviously i'm not a mac "elitist", people are used to windows, they're comfortable with windows, a good portion of them dont know theres anything except windows, and a lot of people couldn't grasp using another os. those are the people that should be using windows. soooo...where does the narrow minded view come in? idk...sounds to me like you're speaking from your rear >.<

JasonStanley wrote:
Apple design's its operating systems for specific hardware and thus it is optimised for the systems it is running on. Windows will run on anything. Thus windows will always struggle to compare to the mac OSX.

while we're making judgments, i'd have to say thats a pretty ignorant statement. what version of windows? vista wont run on my 900MHz P3 with 256MB of ram and a 10 gig hard drive. and vista ultimate wont run for s**t on plenty of peoples current hardware. however, linux will run on my 900MHz P3 and it will look, in my opinion, prettier and will probably run faster than a pc with 1gb ram and a 3ghz proc running vista. now you could go ahead and throw xp on the poor old P3, but thats old news. who cares what came out in 2001? especially when i can use a linux distro that just came out with a new version in october.
so given vista requires at LEAST 512MB of ram which is a JOKE if you actually want to use it.. it requires 15GB of hdd space, etc etc how is microsoft NOT designing windows to run on specific hardware? apples OS works with PPC and Intel procs with a patch to make it work with amd.. microsofts OS only works with intel and amd (x86) procs. apple - 3, microsoft - 2.. =\

i'm bored.. have fun :]
  • kc0tma
  • o|||||||o
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 3318
  • Loc: Trout Creek, MT

Post 3+ Months Ago

Back only 10 years ago, I would have never used a mac, just too proprietary then. Nowadays, they are better. Anymore, it is microsoft as a brand of hardware/software that is keeping a leash on things. They kind of have their eggs in the wrong basket, but have (semi) good intentions. Like with the open document format that the shiny new office 2007 natively uses (office 2007 can eat doo doo for the record!), they say it is suppose to use xml or something, I don't know, but it is suppose to be better suited for integrating into production...but only if you do one of two things: get a volume license for office 2007 and upgrade all 350 computers on your network, OR you can go around to 340 of your 350 computers and put a patch for office 2003 so that they work with the .docx files. Or alternatively, you can just get open office and not have to worry about it anymore.

My point here is this: Apple made a smart move when they went unix based for OS X and started producing intel based computers.
  • georanson
  • Beginner
  • Beginner
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 53
  • Loc: florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

look up OSX86

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 18 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
 

© 1998-2014. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.