Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Homebuild MAC?

Last response: in Systems
Share
February 9, 2008 12:21:14 PM

Is it possible to do a homebuild MAC nowadays that they has became closer to normal PCs?
I'm thinking of getting a MAC but heck! Those on the list are all overpriced!

More about : homebuild mac

February 9, 2008 12:37:53 PM

Why? OSX is a very inferior OS.

And yes, there is a project called OSX86... which is OSX for PCs.
February 9, 2008 2:12:38 PM

I agree...there's no real reason to build a mac. If you're going through all that trouble, you might as well go the safer route and build a PC and put osx86 on it (if you love the os that much..)
Related resources
a b B Homebuilt system
February 9, 2008 2:36:24 PM

Actually Mac is not an inferior OS. In some ways it is superior. How do I know? Because I have always had PC's for a little over 10 years, I've gone to college for networking, and started out using PC's. Quite frankly, I will probably always have a pc for my games and various programs. That said, I do use a Macbook which has the intel core 2 duo, and must say I am quite impressed. There are many great features of a Mac. For example, you can set up multiple network locations, example, if you had a laptop and needed to go 20 different places, you can have a location, or basically a profile set up for each of those places you travel to, go to the apple menu, and select where you are and it has everything done for you. Also, Mac is based on Unix, so you can use the command lines and customize. It also has a quite nice network utility, something windows needs to put in instead of the old command prompt.

This is from a guy that will always use pc's, and is using vista on an athlon 5200 x2 with 2gb of memory. PC's for me have the programs I want and need, and are great. Love them, but again, don't bash the Mac either, they have come a long way, and leopard is nice too.

Honestly, on Mac, it is a great OS, having used both I can say that because I have built PC's, and work on Macs at my job, which is about 90% Mac computers, in fact just got to take an lcd out of a iBook g4 yesterday, fun fun fun. But the plain fact is, what do you want your machine to do? If you want to run games and what not, go with Windows. If you plan on running lots of different software applications go with Windows. Windows is great as well, works with just about everything.

Mac, you'd probably have to hack the OS to even get it installed, have to order almost all your software. So that's a couple of things. That said, if all you need it for is a simple box to check your email, surf the web, do some word processing, just basic things an average home user would use a computer for, the Mac is a fine choice, you don't have to worry as much about viruses etc from what I've seen. Though in defense of Windows, they are getting better on that front. Mac is very very stable, at least my Macbook usually is, but again, I don't get many problems out of my windows box either. But people should not have a mindset that Mac is inferior or Mac stinks. I used to think that way, but when you mess with it, it's actually quite capable.

One feature I do like is that I have what is my expose feature. If I'm doing a lot of work, I can move my mouse to one corner of my screen, and it will show my desktop, move to another corner, it brings up a mini window showing what I'm doing in each application, then I can click whichever one I need into.
February 9, 2008 2:37:16 PM

I think the only reason I would mess around with OSX86 is because I have to learn OSX for a job, and I don't have $2,000 to blow on a Mac.
a b B Homebuilt system
February 9, 2008 2:57:28 PM

Yeah, and that's the other thing about Mac, still a nice machine, but a lot of people see pc=500ish, well you get the idea.
February 10, 2008 7:04:25 PM

runswindows95 said:
I think the only reason I would mess around with OSX86 is because I have to learn OSX for a job, and I don't have $2,000 to blow on a Mac.


Yepp. That's the reason I want a mac...
I will try to install OSX Leopard on my AMD machine and see how it work. OSX86 forums says it will work so I will have to trust them.
February 10, 2008 7:30:47 PM

skittle said:
Why? OSX is a very inferior OS.

And yes, there is a project called OSX86... which is OSX for PCs.


Ha Skittle....

I think you should share all this knowledge and wisdom with the community. I mean it's great to have your conclusions, but sometimes I would like you to go a bit in depth in your analysis. It would change from all this fanboy crap some other members write.

Go ahead and explain us why it is VERY inferior.

