Apple OS X build for Intel chips - Rumored to be Leaked

Advertisement (Why?)

Thanks to Gelob for pointing out the story in our BPN.

Word has come from Mac Daily News concerning a possible leak of Apple’s upcoming OS X 10.4.1 which notably supports Intel based processing units. However, some are beginning to question if the reports are true – considering Apple announced less than a week ago they are switching from IBM based units to Intel chipsets.

“I estimate that we’re down to a matter of hours before Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hardware is available for download on Internet software piracy sites and peer-to-peer piracy networks,” reported Mac Daily News on Saturday. They soon updated their article after press time, reporting “A reader who for obvious reasons wishes to remain anonymous just demonstrated to me that the software is, in fact, already available on Internet software piracy sites.”

Neowin would like to ask you what your thoughts are. Could a newer version of OS X be ready so soon after an official transition announcement? Or do you think this is a marketing scheme on Apple’s behalf to draw even more attention to the recent news? We’d like to hear your thoughts. In the meantime, all we have to base this report on is an article on Mac Daily News. Once we get a hold of more information regarding this issue – maybe even a few screenshots, we’ll post them.

Update: It's becoming clear that this story is fake / untrue. A file floating around torrent hubs, suggested to be an x86 build of OS X, which was in fact a large collection of text files.

View: Article at Mac Daily News

View: Apple OS X 10.4.1 for Intel Discussion

We must ask you to please refrain from posting links, or even hints as to where to obtain this release. We warn you - immediate action will be taken on anyone who disregards our request. Thank you.

(1 reply) #1 Mx² on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:27

Interesting

#1.1 supernova_00 on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:58

hmm Apple did contribute a patch for firefox last week so that it could be built for the os on intel systems.

(2 replies) #2 weenur on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:28

Saw this floating about the interweb on how to get it.

QUOTE

a) wait upto 2006
b)
Become an developer http://developer.apple.com (500eur/year)
Buy the Development PC 1000eur, this package includes OSX for Intel (Preinstalled on HD)

#2.1 eAi on 13 Jun 2005 - 01:41

The developer PC is only avaliable to key developers.

#2.2 roadwarrior on 13 Jun 2005 - 02:42

Wrong. It is available to anyone who is:

A. A Select or Premier level developer (Select level costs $500 a year)

&

B. Willing to part with $999 for the rental of the system. You are allowed to keep it until December of 2006, but it must be returned after that.

Developer Transition Kit web site

#3 Lasker on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:31

this is not true is not leaked yet, wait until the developer kit PC became available

(3 replies) #4 theyarecomingforyou on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:31

I've seen this about, but I can't imagine it just installing on a regular PC - it will likely need very specific hardware and drivers will likely be a nightmare (at least initially).

I would be interested in seeing screenshots, though I can't imagine this being an accident (if indeed it has even been leaked... this sounds more like a rumour) - all the dev machines would surely have hardware dongles to prevent it being leaked otherwise.

#4.1 todd` on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:41

Plenty of screenshots here: http://images.google.com/images?q=os+x

It will look the same.

#4.2 Andareed on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:45

Afaik, osx uses a BSD (free or open, not sure) kernel. So I would think driver support would be whatever the same as "regular" BSD. That said, I would gather that driver support is pretty good.

#4.3 mezz on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:39

Afaik, osx uses a BSD (free or open, not sure) kernel.

Not quiet, MacOS X uses Mach 3.0 kernel with FreeBSD stuff. Visit here to learn more: http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/

#5 DjmUK on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:32

Full discussion: http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=331263

(4 replies) #6 markjensen on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:33

Could a newer version of OS X be ready so soon after an official transition announcement?

Yeah, sure it could. I am quite positive that they had a working internal version before officially announcing a switch.

Will the download (if real) work on a standard x86 PC. Highly unlikely. They would be nuts to have even their internal copy work without a very specific hardware configuration.

#6.1 StarSabers on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:44

If it works on standard PC hardware, unlike previous Apple OS versions, there could be many people that flock to buy Mac OSX (as I would be one of those interested). Apple's have always been far out of my price range, and I want more control over the hardware.

#6.2 code_monkey on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:46

The big thing with Apple is the whole "experience". Moving to the open x86 platform is what killed BeOS.

