I built a hackintosh a month ago. core i7 9800gtx+ 6gb tripple channel ram. 1500 dollars less than the equivalent mac pro. I used my leopard family pack disk that I have for my mac mini htpc and my macbook. Apple got their money for their os from me. Also, I will not use 2 different os's for my main operating system. I need the power of a desktop and enjoy os x. I don't want to spend 1500 more for a single xeon processor that offers no real advantage over a core i7 unless one crash in 5 years costs you thousands of dollars. If I had to use windows to get an affordable powerful pc then i would be switching all of my computers over to windows and not give apple any more money. With my hackintosh, I will buy a new macbook and a new mac mini htpc when its time to upgrade them or when they break. So in the end we both win.
I think its ridiculous to call it stealing when a $130 license has been purchased. That is roughly the cost of windows home premium.
I do wonder if these psystar hackintoshes are really going to be good for the average user. Seems like even though they can update now, that they will run into trouble in the future. A geek like me isn't going to have problems finding out how to get everything working again with apple changes something. The average user will. I would think that anyone with the knowledge to keep these computers up and running would be better off building their own anyway.
The license is monopolistic and not necessarily legally binding. Apple could also lose me as a lucrative customer. I buy a lot of their software and hardware.
BZZZZT wrong. If you're using a Core i7, then it's not "equivalent to a Mac Pro". The Mac Pro uses Nehalem Xeons. How is that the same thing as a Core i7? In fact that $1500 you mentioned is about the cost difference between those two chips. Regardless of whether you THINK they're the same thing or not, they are NOT the same thing. It's pretty cut and dried. Xeons are workstation processors, the Mac Pro is a workstation. What don't people understand about that?
Bottom line, you get what you pay for, therefore the word "overpriced" does not apply, just like how when you pay more for a Mustang GT, you get a bigger engine. Also just FYI, Apple doesn't make any money on software. They make money on hardware. That's kind of the whole reason they're taking Psystar to court in the first place.
Do you put words in people's mouths much? I never used the word "overpriced". Go back and read it again.
Also, the i7 is a nehalem chip. The only difference between a single processor nehalam i7 and a single processor nehalem xeon is that the xeon supports ECC memory. ECC is slower than non ECC memory. It is slightly more stable, which is why i said that the xeon is a positive in a situation where one crash every few years could cost you thousands of dollars. For most people however (even power users), the the Xeon with its ECC memory is actually slower than the i7 with its non-ECC memory without any disadvantages.
What I'm saying is, don't just say "ITS A WORKSTATION PROCESSOR" without having any idea what it means and expecting to be right. Do some research first.
True about the multiple processor support. That is why I do like dual processor xeon setups. Its the single processor setups that i think are useless for almost everyone. In this current generation the nehalem xeon chips and the core i7 chips have the same exact cache. So that is not an advantage anymore.
Need I remind you exactly what snowboards said? He said, and I quote: "1500 dollars less than the equivalent mac pro"
Note the words "equivalent" and "$1500 dollars". After the both of you noted a number of deficiencies in the Core i7 vs. the Xeon, are you really going to argue that the i7 is the "equivalent" to the Xeon? Really?
Yes, the Xeon costs more, but that's not really Apple's fault, is it? Like I said: You get what you pay for. In the case of the Mac Pro, you are paying for Xeon chips. Whether you would prefer a Core i7 because it's cheaper is completely irrelevant. Saying "I got the same thing for $1500 less" is a logical fallacy. I mean we haven't even gone over everything else you get with a Mac Pro, we've just been restricting it to the cost differences between the i7 and the Xeon.
You are an ass for using ""overpriced"", when i never said "overpriced". You are also an ass for missing the point entirely. There is only one "deficiency" of the core i7 compared to the single core xeon. That is the ability to use ECC ram which actually makes the xeon slower than the i7 running non-ECC ram. So my computer is actually faster.
step back and see the big picture and not just marketing terms and bs. You also seem to have missed that I am a mac user and have been for years. I'm not just mindlessly bashing apple the way that you mindlessly support them.
Yeah snowboards, I miss the good ole days when Intel didn't gimp the chips to force you to buy Xeons. My old dual PIII was a great machine, and affordable too.
Man, people here just don't like hearing the truth.
Hey wiimypi. Xeon 3520? Why the shit are you using that chip as a comparison? What, nobody told you that the Mac Pro uses Xeon 5500s? Yeah, look it up and do the math again, genius. You're not helping your case here by looking like a moron.
And of course I'm not wrong. People just don't like hearing the truth. It's kind of sad, really.
Okay Zak. Let's explain this to you very, very slowly. We just proved that by using ECC memory, the Xeon processors are actually SLOWER than the i7s. We also just proved that you put words into other people's mouths and then completely ignore the evidence against you. Sit down and shut up. Checkmate.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I built a hackintosh a month ago. core i7 9800gtx+ 6gb tripple channel ram. 1500 dollars less than the equivalent mac pro. I used my leopard family pack disk that I have for my mac mini htpc and my macbook. Apple got their money for their os from me. Also, I will not use 2 different os's for my main operating system. I need the power of a desktop and enjoy os x. I don't want to spend 1500 more for a single xeon processor that offers no real advantage over a core i7 unless one crash in 5 years costs you thousands of dollars. If I had to use windows to get an affordable powerful pc then i would be switching all of my computers over to windows and not give apple any more money. With my hackintosh, I will buy a new macbook and a new mac mini htpc when its time to upgrade them or when they break. So in the end we both win.