Take care.
February 10, 2008 8:17:56 PM

Yeah, if you're building a PC just TO RUN OSX, then it isn't really worth it.
You're going to end up buying Windows parts and not even be able to play games.
I would recommend just getting two drives, one with Windows, and one with OSX-any x86 machine can run OSX to some extent, my Athlon 64 X2 machine can even run OSX.
I can pretty much say you'll end up using Windows.
February 10, 2008 10:06:44 PM

LOL, inferior OS xDDDDDD

You know what Unix means?
February 10, 2008 10:32:56 PM

Quote:
There are many great features of a Mac. For example, you can set up multiple network locations, example, if you had a laptop and needed to go 20 different places, you can have a location, or basically a profile set up for each of those places you travel to, go to the apple menu, and select where you are and it has everything done for you.


Haven't PC's always been able to do this? I now use my Vista laptop and go from home, to work, then to a business conference at a hotel every other month. I never tell my computer where i'm at. I set it up once and then it decides where i'm at and connects.

Anyway, just throwing this out there. I like computers in general. Windows and Mac although I haven't played around with a mac in a long time
February 11, 2008 12:47:26 AM

And everybody plays games, don't they? Doesn't anybody on this forum have a job or do they just play games all day?
a b B Homebuilt system
February 11, 2008 12:58:50 AM

^;) I have a job (part time) that is building gaming PCs.
February 11, 2008 1:03:25 AM

Actually, I just use my computer to download porn. :kaola: 
February 11, 2008 1:04:50 AM

@shadow: Well you're biased :lol: 

I don't like macs, I don't really like OSX either. But to say it's inferior is just BS. Now windows ME, that's inferior. Besides, you can't get viruses in OSX :pt1cable: 
February 11, 2008 1:06:42 AM

To be honest, I just refuse to pay all that money for hardware just to run a word processor.
February 11, 2008 1:42:14 AM

I like some of the OSX-only software. SubEthaEdit is great for software dev, much nicer than wordpad and free unlike visual C++.
February 11, 2008 9:23:19 AM

That's the way to do it ;) 
February 11, 2008 9:54:03 AM

I can play my favorites games (blizzard games), on MAC without any weird patch (as in linux). And the 8600gt on my macbook is enough for my POV and games available.
btw, work on mac, play on p.... ops, PLAY ON VIDEOGAMES (its more troubleless)!!!

edit 1:
Back to the topic, I have a AMD box (4600+/m2npv-vm), and tried to install MAC x86. The only problems where network driver and video driver. For Mac x86, you have to make a pre-search and buy a more compatible network card then my onboard marvell.

edit 2:
hybrid mac/win game DVDs are from around for a couple years now
February 11, 2008 3:38:53 PM

I'm not looking to build only a MAC machine. I'm looking to build a workstation which running both Windows and MAC. It's just that i'm not sure if MAC OSX needs a special components like it used to before or not. No idea bough a new one and it fails the intended purpose.

What i'm looking in a mac is it's tremendous wide range of softwares in multimedia production. Very tiny gaming capacity OS is a huge plus since there will be distracting me from seeing it as a gaming machine rather than a workstation.

and of course as earlier said. I need it for a couple of jobs.
February 11, 2008 4:18:19 PM

randomizer said:
@shadow: Well you're biased :lol: 

I don't like macs, I don't really like OSX either. But to say it's inferior is just BS. Now windows ME, that's inferior. Besides, you can't get viruses in OSX :pt1cable: 


That's due to the mass population being on windows =P, so no one really wants to go about making viruses for Mac OSX. In all reality, Vista is actually more secure than OSX...I always laugh when people try to argue this point with me, I shoot them down and the look on the apple fanboy face is fantastic. =D..

But in all reality, apples are good machines. My brother has a Mac pro in the other room, two dual 2.67 ghz core 2 duo's with 8 gigs of ram. The machine is a beast, now is it worth the 6000 or so payed when he got it? HECK NO...But I won't bash it for doing what it does well, it's a good machine, although I would never BUY a mac, I'd just run the OSX86 project solution for a pc based mac =P.

