OS X-installing EFIX device gets unboxed

While some may have rightly questioned whether the OS X-installing EFIX device would ever actually see the light of day, it looks like the Apple irritant is very much real, and now in the hands of at least at two adventuresome InsanelyMac forum members, one of whom thankfully took time to snap a few unboxing pictures. The other member, "np_," went one step further and tested the device with an Asus motherboard and found that it worked "perfectly," despite the fact that EFIX only officially supports Gigabyte boards. Hit up the link below for a few more pics and impressions.

[Thanks, Rich]

[Byrdman @ Sep 11th 2008 5:41PM]

cant wait to get my hands on one of these

[vampritt @ Sep 13th 2008 2:15AM]

"This is like taking an Aston Martin interior and shoveling it into a Chinese tractor.


Hm... so that Core2Duo Apple of yours with 8600GT Geforce is the Aston Martin exterior and my QuadCore GForce 280 is the Chinese tractor ? hm... think again...

[y2kss66 @ Sep 11th 2008 5:43PM]

This looks cool I might have to buy one!

[Skyride @ Sep 11th 2008 5:45PM]

These look like an awesome idea. Although the only comment I would make is that mac on a PC, its such a complex buisness with drivers and so on that if you need one of these to do it you should just buy a mac.

ah! saying that last line makes me chill.

[Hiptrigger @ Sep 11th 2008 5:50PM]

Such a poor idea. the whole point of the Apple product experience is that it works together, font rendering matches display capability, drivers behave nicely, core temps, aspect ratios... on and on. Part of the esence of the whole Mac "simplicity" thing is users (especially new users) don't have to mess with admin/IT-type issues

This is like taking an Aston Martin interior and shoveling it into a Chinese tractor.

I hope they get crushed by Apple.

[Byrdman @ Sep 11th 2008 5:59PM]

technically they arent doing anyting wrong. they arent hacking OS X, but rather emulating EFI. EFI is not owned by Apple, its owned by intel. as long as they didnt rip it off from intel, they should be in the clear

[Major4Play @ Sep 11th 2008 6:11PM]

Comments like that show just how uninformed most Apple fans are.
"font rendering matches display capability, drivers behave nicely, core temps, aspect ratios"
Font rendering is carried out by the OS it has nothing to do with your display, Apple dispalys use the same mass manufactured panels as everyone else.
Core temps , core temps have to do with your heatsinks not your drivers.
Aspect ratios, again this is just resolution and seeing as again Apple use Intel integrated GFX, ATI & Nvidia just like everyone else.

Alot of crap is talked about drivers but I have never had any problems using near standard intel hardware and I have run OSX86 on 3 different systems.

"This is like taking an Aston Martin interior and shoveling it into a Chinese tractor.

I hope they get crushed by Apple."
Most well built modded systems can be every bit as nice as Apple's hardware, if some modders and home builders want to run OSX why does it really bother you so much ? So used to doing as you're told that people with free will get under your skin !

[Mr. Ford @ Sep 11th 2008 6:15PM]

Thanks for saving me the money. I was really interested in this device. It seems that I could have tried out the "magical" Apple OS without having to purchase overpriced hardware to go with it. I might have actually become a convert if OSX is as good as all the Apple lovers say it is. I'm not willing to take a risk on a $1000 laptop, or an iMac for that matter. I would have wasted $170 trying this instead, but you made it clear to me that Apple is for "simple" minded people who just can't seem to figure out how to work a PC. I guess OSX isn't for an IT consultant like me after all. All Hail Steve Jobs!!!!!

[Jason @ Sep 11th 2008 6:33PM]

Birdman: While this isn't doing anything wrong, the minute someone tries to install OSX on a non-Apple machine, they're breaking the OSX EULA.

[Alex @ Sep 11th 2008 6:25PM]

@Major4Play

Calm down there buddy.

All he was saying is that the majority of users wouldn't find this useful/helpful, especially new users. Granted, most new users would not be using this device. And as for "Comments like that show just how uninformed most Apple fans are." I wouldn't say that a statement by ONE person gives you adequate right to judge how MOST Apple fans are. He did cite poor examples, and you were very right in pointing that out.

And with this statement: "Most well built modded systems can be every bit as nice as Apple's hardware, if some modders and home builders want to run OSX why does it really bother you so much ? So used to doing as you're told that people with free will get under your skin !" He wasn't saying that other modded/self-built hardware combination's couldn't run as well as Apple's does, he was just saying that, "Part of the esence of the whole Mac "simplicity" thing is users (especially new users) don't have to mess with admin/IT-type issues" Again, talking about NEW users not knowing how to use this product well.

