OS X makes itself at home on Sony Vaio UX

If you think running OS X on your Xbox 360 (well, the PC-stuffed version) is 1337, how about cramming Apple's latest operating system on a handheld Vaio? A long-winded sev7en over at MicroPCTalk has apparently taken it upon himself to do just that, and while we'd offer up kudos if he simply shared photographs and nonchalantly bragged about his success, offering up a full blown installation guide is darn near saintly. The aptly-named Mac OSUX project allows users to more easily carry OS X around in their cargo pockets, and all that's reportedly required (or recommended) is a Vaio UX, copy of OS X, a docking station, external USB 2.0 optical DVD drive, keyboard and mouse, and marginal reading comprehension skills. If you fit the aforementioned mold, feel free to hit the read link and get to it.

[Nando @ Jun 8th 2007 12:02PM]

Neato!

[paloooz @ Jun 8th 2007 12:03PM]

OH! I didn't notice it was one of those handheld things. I thought it was just a Vaio laptop or whatever. That's pretty cool! I guess this guy and Sony beat Apple to it. :-)

[optV @ Jun 8th 2007 12:05PM]

It is very easy to install OS-X on almost anything with supported hardware. For example, here is a guide on how to install it on a Dell XPS m1210 laptop http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showtopic=41775

It is however illegal to download a patched version of OSX.

[Benz145 @ Jun 8th 2007 1:46PM]

It may be easy to install OSX on anything with supported hardware, but getting the highly proprietary hardware on something like the Sony UX is quite complicated. The majority of the hardware is working, and has been tweaked to offer nearly as good if not the same performance as when running Vista or XP on the UX. The guide is also going to be updated as new hardware is made to work with the UX.

[ethana2 @ Jun 29th 2007 12:16AM]

I wonder if anyone could make a Linux distro that comes with a script to set itself up like OSX with gimp shop and everything... iFox...

Not included, mind you- which makes all the difference...

[pencap23 @ Jun 8th 2007 12:22PM]

What a waste of a UX

[paloooz @ Jun 8th 2007 12:48PM]

What a waste of a comment.

[pencap23 @ Jun 8th 2007 1:21PM]

Haha I understand it was more just for the sake of actually putting OS X on a UX. I just kind of left that comment to be a jerk more or less and to show my enmity for OS X. So I guess I did waste a comment, then again you did replying to it, as am I replying to your reply!

[scott @ Jun 8th 2007 12:32PM]

Dont get your hopes up guys, wireless G is still WIP and pretty much makes the tiny little device useless without it...

[Sameer Surampalli @ Jun 8th 2007 1:19PM]

It's freakin' easy to remake current drivers to work with your system, but of course, this depends on what company the wireless card is from. A Broadcom chip is the easiest to incorporate into OS X.

[Benz145 @ Jun 8th 2007 1:46PM]

Almost all USB wireless cards will work fine for the time being until they get a handle on making the internal wireless work.

[Phillip Donley @ Jun 8th 2007 12:33PM]

So it basically serves as an ultra-portable monitor? You need to attach a keyboard and a mouse to make it operable? Cool looking, but not very functional.

[mtipper @ Jun 8th 2007 12:54PM]

ur a nob

[pencap23 @ Jun 8th 2007 1:22PM]

XD

[Benz145 @ Jun 8th 2007 1:47PM]

Not at all, its a Micro PC, the mouse and keyboard are built in...

[Argot @ Jun 8th 2007 3:18PM]

Kind of like a Mac.

[JerkyChew @ Jun 8th 2007 12:35PM]

GAAAAHHHH! I'm trying so hard not to buy one of these micro PCs, and these guys just made it a LOT harder. I keep saying my next laptop has to run OS X (and not be a Macbook - No right mouse button). If this works as advertised I guess the UX is a shoe-in for my next machine.

[Steve @ Jun 8th 2007 12:43PM]

Umm, just so you know, all current Mac laptops have a right mouse button. Well, kinda anyway. The touchpad can recognise when two fingers are pressing on it and, if you change a setting or two, the mac interprets this as a right click (although I find it more reliable to configure it so that you have to press down with two fingers AND click the button to get a right click). Works in Windows too if you use Bootcamp.

