Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 218 posts

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#11

Post by peatmoss »

For people wed to commercial design apps, I can totally understand the draw of running macOS on commodity hardware. But as someone who skews more to the hacker end of the spectrum and doesn't depend on commercial software, the day-to-day qualitative experience of Linux is head and shoulders above macOS these days. Ditto OpenBSD, etc. I'll never go back.

At least it does if you've already come around to using a desktop formfactor. For me I get lots of physical RAM (R / Pandas) a mechanical keyboard, and one of those straight-out-of-the-90s Logitech marble mouses that you'll pry from my cold dead fingers. Hardware support in Linux/*BSD for any Intel graphics based system is a total non-issue.

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#12

Post by imron »

protomyth wrote: post #8

How about Apple create a "Custom Hardware" program ala their Developer program and basically charge $99+ a year for a legal install usb image. Then they can skip building a Pro and concentrate on the portables and iMac they like.

Because the cost for supporting random hardware will probably run to more than they make from running such a program.

Not to mention Apple doesn't seem to care about the developer and/or professional consumer anymore.

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#13

Post by paulrpotts »

Absolutely. I have a 2008 Mac Pro and it is still going strong, an absolute workhorse of a machine with 4 hard drives; incredibly reliable. At least, it was incredibly reliable with Snow Leopard, but MacOS X has been a bit downhill from there as far as reliability of the audio subsystem. The only real downsides to this machine have been that it is loud, which is problematic when using it for recording. But I would happily buy a modernized version of the same machine, and I'd be _especially_ happy to do so if it was much quieter.

If Apple offered me a dead-silent Mac Mini, even one with not much CPU capability, I would use it for tracking -- that is, right in the room where I'm recording. Also for Skype stuff for podcast recording, and streaming; probably two of them. These machines don't need to have a lot of CPU to record; they only have to do a modest amount of live audio processing. They don't have to run dozens to hundreds of instances of plug-ins like when I'm mixing.

Then the Mac Pro can go in the room where I'm mixing and mastering. So quiet is important but dead silence in the Pro is not really a requirement for me.

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#14

Post by icefox »

walterbell wrote: post #5

HP has stepped up to compete with the sealed Mac Mini. Their "Z2 Mini Workstation" is small, has user upgradeable RAM/disk, optional Xeon and Nvidia GPU, and can drive six monitors, http://www8.hp.com/us/en/workstations/z2mini.html

Can you run OS X on it?

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#15

Post by Xyzodiac »

peatmoss wrote: post #11

For people wed to commercial design apps, I can totally understand the draw of running macOS on commodity hardware. But as someone who skews more to the hacker end of the spectrum and doesn't depend on commercial software, the day-to-day qualitative experience of Linux is head and shoulders above macOS these days. Ditto OpenBSD, etc. I'll never go back. At least it does if you've already come around to using a deskto…

It's not just design, there's also a heavy reliance on Mac only (or at least Mac and Windows only) pro video and audio programs. I will say though, I've always loved running Linux on desktops where this isn't the use case.

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#16

Post by walterbell »

imron wrote: post #12
protomyth wrote: post #8

How about Apple create a "Custom Hardware" program ala their Developer program and basically charge $99+ a year for a legal install usb image. Then they can skip building a Pro and concentrate on the portables and iMac they like.

Because the cost for supporting random hardware will probably run to more than they make from running such a program. Not to mention Apple doesn't seem to care about the developer and/or professional consumer anymore.

There is a middle ground between "random hardware" and one Apple device, clearly evidenced by the Hackintosh community. The difference is that Apple can more effectively support a whitelist of components than the Hackintosh community that is already doing it on a volunteer basis.