Again I will point out that new users would not be purchasing the product, but his statement was valid. Some of your attacks were not. Secondly, (and summing up this extremely long post) don't clump ALL Apple fans together by one statement, it just makes you sound ignorant.

[Johan S @ Sep 11th 2008 6:28PM]

Maybe not everyone WANTS the Apple experience?

[Hiptrigger @ Sep 11th 2008 6:36PM]

I don't care if you run OS X on your electric toothbrush, junior. No Apple fan here. Maybe I picked the wrong set of parameters (still you are mistaken re: core temps have nothing to do with mechanical heatsinks - I was referring to the OS's capacity for turning on/off fans, monitoring systems, etc.)

The point is *optimization* of the hardware-software experience for users who want to do some work/have fun/create, etc. and not be constantly wasting time with their rig. Some people like tweaking/hacking, great - but this is making so any fool can run OS X on whatever ...it becomes a problem of the Brand. ...public perception of what the OS X experience & what exactly supports the Apple Brand. Having the OS, the UI run on crap or have unintended quirks might lead brand perception astray. And hardware is a primary source of revenue & margin for Apple to continue innovating ahead of the pack. If this thing became more than a tinker toy for maker faire geeks, then if I were Apple I would see it as a problem, don't you.?

On your metrosexual netbook or whatever, why wouldn't you run Ubuntu or FreeBSD? If you want a mac, get a mac, ..comes with built-in Genius bar help, warranty, guides the whole bit. But if this is just a science experiment for geeks who like to play around with different setups - why commercialize the gizmo and seemingly create it for the masses?

[Nick @ Sep 11th 2008 6:51PM]

First off, Let it be known that if it does get created for the masses, its clear that we're all going to have to put up with it. Idk what bothers you to be honest, yes I know, simplicity, the warranty, the whole kit. But, life's never gonna be perfect, and OSX is already running on regular Windows PC's via LiveCD's and such, so theres not much no one can do. its a Multi-OS world out there..

Lol Chilax everyone, you should all just refrain from attacking each other and just move on, now thats simplicity!

Cheers,
Nick

[Graham @ Sep 11th 2008 7:16PM]

Mac experience? Are you kidding me? Do you mean the experience of coughing up the extra cash for a PC?

I am a proud owner of OSX86 Shuttle Box, and it runs faster and nicer than any mac Mini or Imac. EFI and Vanilla Kerner are both working as well as drivers, out of the box. How much did I pay for the hardware: about $325.

And yeah, I own a real mac mini, and a family license of leapord.

As for the IT/Admin experience, gawd forbid any one actually educate themselves to the details of how their computer works... I hope you leave you linksys wireless router completely open for neighbors to steal bandwidth. Hell, I hope your neighbor over writes the Busybox linux firmware, with something nasty.

This kind of Mac user, just pisses me off. You have no idea how to use a computer, and really will never learn. Try using the terminal some time jerk off, replace a kext, write a batch file.... You may actually learn something.

[Wii60 @ Sep 11th 2008 7:24PM]

@Jason

Who cares about the EULA? Clearly you don't agree to it by using this device which voids it entirely.

[Guilty @ Sep 11th 2008 7:57PM]

@Hiptrigger:

Your statement about not being an Apple fan is not all that convincing...

"...running on crap or having unintended quirks might lead brand perception astray..."
Brand perception? You mean how the general public sees it? Most people who install OSX86 have already made up their minds that Apple hardware is too expensive, so they pirate OS X. That group of people (mostly hackers and geeks) does NOT make up the general public. Anyway, I stopped using OSX86 when I saw how crappy Tiger was... Leopard's even worse, I'm told!

As for "innovating ahead of the pack", tell me, WHAT exactly did apple actually invent [i.e. not someone else's idea]?
Expensive hardware? No, that's copyrighted by SONY. OS X? They just made a pretty GUI for a modified BSD kernel. iPod? By far, not the first MP3 player. iPhone? Multitouch? 3G? Accelerometer? GUI? No, all previously invented. Tightly integrated hardware and software? We need CHOICE, not "I HAVE upgrade to Snow Leopard, otherwise Apple will brutally murder me!"

