osx86
Latest
EFiX OS X-installing USB device now available?
Well, today's the day that the EFiX folks promised their magical OS X-installing USB device would be available to the general PC-going public and, judging from the company's website at least, it seems like it's no more readily available than it was yesterday. The company has at least put up a product page for the desktop version of the device (pictured at right), however, as well as some non-working links for promised laptop and PCI versions of the device -- not to mention an intriguing (also non-working) link for "complete systems." They've also helpfully provided a list of compatible hardware, which looks to be extensive enough (assuming it all is, in fact, compatible). Feel free to post in comments if you've actually managed to get an order in one way or another, and we'll be sure to let you know if we hear anything more.[Thanks, Scientist]
Psystar puffs out its chest, introduces off-license OS X servers
Apple hasn't sued Psystar yet, so it's no surprise the company is pushing the envelope as far as it can -- it's just introduced two rackmount servers that come with OS X Server pre-installed. The OpenServ 1100 and 2400 are both configurable with 2.5 GHz Xeon processors and up to 16GB of RAM, with the 1U 1100 sporting four drive bays and the 2U 2400 rocking six. Just like Psystar's other products, you're on your own (or at the mercy of Psystar) for service and support, since Apple won't help you -- and considering Psystar kept sending us support tickets for that DHCP issue but never actually called us to resolve it, that might make enterprise customers a bit wary. On the other hand, with prices starting at $1599, we're certain some desperate render shop will take the plunge.[Via Information Week]
EFiX wants to bring OSX86 to the masses
Word in the OSX86 world is that a new product will revolutionize (and simplify) the process of installing OS X on a PC -- and that product is called the EFiX. The USB dongle allegedly pops into a free port and allows you to install the retail version of the Mac operating system on just about any system by automatically locating the proper hacks and drivers needed. Famed OSX86 hacker Netkas has demoed a beta unit on video (which you can see after the break) and claims that it's working as it should. The manufacturer is aiming to have models available for purchase by June 23rd... barring any more "sabotage." This sounds like a much more reasonable solution than marketing a Mac clone -- feel free to send one our way whenever you like guys.[Via Boing Boing Gadgets]
OS X made to run on a Samsung Q1 Ultra Premium
With all the Psystar-related drama going on in the OSx86 scene this week, it's easy to overlook the fact that people are doing some pretty wild things with the community-led project -- we've already seen OS X boot on a Sony Vaio UX, and now the crew at jkOnTheRun have managed to shoehorn it on to a Samsung Q1 Ultra Premium UMPC. The Q1's 1.33GHz Core Solo and upgraded 2GB of RAM are enough to run Leopard smoothly, it seems -- Apple sold Mac Minis with similar specs a while back, after all -- and while not everything works exactly right, it appears the digitizer is recognized, allowing Ink to work. It's not perfect, as there are some calibration issues, but it's a fun little peek into what an OS X tablet might look like -- minus the command button, of course.
OSx86 Project not too happy with Psystar either
Uh-oh, it looks like wannabe Mac clone maker Psystar has more than one licensing issue with the Open Computer: the company didn't get permission from developers working on the OSx86 Project to sell their work. Netkas, who developed the EFI emulator Psystar is using, posted up a blog entry yesterday calling Psystar "liars" and has re-released his code under a license that specifically forbids commercial usage. We chatted briefly with Netkas and he told us that not only did Psystar take his code without permission, it's using other code from the project like the NVInject graphics patch developed by Gotoh, and that he contacted Psystar when he learned about the Open Computer with no results. We also talked to several other members of the OSx86 scene who believe that Apple is tolerant of (and even subtly assisting) their efforts, and are worried that the Psystar flap might end that relationship and bring the hammer down -- after all, there's no Psystar without OSx86.Interestingly, when we called Psystar to get comments on all of this, Rudy Pedraza, the president, first wanted to know if we could make Netkas call him, then denied using the EFI emulator, then repeatedly asked us for Netkas's phone number (in Russia!) so he could talk to him directly, and then finally promised to call us back. Yeah, he never called back. That's a lot of uncertainty around a pair of machines that haven't shipped from a company with two different addresses that's been in business for less than a year -- and Apple hasn't even gotten involved yet. At this point we're going to say that if you really want a hackintosh, you're likely better off rolling up your sleeves and building one yourself -- you'll probably have it done well before this whole mess gets sorted out. Read - Netkas blog posting Read - The Guardian "So exactly who or what is Psystar?"Read - Psystar listing at the Florida State Department website