#6.3 seta-san on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:40

i don't think this will kill make. I remember when when apple moved from 68k processors to the first line of 601PPC. It wasn't as much of a hassle for compatibility at first only now more than 10 years after they gave up the 68k processors is browsing the internet a hassle with a lack of updates browsers or tools. Seeing firefox being built for 68k macs would really breathe new life into old macs. but i digress. switching won't be a killer to it. Regarding the leak.. it's very possible. Apples been keeping internal builds of mac and other software for x86 for years. I also can't see apple ever switching again.

#6.4 dismuter on 13 Jun 2005 - 14:10

I am quite positive that they had a working internal version before officially announcing a switch.

They already stated that Mac OS X has had a "secret double life" for the past 5 years.
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2438&p=3
The x86 version has always existed under code name "Marklar" and rumors of that had even leaked to the web in 2002.

#7 Bwizzel-B on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:35

I guess I would care if this was a big deal, but let's face it- it isn't.

(4 replies) #8 rajputwarrior on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:40

trust me, it's leaked.... i ain't telling you how i know, but i know it is, i have SS to prove it

#8.1 Chad on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:06

LOL! Your screenshot just shows someone downloading a file. That's no proof at all!

#8.2 MrA on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:13

Here's a picture. We need a close-up of the about box though.

PS. I don't think this is against the rules, but if it is, I'm sorry.

EDIT: The shot's probably fake.

Last edited by 40033 on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:34

#8.3 todd` on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:39

It's fake.. this leak is a hoax..

#8.4 roadwarrior on 12 Jun 2005 - 23:18

That shot could easily be PearPC running full screen, or even a screenshot from a Mac being shown full screen on a PC.

(2 replies) #9 MrA on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:47

Ive seen a torrent, but I can't download it (stupid resnet)

#9.1 rob.derosa on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:53

resnet is the worst! seriously cant wait to get into private accom. next year

#9.2 Andareed on 12 Jun 2005 - 23:27

Oh, the woes of resnet.

#10 xfodder on 12 Jun 2005 - 20:48

it is possible that it has leaked, apple has been working on in ever since 10.0 shipped, from what i saw, the development kit that was given out to developers at WWDC is nothing more than a regular P4 based PC, but the pictures i saw were pretty bad.

even if it did run on x86 PC, there wouldn't be any drivers yet...that's why apple gave it too developer, so there can be app's and drivers ready for next year....

#11 RazorSA on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:12

I think that it is a leak ... but with VERY limited driver support !!!

Something similar to the Unreal 2 beta release back in the day. ???

#12 yakumo on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:13

well my first thought was this 'demonstration' was jsut osx on a regular MAC, or running on pearPC, and the reporter got taken in..

but who knows.

#13 EduardValencia on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:19

the future is uncertain,this switch to intel will cause the piracy f the the OS,this ain't good for apple,a company that i respect,and very well known for his quality and innovation of their product

dissapointing

#14 shen on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:22

when jobs first made his announcement, he said they'd been developing x86 versions of the mac os alongside the ppc versions for the past five years... i don't see why a working x86 build *wouldn't* be available, so soon.

#15 cowabunga on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:23

Funny, since me and some friends discussed yesterday that it would be great for OSX sales if a pirated/modified version of OSX that worked on any hardware surfaced. A lot of people using Windows that don't want to run out and buy an Apple computer (like me) will try the software if it works on their current computer (like me). Odds are that some people will like it so much that they might even buy a new Apple computer to get a legit version (maybe even me)

I sure hope they come to their senses and sell a non hardware restricted version, but it never was Apples style to let go of total control and settle for just control. I really want an option for a good OS from a real company and not just the Linux community alternative. Also this might be Apples last chance since Linux is getting better and better.

(5 replies) #16 XxiNickxX on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:28

Neowin's journalism has truly gone to hell. Why in god's green earth would this be front page news? 'Rumored to be leaked' wtf?

#16.1 yakumo on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:39

it was good enough for slashdot.

#16.2 darthfader on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:40

come on, this is the big thing here. Even if rumor, it´s the big thing.
Like proof of extraterrestrial life or whatever.

#16.3 TheSarge on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:49

Remember the good old days when journolists actualy went out and did interveiws with newsmakers, hunted down leads, dug up dirt, did their own fact checking, etc?
I don't, but then I'm and old man and my memory isn't too good anymore.

