Imac Dual Core - how to build my own
 

Hey I was wondering if anyone knew what the motherboard was in the intel mac. Also a complete list of all the parts and whats compatable would be nice cause i have an empty box id like to build a mac out of.

Apple.

There's a rumor it was designed by Intel, but even if it was, it's physical design was setup for the iMac form factor, and at least has EFI instead of bios. who knows what other changes were made just for apple.

You're probably not going to find a lot of support here for hacking a copy of OS X to work on generic hardware...

What CAlvarez said is true - these forums will not support any attempts at subverting Apple's licensing. And currently the OS X license says that you cannot install it on anything other than an Apple machine.

And in any case, it's custom hardware - it's not something you are going to find in any catalog.

I don't think there is anything wrong with being intellectually curious and knowing to what extent Apple uses off-the-shelf stuff and where the specifics start is pretty interesting in my opinion.

Innovation comes from curious people and the thought police fraction here might want to meditate how exactly Xerox' "intellectual property" was treated when Steve and friends visited PARC...

There is nothing wrong with curiousity and knowledge, the rest gets taken care of by Apples army of paranoid lawyers anyway.

No argument there. I merely pointed out that the task was going to be many orders of magnitude harder than fallenconcept seemed to think it would be.

As I understood the history of that encounter, there was no ill-doing. But that is not the subject of this thread. In any case, what was mentioned above is a software licensing issue, and it has nothing to do with whether someone has the right to implement (from scratch) their own clone of OS X.

And a desire to stay well out of the notice of all lawyers (Apple or otherwise) is one of the motivating factors behind these forums' avoidance of all activities with any semblance of illegality. (It's not the only motivating factor!)

i am curious that is all cause i cant see apple staying with the product just on there computers. we all know dell had some interest in using the operating system. Also the rumors of apple trying to find a way to run all windows programs on the operating system without an emulator. I bet in the near future they will be supporting installing the operating system on a pc. They need to because someone needs to stick it to microsoft the software cut was so not needed and not to mention the fact microsoft sued blackberry. Curiously thats the only big handheld company who isnt using windows mobile.

Well, we will have to wait and see. But Apple is a hardware company and so I expect that they will continue doing what they have said they will do - to do everything they can to prevent OS X from running on non-Apple hardware.

I think it will be the opposite of being able to install apple on a pc... I think thay are going to make it so you can run windows and mac together on apple (much MUCH better than VPC does)

BSD, Aqua, X11, and Windoze all running side by side in the same user space. I personally think, if they do get it to work, all the debuggers will start jumping off the south bridge to end their misery ... :p

yes but a good thing to look at is the HP Ipod. Apple will let dell use the operating system for the right amount of money. I can not see apple keeping the operating system to themselfs cause you know Steve Jobs and Apple would love to be the main OS and looking at the way Microsoft has been doing things it wouldnt suprise me. You can see there backstepping and running scared. They keep sueing and sueing and sueing to try and get there way. You know Microsoft is going to let Windows run on Apple, So what makes you think Apple wouldnt do the same. I bet you Apple was pissed when they saw Windows cut all the development on those programs. Here is the key when the next version of OSX comes out see if it has PS2 support if that is in there you will know Apple wants it on PC.

Apple is still a hardware company. That's the main source of their revenue. I think there will be a lot more iterations of the *Pod to fill their coffers before OS X is offered as an install for any-old-hardware.

Seriously though, I don't think they'll ever do it.

1) They would have to come up with a solid key-serial-number solution for every copy of OS X.

2) They would find themselves supporting every piece of **** piece of hardware under the sun and trying to keep everything from falling apart under OS X. Something Microsoft does (barely). Something I don't envy them having to do. At least if you buy a Mac, Apple knows they have a fairly limited hardware profile to deal with.

Microsoft doesn't care what Windows runs on, as long as you purchase a licensed copy of their software. Don't make the mistake of comparing Apple and Microsoft as a one to one comparison. Maybe if Microsoft and Dell were 1 company you could, but Microsoft is only half of the issue.

I don't think Apple was pissed or surprised. They've know about it for a while, hence Safari.

I don't get it. What does this have to do with OS X on a PC?

Probably thinking that since PS2 is a PC only hadrware plug and is used for mouse and keybaord (though usb works fine too), it would mean that they are implimenting a PC version as Macs never have used PS2 in the past, they used ADB instead.

OOOOOOOOOOOooo.. Haha!

I was thinking PS2 as in PlayStation2, not that hacknied old-ass keyboard/video plug. There's NO way in HELL that Apple will slap PS2 support on the MacTels. Hell, even Dell is finally dropping it.