Psystar says rumors of its demise are greatly exaggerated, still selling Open Computers
So the rumors swirling around would-be Mac clone maker Psystar are getting pretty wild out there -- we've heard everything from "Apple has shut the company down" to "Psystar is going to challenge Apple's EULA in court" in the vacuum following the company's site meltdown yesterday. That's a big spread, so we hit up Psystar's president Rudy Pedraza for some answers. Rudy was relatively cagey on the phone, refusing to answer any questions about Apple's EULA or copyrights -- or even confirm if Apple has talked with the company -- but he told us that he's got a "team" of people working on an official response and that the Open Computer (and the new quad-core Open Pro, pictured above) are still for sale. What's more, he told us that "a few" orders placed before yesterday's flood of interest have shipped, which means we're curious to see if any of these early adopters actually surface in the next few days. Rudy also told us that Psystar isn't out to infringe any copyrights or trademarks (really?), and that he has no idea how Information Week got a quote from someone named "Robert" indicating that the company was going to challenge Apple's EULA in court. Sure thing. Rudy promised us a machine either today or tomorrow, we'll see what happens -- honestly, it seems like things are chaos at Psystar's HQ in Miami right now.P.S. -Remember MGM v. Grokster? In that case the Supreme Court ruled that a company that based its business around the knowing copyright infringement of customers was still liable, even if it didn't infringe directly. Kinda shoots a hole in the "just don't pre-install Leopard" theory, no?Read - Psystar Open ProRead - Information Week ("Psystar vows to challenge Apple EULA")Read - DailyTech: ("Apple Kills Psystar's $399 Mac")
Psystar site goes down under load, Apple lawyers seen shopping for BMWs
Psystar's offer to build off-license OSx86 OpenMac clones was apparently pretty popular -- we saw a note from the company saying it was trying hard to cope with the rush of traffic, but it looks like things got overwhelming, and the site is now unavailable. People are speculating that Apple already shut things down, but that's pretty unlikely: nothing on the Psystar site infringed any of Apple's IP (as far as we can recall) and the company hadn't actually sold anything yet, which means there isn't much of anything for Apple to go to court over. On top of that, we doubt that Psystar wasn't expecting to attract Apple's attention, so we don't think a cease and desist letter would scare the company into shutting things completely down. Of course, we're still willing to bet that Apple's legal team is licking their chops in anticipation of something actionable happening, but we'd say the most interesting thing about this so far is the incredible amount of attention a low-cost expandable minitower running OS X has gotten -- maybe someone at Apple apart from the lawyers should be taking notes as well.Update: They're back! They've changed the name to "Open Computer," which should totally throw off Apple's lawyers. Or... probably won't.
Psystar's OpenMac Apple clone is close to a Cease and Desist order
If you're not brave enough to OSx86 your own PC, psystar will sell you its OpenMac clone for $400. For that price you get 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo E4500 processor, 2GB of memory, integrated GMA 950 graphics, 250GB disk and 20x DVD burner. Add another $155 and they'll even install Leopard on the non-Apple kit with the help of an EFI V8 emulator. Even at $555 it's still a spec-for-spec bargain compared to the Mac mini (albeit without the mini dimensions). If interested you'd better snap one up quick. Jobs, you'll recall, put a swift end to official Mac-clone licensing when he resumed power at Apple. No reason to think that he (or his lawyers) feel any differently now. [Thanks, Roberto]
Apple modifies Public Source License to thwart hackers
The InsanelyMac Forum has a post concerning an apparent modification Apple made to their Public Source License, the license that guards the open source portions of Mac OS X such as its Unix kernel, called Darwin. The changes the InsanelyMac Forum cite seem to have been made to set up another roadblock for those who are trying to hack Mac OS X to work on non-Apple hardware, though Apple's site for the license say the latest version is dated August of 2003. Semantics aside, the changes quoted in the forum reflect the application of another fine-toothed comb to what users are not allowed to do with the source they download from Apple's site. Too bad; with Vista receiving mixed reviews, I'm sure Michael Dell would still be interested in offering customers a better choice.