[jmzrbnsn @ Sep 11th 2008 9:38PM]

But, that's SO boring!

[Eh @ Sep 11th 2008 10:53PM]

If youve ever used a 20" iMac then youd know Apple doesnt give a flying shit about which display it picks. Same with the Macbook.

Either way that was seriously the biggest exageration Ive ever seen about Macs, and Ive seen a lot of exagerations. Apple cuts costs everywhere they can just like every other company and they do not research hardware as much as you think, they pretty much dont research at all, they let other companies do it like Intel.

[yui @ Sep 12th 2008 12:31AM]

@ Mr. Ford:

" I would have wasted $170 trying this instead, but you made it clear to me that Apple is for "simple" minded people who just can't seem to figure out how to work a PC. I guess OSX isn't for an IT consultant like me after all. All Hail Steve Jobs!!!!!"

Could I take this as a personal insult to those who is using Apple products?
Yes. OSX would never make you, as an IT consultant, satisfy at all. Don't even try to get this EFIX and go back to your Vista for a peace of mind.

[Major4Play @ Sep 12th 2008 4:51AM]

@Alex

I was talking about "typical" Apple fanboys, I own 2 iMacs & a macbook but I still don't refer to myself as a "fan"

"He wasn't saying that other modded/self-built hardware combination's couldn't run as well as Apple's does, he was just saying that, "Part of the esence of the whole Mac "simplicity" thing is users (especially new users) don't have to mess with admin/IT-type issues" Again, talking about NEW users not knowing how to use this product well."


"This is like taking an Aston Martin interior and shoveling it into a Chinese tractor."
Doesn't sound like that Alex, it's nice you're here to interpret this nonsense but he did write exactly what he thought.
"Part of the esence of the whole Mac "simplicity" thing is users (especially new users) don't have to mess with admin/IT-type issues"
He said users and new users Alex didn't you read his post ?
But then pretty typical to put me on one side and you and your "buddy" on the other, do i own more Apple hardware than you ?
Oh and I'm really not your "buddy"

[Chris @ Sep 11th 2008 5:53PM]

I'd get one but the chances of this being compatable with a GTX 280 is really small.

[CommanderLock @ Sep 11th 2008 6:23PM]

You could try, I guess. The hardware listed as compatible on the site are the ones they've tested in their labs. I have an 8800GT, so I'm good right there.
They didn't say about SLI/Crossfire, which is available on Mac Pros if you buy it with it or get another 8800GT from Apple's site, so that would be worth trying...hmmm...

[Decoy @ Sep 11th 2008 9:01PM]

How fast do you want to render Photoshop?

[Chris @ Sep 11th 2008 10:43PM]

CommanderLock : You do realize that none of the boards listed as supported are Nvidia so I couldn't do sli anyway.

[Christian Walters @ Sep 11th 2008 6:01PM]

Im quite surprised that this actually came out, this is thing is as legendary as Duke Nukem Forever in the vapourware categorie.

[deepfreeze @ Sep 11th 2008 6:05PM]

important point, np_ had edited applehda.kext, that's why he had sound on asus mobo.

[ricosuave @ Sep 11th 2008 6:04PM]

it is 170 dollars, ouch!

[Michael Scrip @ Sep 11th 2008 6:12PM]

But how much does a Mac cost compared to building your own PC?

This is a device for people (PC builders, modders, techies) to play with. It probably won't get into the hands of someone who wants to actually buy a Mac.

But, for close to $300 for this and a copy of OSX, it's quite an investment for an experiment.

[Mr. Ford @ Sep 11th 2008 6:42PM]

@Michael
The $300 is still less than the price differential of Mac hardware cost (as opposed to comparable PC) + the cost of boot camp or parallels.

[Brandon @ Sep 11th 2008 6:48PM]

Bootcamp comes with OSX

[Zak @ Sep 11th 2008 6:50PM]

$300 plus the cost of the PC. And a monitor if you need one. You can get a brand new Mac Mini for $595 which comes with Leopard, so that differential is not as wide as you think it is.

[Michael Scrip @ Sep 11th 2008 7:40PM]

> "You can get a brand new Mac Mini for $595 which comes with Leopard, so that differential is not as wide as you think it is."

Or you can just add $300 to the PC you already have. For $300 you get a Mac.

How much faster is a quad-core than a Mac Mini?

[Mr. Ford @ Sep 11th 2008 8:07PM]

@Michael
The previous post wasn't hostile, I agree with you. I just wanted others to know what my post was in response to.