But yea, macs are no way inferior, they are just a different category of PC's. I'm glad to have learned the OS, not in much depth, but I can pretty much fix issues that arise and such...So it's all good on that. I really need to get one of my older machines booted with Ubuntu and start learning Unix, all my experience is based on windows, OSX, and Dos...lol. Need some more diversity ^_^, and unix is next.

Man..I'd love to open a small PC shop and build/fix computers, although I find installing software a funny thing to get payed for, but hey, more money for me ^_^. The only downside though, is the fact that it's VERY difficult to get by with a small pc shop, difficult to make a living off of it unless you want to work at these larger stores fixing systems (best buy, etc). It seems you can only make it a hobby, and a form of extra income...But not a living =(. With my 13 years of experience though, I'd love to make a living out of it ^_^.

hmnih87: go to http://www.osx86project.org/ . That's what you're looking for, basically a pc running OSX. Make sure you pay attention and read around a lot, research before you go through with it, cause you can't just buy random parts and put it together and expect it to work, read carefully, research, and it'll be a easier task.
February 11, 2008 5:06:16 PM

with that said, if I recall correctly they use a totally different CMOS / BIOS and the OS relies on it. So even though they are Intel processor-based, they are different and separate from a PC platform. That's why any OSX install on an x86(-64) machine would have to be a hack and thus comes with all the appropriate disclaimers.
February 11, 2008 5:08:08 PM

Actually, they have a method now where you don't have to manually hack it via command codes. I forgot what you need to use in conjunction with the install, but it starts with a K, just search around the osx86 community, you'll be sure to turn it up.
February 11, 2008 5:57:56 PM

Definitely, you can build a simple PC (AMD or Intel), and install the MAC x86. It's a hack add-on for MAC OS X to bypass the Apple BIOS opcodes.
You only need to research for the most compatible parts, especially the network card, otherwise you can't surf the web to fix other things.
Another problem is the SATA interface that is not natively supported by some versions of MAC x86.
February 11, 2008 6:58:27 PM

kbits said:
Ha Skittle....

I think you should share all this knowledge and wisdom with the community. I mean it's great to have your conclusions, but sometimes I would like you to go a bit in depth in your analysis. It would change from all this fanboy crap some other members write.

Go ahead and explain us why it is VERY inferior.

Take care.


Thats easy: Its named after cats
February 12, 2008 3:00:05 AM

skittle said:
Thats easy: Its named after cats

Well Ubuntu is named after... anything :heink: 
February 12, 2008 3:28:28 AM

isnt ubuntu some african word or something?
February 12, 2008 3:41:49 AM

Sure is. But Fiesty Fawn, Gutsy Gibbon, Hoary Hedgehog? Who comes up with names like that?
February 12, 2008 3:46:30 AM

duno, but linux sure is comming a long way. I still await the day when microsoft APIs become fully available to the open source community. This will be a day to rejoice.

To the mac lovers: Unix is getting really old by the way. Its starting to get wrinkles :) 
February 12, 2008 3:59:41 AM

Linux is based on similar principles to Unix.
February 12, 2008 4:04:15 AM

priniciples? Yes... in fact you could call BSD and Linux "Unix like" OS's. However they are merely derivitives of what used to be UNIX, they are very different.
February 12, 2008 4:24:42 AM

Linux is free, OSX is not :D 
February 12, 2008 10:48:33 AM

Linux can't run:
- decent office
- decent photo/video/music editor
- decent 3d design/cad
- decent games
- decent html editors

what I can do with a OS like this? Scream whole world that it's FREE?

And the original topic question?
February 12, 2008 12:09:33 PM

Decent Office? Dude, Open Office is a great office package, and has some features Office 2007 doesn't even offer like the ability to save directly to PDF. Decent Photo? The GIMP is a a great photo editor, but it's no Photoshop. Still, for the basic and a lot of the advance stuff, it rocks! Audacity is a great wave editor. I don't do video besides watching Youtube, so can't name one there. I heard QCad is a great program, but again, never ran it. Decent HTML Editor? I'm sorry, if you can't write HTML correctly without an editor, you shouldn't be doing websites. I just use Gtext to write HTML.