[paloooz @ Jun 8th 2007 12:50PM]

Further clarification without all the rambling:

Place two fingers on track pad, click button.

[imajoebob @ Jun 10th 2007 2:45AM]

...and after about 3 days of using the Command-click it becomes second nature (except saying "command" instead of "alt"). Plus, once used to it, you begin to appreciate the wide single button, and the lack of pain in your right thumb.

[Jugomugo @ Jun 8th 2007 1:07PM]

Actually, the new Mac trackpads are better than any PC counterpart I've ever encountered. They did a great job with it.

[pito189 @ Jun 8th 2007 1:13PM]

Yeah two fingers on the trackpad is a god send, I never got used to the ctrl click crap. But tap with two fingers it so much faster than having a right click button, no need to even move your fingers from the trackpad.

[Camperton @ Jun 8th 2007 4:37PM]

or use a little system utility called Sidetrack. So you can tap a corner of the track pad as a button. I actually like this better than an actual second button, as the positioning is less cumbersome. It's highly configurable too. Can't imagine not having a right click either : - )

http://www.ragingmenace.com/software/sidetrack/index.html

[Mr Lizard @ Jun 8th 2007 8:27PM]

I don't use any trackpad button on this MacBook

Tap with two fingers and hey presto- a right click menu appears

[Jan @ Jun 8th 2007 1:16PM]

OSX 10.4.9 / Vista dual boot. Works on all SSE3/SSE3 computers (= all not-more-then-5-years-old computers):

http://www.profit42.com/index.php/2007/04/07/osx-1049-vista-dual-boot-on-your-windows-machine/

[Steph @ Jun 8th 2007 2:01PM]

"This means that for most people it is ILLEGAL to install osx on their computer. If you aren’t an Apple developer, leave page now."

It says it plain and clear on the site where it also tells you that downloading OSX89 is illegal, too.

It's also written quite clearly on Mac OSX Tiger (10.4) that it is for use on "Apple-labled computers."

It's illegal to put OSX on non-Apple hardware, get it through your heads and buy a Mac if you want OSX.

[crescentdavid @ Jun 8th 2007 1:50PM]

Darwin award goes to pitobread: "it so much faster than having a right click button,"

Sweet jesus.

On topic: this is a great hack AND a great step-through of how to do it. Why do it? Because it can be done, of course.

Just stay away from the time-consuming right clicker and you'll be done in-well-no time at all.

[Benz145 @ Jun 8th 2007 1:56PM]

For anyone who enjoys the guide, please Digg the story here -

http://digg.com/gadgets/Mac_OSX_on_Sony_Vaio_UMPC_Guide

[wWw @ Jun 8th 2007 2:04PM]

STEVE JOBS'S WORST NIGHTMARE

[Tom @ Jun 8th 2007 2:37PM]

I'm always perplexed as to how Apple stays in business creating such proprietary hardware and software. I would gladly pay for a copy of OSX had it been legal to run on a box I make. Sorry Apple, I like to have full control over my hardware. And sorry Apple, this guy here just beat you to a market place all while stealing from you. Thanks sev7en, for stickin' it to the man.

[johnzilla @ Jun 8th 2007 3:19PM]

Your comment makes no sense. Apple hardware is not proprietary...they use off-the-shelf components from major OEMs just like any other PC company (Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc). If their hardware is so proprietary, why are there so many companies making good money offering hardware upgrades for Macs? Processor upgrades, etc.

Their software is no more proprietary than any other UNIX distribution (Linux or otherwise). Or Windows, for that matter. Are you implying that Windows is not proprietary? That's absurd.

Apple simply guarantees that their software will run on their hardware...how is that proprietary? In the "roll-the-dice-and-hope-it-works" world of Windows, I would think a company guaranteeing that their software will run on their hardware is a good thing.

[Tom @ Jun 8th 2007 3:40PM]

Lol, in explaining how Apple is not proprietary, you described a proprietary environment.

