: OS X 10.4.4 got hacked!!

Feb 15th, 2006, 03:01 AM
Got this link from a friend of mine who likes Mac on his PC. :eek:


Feb 15th, 2006, 03:47 AM
seen this numerous times already. Old stuff

Feb 15th, 2006, 04:06 AM
actually this is new.

Feb 15th, 2006, 07:19 AM
This leads to another question. Do you think Apple would be hurt (monetarily) if they release OS X for generic PC's?

My Take:

Apple is a company in the wind right now.. riding with its sails full mast. With OSx86 now readily available.. it's inevitable that it's going to be hacked.. no matter what they put into it to stop people.

Now, some think that Apple will be hurt, they are primarily a hardware company. This is true, they are a hardware company.. But, I think they've proven the demand for pretty much every application that they have released, to be worth something running on Generic Hardware. I think you would see sales sky-rocket if they did release OS X for generic hardware. Think of the promotional campaign?!

Apple has a really strong brand at the moment.. if they were going to do it, this would be perfect timing. I'm also not saying that they should stop building their hardware.. I think, they'd still get the Mac faithful buying it. Think of how many people out there customize their cases and pay premium anyway. They'd probably even convert quite a few people to their hardware once they got a taste of the OS. I personally don't think they would even take a hit on their hardware sales. However, they would probably more than triple their software sales.

One thing I think that should not be done.. is make iLife and such apps available for Windows. That isn't the idea here. It's still Apple's Mac OS X and all of the apps that come with it that will be the money maker. If you ask me.. the market would be a strong one... one that only solidifies Apple as a company. This could potentially (given time) even make for a really close war between Apple and Microsoft (not flamebait).

Anyway... I've already said too much. Have fun! :) Love the OS you use!

Feb 15th, 2006, 08:33 AM
The only problem I see is (well, my opinion) the fact that most people tend to buy Windows also because that's what they use at work (fear of going against the grain?). Apple would have to futher advertise the fact that the normal Office files are translateable across both platforms. When I was thinking of switching, I didn't quite realize how easy it was to share Office files.

Feb 15th, 2006, 08:41 AM
Hmm, yeah, nice work. Too bad current version is 10.4.5 (check Software Update if you don't believe me).

Anyway, as far as the discussion about whether OSX on White Box x86 would harm or help Apple goes, I don't think it's going to matter much. Installation is very much a moving target, and Apple, we should remind ourselves, control both the hardware and software. So, their options are rather broad, to say the least.

How about this scenario: OSX 10.4-something runs with a hack, but 10.5 and above doesn't. PC users who have been exposed to OSX like what they see, and need new hardware to keep current in one or three years. So, they buy new x86 Macs instead of new x86 PCs. Now, who's hacking who?

More interesting is the recent developments regarding MS-Windows on OSX via VPC. Rumour has it that Microsoft will not release an x86 version of VPC; recent statements from Redmond back off from an earlier assertion they would (it would run at native speeds, with the exception of the video card, probably). It seems MS fears giving PC users a reason to consider Apple when the next hardware purchase comes around, more than Apple fears MS, since Apple has done nothing to prevent loading Windows directly on Intel Macs (the also have done nothing to help, but why anyone would expect them to spend time and money, at a time when there is pressure to get x86 Macs out the door and the OS working, is beyond me).

Currently the biggest problem is Apple has adopted EFI for x86 booting (within 2 years all PCs will support it as well, a few do now). (EFI is a modern bootloader developed by Intel in 1999 with support from Microsoft. It's a modern replacement for the Open Firmware bootloader used on PPC Macs, (developed by Sun in 1989). Apparently the Intel Engineer who was in charge of replacing BIOS wanted to use OF, but Microsoft nixed it, so they built their own.

Since there is no need for it from Apple's perspective, they did not bother implementing the legacy BIOS support, so XP will not boot, but Vista (and all future OS's; eg Linux does now) will use EFI. In fact, nearly everyone, including BIOS chip makers, can hardly wait to dump BIOS, and Microsoft hasn't used it on any software projects since 2003 (eg: XP-64 does not support BIOS).

Feb 16th, 2006, 09:41 AM
I'm working on a devel version on a generic P4, waiting to afford to get the mac desktop ;)
It's taking a lot more work than I thought it would, so I *hope* I can run this OS on my P4 machines, a lot more "lickable" interface than Linux/BSD. ;)