Apple OSX for x86 leaked and cracked

Mac had a better computer than IBM back in the day. The reason IBM PC's became so much more popular was because you could clone them. That made it much cheaper for people to use PC's, so more ppl had PC's, more software got written for them, and they became dominant. Of course, IBM no longer makes computers, even if their standard is still dominant.

heres what i guess could happen..

windows longhorn WOULD have been the fall of M$, especially with its high standards. people dont want to learn a new environment every new OS upgrade, they want it similar, but slowly change. Itd be like going from windows 3.1 to XP right away, youd be all "Wtf mate", or likle going from os7 to osx.4..its sorta the same, but everythings moved around

Windows vista just bought them some time. your average idiot wont see its the =98SE, and will run out and buy it.

Mac will do 1 of 2 things:

1. Theyll come through with making x86 macs to dual boot. Best way to get rid of an enemy is make him a friend (M$)...then squash him! Itd let people slowlly ween off of xp onto os x. I bet theyll have options to dual boot before you even buy it. But as i said before, on osx you can run any linux program. CXOffice, WINE, Cedega, all can run (yes i know its BSD, but ive seen people run wine on it, play enemy territory and doom 3 on BSD, etc). Ok, so now you have a base to run M$ on osx. I wouldnt put it past jobs to help develop a windows compatability kit...you get a company with a lot of $$ to put into a aproject like wine, youll see some results....lets not forget, you get all linux programs. Thats 3 OSes in one....plus running all PPC apps.

That IMO, would slowly kill M$. Wouldnt make os x dominant like windows is now, but itd take atleast a decade for a real notice...and personally, alot of people are/were going to switch before jobs started screwing around with his x86 deal. Now no one wants to buy a PPC mac for fear of it being obsolete really quick

2. Steve realizes his software will just be hacked. Plain and simple. No matter what he does to protect it, it will be defeated. Im guessing hed release the first wave of x86 macs before he figures that out. Then im sure he'd probably offer a recall/exchange program. No harm has been done yet. Companies like maxon, discreet, adobe...so what, they checked the "Intel" box on Xcode for compiling and wasted a few hours building a program that could be discarded, because the PPC version already works.

So, in short, there itll be a huge hit, or itll just get trampled..i t hink itll just get trampled.

THEN, i say linux will have its time. M$ cant rule forever, in the words of james headfield, "the higher you are, the farther you fall"...Steve isnt as greedy as bill gates, but he'll do his stupid share im sure. Overcharge (more than now)...im guessing steve could defeat M$, then F things up big time for himself, and before M$ can come back, people turn to linux (cause theyd have a taste of it on OS X)..well oone can hope

Thats just my .02. id like to see someone new on everyones desktop other than bill gates. But i know businesses are holding on to windows for a LONG tiime.

Then again, that could change. Federal Reserve Bank of cleveland is getting REALLY fed up with dell and windows 2k/xp. My mother flew out to kansas for a meeting, which totally was a waste of time. Everyone could log in, but she couldnt. She'd get in, someone else would get punted. Then XP turned off the network adaptor...

then i guess their new software wont run, after it just did 2 days ago..

in short, theyre really regretting their contract with dell. I think if you had one or 2 major businesses switch over (with the help of some windows emulators) youd have a good match against microsoft.

Am I the only one who thinks it's strange that we can talk all we want about how we've got osx86 working, but we can't post a screenshot? A true screenshot would look hardly different than a normal osx screenshot, if at all. Maybe if you had a picture showing a dell latitude running osx or something like that it'd be iffy.. But then if it came down to it, you were just running PearPC full screen!

cause that would admit you to breaking the law, and if we get someone browsing these forums, they mite A. get the wrong idea, B. report the user, etc..itd just be bad..

however, if you wanna, screenshot, i got one for you.:

Is this working on any AMD systems? Does it even matter? I mean a CPU is a CPU, and since the cpu detection chip has been bypassed, it should technically be doable on an amd processor right?

in theory maybe it could. how youd get it to, beats us.

Venice cores have sse3, don't they? Wouldn't that work?

ELMO!!!

This has indeed been reported as working well on Venice cores. Most AC 97 sound is supported as well after a small change to a config file in a kernel extension package, and major network chipsets (Realtek, 3com, etc. - definitely not nVidia or Marvell) work too. Unless you have the same video device as the devkit boxes, you're restricted to VESA, and if you have a Radeon that OS X thinks it supports, you'll have to remove the ATI drivers in safe mode before you can get past a kernel panic on normal boot.

