OSx86
I haven't posted on the successes of OSx86 yet, and I really hadn't planned to. I've been silent about it becauyse I've talked about the Apple/Intel hanky-panky here and here, and that seemed like enough. I also kept quiet because I don't think it's a big deal whatsoever, which I will elaborate on below.
However, a comment following my plea for a vintage Mac informed me that I do need to chime in. Here's what the commenter wrote:
Looks like some nerds have it running on some crappy Dell - and it runs faster than on the Apple!The commenter linked to this article on Wired News. Since this seems to be the most mainstream article about the hack out there, it may be the only news you (or at least this one commenter) have read about the issue. The article glosses over a few important details to sound more sensational. Allow me, your favorite OS X evangelist, to clear things up.
It's the end of the world as you know it but at least I feel fine.
I would like all of the average computer users out there to read the following paragraph that I have written explaining in a nutshell how the hackers got OS X running on a beige-box PC:
The version of OS X that is floating around is a version sold solely for programmers and written to run on a machine only available to registered programmers. That system that is built around a stock Intel motherboard. This developer version of OS X is locked to the motherboard through the TPM chip on that motherboard. The developer version also requires a processor capable of SSE3 and a VPU capable of processing Quartz Extreme. These walls have been torn down by hacking a kernel extension to circumvent TPM and avoiding any hardware limitations by running OS X in VMWare.
Now I ask the average computer users who just read that paragraph: Did any of that make sense to you? I doubt it. I haven't blogged about this development because it doesn't matter to the average computer user. Running OS X on a machine not manufactured by Apple is hard to do. Even I don't understand the instructions. The average computer user is not going to do this.
Furthermore, no one has any idea what the Intel-powered Macs sold to the general public will contain. It is my theory—not hypothesis, as this is based on historical evidence—that these machines will have motherboards designed by Apple, not Intel. These motherboards will contain a TPM chip (which is not as big of a deal as a lot of people think), no doubt about it. However, it is not just TPM that will block OS X from installing on a $199 eMachine from Office Depot. My hypothesis—yes, this is a hypothesis—is that OS X will require Apple's version of EFI, Intel's replacement for BIOS. The only current versions of Windows that boot with EFI are server products and the 64-bit version of XP. It won't be until Windows Vista comes out with a golf clap and a yawn that consumer versions of PCs with EFI will hit stores. And even then, getting OS X to run on your Dell will require flashing Dell's EFI with Apple's EFI, risk ruining your computer, and praying that Apple's EFI knows how to communicate with Dell's bridges and busses.
Again, the average computer user has no idea what I'm talking about here, which is why none of this is a big deal to Apple. The people who actually buy computers instead of building them are not going to go to the trouble of jumping through hoops to get OS X up and running on a Dell. It's just silly.
As to the commenter's real point—that OS X is running faster on Intel processors—well, duh. Why do you think Apple is switching? It has been Apple's curse for so long; their processor vendor leapfrogs Intel, then can't deliver in quantity or innovate fast enough because the market is too small. Each iteration of PowerPC processors -- 603e, G3, G4, G5 -- every time, it jumped far ahead of Intel. And every time, Intel caught up and surpassed. Now the pieces have fallen into place for Apple to switch with as few hiccups for consumers as possible.
I, for one, welcome our new Mactel overlords.
7 Comments:
What do you mac headz use for a eucharist?
(Fingers in ears...) He's just trying to piss you off. Don't enable him. Don't enable him. Don't enable him...
Hate to be the gas can near the fire, but the 'average' computer user doesn't know how to rip the guts out of Netscape, make it skinnable, modular, and call it Firefox either. But it happened. The point isn't that average users need to be able to make a PC hack of OSX. The point is that once some computer geek can do it they will soon find a way to make it available to the public. OSX is software - excellent, Unix-based, Linux-esque software - but software nonetheless. It can be copied, hacked, and told to avoid Apple's special TPM chip altogether. Which one would think you would be thrilled about. When Apple went PC a few months back you screamed to the top of your lungs that it wasn't about the hardware but about being able to use OSX. Soon you will be able to use OSX on a real computer for a quarter of the price. Hooray!