Apple computers enforces, as you said, that their software will ONLY run on their hardware. That, in and of itself, is the definition of proprietary. You cannot buy your own motherboard for running OSX! When I build a computer, I spend the most time not on the processor, RAM, or otherwise - I spend the most time picking out a quality motherboard. What chipset it's running, what the raid and sata options are, how many IDE channels it allows, how many controlled fan ports exist, RAM capabilities, etc. When I build a computer, I ensure that the motherboard fits the quality bill and the user's specifications - all for a lower price than Apple would ever offer.

So, the fact that I cannot use off-the-shelf motherboards exemplifies that Apple is in the business of proprietary hardware and software (Apple motherboards are necessary to run Apple operating systems). It's not that they're offering technology that does not exist outside of their realm, it's simply that they are ensuring one can only buy their software if they first buy their hardware.

Sony makes proprietary memory cards for their devices - they ensure that if you buy their hardware, you must purchase their memory cards. That is proprietary. So is what Apple does - I think you need to brush up on your definition of what proprietary is.

Also, if you think that the Windows computing world is "roll-the-dice-and-hope-it-works", please, build a PC. Try it. You'll see that everything works with Windows as advertised. I don't know where you got THAT idea, but you're poorly mistaken. I have never met a device that doesn't work with Windows. Windows works with any generic hardware. As does Linux. Not so much Apple.

[Colin @ Jun 8th 2007 5:12PM]

Apple is a hardware company. They build quality/aesthetically pleasing hardware packages. They limit the hardware that they choose to put in their systems, and install a Unix based OS on it. By limiting the hardware that is put into the system, they can easily control the drivers for their system, and ensure that the Unix system running on top of their hardware will work. They know the specs of every piece of hardware ever put into any Apple computer and can easily make sure that drivers will work for it. Apple stays in business because they build and support an end to end system.

It's actually very similar to what Dell is doing in offering Ubuntu on systems. They chose a subset of their Dell hardware and are ensuring that Ubuntu will work with that hardware. They are not making any money off of the OS. Apple makes very little off of their OS. The appeal of an Apple system is exactly that, it's a system.

Of every laptop I've owned, my MacBook is my favorite, because everything about it is just so polished. I plug into the network at the office, it automatically finds all of the networked printers, it shows me all of the available workgroups and windows domains. I own 6 PCs and 1 Mac. My favorite computer is my Mac. That's why Apple stays in business.

[ethana2 @ Jun 29th 2007 12:22AM]

I have always held the same opinion. Until I can build my own box and dual boot it with Linux, Apple isn't getting a cent from me.

Rock on. Naturally, I avoid game consoles like the plague as well- except the ps3, you can run your own os on, which is awesome. And maybe I'd consider getting a wiimote to try next to a mouse and trackball for my pc... Although I have to admit, my next pc has to have a touchscreen..

[Scabrous Vermicelli @ Jun 8th 2007 2:44PM]

I'd first heard about this a few months back, but that it was flaky as heck at the time. Can anyone with firsthand experience comment on stability as of late? This is VERY tempting!

[Benz145 @ Jun 8th 2007 2:52PM]

It should work fine as your primary OS, you can always dual boot it with XP/Vista if you'd like to have them for backup : )

[Roflgoat @ Jun 8th 2007 3:08PM]

MOR LIEK OSUCKS LOL

[Argot @ Jun 8th 2007 3:12PM]

This is Jobs worst nightmare... Someone running his OS on good valued hardware beyond his greedy control! :D

[Butter @ Jun 8th 2007 3:14PM]

i was going to buy one of these things and try this but i didnt have the balls (or the money for that matter, but who pays attention to such details?)
this is super hot, man. now that sev7en has lent me his pair, anybody got a couple of thousand bucks laying around?
_b

[Tom @ Jun 8th 2007 5:44PM]

As far as I see it, on a $2500 Apple, it might cost them $1200 in parts and $100 in labor (grossly arbitrary estimates), which makes for a $1200 OS :)

I do not believe for a second that Apple is a hardware company. They make some hardware, yes, but for the most part they outsource for processors, video, sound, etc. They might make their motherboards (I don't feel like researching that bit right now), but for the most part they get manufacturing support from other companies. I would call them a software/industrial design firm, with some internal hardware resources.