I saw benchmarks using XBench 1.2 (a universal binary) of an overclocked Venice box, and it beat out my 1 GHz Powerbook in every category - even OpenGL (under VESA software acceleration!).

Yes it will, for a fact, work on Athlon 64s with SSE2 and/or SSE3. Yes the AC 97 should work fine. Just have to add one line to a config file. As far as benchmarks and performance, it will perform just a well, if not better, than XP or Linux does. It will be much faster than the G5s.

One of the reasons I've always hated OSX is that it's so damn slow. Even on new hardware, I find it slower than linux is on my pentium 133. I doubt it will be faster than linux. It's too bloated, too many bells and whistles. BSD w/o the bells and whistles is comparable to linux in speed, so I don't see how it could be faster when you add in all that crap.

OSX / Linux (pending on which kernal) have both been comapred to Windows lately because they are getting so bloated trying to add all these features in.

Linux is fast - if you dont use the GUI and do all etxt base d- but once you get into the "desktop" set up for it - it can crawl

the one time i installed fedora core 3 - i had a pIII 533 and 256mb of ram - the GUI crawleddddddddddd until i installed anotehr 256 for 512 total, then things ran smooth.

Isn't linux being targeted more towards the dekstop market nowdays anyway (yes I realise its still there for server etc), but just with all th GUI 'enhancements'

It's not that linux is slow, it's that fedora is slow. Use a faster distro, faster window manager, less bloat, etc. This is not a problem intrinsically with linux, it has to do with the philosophy of some companies that make linux distros for the masses.

I heard it said once that the main difference between linux and windows is that the general direction of development of windows is determined by the stupidest users. Everything is made to be easier, more automatic, more moron-proof, and less secure as a result. On the other hand, the direction of development of linux is determined by the most intelligent users. Ultimate quality is not sacrificed for ease of use, and uniformity is not required, choice is maintained, even if it confuses the less than smart people.

you know, if youve demo'd Tiger on a dual G5, you will notice a huge speed increase. I did. Going from OSX.3 to OSX.4 which takes advantage of 64bit computing is nice. Im not saying it compares to gentoo or a fast linux distro, but for general operations, its pretty quick.

Id install gentoo on here, then compile Enemy Territory, but i dont wanna F with the partitions on my drives..i like linux either being on its own drive, or its own folder...no way i can do that?

It'll work on non-SSE3 CPUs as well, but is slow and good luck finding drivers. This is only for the gifted hacker/programmers to tinker with. By the time it comes out, most of us will have dual-core CPUs anyway. I think it and Vista will probably be launching simultaneously. Unfortunately, after I leave my present company, I'll probably no longer have vendors kissing our keister, nor have betas to legally play with.

I used it on some PC's at school, and it took like 4-5 mins to open a web browser.

It looks promising thats for sure, but it will not be to much worry for big old bill gates. The Mac Os is great, but for people lilke me that like to game every so often and a lot of people are in that boat so its understandable that Microsoft could lose some market share if this goes retail but not a whole lot until there is wide support for both, then I might think of switching.

If Apple released an x86 compatible version of OS*, it would be great. I'd definitely try it if the price was right.

MRD said:

It's not that linux is slow, it's that fedora is slow. Use a faster distro, faster window manager, less bloat, etc. This is not a problem intrinsically with linux, it has to do with the philosophy of some companies that make linux distros for the masses.

I heard it said once that the main difference between linux and windows is that the general direction of development of windows is determined by the stupidest users. Everything is made to be easier, more automatic, more moron-proof, and less secure as a result. On the other hand, the direction of development of linux is determined by the most intelligent users. Ultimate quality is not sacrificed for ease of use, and uniformity is not required, choice is maintained, even if it confuses the less than smart people.

Click to expand...

Very true

Fedora is the disrto aimed @ "desktop" users, it is suppsoed to be the "windows" of the linux world so to say - i like the idea as it gives people an easier way to get into linux BUT it also shows just how hard it is to make an O/S for the less then smart people and still have it run so incredibly fast.

it's working quite well in native mode on an overclocked Venice 3500+ system of someone I know, uh... legally too.

sound is something that's still being worked on though, the onboard sound of the DFI NF4-SLIDR doesn't work straight away with OSX x86