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

Why You Should Build a Hackintosh

martinhering.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–248 of 248 posts

Re: Why You Should Build a Hackintosh

#241

Post by jimnotgym »

krylon wrote: post #97
jimnotgym wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder start makes your setup so fragile? We have a similar number of Windows machines, and we would be doing nothing in IT this week if we were just answering support calls. We use WSUS for updates, and barely have to touch it? Again I don't have any problem with licensing. I tell a reseller what I want and review their response. No big deal?

> We use WSUS for updates So do we. But I have encountered my fair share of cases where an update to Windows or Office broke some third-party application. Once, and update for Office 2007 failed to register properly (but only on two machines), so after the reboot, Windows Update wanted to install that update again, followed by a reboot, etc. Once, an update to Office broke Autodesk Inventor, and reinstalling inventor…

> Windows 8.1 to crash regularly

When windows 8.1 came out, we stayed on Windows 7. When Windows 10 came out, we stayed on Windows 7. We downgraded each new machine to Windows 7. Last year we gave a power user Windows 10 to find out how it operated with our collection of third party software. Two more were added over the year. A year later we are rolling out Windows 10 across the estate. I think this is the answer, we run a conservative strategy with regards to OS versions. We went from XP, to 7 and then to 10 and skipped all of the experimental versions. don't get me wrong, I tried them all, I installed Windows 10 on my laptop the day it was available, but not on my domain...no way.

We let WSUS install critical updates when it wants to. I don't install much else without a good reason. AV updates have caused a few freezes that have meant a couple of reboots are in order, but not much else.

I use Kubuntu and Ubuntu server and I have had some really annoying update issues with them too. I used to have an Apple laptop that after updates would disable it's own wifi and need a reboot.

> Have you ever had to deal with, say, per-CPU vs. per-user licensing for SQL Server?

No, but if I did it would be licensed once and then stay the same for years. I do have Oracle, like you mentioned before. That has a very quirky license, but that hasn't left me anything to do for 3 years since it moved server. It did 7 years on the old server!

I think one of the secrets of enterprise IT is conservative versioning, "n-1 is the version you want", I was told some years ago. A normal PC at our place would be running Windows 7, ERP client, browsers, and Office 2010. A number run Adobe cc and other things I can't avoid. We are looking at moving to Office 365, but if we instead re-buy Office 2016 we will stick with it for years. Perhaps that is the secret? It seems like you are unable to run this conservatively in your environment?

Re: Why You Should Build a Hackintosh

#242

Post by extra88 »

PascLeRasc wrote: post #195
ageitgey wrote: post #122

I can tell you from experience that building a Hackintosh is a terrible idea for almost all people. I have no moral objection to it and I totally understand the motivation. Apple is completely failing to provide hardware that runs at a fraction of the performance you'd get from building a commodity $2500 AMD/Nvidia desktop even if you give Apple $7000 for a Pro model. Apple's platform especially sucks if you do anyth…

As an alternative, I can recommend getting a used tower Mac Pro and upgrading it. There's a ton of community info [1] [2] out on CPU, GPU, and RAM upgrading, and even the oldest 2006 model, the one I have, can run El Capitan, and the 2009-2010 models can do Mojave. There are guides for every configuration you could want and RAM is super cheap (even ECC!). You get as good a case or better than if you build a standard…

For multi-core operations, the 12 core Xeons still compare pretty well to newer Macs but are very poor for single core. The range of video cards on that site is surprisingly decent but the newer PCIe 3.0 cards will be limited by the PCIe 2.0 slot.

Re: Why You Should Build a Hackintosh

#243

Post by exadeci »

ageitgey wrote: post #214
locusm wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fud - buying the right parts means you'll have a working Hackintosh within about 30 to 60 minutes from start to finish. I'm typing this from a Hackintosh, my very first actually. All I did was follow the https://www.tonymacx86.com/ guides. No issues through all High Sierra updates, the nVidia drivers have been generally problem free too.