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#17

Post by eropple »

peatmoss wrote: post #11

For people wed to commercial design apps, I can totally understand the draw of running macOS on commodity hardware. But as someone who skews more to the hacker end of the spectrum and doesn't depend on commercial software, the day-to-day qualitative experience of Linux is head and shoulders above macOS these days. Ditto OpenBSD, etc. I'll never go back. At least it does if you've already come around to using a deskto…

Uhhhh. I put my time in with a Linux desktop for nearly a decade until a job bought me a Mac and there's no way I'd go back. And I think my "hacker end of the spectrum" bona fides are pretty good--but those bona fides aren't incompatible with a preference for a pleasing UX that has been considered with users in mind, which for my money no open-source desktop environment has even approached (and I have my beefs with OS X but they're small fry compared to even just "why is there no terminal emulator on par with iTerm2 in 2017?"). Wanting to enjoy using the thing you spend much of your waking life in front of is a pretty reasonable ask, and the indicative give-a-damn of well-thought-out polished experiences is worth it to me to the point where I don't even bother to boot the way faster desktop with way more RAM that sits under my desk when I can just plug in my MacBook Pro and everything just works. (Also that the window system doesn't randomly lose heads, which still happens on my dual-boot desktop, in 2017, to the point where I don't even bother with it. I'll probably Hackintosh that next time I'm bored.)

Casting your own preferences as implicitly "hacker" and pulling out some "qualitative experience" (which among nerds is best read as "subjective preferences") stuff is pretty silly.

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#18

Post by iainmerrick »

mjn wrote: post #7
iplaw wrote: post #2

This is what they used to do with the venerable Mac Pro tower, built as recently as Mid 2012. The heavy gauge aluminum construction was a work of art. People pick up Mac Pro G5 shells and use them to build tables, benches, etc. I am hoping that Apple returns to this sort of design philosophy. It's quite frustrating that many of their iMacs are not (easily) user upgradable. Upgrading an HDD to an SSD requires cutting…

The current philosophy is pretty solidly in line with the historical Apple design philosophy, so I wouldn't necessarily expect it to change. The iMac is basically today's evolution of the original Mac [1], a single-piece computer/monitor combination with no user-serviceable parts. Jobs said in 1984 that hardware customization is unnecessary to support, because "customization really is mostly software now". The Mac Pr…

You're cherry-picking. That is definitely one of Apple's design philosophies, and it has definitely worked very well for the iPhone and iPad. But not all their computers have followed that style. The Mac II launched in 1987(!) and was very influential. And as the earlier commenter mentioned, before the "trash can" redesign, the Mac Pro was easy to open and had plenty of ports.

Trying to apply that sealed appliance approach to every single product is sometimes a mistake, as demonstrated by the Mac Pro misstep.

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#19

Post by eddieroger »

panglott wrote: post #4

Why not allow developers to build their own Macs? The situation today in completely different than 1995-1996, when Apple briefly allowed Macintosh clones, before Jobs killed the project because they were cannibalizing Apple's high-end desktop sales. Now high-end desktop sales are such a small part of Apple's line that they let the products stagnate for years. Are Mac Pro motherboards really going to compete with note…

Drivers.

Apple likes the control over the hardware and software, and packages all of the drivers needed to run macOS on any blessed instance of Apple hardware currently supported (and maybe even ever created, since Intel). If you wanted, and I have done this before, you can clone a Mac made HDD and boot it from any other Mac you can get your hands on, and other than the hardware swap it's basically a reboot. If Apple let me build a tower and drop anything I wanted in to it, they can't guarantee that anymore, and even if it's just amongst developers, it hurts their brand experience.

Re: Modern “Hackintoshes” show that Apple should probably just build a Mac tower

#20

Post by grandalf »

imron wrote: post #12
protomyth wrote: post #8

How about Apple create a "Custom Hardware" program ala their Developer program and basically charge $99+ a year for a legal install usb image. Then they can skip building a Pro and concentrate on the portables and iMac they like.

Because the cost for supporting random hardware will probably run to more than they make from running such a program. Not to mention Apple doesn't seem to care about the developer and/or professional consumer anymore.

Even if once each year Apple picked a "blessed" list of commodity hardware (one motherboard, one graphics card, etc.) that was supported, it would still be a major improvement over the status quo. Apple could pick partly based on the MSRP of the hardware or charge a licensing fee to the winner.

It's just such a shame that getting a high performance desktop that runs OSX is such a hassle.

Post reply on HN