@Brandon
Touche`

@Zak
The mac mini doesn't come with a monitor for $569, at least not that I have been able to find. It doesn't offer any more performance than what I can buy for $300-$350 (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8773222&type=product&id=1203815923428) in a PC. So for around $650, I can have a machine that runs both. If you add the cost of Windows (if I don't like OSX), I'll be out around $700. The money is a wash, but I feel more secure knowing that if I'm disappointed, I can at least do something productive with whats left over. I absolutely love the form factor of the mini, but again, I'm not sure that I want to commit. It appears that I now have an option. If I don't like it, I know plenty of guys like me who will buy the EFIX off me second hand.

[Mr. Ford @ Sep 11th 2008 8:09PM]

I know less guys personally who would buy the mini.

[CommanderLock @ Sep 11th 2008 6:10PM]

Hey, Apple had it coming when they didn't squash the OSx86 project when it started, so stuff like this that's completely legit given the right hardware is going to pop up more. Pystar could bite the dust and small-scale stuff like this could get more noticed, and it's a little more honorable for the company to make it for the enthusiasts and not the general consumer.
But I wouldn't be surprised if the outcome of Apple v. Pystar allowed for products like EFIX's dongle to exist for some odd legal reason/loophole.
I'd get one if I had a Gigabyte MB.

[Michael Scrip @ Sep 11th 2008 6:14PM]

You could buy this and a Gigabyte motherboard for far less than a Mac.

Just sayin'...

[CommanderLock @ Sep 11th 2008 6:20PM]

Just to add to my other comment, I think if you view it as being for the enthusiast crowd (not the general consumer), then it is a cool idea. I like the idea (and thrill) of putting Mac OSX on my PC with no Mac parts besides the OS itself. It's for the fun of it, not to make profit. Hell, if EFIX is squashed then we know it must work. Apple sued Pystar because they got it to work.
Apple was asking for this when they switched to Intel. As long as consumers like the retail Mac experience-that's fine by them as long as they can swallow the premium for the label and guaranteed-to-work factor. The consumer and enthusiast market are two very different crowds to sell to. Here's a small rundown:
EFIX is enthusiast product, sold for enthusiasts to tinker and experiment with.
Mac is consumer, guaranteed-to-work (compared to enthusiast) with their retail products.
Microsoft is consumer, for a much wider variety of crowds and hardware, and so they must support more customers than Mac.
Pystar is consumer PROFITING off enthusiast (big difference), which is not as ethical as purely enthusiast.

My 2 cents. More like 4 cents, though...

[Noah @ Sep 11th 2008 6:13PM]

I wonder if this works with AMD processors. I know that there are custom kexts and driversets for AMD processors and chipsets for OSx86, but if this works with AMD processors (albeit with a modified kext loaded after install) that would be FANTASTIC. I'd just have this, install OSX, and change the necessary kexts/add the drivers.

[decapitor @ Sep 11th 2008 7:31PM]

I think I'd actually get this if they had support for X-Fi (I know I know not even Creative can write drivers for them...) cause all my other hardware happens to be on that list.

[Billy G @ Sep 11th 2008 7:41PM]

Creative don't even bother writing proper drivers for Windows, why would they do it for anyone else?

[DarkSamus @ Sep 11th 2008 6:39PM]

Thats awesome but it would be cheaper to get a gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L rev 2 mobo and run kalway on it. Everything on that mobo runs great with OSX. You can build a Mac Pro Lite Quad Core with just under $600.

[ethana2 @ Sep 11th 2008 6:44PM]

People still don't get it.

Exclusivity has __NOTHING__ to do with how well your hardware works. The key is a monolithic software stack.

[HardwareDeveloper @ Sep 11th 2008 6:48PM]

The only good thing about it is to push the manufacturer to do better, there's no real productivity into it... Macs stability and synergy between hardware and software make the product successful, i doubt one would want the drivers headache just to have Mac OSX on cheaper hardware...

[neosoul @ Sep 11th 2008 9:41PM]

I think you got it right on the nose. Other than the actual synergy between Macs and their hardware (even a 'pc' fan like myself will admit) what the heck do you use it for?

It's like installing Linux on a Sun box, they spent millions qualifying their hardware with their OS to provide rock solid stability - and you install a major variable for ...? It's not that Linux stinks either, it's just completely defeating the purpose of paying that premium.

