Live data from Hacker News

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

arstechnica.com

91–100 of 218 posts

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

#91
post #49
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the iOS "developer previews" have shown that even if you label something as being "unstable and just for developers" you'll still end up with thousands upon thousands of people with no idea what they're doing running it anyways and subsequently being vocally horrified that not everything works perfectly.

The difference is those people would now have to build hardware instead of just opening itunes and hitting install. You really think those users could get past the bios setup stage?

people would now have to build hardware

No, all kinds of companies will start offering machines as 'ready for macOS', and we'll see the same problems.

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

#92
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deleted this comment because it's apparently rubbing people the wrong way that I experienced poor performance using Adobe programs on a Windows machine and decided to share that experience.

Could be the disk speed.

No disk drive. Running off of an ADATA Premier SP600 256 gig SSD, which is supposed to have 540MB/s read, 290MB/s write.

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

#93
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deleted this comment because it's apparently rubbing people the wrong way that I experienced poor performance using Adobe programs on a Windows machine and decided to share that experience.

I've never heard that PS is supposed to run better on one platform. From my personal experience there's no difference. PS performs bad pretty much platform-independently. However I'd love to see some tests about this.

If there are tests you can point me to I'd love to run them. I admittedly haven't used either program much on the Windows PC, as I was turned off almost instantly when spot usage of clone/heal tools took on the order of seconds to complete.

Edit: I'd love an explanation as to why this was downvoted as well.

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

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deleted this comment because it's apparently rubbing people the wrong way that I experienced poor performance using Adobe programs on a Windows machine and decided to share that experience.

I use Creative Suite regularly on both PC and Mac and haven't really seen a difference in speed at all. All 3 computers I run it on have SSDs, though. Are you running SSD on the Windows side?

Yeah, mentioned that in another comment: ADATA Premier SP600 256 gig SSD

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

#95

Boy did they drop the football in this area. I always thought the advantage to making the switch to more common PC architectures was the ability to keep pace and support a wider array of components and technologies. Instead, they over-designed the enclosure and froze the high-end range of the platform. Creating a simple, but reliable tower design (optimized for speed rather than size) would have been extremely well r…

Deleted this comment because it's apparently rubbing people the wrong way that I experienced poor performance using Adobe programs on a Windows machine and decided to share that experience.

Adobe CS works great on my similarly spec'd (slightly worse) PC. Maybe try reinstalling? I do have an SSD- if yours is a platter that could affect performance too.

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

#96

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…

> the day-to-day qualitative experience of Linux is head and shoulders above macOS these days. For you, perhaps. But given your preamble it strongly suggests your conditions make this boil down to "for someone who wants to use Linux, Linux is better." For a start: Linux is not a monolithic ecosystem. The sheer number of qualifiers that are needed (what flavor? What window manager? What hardware? because driver hell i…

Linux is far less fiddly than it used to be, though.

I just recently installed the currently frozen Debian testing (with the intent on staying on it once it replaces the previous stable) and there was nothing to configure, it just works, even starting with a minimal install (no DE) there was nothing to configure, just pull the right packages (like bluez, pulseaudio-module-bluetooth etc) and I could pair with my wireless headphones etc. If you install a complete DE like Gnome or KDE from the metapackages you don't even have to install anything yourself, it just works out of the box. Even for people like me who do minimal installs and run tiling wm there is little to nothing to configure. apt install xorg will get all you need for Xorg to work and autodetect your hardware, echo "exec dwm" >> .xinitrc will get your startx session up.

The early 2k had the massive amount of suffering between very poor WiFI support (lots of kernel drivers out of tree, need to compile them yourself and pray the API was synced with the current kernel or do it yourself), terrible state of audio stack (pulseaudio has gotten a lot more stable now, and is better than what we had in early PA days, or ALSA days), terrible state of GPU support (with mostly nvidia being okay, but still you would have to be more careful with kernel upgrades. Now you can even run a rolling release distro like arch, and pick a LTS kernel). But now it's great. You don't need the proprietary driver for AMD cards, intel iGPUs work fine, NVIDIA requires the proprietary driver for performance but the open source drv will still help you get a decent X session up in the first time install, audio just works, bluetooth just works, wifi just works. Even wifi with proprietary drivers, like the broadcom ship on my mac, it's just a matter of apt install broadcom-sta-dkms and it just works. Even Debian doesn't shy away from distributing the proprietary packages in the non-free repository and it's smooth sailing.

Linux missed many window of opportunities during times when it really could have become closer to a mainstream OS. What is funny, is that in my opinion, Linux is now as ready for mainstream purposes as it could ever be, but the opportunities for it will not come again.

And then we have the locked down versions that are getting popular, like Chrome OS, which is really linux underneath. We'll probably see more of that, not less, in the future, but it's not too bad as long as we have the freedom to unlock the bootloader and install what we want. Google is in a good position to bring an alternative to MacOS/Windows, although it won't be GNU/Linux as we know it in full, but it's close enough.

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

#97

Boy did they drop the football in this area. I always thought the advantage to making the switch to more common PC architectures was the ability to keep pace and support a wider array of components and technologies. Instead, they over-designed the enclosure and froze the high-end range of the platform. Creating a simple, but reliable tower design (optimized for speed rather than size) would have been extremely well r…

Deleted this comment because it's apparently rubbing people the wrong way that I experienced poor performance using Adobe programs on a Windows machine and decided to share that experience.

I am very suspicious of the benchmarks that you pointed to. Maybe some users are reporting erroneous data?

Take a look at the Passmark list here: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

The i5 scores in at 7995, and the i7 4960HQ is 9770. If you are really CPU bound, there are going to be some big advantages for the i7 here.

Of course, if performance is so bad on the Windows machine that it is nearly unusable, then there is probably something else causing the issue.

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

#98
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have this in the form of a legal note, don't they? Last I heard it was technically "illegal" to run macOS on anything other than Apple hardware per the TOS. Or is that just an urban legend?

Not illegal, just against the EULA. Basically they could revoke your usage of the software and probably legally fine you. It is a software license issue. Technically it would be something like unlicensed distribution/copying. Practically speaking they don't care though. The machine building market is vanishingly small and the licensing gives Apple plausible "we never said it would work" deniability.

I think the illegal bit is using an illegal copy of their OS to install as you don't hold the copyright and so aren't allowed to make a (modified) copy of the installer that works on the non-Apple hardware.

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

#99
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deleted this comment because it's apparently rubbing people the wrong way that I experienced poor performance using Adobe programs on a Windows machine and decided to share that experience.

I am very suspicious of the benchmarks that you pointed to. Maybe some users are reporting erroneous data? Take a look at the Passmark list here: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php The i5 scores in at 7995, and the i7 4960HQ is 9770. If you are really CPU bound, there are going to be some big advantages for the i7 here. Of course, if performance is so bad on the Windows machine that it is nearly unusable, then…

Maybe that's the case, then? I just googled the comparison and that site I linked came up.

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

#100
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> 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. It's even more so in programming. Go to any developer conference, whether it's for Rails, C, Java, Haskell or whatever: a huge percentage there will have MacBook Pros, much much more than the percentage of Mac users in the general market (e.g 10% in the general market and 40 to 60% in dev…

You see the same in virtually any physics department (I'm not aware of a similar trend in other STEM subjects, but presumably). Everyone uses a mixture of Linux and OS X. At the start of my PhD, the question wasn't "What laptop do you want?" it was "Do you want a Macbook or an iMac?"
Post reply on HN