Leopard Hacked To Run On A PC

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Apple’s Leopard has been hacked to run on a PC? That didn’t take long, now did it? Apparently it is a simple, three-step process.

Well its been only a day since the Mac OSX Leopard was released officially by Apple and the hackers have managed to create a patched DVD that everyone like you and me can use to install Leopard on PC’s without having to buy a Mac.
Click to expand...
 
Isn't it against forum policy to discuss using Mac OS illegally? :D


But that's pretty cool I guess. Makes you wonder why Apple wouldn't just release a non-Mac version if it's so easy to hack it. If you can't sway someone to buy a Mac, you can try to get them to buy your OS at least. Seems like they could make a little more money, no?
 
Man they really did that fast.

I wonder how long it will take apple to throw a check into the update system to brick the hacked installs?
 
This has been around since Tiger. It runs flawless if you've got the right hardware (like me :)), you can't even tell a difference between the hacked and real versions. The process works by ripping an ISO of your DVD, patching it, burning the ISO, and then installing it. The only problem with the process is that the patch utility runs on Macs, not PCs, sooo yeah, you run into a chicken-egg scenario there.
 
I don't know if this is against the forum, but I don't think so. I mean, we are not talking here about how to do it, the OP is only letting us know about the news that probably will come in TV anyways. So, I don't see nothing wrong in it.

By the way, this is crazy. Hackers now are better and better. Greedy developers just can't keep up now. Maybe they are thinking about making money all the way to the creation of things, and forget about other things like security, and the benefits of the customer.
 
InorganicMatter said:
This has been around since Tiger. It runs flawless if you've got the right hardware (like me :)), you can't even tell a difference between the hacked and real versions. The process works by ripping an ISO of your DVD, patching it, burning the ISO, and then installing it. The only problem with the process is that the patch utility runs on Macs, not PCs, sooo yeah, you run into a chicken-egg scenario there.
Click to expand...

A while back I saw pics of PC versions of Tiger being sold in HK, IIRC.
 
Odin75 said:
I don't know if this is against the forum, but I don't think so. I mean, we are not talking here about how to do it, the OP is only letting us know about the news that probably will come in TV anyways. So, I don't see nothing wrong in it.

By the way, this is crazy. Hackers now are better and better. Greedy developers just can't keep up now. Maybe they are thinking about making money all the way to the creation of things, and forget about other things like security, and the benefits of the customer.
Click to expand...

The op in this case can bend the rules if he wants to. Lets just say he has been around a while....

Anyway saying it has been done is fine. Talking about where to find it is not.
 
GJSNeptune said:
Isn't it against forum policy to discuss using Mac OS illegally? :D


But that's pretty cool I guess. Makes you wonder why Apple wouldn't just release a non-Mac version if it's so easy to hack it. If you can't sway someone to buy a Mac, you can try to get them to buy your OS at least. Seems like they could make a little more money, no?
Click to expand...

Actually no. Buying an Intel Mac, which is basically a PC with the ability to install OSX, costs a lot more than buying a PC with Intel Inside then buying a copy of OSX. Apple would lose their ability to charge out the ass altogether if they sold open copies of OSX.

Every Apple business success is built around artificially tying hardware to software (iPod/iTunes, OSX/Mac, iPhone/AT&T, etc.), and always has.
 
new headline: Apple says, "no credit card, no Leopard"

:D
 
InorganicMatter said:
This has been around since Tiger. It runs flawless if you've got the right hardware (like me :)), you can't even tell a difference between the hacked and real versions. The process works by ripping an ISO of your DVD, patching it, burning the ISO, and then installing it. The only problem with the process is that the patch utility runs on Macs, not PCs, sooo yeah, you run into a chicken-egg scenario there.
Click to expand...

Do both your cores work on your CPU without the stutter of death? This has been a major problem with this sort of setup in the past.
 
Like an earlier poster pointed out this was done with Tiger quite a while ago. Depending on your equipment you can wind up with a pretty crippled install but it's still interesting to see it work.

With Apple making "the while widget" as Steve likes to say they can get some nice integration between their OS and the intended hardware. With it out in the wild you end up with the MS problem of trying to be compatible with a universe of peripherals and configs.

I'd rather go from the other end: a Mac that is also running XP/Vista. :p
 
I'm glad for this. I wonder how the performance is?
 
rbanzai said:
Like an earlier poster pointed out this was done with Tiger quite a while ago. Depending on your equipment you can wind up with a pretty crippled install but it's still interesting to see it work.