However, I entirely agree with your statement on the Apple "system". When you rigidly control everything, you can have a very polished system. I suppose you can't really compare Microsoft to Apple then, because Apple works within a controlled environment, and Microsoft operates in a random environment. Apple does well with covering a product top to bottom. Microsoft does well ensuring software compatibility and compatibility with hardware growth from every-which company who decides to make a new product. Apples to oranges, even though I strongly consider both companies to be software companies.

I guess that answers my initial question as to why they're able to stay in business despite proprietary methods.

[Justin Moravetz @ Jun 8th 2007 5:39PM]

I did this to my UX ages ago. Even have QE working. I'm selling off my unit though. Can't afford to keep it.

[Cybear @ Jun 12th 2007 7:38AM]

I am interested in buying a Sony UX, especially if it has MacOSX already running. Where are you located? Which UX model? Price?

[Justin Moravetz @ Jun 9th 2007 8:48PM]

Its a UX280P, 1GB of RAM, 40GB HDD, it currently dual boots OSX 10.4.8 and WinXP. OSX is the default OS if you dont choose during the bootup. The machine is very new, put a screen protector on it on day one. Still have the box / manuals, etc. I purchased the machine on March 17th. Im asking $1350.

[Tom @ Jun 8th 2007 5:47PM]

This new comment system is a bit sketchy. I don't think this showed up under the comment thread I intended it to.

[REDbULL Runner @ Jun 8th 2007 6:07PM]

Im currently running this on my $400 eMachines T6420, Running OSX 10.4.8.

It works perfectly, I have 2 monitors (using an nVidia GeForce 7600GS) with all hardware rendering supported, Quartz extreme and Core Image running great. Audio, Video, Networking... all working perfectly. I have even removed windows completely from this system. If i want to play games, i can use VMWare Fusion to do so, with all DX8 hardware accelleration working.

This has become my main computer. I Highly doubt i will go back to windows, as all of my other computers are running gentoo linux.

Im planning on buying a Mac Pro soon. And once I do, I will probably leave this one running OSX and give it to my friend.

[Major Malfunction @ Jun 9th 2007 10:19PM]

Holy crap, I'm glad you told us your lifeplan. When are you ever going to find time to use the bathroom, I'm surprised you didn't tell us without asking.

[oliveandmartini @ Jun 8th 2007 7:28PM]

Regarding Apple building quality hardware. What a laugh. As someone here pointed out, they outsource the HW work. The finished product is anything but quality. Compare the keyboard on a MacBook to the keyboard on an IBM/Lenovo laptop. Night and day. One is a cheap, cheesy chicklet keyboard with no feel that starts to lose keys after 2-3 months of use. The other is a work of art and function. Or the LCD screen on the MacBook. That thing started to burn out after 1 month of use. And the OS? Well, my friends, it is no better than NextStep of 10 years ago. No, no, no. Apple is great at running a scam. Nothing more.

[jopari @ Jun 9th 2007 2:34PM]

Obviously you've never used a Macbook keyboard... or you would know that it's the work of art, not the Lenovo (Oh, by the way, you spelled Chiclet wrong). Not to mention that there's been almost no claims of screen burnout (which isn't to say there haven't been issues-the Magsafe power adapter cords have the annoying tendency to melt, for instance). And if OS X 10.4 is "no better than NextStep of 10 years ago" then Vista is certainly no better than Windows 3.1. Get your facts straight, troll.

[harpreet @ Jun 9th 2007 3:17AM]

Gosh I feel like a dumbass to have bought a macbook just to use mac os x!!!

[oliveandmartini @ Jun 11th 2007 12:25AM]

I have purchased and used the said wonderful MacBook last fall. So I speak from personal experience. To call it a work of art is a blasphemy. Did I spell that right? Feel free to correct my spelling. He-he...

"...jopari @ Jun 9th 2007 2:34PM
Obviously you've never used a Macbook keyboard... or you would know that it's the work of art, not the Lenovo (Oh, by the way, you spelled Chiclet wrong). Not to mention that there's been almost no claims of screen burnout (which isn't to say there haven't been issues-the Magsafe power adapter cords have the annoying tendency to melt, for instance). And if OS X 10.4 is "no better than NextStep of 10 years ago" then Vista is certainly no better than Windows 3.1. Get your facts straight, troll.
..."