Instead you seem to find a way to continue worship of your evil Apple overlords. Hmmm. It's a Mac thing.
Three years ago this was the conversation I had with all too many Macheads:
Me: But aren't Intel chips faster for less money than the Mac?
Machead: You WOULD think so being an ignorant cumguzzler who knows nothing of throughput and every other advantage of the PowerPC...
This conversation changed a few months ago:
Me: Won't Apple lose all the "advantages" of the PowerPC now that they are running Intel chips?
Machead: Lose? You festering anal sore. Don't you know that Intel chips have always been faster , Apple will be better than ever, and it is all about OSX anyway.
I imagine this is the conversation I'll be having two years from now:
Me: You were right about OSX. It's a great operating system - especially since I'm running it on my three year old Dell at one and a half times the speed of a DRM/TPM crippled ridiculously expensive new Mac.
Machead: Yeah, well MY computer looks like a lamp! So lick my nuts!
Don't worry though, Arlo. We all know that Apple always knew there weren't any WMD's but really went in to liberate the... Oh, no, that's the storyline of the other corporate ass kissers who change their tune every five minutes as it suits them. :) What's important is that you are happy and if you like paying an extra thousand bucks for your computers than that's exactly what you should do. Because you're good enough, smart enough, and gosh darn it people like you.
I don't think Apple does everything right. They just do more things right than another company.
But, sure, maybe I do fall victim to the reality distortion field a bit too much. I completely agree with you on that. I'm no more a Mac zealot than, oh, a Linux zealot. But I'm a zealot. There. I admitted it.
If you're a 3D Animator or an engineer or an architect, or you like to play your video games with huge FPS rates, you're kind of S.O.L. when it comes to a Mac. The options are very limited on the Mac for these kinds of users. I'll freely admit that, too.
But I don't think my opinion has changed one bit. Are there still advantages to PowerPC over Intel? Hell yes. Unfortunately, they're losing in the one category that counts to anyone: speed. Is a G5 faster than a similarly clocked P4? Yes. But is there a 3.8GHz G5? No. You don't have to be stupid to see what's going on here, and as I said above, this has happened too many times to Apple, and therefore too many times to their core customers. Am I disappointed? Sure. PowerPC and that Velocity Engine thing would have made Photoshop zing had Apple's vendor been able to keep up with it's competitors. Oh, wait, IBM didn't have any competitors for the G5. Silly me. Apple made the decision they had to make, and as long as I can still run OS X and it can keep up with me, I don't care what's under the hood.
As far as OSx86 is concerned, the point I was trying to make is that I simply don't think the commercial version of OS X for Intel is going to be as easy to crack, and it will certainly be harder to install.
But maybe I'm wrong. And if I'm wrong, I'll freely admit that it's a good thing. If people want to run pirated versions of OS X on their Dells, awesome. Anything to get Windows the fuck out of our society.
Plus, if the hackers figure out how to make it install easily and simply, Apple will have no other choice but to start lowering prices.
When kids start upgrading grandma's Dell with OS X, then Apple will have to lower their computer prices for when grandma has to replace that computer.
When Apple starts having to compete with HP because graphic designers are installing OS X on HP workstations, Apple will have to bring down the price of a Powermac.
Hell, OSx86 would make setting up and maintaining that music/email/web/backup server I want in my apartment a lot cheaper, and it would certainly be easier than setting it up with Linux. I might end up installing it on a $299 barebones PC, too, and gladly show it off to you and everyone I know.
But I simply don't think any of this is going to happen. I think (hope?) that future Apple machines will have newer parts than Dells at that point. Apple, unlike most computer manufacturers, don't have to wait for Microsoft to support Intel's latest gizmos. Therefore, Apple will be able to support newer processors and legacy-free chipsets before Dell ever will. OS X for Intel won't run on an OEM PC until they share the same parts. Think about how long after Apple introduced the very first iMac before USB was widespread in Windows machines. Two years? Three?
For this very reason, I must refute your assertion that in two years, brand new Macs will still be slower than Dells that are three-years older. Neither of us know what the future holds, but I suspect that Apple and Dell will be building machines out of basically the same parts at that point. I think we agree on that. But in most cases, Apple will most likely have newer, more advanced parts than Dell. Why would Apple's machine be slower than the Dell?