With Apple making "the while widget" as Steve likes to say they can get some nice integration between their OS and the intended hardware. With it out in the wild you end up with the MS problem of trying to be compatible with a universe of peripherals and configs.

I'd rather go from the other end: a Mac that is also running XP/Vista. :p
Click to expand...

Enjoy paying $500+ for Mac OS.
 
I wouldn't mind having the option to throw OS X on a PC...BUT...here's one major reason it will never happen.

Apple likes to talk long smack on stability, etc. etc. etc. They can do this because hell, they only have to develop an OS for ONE hardware configuration (basically).

Microsoft has to make an OS that will run every single solitary piece of hardware known to man...and then some....in two billiondy different configurations.

There is no way Apple could whip one of their OS's into shape to handle all motherboards, chipsets, video cards, peripherals etc. etc. etc. without spending 5 years doing it...kinda like they laugh at MS for doing with Vista.
 
Nemesis999 said:
Enjoy paying $500+ for Mac OS.
Click to expand...

Good point.

In the past, the Mac was a different machine completely and you couldn't directly compare it to the PC. Now that it is directly comparable to a PC as it is based on the same hardware platform, now you can see the exact premium in the price that being a Mac costs.
 
Man it's gonna be hard to find the drivers, although since OSX is BSD based FreeBSD drivers will probably work.
 
Yeah, if you have the proper hardware, it works really well. I think I ran the first x86 one the exact same hardware that Apple tested on (Intel 915-series chipset I think) based board and system.
 
Hypernova said:
Man it's gonna be hard to find the drivers, although since OSX is BSD based FreeBSD drivers will probably work.
Click to expand...

No on the BSD drivers. OSX's Darwin kernel is based on BSD, but it has gotten much more loosely based than it once was. Drivers really aren't THAT big of a deal - there's homebrew drivers for all of the major hardware out there that is not natively supported (Intel HD Audio, Radeon X1000 series, GeForce 8000 series, etc.)
 
Met-AL said:
Good point.

In the past, the Mac was a different machine completely and you couldn't directly compare it to the PC. Now that it is directly comparable to a PC as it is based on the same hardware platform, now you can see the exact premium in the price that being a Mac costs.
Click to expand...

Actually if you match hardware to hardware, Macs are priced almost the same as major PC places like Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. The difference is, there is no lower end desktop Mac, there is the all in one iMac or the render/video workstation Mac Pros.

I suppose you could call the Mac Mini a desktop PC, but its so small that it uses laptop parts (similar to iMac).

But go ahead, continue thinking that PCs and Macs are so vastly different in prices when usually its within a hundred either above or below :rolleyes:
 
Just proves PC's superiority over mac:p

every game, program, OS or any piece of software for any system will eventually be hacked or released for PC.
 
iMac - $ 1,199

2.0Ghz Core 2 Duo,
250GB HD
1 GB DDR2 667mhz
20 inch screen
ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT 128MB
8x superdrive




Dell Inspiron 530 - $809

2.2 Ghz Core 2 Duo
320 GB HD
1 GB DDR2 667Mhz
20 in widescreen LCD
ATI Radeon HD 2400 128MB
16x DVD-/+RW


The dell specs are a little higher than the iMac but is $300 cheaper
 
Exavior said:
iMac - $ 1,199

2.0Ghz Core 2 Duo,
250GB HD
1 GB DDR2 667mhz
20 inch screen
ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT 128MB
8x superdrive




Dell Inspiron 530 - $809

2.2 Ghz Core 2 Duo
320 GB HD
1 GB DDR2 667Mhz
20 in widescreen LCD
ATI Radeon HD 2400 128MB
16x DVD-/+RW


The dell specs are a little higher than the iMac but is $300 cheaper
Click to expand...

Careful there. Jmackay is known for trying to somehow make ridiculous assertion of Macs still being cheaper and better than PC's despite cold hard facts.. you'd think he's Steve Job's kin or something.
 
And the dell also comes with a big ugly tower. Like I said, you can't compare Macs to regular desktops because they don't have regular desktops.

Compare the iMac to the Dell XPS One (not yet released) or the Gateway "One", as they are all-in-one systems.

The iMac is more expensive because it uses laptop parts, and is a full computer inside the LCD, while the dell has a tower that holds everything and thus can use cheaper parts.

You can fault apple for not having a good desktop option, but you can't say they are more expensive for the same hardware. I priced out a dell workstation vs apple and the apple was cheaper for the parts.