I'm glad you had a good experience! But it's also true that the most recent random macOS update thread on tonymac86.com (10.13.6, a minor update) has 44 pages of user comments ranging from the update worked perfectly to the computer completely won't boot and kernel panics - and all manner of issues in between. If you are using the computer to do paid work and can't gamble like on every update, I think you'd be crazy…

> the computer completely won't boot and kernel panics - and all manner of issues in between.

So like a linux dist-upgrade then? :)

Re: Why You Should Build a Hackintosh

#244

Post by michaelmrose »

isostatic wrote: post #228
washadjeffmad wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not seriously, unless you believe Apple is going to start working with cops to kick in doors and inspect homess for non-Apple branded hardware for unsanctioned OS installs. Even if a judge agreed with Apple's EULA (unlikely, and unlikely to be tested), that's not really enforceable in any practical sense unless you're selling computers with MacOS preinstalled. Then it's a matter of commercial licensing and distributi…

So you're saying it's fine to break the law of you don't get found out?

Most people think its ok to break the law if you won't get found out AND they don't think breaking the law presents any moral issue.

Ever noticed how people tend to drive at a speed that seems safe given conditions? Respect for ethics is a virtue respect for the law for its own sake is a disease.

Re: Why You Should Build a Hackintosh

#245

Post by michaelmrose »

e12e wrote: post #113
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But you can never do any work on it without risk. What risk is that?

Same as running any other not legally licensed software - a civil suit. And/or "sanctions" if the company who's license your violating has the power to, say, disable a cloud account, developer license etc.

This probably wouldn't bode well for them. It would provide negative pr and the majority of hackintosh users would be liable to move off the platform.

These users would be paying them the say zero dollars right now either way but they would no longer be potential future customers.

What would they gain by this?

Re: Why You Should Build a Hackintosh

#246

Post by [deleted] »

dkonofalski wrote: post #169
vinceguidry wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Right, so he had his workflow organized in a particular way that worked for him, but rather than allow him to work like that his computer forced him into a workflow management paradigm and then you told him it was better that way and he should just accept it. You can't opt out of strong opinionation when it comes to operating systems or applications in general, sadly.

Nor should you. An OS where every person gets to customize every aspect to their own liking is mostly a recipe for disaster from a support experience standpoint unless you really know what you're doing. Take Linux for example. You can customize a ton to get your workflow exactly right if you really know exactly what you're doing. If you don't, though (and I'd argue that most people don't), it's a nightmare. One wrong…

[deleted]

Re: Why You Should Build a Hackintosh

#247

Post by michaelmrose »

dkonofalski wrote: post #169
vinceguidry wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Right, so he had his workflow organized in a particular way that worked for him, but rather than allow him to work like that his computer forced him into a workflow management paradigm and then you told him it was better that way and he should just accept it. You can't opt out of strong opinionation when it comes to operating systems or applications in general, sadly.

Nor should you. An OS where every person gets to customize every aspect to their own liking is mostly a recipe for disaster from a support experience standpoint unless you really know what you're doing. Take Linux for example. You can customize a ton to get your workflow exactly right if you really know exactly what you're doing. If you don't, though (and I'd argue that most people don't), it's a nightmare. One wrong…

"it's a nightmare. One wrong step can take down the entire workflow completely."

How and in what universe? I'm not merely being flip I literally don't understand how having options leads to such disasters. In most linux distros for example you have a central settings menu much like the windows control center plus many apps have a settings menu for app specific settings.

If you check a box and things no longer work the way you expect it doesn't require magic to open the menu and uncheck the box or reset the app to default settings. Its rather difficult to do any real harm. Even mucking up a system so bad it can't boot is cause for booting up from a disk to fix the problem or reinstalling in an hour if that seems too challenging.

I'm not clear on how to parse "take down an entire workflow completely" into anything meaningful. Its like someone argued for a house with a single set of furniture glued down to the floor and discussed how houses where you could put any sort of furniture down anywhere could take down your breakfast routine completely as if billions of people weren't out there organizing their own kitchens and churning out meals all over the world.

Post reply on HN