I think they will, eventually. Last quarter Apple made more money from iPods than Macs. That's a definite shift. And there is not as much money in the hardware business as there used to be. That's why IBM left. They don't see themselves as a commodity/appliance company. Apple doesn't see themselves that way either.

That's a valid point. I think Apple will wait until the last support contract for a PPC Mac expires before considering supporting Windows machines. And they may decide to sell OS X to PC manufacturers only, not to the general public. Apple could offer OS X support to the manufacturers along with OS X licenses. That way they could gradually build up their support business by adding one manufacturer at a time.

Windows Vista will run on hardware that is much more similar to current Intel Mac hardware. That will change the game a bit.

I imagine the user having a choice... OSXi or Windows Vista ... One needs a minimal requirement (ok a sensible requirement) of 512 megs of RAM... while the other minimallt needs 1 gig... And its the same for almost every component... So user goes... If I choose OSXi, I can get a small machine thats got nice performance... If I choose Vista, I have to get the monster machine, just to be able to run the OS ! That would be a funny one... Would make for sure some great gag call recodings with companies like Dell...

Something I always find mildly amusing about these kinds of threads is that you always get some people arguing that Apple is a hardware company, and others that they're a software company.

Neither, of course, is true. Apple sells systems. You don't buy OS X. You don't buy Apple hardware. You buy a Mac, with software and hardware matched to each other. (Okay, some people buy Apple hardware and install other BSDs or Linux on it. Damned few people, though. Of course, OpenBSD on a mini would make the ultimate box to drop off at a co-lo facility....)

I really doubt that Apple will ever seriously decouple hardware and software. Rather, if there's ever an official way to run OS X on non-Apple hardware, it'll be exactly like the deal with the HP iPod. Apple will design the whole thing, and it'll get manufactured to Apple's specs if not alongside Apple-branded equipment. They'll just be gracious enough to let the other company pay them to put their logo on the case and offer them a standard volume discount for the machines.

People will go out and build their own Intel- or AMD-based PCs and manage to install OS X on it. Those who post instructions how to do so may or may not get DMCA takedown notices for their troubles. Anybody who tries to make a business off of it will make a tasty hors'd'oeuvre for Apple's lawyers.

And everybody else will realize that the price / performance / quality equation of the Apple hardware really does beat the competition; they just don't sell bottom-of-the-barrel crap, is all.

In other words, business as usual.

Cheers,

b&

That's very nicely put...

FWIW, its an apple designed board with intel chips/chipset. There really is no way of telling what intel board its based off of, if it even is.

I bet someone just makes an aqua knock off shell for free bsd, and there will be your os x for the PC. At least that will happen first (infact I have seen some out there that look very familiar with OS X).

Someone has successfully loaded the x86 version of OS X onto a sony laptop however. So, it is very possible to load it on an x86 based PC, it will just be hard to get every thing to run right and smooth.

I am sure the open source community will have something out there eventually, since apple itself is actually borrowing open source code for their OS. You will just have to sit and wait.

This is the exact reason why apple does not make sense in the enterprise world. I only see apple computers on the enterprise level for special reasons (like someone high up has a preference). Why in the world would I want to spend $1,000+ dollars on a machine for office apps and internet/email? The mac mini was their answer to low end machines but then again, its still more expensive once you add in the keyboard/mouse and monitor. Not to mention the mac mini has no upgradability. You can add one stick of ram to it, and it doesn't come with any build options.

Why would I want to waste my money if I ran a buisness for things like that, when I could have a PC that costs 400.00 (cheaper if I opt out to put in an optical drive) each that will meet my needs. I have a competent IT staff, running linux servers that are secrure and stable, why in the hell would I pay more for apple hardware when I don't need it? On the basic level comparing a mac to a PC is like comparing apples to oranges. Sure you'll come back with the PCs are giant pieces of crap and they run slow and they break down. I am sorry that is just so unilatteral, especially coming from some people who are obviously smart on this thread. All computers break down, and all of them have problems running at times. If they didn't I wouldn't have my current job right now.

Don't even get me started about repairing macs on the enterprise level versus repairing PCs on the enterprise level. PCs are all around way easier to fix. Also, a lot of you on this forum may be administrators or developers, but how many of you actually perform componet level repairs on them, and then on top of that keep up with apple standards (apple has a grading system, and you get graded every repair you make)? which again on an enterprise level do not make much sense. I have novell at work, I think it stinks, but it makes sense in an enterprise enviroment. it is extremely easy to use, secure, and easy to manage and map out your whole network. it also plays nice with windows and linux, which is a plus.