Why take a PC which actually works with a broader range of hardware and then shove an OS that was expecting something else. I can justify OSX86 but just for fun - not a ~$180 device.

End note: Macs are good for Mac users, and Windows are good for Windows users. Don't jury rig a Mac together and expect the full Mac experience.

:-)

p.s. did anyone try installing something as simple as a wireless driver on one of those hacked osx's? ::me shakes::

[Billy G @ Sep 11th 2008 7:02PM]

windows4eva

[absurdio @ Sep 11th 2008 11:42PM]

Billy G goes to McDonalds just to flaunt his Burger King crown.

[3Dman @ Sep 11th 2008 8:28PM]

You can use modified Boot-132 bootloader and boot Retail DVD what's the different ?

[YOYO @ Sep 11th 2008 9:08PM]

there isn't any relay i don't think what people get is there isn't realy any hacking to with the os to make it run on a pc

apple use intel chipset intel cpu the same one i already have all there hardware is the same as any other pc and yes apple is a pc even mighty Steve jobs has said that

the only dif between apple hardware and my pc is the use efi and apple brading u really don't have to mod osx to much to make run on on stander pc

really all there doing is patching the install disk and removing the part that makes the os look for the apple branding in the mother board and mod it to run off from bio instead efi all the extra hacking that gets done on osx86 is mainly do the fact that apple supports limited hardware so people have to add there own driver support all this chip does is emulate efi and apple brading most likely ent realy paid to much attetion to it cuz i dont need this my self but in fact u can buy a tryan board for a pc that wont require any extra driver or supports

all u do to os x is make not look for apple branding that it

it will also even run efi and u can have a mac pro for half the coast t

o prove my point i know lots off apple guy whobuy the pc version of a video card cuz it cheaper and just flash the rom to make it apple version no diff in hardware just need to say it a mac version on the rom


the only thing that prevents osx from running on a normal pc is steve job at tech level it all ready made for regular hardware sorry apple fan boy but there is no suck thing as apple hardware it just intel nvidia the same as the rest of us intel does not have any exculsive mother chipset for apple only

apple no differnt then dell

apple they buy the chip install apple brading thats it hell asus make apple barebone laptops then apple install what every they want just like dell there only hand full compnay in the world who make laptops and apple not 1 them

so to answer you r question there not really a diff u can set a pc to do efi if u just installed 123 boot loader once u get around the efi thing it kinda simple


and if the rumors r true u will find more efi boards on the market soon as windows is rumored to be switching from bio to efi as well and that case apple will see may more years of this kinda stuff

[Neeko @ Sep 11th 2008 8:36PM]

Hmm i can buy a mac mini or build a more powerful shuttle for same price..decisions decisions..

[Peter Sills @ Sep 11th 2008 9:37PM]

First, ANY additional choices, as long as they are legal, are a good thing. From what little I know, this is entirely legal as they have not in any way "hacked" proprietary Apple hardware or software. The EULA on OSX is another matter and does not sound legit to me. Apple should not have the right to limit how you can use software which is purchased legally. Here, I believe, Apple is on shakey ground.

Second, this "may" open the doors to full-on Apple clones. I, for one, welcome this. Competition can only make for cheaper, better Macs. Right now, using this solution, I can build a MUCH BETTER, MUCH FASTER, MUCH CHEAPER Mac than Apple can. Why should this not be allowed? The only concern is that Apple will take all of its marbles and go home! (Why not they make far more on iPods than PCs.)

Third, for those that think there is something magical about the Apple hardware - do some reading and LEARN. The hardware is basically generic and designed, primarily by Intel (desktops) and Sony (laptops). The hardware is no different at its core than any PC you can buy today. If you like OSX, you should be able to run it - at least I would like to see it that way.

The problem is that Apple has evolved into a company which is exactly like the ones they used to make fun of - you know, those companies which used F.U.D. as their primary marketing technique? Look at the current Apple ads against Vista - nonsense - sorry to tell you Apple fanboys. I run both, and I can tell you that Vista Ultimate 64 so far has proved to be a MUCH more stable and reliable OS than OSX. Runs faster too. Problem was that there was a major transition to a new driver architecture which, admittedly, Microsoft handled badly. That is well over now, so get used to it.

In the end run, these are computers - pure and simple, and you should be able to have access to whatever software you are willing to PAY for. Sorry Apple - not on your side on this one.