While I'm sure that Apple will eventualy make an OS that works with the (as yet nonexistant) Intel-Mac chips, I find it hard to believe that they would make the OS before the chip was in their hands. You see, the chips that Intel will make for the Mac will likely not be Windows-compatible: It would be one hell of a risk for Intel to take, not to mention Apple. (I'm not saying that it's impossible to run a Mac on a Wintel chip; that's been done already). Besides, I don't think the Anti-Trust lawyers would allow that to happen. Think about it: If intel makes one chip that works with both Mac and Win, that's one less difference between the two platforms. That's one less reason for their to even BE two platforms, and that means that it increases the likelyhood of Microsoft pushing Apple off the stage entierly. Nevermind what all this means to AMD: Think what this means to the monopolistic tendancies of our friends from redmond.

#16.4 Jugalator on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:00

" it was good enough for slashdot."

Slashdot has a lot of readers, but don't mistake that for an indication of its quality (popularity doesn't imply quality).
It's certainly nothing I think Neowin should somehow "look up" to.

These days they've started posting anti-MS *blogs* as news. *sigh*

#16.5 weenur on 13 Jun 2005 - 03:09

. You see, the chips that Intel will make for the Mac will likely not be Windows-compatible: It would be one hell of a risk for Intel to take, not to mention Apple. (I'm not saying that it's impossible to run a Mac on a Wintel chip; that's been done already). Besides, I don't think the Anti-Trust lawyers would allow that to happen. Think about it: If intel makes one chip that works with both Mac and Win, that's one less difference between the two platforms. That's one less reason for their to even BE two platforms, and that means that it increases the likelyhood of Microsoft pushing Apple off the stage entierly. Nevermind what all this means to AMD: Think what this means to the monopolistic tendancies of our friends from redmond.

The chips Intel makes for Apple will be exactly the same chips that run Windows. It's already been said by one of the higher-ups at Apple that OS X won't run on non-Apple hardware, but they won't prevent anyone from installing Windows on Apple hardware. Add to that the fact that it would cost Intel a good chunk of cash to build a fab for Apple specific processors. It would be a losing proposition for Intel at that point. They know that Apple doesn't have the volume that Dell does, so it would be a huge risk. No, the processors in an Apple box will be the same as any other Intel processor.

If anything, Microsoft would be worried if Apple didn't lock OS X onto specific hardware. From my experience, OS X is a much more pleasant computing experience simply because it's so bloody easy to manage that I don't even have to think about it. I like that.

#17 Ely on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:34

#16 It's called: trying to be on top of the news before the others", This is just too big of a news to allow for others to post it way ahead.

(5 replies) #18 todd` on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:36

Faked.. well.. there was a torrent, which has since been deleted, and if you open it in a hex editor, it's just a file filled with "GNAA" .. it had almost 700 leechers too

#18.1 BeGiNnEr on 12 Jun 2005 - 21:59

No, You're corrupting, most possible due to very slow download speeds.

#18.2 zachman123 on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:21

shh.... you discovered the secret of OSX... GNAA, when repeated the correct number of times creates an OS!

#18.3 Palin on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:39

Google "GNAA" — It's a prank, kids.

#18.4 rm20010 on 13 Jun 2005 - 01:26

Oh good grief. You just made me feel uneasy by Googling 'GNAA'.

#18.5 Palin on 13 Jun 2005 - 04:07

It's not what you might think it is, it's a trolling/pranking group. More info here.

#19 Kushan on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:13

This is interesting. I highly doubt it's true due to the fact that it's not on any of the *usual* places this stuff appears and the fact that all of the screenshots could so easily be faked and stuff.

If, on the other hand, it IS true, would it install on a regular x86 Machine? More to the point, would it work on AMD based machines as well? Even if this is a hoax, the OS will be ported eventually so those questions still stand.

#20 rIaHc3 on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:15

SS can be posted right.........?

A guy said SS can't be posted but I see nothing wrong.

#21 kerby on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:29

Mac OS X 10.4.1 runs on Intel Pentium 4 3.6 GHz

Steve Jobs showed a Mac running Apple's current version of Max OS X 10.4.1 running on an Intel Pentium processor at the Worldwide Developers Conference yesterday. He said that Mac OS X was designed from the start to be processor independent and that every version of Mac OS X for the last 5 years has been run on an Intel processor.

Wolfram Research showed their latest internal development version of Mathematica, which one of their engineers ported to run on the Pentium-based Mac in only two hours.