February 12, 2008 9:18:30 PM

Openoffice is far better than M$ Office. Linux can run decent games, blame the developers for not compiling it for Linux. Oh yea, and it's free, as is all the software that goes along with it. Some people don't like spending $400 on an OS and another $250-300 on an office program. I use Open Office on XP for that very reason. Free, and it's decent software.

EDIT: Oh and I'm not a linux fanboy, I don't even use linux.
February 13, 2008 1:43:36 AM

Save to PDF is a great feature that any program for windows can have for free with the PDF Printers. I use Ulead PhotoImpact besides Photoshop, and GIMP don't even touch 10% the features off a photo editor. I know Audacity and it lacks a lot of features.
To understand the need of a great HTML Editor, try to make a real site and be produtive without one like Dreanweaver.

ps.: my sites are only 10% from HTML editor, 50% comes from the initial design in Photoimpact and rest comes from php coding.

this topic is going to a trash
February 13, 2008 1:50:22 AM

Dreamweaver is way too expensive.
May 7, 2008 3:57:01 AM

I have a MacBook Pro, and I run both Vista Ultimate and Mac OSX on it. I am not a huge fan of Mac OSX, but I will admit that it does have some good things going for it. It's fairly easy to use and is dumbed down enough and has everything needed for the average computer user to use the internet and upload/edit some photos. What is absolutely ridiculous is that there no way the average user could possibly afford most Mac computers, which are overpriced to the point of ludicrousness (and it obviously has severely limited game and complex application use). Also, the **** about OSX not getting viruses is completely stupid. Sure, it's a different architecture but that doesn't mean it's invincible, it just means that no one bothered to design viruses for an OS a tiny fraction of the population is using. I mean, five years ago, how many people did you know used a Mac?

The prices Apple is charging in order to have one of their computers, are, how should we put it, absolutely insane. Configure a PC laptop with specs equivalent to the MacBook Pro and the price will not come near $2000. Buying this computer was one of the least cost effective decisions in my life. Furthermore, Macs do not have "better hardware" and are not "built or designed better" (other than aesthetically, I will grant that). For example, one of my sticks of RAM failed and I got a replacement under warranty. Had I not been covered, that stick of 1 gig RAM would have cost $150 (Apple Store's retail price). We are talking about some **** Samsung DDR2 667 MHZ notebook RAM, when you can go buy better Corsair or Kingston RAM from NewEgg for $21.99.

The point is that while the OS is decent, Apple makes overpriced computers with oftentimes inferior specs than PC equivalents, then sells them for hundreds or thousands more. Only a fool would spend that money for aesthetic appeal or simply for an easy to use OS not nearly as versatile as Windows.

The point of this little rant is that I sympathize completely with the OP's desire to build his own system, since he has chosen to use OSX.
May 7, 2008 4:42:06 AM

Digging up old threads eh? :D 

If OSX has one thing going for it, it's Terminal vs DOS prompts. You can actually copy/paste with terminal!
May 7, 2008 7:47:36 AM

bc4 said:
Quote:
There are many great features of a Mac. For example, you can set up multiple network locations, example, if you had a laptop and needed to go 20 different places, you can have a location, or basically a profile set up for each of those places you travel to, go to the apple menu, and select where you are and it has everything done for you.


Haven't PC's always been able to do this? I now use my Vista laptop and go from home, to work, then to a business conference at a hotel every other month. I never tell my computer where i'm at. I set it up once and then it decides where i'm at and connects.

Anyway, just throwing this out there. I like computers in general. Windows and Mac although I haven't played around with a mac in a long time

Is this like the difference between Kirk and Piccard, kirk never had to point where to go but Piccard always did?
March 5, 2009 2:01:06 PM

I used PCs way back since the 8086 machines and watched Windows appear and grow from 3.11WFW and up. I work in graphics and web design, and have worked on Macs for a long time at work, but always had PCs at home, simply because I was more comfortable with them.