Apple Drops Trusted Computing
When Apple announced the move to Intel processors, there was a good deal of talk regarding whether the company would make use of the content protection offered through Intel's Trusted Platform Module (TPM) to ensure OSx86 could only be run on Apple's own hardware. Although Apple did eventually include the Trusted Computing chips in the machines, it seems that they never actually used them. For some however, the mere presence of the chip without a a statement from Apple as to what it was being used for was enough to make them switch away from Macs. Amit Singh brings news that with the introduction of the Mac Pro, the TPM is absent from the motherboards of Apple's new machines; something that should lay to rest any remaining conspiratorial fears. Singh had previously released a piece of software that allowed users of machines containing the TPM to use Trusted Computing to protect their own data. [via BoingBoing]
OSx86 Project announces forum reorganization and upcoming name change, hints at new features
I just received an email from the OSx86 Project announcing a few recent and upcoming changes they have and will be making to the site. Last week they reorganized the forums to make the browsing and searching process easier, but in the upcoming weeks (by the end of the month, they promise), a host of new features will debut on the site, including blogging, a picture sharing gallery and a marketplace, along with a new name: Insanely Mac. It should be interesting to see (what I believe is) the first major upgrade to the already 39K+ member forum.
Why no Windows on Macintel? $12,000
It's an interesting and logical theory. You know that contest to see who can get Windows to run on an Intel-based Macs? According to the OSx86 project, that very contest is the reason we aren't all dual-booting right now. One argument for open source is that collaboration breeds potentially better, or at least faster results than working in isolation. So this contest has stopped the information sharing, and developers are guarding their tricks so they can win the money. Now obviously we're all looking forward to Q or Virtual PC just doing everything in emulation. I want something like Wine, so I can use Exposé to see Outlook and IE6 alongside all my Mac apps, not virtualized inside some other OS window... But that's just me. And I tend to agree that we aren't installing Windows on Macintels because, in part, people are working alone. I still don't see what's to stop someone with real money (like a software company) from ignoring the $12,000 and developing a tool to install Windows on a Mac. I guess this will all be a moot point once the first person has done it. As long as the method and/or tool is available online I'm all for it. [Via digg, photo via Flickr]
OSX86 Forums Closed by DMCA Violation Notice
For those people attempting to get Mac OS X 10.4.x for Intel installed on machines other than Macs, the best place to get that information was the forums at the OSX86 Project. The forums are now closed indefinitely because the project was served with a DMCA violation notice and the project manager(s) are working on culling the questionable content.The front page of the forums has been replaced with this notice:Welcome! We're sorry to report that despite our best efforts, the OSx86 Project has been served with a DMCA violation notice. The forum will be unavailable while we evaluate its contents to remove any violations present. We thank you for your patience in this matter.
Apple Seeks (Poetic) Justice
Seems Apple has hidden a secret message to OSX86 hackers to find in the 10.4.4 build of Mac OS X for Intel. And this time it's in verse!Your karma check for today:There once was a user that whinedhis existing OS was so blind,he'd do better to piratean OS that ran greatbut found his hardware declined.Please don't steal Mac OS!Really, that's way uncool.(C) Apple Computer, Inc.Sure, it's not the greatest poem, but how funny is this! I've always loved easter eggs in software and this is the best kind. The people who run OSX86 Project site have offered up their own poetic reply to Apple. You can read it at their site.I humbly offer up my own poetic reply in the style of William Carlos Williams after the jump...
Red Hat Linux distro to boot on Intel Macs
They haven't mentioned exactly HOW they will make Red Hat Linux boot on the new Intel-based Macs, but a Red Hat spokesperson has confirmed they are committed to creating a distro for the new hardware. This may take a while because they haven't yet purchased any Intel Macs. Secondly Red Hat Fedora hasn't even begun to discuss whether they will be taking a grub or lilo tactic as a bootloader.As mentioned here before, even with EFI support in existing open source tools, getting the new MacIntels to boot something other than OS X has proven tricky.Linux support will eventually happen for the new platform (and related hardware in the new machines), but I'm not sure Red Hat will be the first distro to achieve that. As always with Linux and BSD, flame wars descend over which flavor is better. The reality is that I use different distros for different uses/machines. Anyhow, a Linux distro on a new Intel Mac may end up being many Linux distros once the bootloader troubles are resolved.[via Ars Technica]
Contest: Dual-booting WinXP and Mac OS X on Intel Mac
Here's a guy that so badly wants to run Windows XP natively on his new Intel-based Mac that he's started a contest to pay the first person who can offer a working way to dual-boot both Mac OS X and WinXP on an Intel Mac.I'm all for the idea of having a computer than can run any OS on the market, but I don't think dual-booting an Intel Mac is the answer. I feel a better solution is for Apple to provide a Rosetta-like translation layer (think WINE for Mac OS X) in which Windows apps can run natively. Just being able to boot your Intel Mac into WinXP does nothing for the monumental security, virus, and spyware problems that plague the Windows world, almost all of which target the OS (or applications tightly integrated into the OS).If Apple really wants to offer a competitive alternative to Microsoft Windows, just think how attractive a computer would be that could run natively every single piece of software on the shelf (without having to reboot into a different OS which is very consumer unfriendly), and also without Windows' security problems.Just as Microsoft is gearing up for a Windows Vista launch this summer (or Fall as the date keeps moving), Apple could really make a splash by announcing at WWDC their next version of Mac OS X with this kind of translation layer built in.