Don't know if it proves anything at all.. but have fun kids.
http://homepage.mac.com/duanewilliams/iblog/C413874129/E1425940776/

#22 coolvi on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:30

Leakage of the software isn't anything of a concern here. It doesn't matter what world you're from, you can't fight/eliminate pirates, at least not in this human age.

The point being made is that (there's a possibility for which) future Mac OS will install and run on off-the-shelf x86 hardware. If it runs on the P4, I don't see why it can't go with AMD; The fact that EM64T is nearly a clone of AMD64, there will certainly be 64-bit Mac OS.

There might be concerns to the leakage of information which is vital to Apple's survival. Hopefully nothing dirty will happen between now and then...

But if all is true, I'm ditching Windows, and I'm sure a lot people are thinking the same...

#23 ThunderRiver on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:35

I thought that it does not run on any PC.. only lockin hardwares.

(2 replies) #24 Jack31081 on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:40

for techies, sometimes you guys can be pretty dense.

Let's assume the Intel version of OSX were leaked. The hurdle is driver support. The only drivers for OSX are going to be the specific ones needed for it to run on the Intel Powermac dev machines.

If you don't have the exact same hardware as the mac dev kits, then you're not gonna be running any version of OSX, leaked or otherwise, any time soon. Unless of course you're a genius and can write drivers for all your hardware.

#24.1 kerby on 12 Jun 2005 - 22:45

#24.2 Jugalator on 13 Jun 2005 - 08:56

"Unless of course you're a genius and can write drivers for all your hardware."

Or a hacker community form doing it.

Or a hardware emulation layer is written for it. Harder things have been done before.

(5 replies) #25 Joshie on 12 Jun 2005 - 23:04

Obviously a fake. But I'm not too concerned about the whole driver issue. VMware (or other software of that sort) will doubtless have a setting for Intel-Mac hardware when the OS is truly released. That's how I'll first play with it, anyway.

#25.1 Andareed on 12 Jun 2005 - 23:48

Apple has stated they will only allow osx to run on their hardware. I doubt vmware would go about developing code specifically to allow osx to run, for fear of being sued by apple.

#25.2 Joshie on 13 Jun 2005 - 00:07

I think it comes down to what Apple uses to lock OS X to its hardware. If it comes down to a simple matter of reverse engineering, Apple would have no ability to sue. Beyond that, I can't imagine somebody creating a custom system configuration for a future version of vmware/virtualpc being impossible. After all, the motherboard is the only component Apple can reasonably place a lock.

#25.3 ThunderRiver on 13 Jun 2005 - 00:37

You meant VirtualPC. Only VirtualPC can emulate hardwares.

VMWare does not emulate all hardwares. In fact, it is a virtual layer, not even an emulator. Get your fact straight!

#25.4 Joshie on 13 Jun 2005 - 02:22

I never once used the word emulate.

#25.5 Knight' on 13 Jun 2005 - 08:06

" You meant VirtualPC. Only VirtualPC can emulate hardwares.

VMWare does not emulate all hardwares. In fact, it is a virtual layer, not even an emulator. Get your fact straight!"

Wow, talk about noob. Virtual PC and VMWare both work on the same principle of binary patching. They both try and fool the virtual OS into thinking they are running in Ring 0 when indeed they are running in Ring 3. That's how they BOTH work.

(1 reply) #26 Yvo on 13 Jun 2005 - 00:31

We can all speculate how Apple will lock down the Mac. However like someone said above, the drivers included with a Mac are going to be for Macs only so running your normal run of the mill PC with the release version (not dev version) might not be that great of an experience.

Personally in order to make this transition smooth I think they are going to make the new Mac based off of the EFI (Extendible Firmware Interface) developed by... Intel. It would make perfect sense. If they use EFI, it will become harder to have Mac OS X run on a normal PC as most normal computers still use a regular BIOS.

http://www.intel.com/technology/efi/

#26.1 zivan56 on 13 Jun 2005 - 04:36

I have 2 laptops with an EFI bios made by Insyde; it does not mean anything, as they will probably have the bios made with proprietary extensions that use EFI.

#27 kirk26 on 13 Jun 2005 - 01:42

Thank you Neowin for your continued support of....oh never mind.

#28 nic on 13 Jun 2005 - 03:35

lets finish downloading our warez before posting an article on it, mmmK!

#29 entropyx on 13 Jun 2005 - 03:51

It's real, I have it.

(2 replies) #30 gnubugu on 13 Jun 2005 - 03:56

entropyx-It's real, I have it.