ATI, and Nvidia develope their own drivers for MS windows. In fact most manufacturers will indeed write their own drivers, they just have to wait for the code from MS to develope it. Not to mention there are tons of generic drivers nowadays that work with a wide variety of things. Apple computers make sense for small specialized buisnesses and the individual (the consumer), not really on the enterprise level

i think people misread my ps2 comment. I was saying the surefire way to know what apple plans to do is check the next version of OSX if they add something like PS2 support or something not on an Mac then they are most likely preparing to allow it to be installed on a PC. I think the big factor is Dell. If they pay apple enough they will let them use the OS. We will have to see. I had a feeling people would get into a heated debate about this. But can you all really say you wouldnt like to be able to customize your mac more? Think about Windows has always been developing off the apple OS. I do have to think the company would jump at the chance at being the dominate OS. This is my arguement. Say Apple gets paid by Dell to use there Operating system. Alot of Corp. use Dells. Now they want the same OS at home as at work. Apples hand would most likely be forced in a situation like this. You do have to remember they are a company out to make money and selling more OS will make them money. I think they know people buy a Apple for the look and design more than anything. Releasing the OS for PC will not effect there business. Remember Apple like all companies is out to make as much money as they can and if they feel they will make more money off releasing the OS for pc they will.

Yeah - but the amount they likely would have to pay is around $64 billion (see http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=AAPL&t=5d&c=)

Yea it would be a large amount but Dell might find it a plus having a more stable OS.

Another thing to think about it is if microsoft allows it so there os can be installed on apple and apple cant block it. That kinda forces apples hand in a way because then they would lose the profit of people upgrading there os, if the person decides to use windows alone. This is very possible if windows is more stable than it has been in the past. I love my OS X cause I have never had one OS crash where I have had multiple crashes on every pc I owned. I do believe though Apple will do what they need to do to sell the most amount of product they can if be be hardware or software. If they feel this is a benfit to there profit they wont hesitate for one minute. It should be interesting to see how this all turns out.

This thread is interesting in some ways.

I was looking at the Intel iMacs earlier today at a dealership. They were opening telling me that they fully expect dual boot Mac / Windows machines AFTER the release of Windows Vista. Vista supports the EFI motherboards so that would be logical.

I can actually see pluses in this. One machine to run whatever of the shelf software you want. Windows users could buy Macs without the fear factor of how to work OSX, Mac users could run Windows App's at real speed not through the overhead of VPC, developers could offer one version of software that could be loaded on a machine and run under either OSX or Windows regardless of how the machine was booted. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs might hold hands on the stage at MacWorld and announce Steve appointment to the board of Microsoft. Well I'm probably getting carried away with the last bit... :-)

As I said the concept is interesting and certainly the hardware platform is now at the point where it could become a reality.

P.S. To the person going on about PS2 support. Look at the majority of Windows based keyboards and mice these days - they are all USB!

i brought up the PS2 point. It started with me saying if Apple were to add support for PS2 in there next os release it would prove they were planning to allow the os to be installed on a pc platform seeing as there hardware doesnt use it.

All i can say is its an interesting time.

I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would licence their OS to anybody ever again particularly Dell. Look what happened last time, the third party players introduced better cheaper machines and took most of Apples hardware sales overnight. How long did that experiment last? About a year from memory.
I don't think Apple is likely to repeat the same mistake particularly with somebody like Dell who will slash and burn the hardware price and aim to sell to current Mac users rather than trying to grow the overall OSX market.

It might help to consider what various players have to gain and lose from this.

All Apple would have to gain from licensing their OS to other hardware manufacturers is, really, expanded manufacturing capacity. We can be pretty certain that their contract-required specs will be so stringent that, aside from volume, nobody'll be able to make a non-Apple Mac significantly cheaper than Apple, and that Apple would charge enough in licensing fees to make up for their lost hardware profits. Apple would also suffer significant dilution of their brand name; ``Apple'' is a high-quality brand, while ``Dell'' is cheap. And Apple would also suffer a support nightmare, as people who bought Dells would call Apple for help after Dell fu...er, failed to provide adequate service. The PR result would be a fiasco.

Dell, on the other hand, would have a lot to gain. They'd no longer be dependent entirely on Microsoft, and it'd give their image a big boost. They'd also steal the bottom half of Apple's market away, as lots of people decided to go for price over value. Indeed, you can see that, in this scenario, Dell would quickly do to Apple what Wal*Mart does to its suppliers. Good for Dell...and the death knell to Apple.

If you ever hear anything substantial to these rumors, you can be pretty sure that it's nothing more than Dell yanking Microsoft's chain when contract renegotiations come 'round.

I'm sorry, I just don't see it ever happening. Not sure I want to, either.

Cheers,

b&