Once OS9 dropped away and I saw some of the UNIX capabilities and robust core features of OSX, I figured it was time to get a mac of my own. I'd been using them at work with pleasure for a long time, and had a feel for the power and ease of use on Macs.

Another thing that annoyed me about PCs (and I'm sure many other people feel this way too) is the huge commitment required to keep it working. I can't tell you how many friends I have whose cases are forever pried open because of all the tinkering under the hood. So much of my career was as a technical support guy, simply because keeping a PC working properly requires so much attention.

I got into computers to work in design, and found my reputation was as a "computer guy" and found most conversations became about how to fix computers, or installing drivers, or virus protection, or some such trick to get the PC working, but never about actual using programs or doing design or using applications or whatever. Even gamers would go on about optimized video drivers and the newest card technology, FPS etc, instead of the game itself.

Mac users rarely if ever talk about all the shoehorning techniques they use to get their machine going, because it just works. If they want to sit down and design, then that's what they do. That's why talking with mac users about design is truly about design and not about "clever" ways to get it to work in the first place. Sure there aren't as many games on the Mac yet, but there is definitely a lot catching up now that they are Intel.

So when I bought my first Mac, a Mac Mini, I thought I would plug it in and tinker around a half hour or so, and then go back to my PC. I checked to see if my files worked etc., and everything did. My MP3s, my video files, my word docs, pretty much EVERYTHING. I didn't get around to plugging my PC back in for a full MONTH, and that was just to get access to more of my files! I since bought a second Mac Mini, the intel version, and have had a mixed computing environment since.

As for building an OSX86 machine, it's amazing how great a machine you can build for very few dollars. You can make a leaping Leopard machine for a fraction of the apple counterpart, and you will find it outperforms windows on the same hardware. Crashes are virtually nonexistent (though not 100% absent) and usability is over the top.

The only problem is, you are back to the same scenario where you have to tinker and "shoehorn" OSX into your PC. You might find the screws to your case are kept off, and you get paranoid about running software update. That being said, once you find a good configuration for OSX86 (for example iPC osx86 or XXX OSx86 installer) with the right install options (and it can be tricky depending on your hardware), you will have a solid machine.

Now that OSX is going 100% Intel with Snow Leopard, I think it will only be a matter of time before Apple starts licensing their OS for other PC manufacturers. The main obstacle that I would agree with is the can of worms that comes out of supporting multiple hardware platforms. How many times have you bought a piece of hardware and read the install instructions that tells you to "continue anyway" despite unsigned drivers?

How much grief will Apple take on if they open themselves up to an open platform? If they at least firmly insist on hardware partners being 100% qualified, then I think they have a shot at remaining the same rock solid platform without performance or quality compromises.

Oh, and of course the other side of it is, the entire legal issue. There is a lawsuit between Apple and Psystar over that very thing, but as a consumer, the most optimistic look you should have about making a "hackintosh" despite the Apple EULA, is to treat is as an experimental platform. No matter how much I love the speed and cost savings of a 3.0GHz C2D machine running OSX, I think the cost of an actual Mac is worth getting rid of the hassles and leaving the case unopened, because it just WORKS.

April 3, 2009 10:21:15 AM

Just a Query, What is the best Configuration For a Decently Powerful PC on which OSX (Hackinthosh) can Be installed.
April 3, 2009 10:31:26 AM

Calling OSX inferior is indeed funny. Even parts of Windows have been 'borrowed' from UNIX source under a BSD-license. And let's not forget they needed the help from DEC engineers to make a stable running kernel (NT).
April 6, 2009 8:15:47 PM

randomizer said:
@shadow: Well you're biased :lol: 

I don't like macs, I don't really like OSX either. But to say it's inferior is just BS. Now windows ME, that's inferior. Besides, you can't get viruses in OSX :pt1cable: 


That is the most stupid reason why you would get a mac. I hope you know the reason why Mac has no viruses is because NO ONE uses them, also the safari browser and mac osx has more security flaws then windows xp, vista and server.

I think the iPod Touch is pretty cool, but I can get the same thing from a different company for much less. Everything else by them is over priced and somewhat stupid (like the Mac Book Air)
!