Intel Software Development Tools Beta for Mac OS
Intel is offering a free trial of the following products for MacIntel developers: Intel® C Compiler for Mac OS Intel® Fortran Compiler for Mac OS Intel® Math Kernel Library for Mac OS Intel® Integrated Performance Primitives for Mac OS I'm not sure much of this would be of interest without a machine running OSx86. Also, I'd be interested to see if these are really necessary in light of the offerings Apple gives to developers. Perhaps in the interest of science someone might enlighten me to the advantages of using an Intel C compiler versus using gcc on OS X? Would the advantages be arbitrary or based on coding style?[via Slashdot]
Official Firefox version for OSx86 available in March
ZDNet reports that an official version of Firefox for Intel Macs will be available in late March. The official release is being targeted for the release of Firefox 1.5.0.2.If you need to run Firefox before March on your OSx86 machine, there are a few possible choices:1. Use Apple's Rosetta to run a PowerPC version of Firefox. 2. Run the preproduction OSx86 version of Firefox Josh Aas and other Mozilla developers have been working on since last year. Note that you will be required to disable the use of Flash and will be without the use of some Java Applets with this version. Also available in a preproduction Intel Mac OS X version on the same Mozilla wiki is their mail client, Thunderbird for OSx86.The ZDNet article also mentions that Apple has been very helpful to Mozilla developer Josh Aas with the process of creating native builds of Mozilla software for OSx86. Props to Apple and Macromedia for cooperating with open source development![via ZDNet Australia]
The Hidden Message to OSx86 Trawlers
In the MacBook Pro's version of OSx86, in /System/Library/Extensions lies a little message in a kernel extension for would-be readers:<key>_name</key><string>Dont Steal Mac OS X[...]<string>Copyright (c) 2006 Apple Computer, Inc. All rights reserved.<string>The purpose of this Apple software is to protect Apple copyrightedmaterials from unauthorized copying and use. You may not copy, modify,reverse engineer, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense,transfer or redistribute this file, in whole or in part. If you haveobtained a copy of this Apple software and do not have a valid licensefrom Apple Computer to use it, please immediately destroy or delete itfrom your computer.Given this message, I have a hunch that perhaps Steve has encouraged his team to implement other forms of copy protection into the production copies of OSx86, perhaps in the form of watermarking. Also, I haven't seen any mention of this in the Intel iMac's version of OSx86. Feel free to pontificate in the comments. Is this a warning that perhaps there are stronger measures coming to find users running OSx86 on non-Apple hardware?[via OSx86 Project]
My day in the Mactel underground installing OS x86
Last week I was listening to This Week in Tech, with the golden voice of Leo Laporte. Apparently Leo had refused a copy of os x86 that had been offered to him by some punk kids. Me? I love punk kids. They pay my bills (because I'm paid to teach them). So it was with great glee that one such punk kid let me know about a little experiment... He and some friends were going to put OS x86 on his Dell. He offered transportation to an undisclosed site where the grand plan would unfold, and I told him I'd check it out.Brace yourself for a walk through the seamy underbelly of Macdom. Let's face it, all this business has Apple a little ruffled. And Mac purists just roll their eyes, knowing whatever comes out of Cupertino next year will be loads better than the VAIO's, Dells, and e-Machines currently sporting the little OS that could. I'm going to explain what we had to go through to get all this working, and what we had by the end of the day. Read on— if you dare!