Finally, I appreciate aesthetics. Computers, and most electronics for that matter, are ugly. If it has to sit out, it may as well look good. That to me is worth extra money, just like it's worth it to the people who buy computers from Sony or Alienware.
Sure, I wear my love on my sleeve, but I don't think I'm being an unfair asshat. Many of us appreciate aesthetics. Many of us appreciate hassle-free computing. Many don't have the time, patience, or knowledge to flash a ROM and install a bootloader in order to shoehorn an OS onto a partitioned hard drive. For these reasons, Apple will always have a customer base for its computers, and it's only going to get bigger.
And if you or any of the hackers out there can figure out how to install OS X on any old PC, I welcome you as stepbrothers and stepsisters. I may have a machine in a closet doing the same thing. Maybe Fock will stop being such a dick about it and try it out himself.
Plus, I thought the second generation iMacs looked stupid.
We can continue this discussion here, Eric, but I promise never to post news about Apple products on this blog ever again. It leads to nothing but trouble.
Wha-? Eric, did you just equate Mac fanatics with Bush supporters? I'm impressed!
I think OSX is a real accomplishment. That it can be stripped, hacked and stolen, reduced to its essential parts and rebuilt because hey afterall it's just software, doesn't alter my opinion. You can also do a lot of things to a 1956 Chevy Bel Aire or to Mahler's fourth symphony. I understand that nothing is ever as good as it should be, but are you really saying that I shouldn't buy a Mac because there's something better out there? Are you kidding? That there are a lot of ways to make a Rio mp3 player every bit as good as an iPod? Are you kidding? That I ought to get up every morning and sit down in front of a Dell? Are you kidding? That the sum is always less than the parts? Surely you're kidding. You're kidding, right?
I'm NOT dissing OSX. I am sure it is fabulous software that is no less special for the fact that it can be run on any machine anywhere. I use Firefox as my browser and that can be run on any machine anywhere. I use Mepis as my OS and that can be run on any machine anywhere (and probably not nearly as well as OSX for that matter - I just like it. I'm peculiar that way.)
I have never met a graphic designer in my life that didn't use a Mac. I am certain they know what they are talking about and aren't using inferior tools just for style points. I have no doubt that Apple (like any other company - even Microsoft, I like the Xbox so much I read a whole book about it. That's super geekdom) has things it does better than anyone else. I don't hate Apple, Macs, or OSX. I don't care enough about any of those things to hate them.
I just find the whole Mac thing amusing. I like a lot of products I have purchased in my life I'm just not sure if I'm fanatical about any of them. I might be. Fanaticism is hard to see from the inside. I do spend far more time screwing with my computer than anyone has a right to do. Could be fanatical. It's just not a brand thing. So when I see a whole group of people truly passionate about a PRODUCT they BOUGHT and had no creative input into whatsoever it makes me curious. What is it about a Toyota Prius that makes their owners incapable of admitting the car has a kind of funny shape? Those people make Mac lovers look like weekend warriors. Why does Calvin sometimes piss on Ford and other times on Chevy? Those guys know deep down that most of the parts for either of those trucks are made overseas and the multinational corporations who sold those trucks don't give two shits whether Cleetus lives or dies, right? And Mac users know that it is just a fucking computer in fancy package, don't they?
Maybe not. And THAT to me is fascinating. So I post my little shitbag replies, think I'm a lot funnier than I am, and wait to see what others have to say. I guess that was a mistake on my part. Oh well. Live and learn.
One last thing...
The comparison to a neocon was the sort of grand exaggeration that both people who like me find charming. If it weren't for Godwin's law making it overly passe the comparison would have been to Hitler. It was intended to be ridiculous - not inflammatory - a fact I tried to note with the universal symbol for "I'm just talking out my big stupid ass here" - the smiley face :)
That is all. I swear a holy swear never to be funny in a jerky way again over the Internet. It just doesn't translate. If I go write that to myself a thousand times perhaps I'll finally remember.
Bye.
Post a Comment
<< Home