I think its ridiculous to call it stealing when a $130 license has been purchased. That is roughly the cost of windows home premium.
I do wonder if these psystar hackintoshes are really going to be good for the average user. Seems like even though they can update now, that they will run into trouble in the future. A geek like me isn't going to have problems finding out how to get everything working again with apple changes something. The average user will. I would think that anyone with the knowledge to keep these computers up and running would be better off building their own anyway.
The reason it's stealing, even though you bought that license, is because you're using the software in a way that is not allowed by the license.
The license is monopolistic and not necessarily legally binding. Apple could also lose me as a lucrative customer. I buy a lot of their software and hardware.
BZZZZT wrong. If you're using a Core i7, then it's not "equivalent to a Mac Pro". The Mac Pro uses Nehalem Xeons. How is that the same thing as a Core i7? In fact that $1500 you mentioned is about the cost difference between those two chips. Regardless of whether you THINK they're the same thing or not, they are NOT the same thing. It's pretty cut and dried. Xeons are workstation processors, the Mac Pro is a workstation. What don't people understand about that?
Bottom line, you get what you pay for, therefore the word "overpriced" does not apply, just like how when you pay more for a Mustang GT, you get a bigger engine. Also just FYI, Apple doesn't make any money on software. They make money on hardware. That's kind of the whole reason they're taking Psystar to court in the first place.
Put the buzzer down, Quizshow. This aint Jeopardy.
He noted that the two weren't the same. The Zeon is different, but not in any way he cares about. And not to the tune of $1500
Do you put words in people's mouths much? I never used the word "overpriced". Go back and read it again.
Also, the i7 is a nehalem chip. The only difference between a single processor nehalam i7 and a single processor nehalem xeon is that the xeon supports ECC memory. ECC is slower than non ECC memory. It is slightly more stable, which is why i said that the xeon is a positive in a situation where one crash every few years could cost you thousands of dollars. For most people however (even power users), the the Xeon with its ECC memory is actually slower than the i7 with its non-ECC memory without any disadvantages.
What I'm saying is, don't just say "ITS A WORKSTATION PROCESSOR" without having any idea what it means and expecting to be right. Do some research first.
Xeons also support dual processor configurations and traditionally have more cache. But you're right, and hes an ass.
True about the multiple processor support. That is why I do like dual processor xeon setups. Its the single processor setups that i think are useless for almost everyone. In this current generation the nehalem xeon chips and the core i7 chips have the same exact cache. So that is not an advantage anymore.
I'm an ass for pointing out the truth? Wow.
Need I remind you exactly what snowboards said? He said, and I quote: "1500 dollars less than the equivalent mac pro"
Note the words "equivalent" and "$1500 dollars". After the both of you noted a number of deficiencies in the Core i7 vs. the Xeon, are you really going to argue that the i7 is the "equivalent" to the Xeon? Really?
Yes, the Xeon costs more, but that's not really Apple's fault, is it? Like I said: You get what you pay for. In the case of the Mac Pro, you are paying for Xeon chips. Whether you would prefer a Core i7 because it's cheaper is completely irrelevant. Saying "I got the same thing for $1500 less" is a logical fallacy. I mean we haven't even gone over everything else you get with a Mac Pro, we've just been restricting it to the cost differences between the i7 and the Xeon.
You are an ass for using ""overpriced"", when i never said "overpriced". You are also an ass for missing the point entirely. There is only one "deficiency" of the core i7 compared to the single core xeon. That is the ability to use ECC ram which actually makes the xeon slower than the i7 running non-ECC ram. So my computer is actually faster.
step back and see the big picture and not just marketing terms and bs. You also seem to have missed that I am a mac user and have been for years. I'm not just mindlessly bashing apple the way that you mindlessly support them.
Yeah snowboards, I miss the good ole days when Intel didn't gimp the chips to force you to buy Xeons. My old dual PIII was a great machine, and affordable too.
I'm going to have to agree with Zak here.
The difference between your rig and the mac pro is completely the difference in chip prices. I'll do the math.
i7 920 - about $250
Xeon 3520 - about $360 (note - there is more than one model of xeon out there)
$360 - $250 = $1500.
There. It's proven you dumbasses. The chip price difference is $1500.
And the advantage of that $1500 is what exactly? Can you even say?
Besides, I never argued that Xeons and Core2s are the same. Neither did Snowboards.
Zak's not *wrong* hes just an asshole.
Man, people here just don't like hearing the truth.
Hey wiimypi. Xeon 3520? Why the shit are you using that chip as a comparison? What, nobody told you that the Mac Pro uses Xeon 5500s? Yeah, look it up and do the math again, genius. You're not helping your case here by looking like a moron.
And of course I'm not wrong. People just don't like hearing the truth. It's kind of sad, really.
Okay Zak. Let's explain this to you very, very slowly. We just proved that by using ECC memory, the Xeon processors are actually SLOWER than the i7s. We also just proved that you put words into other people's mouths and then completely ignore the evidence against you. Sit down and shut up. Checkmate.