NO YOU DON'T, NOW SHUT UP AND GO SIT IN THE BACK OF THE SHORT BUS YOU STUPID LITTLE WANNABE MORON!

For people not knowing, it is a fake, started by a children's warez group who deal in seeding fakes thru the net just to see how fast they spread. Little kids playing games while they wait for puberty...

#30.1 ProgramGeek on 13 Jun 2005 - 06:31

Disregard that message, I am currently running Panther on my Pentium 4 system. Just wait until the real torrents begin to seed guys.... The real ones are coming!!

(hehe, suckers)

#30.2 roadwarrior on 13 Jun 2005 - 12:14

If it is a leak of the developer system, then you are running Tiger, not Panther, noob.

#31 gnubugu on 13 Jun 2005 - 03:58

I guess that forrest gump saying "stupid is as stupid does" applies to entropyx

#32 aristotle-dude on 13 Jun 2005 - 04:06

Yet another fake download eh? LOL

(3 replies) #33 thenewbf on 13 Jun 2005 - 04:11

if it's such a fake, then why are torrent sites saying "This search query has been blocked at the request of the copyright holder, in compliance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ( "DMCA" )"

... "at the request of the copyright holder". if it wasn't the real thing, would they really be requesting to have it BLOCKED?

Last edited by 75251 on 13 Jun 2005 - 04:17

#33.1 MrCobra on 13 Jun 2005 - 04:55

Because it's not fake. Most likely the people complaining and b!tching that it's fake are the same people that flamed anyone for saying the move to Intel was a possibility.

#33.2 Jugalator on 13 Jun 2005 - 08:10

if it's such a fake, then why are torrent sites saying "This search query has been blocked at the request of the copyright holder, in compliance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ( "DMCA" )"

It doesn't do that on the torrent sites I'm looking on at least.

Huh? Well, it doesn't seem to have been released as warez yet anyway.
Not even the NFO sites have posted it as a release that has been made.

And no, I doubt these people are living in denial; they've already been shown wrong for christ sake.

#33.3 aristotle-dude on 13 Jun 2005 - 15:55

It's a fake. It's over 900 MBs of text files by the GNAA which are infamous slashdot trolls. If it was real, it would be at least a Gig and a half.

Last edited by 18285 on 13 Jun 2005 - 16:02

(1 reply) #34 bucko on 13 Jun 2005 - 08:11

Get your brains figured out, there will not be a version of osx that will run on normal pc's with dual boot! Get it into your heads! Just go out and buy a mac mini adn run OSX on that

#34.1 tomasarson on 13 Jun 2005 - 09:26

i agree.

but i do think that the osx intel version will be hacked.

be it ran with compatible hardware, somehow driver hacks or whatever comes up.

this is the biggest thing for crackers to mess around with since windows xp!

#35 LCPLSkyeHack on 13 Jun 2005 - 09:46

hmmmmmm. so it was microsoft all along..........

#36 ecotrojan on 13 Jun 2005 - 09:51

lets all take a chill pill

#37 pickleman on 13 Jun 2005 - 10:50

when it all boils down. what's the big deal if Apple switches to Intel chips? What do you think is really going to happen? Cheaper Computers? Faster computers? What? It's already been stated that OSX will be the only Operating System used on these machines. So what exactly is the benefit going to be for consumers? My guess, nothing of importance. As Michael Robertson said in his article on Linspire.com...
"This is only slightly more significant than Apple choosing to change the hard disk or memory supplier it puts into its computers."

I agree. This is all just overhyped nothingness.

Last edited by 113134 on 13 Jun 2005 - 10:55

#38 mr_demilord on 13 Jun 2005 - 11:08

Nice flamewar

#39 ph0enix on 13 Jun 2005 - 11:18

Could a newer version of OS X be ready so soon after an official transition announcement? Or do you think this is a marketing scheme on Apple’s behalf to draw even more attention to the recent news?

Every build of OS X since the first release has been also compiled for the x86 platform. So OS X is ready to run even when Steve noted during the keynote, that 'we just need your [the developers] help to finish it'. Marketing scheme on Apple's behalf to draw even more attention to the recent news? Why? I don't think Apple need more attention. They have already enough.

The big bang is over, so let's get back to business. Apple is switching to Intel. And?

The soul of a Mac is its operating system.

I think many people have simply ignored the last, but most important message from Steve at the end of his keynote.

Neowin.net