But anyway, I don't want to have this thread go way off topic as well.
 
Azhar said:
Careful there. Jmackay is known for trying to somehow make ridiculous assertion of Macs still being cheaper and better than PC's despite cold hard facts.. you'd think he's Steve Job's kin or something.
Click to expand...

Laptop 200GB HD $204.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145160
Desktop 750GB HD: $189.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136131

Now you can claim that Hitachi is super expensive and that WD is a much cheaper, or you can realize that you are comparing two things that are very different.
 
I thought we weren't going to derail?

I still say Apple should release a non-Mac version of their OS. If anything, they at least wouldn't have to suffer the embarrassment of having their software hacked so quickly.
 
GJSNeptune said:
I thought we weren't going to derail?

I still say Apple should release a non-Mac version of their OS. If anything, they at least wouldn't have to suffer the embarrassment of having their software hacked so quickly.
Click to expand...

People kept bringing it up, I'll let it die if they do :p

Anyway, all OSes get hacked right away, people love to break em. Hell XP was released online before it was out in stores and Vista's activation was cracked very early with the OEM bios or whatever.

I wouldn't say its an embarrassment to have your OS hacked, I'd say its a sign that people want it :p (MS or Mac). I mean if people are going out of their way to run your OS on a computer that means there is something good going for it :)
 
lillimon04 said:
What at are you trying to get at here? Everyone knows that laptop hdds are a lot more expensive than regular pc hdds.
Click to expand...

Because iMacs use laptop parts and Dell Desktops use regular ones.. congratulations you made the connection :)

So its not "Macs are more expensive than XXXXXXXX", its "the parts Macs use to be small (laptop parts) are more expensive, thus raising the price of the Mac over the XXXXXXXX".

So like I said, you can't compare Mac hardware prices to other PC Manufacturers unless you use the same internals.
 
I am a PC guy through and through. I have a fairly blazing system running Vista Ultimate x64. But lets put this on the line here.

OSX86 runs pretty damn good on the right hardware. In fact, it runs perfectly if you like to tweak it with kexts and patches. The ironic thing is that you will STILL do less tweaking and patching to get OSX86 to work correctly than you would with Vista right out of the box. It is a sad fact. I have been running Vista since beta. And even on a system with 4GB of RAM, 1TB of storage and Quad cores, it still runs like a big sack of shit. Seriously. This has been one of the most disappointing OS experiences for me since Windows ME. Unfortunately, we still need Windows, so you are either running Vista (or XP, which is pretty long in the tooth) or a Mac with parallels (or boot camp).

Take OS X, on the other hand, and you find that stuff just works. YES, it is a locked down hardware so it is far easier to program for, I get it. But really, when a hacked version works just as well as the original on hardware it was NOT designed for...you really see the problems with Vista. Vista is pretty, don't get me wrong, but it SUCKS.

Now, if you want to compare hardware, try running Vista on 1GB of RAM with all the pretty stuff on. For that matter, run Vista Ultimate with Aero and whatnot on a Core 2 Duo @ 2GHz, with 1GB DDR, on a GMA 950 chipset. Let me know how that works out, because OS X does it with all the bells and whistles.

On the subject of hardware cost, yes, if you really get down to it you do pay a bit more when going OEM. You do pay a bit for style, though, and Apple engineers and designers are ON THE BALL. Have you ever used the Mighty Mouse? Scrolling on it is incredible. Also which do you think looks better on your desk?

131
product-20in.jpg


I hate to say it, but Apple really nailed it this revision of hardware and software. I'm not saying I am going to switch, but I am going to add OS X to my life.
 
You guys are funny, talking about OSx86 illegal?

There is nothing illegal about it. http://www.insanelymac.com has detailed instructions and tutorials for getting hardware working with specific iso's and patches. Apple Legal knows them, they stay in contact with eachother, insnaelymac knows exactly what is illegal and what isnt. Posting screenshots of the Leopard beta was more illegal than instructions on patching the Leopard beta to run on a PC. A vast majority of OSx86 is done through open source code like Darwin.

What is not allowed is posting copyright material, thats the stuff you will find on torrent sites (like prepatched iso's). Talking about using the material is not illelgal in anyway shape or form.

Seriously, why dont people get all freaked out when someone talks about unlocking the iPhone, or putting custom firmware on their PSP? Its the same damn thing. Anyone with a leopard disc can download legal patching files and break their own license agreement by patching it to run on a PC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top