• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

Sign in to follow this  

Mac OS on Intel based computers?

Recommended Posts

moshi    0

sure, and i run IRIX on my Commodore64 :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
L33T P3NIS    0

xp*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickedkitten    12
Originally posted by Advocate

Just thought I'd add a little spice to this thread ;)

The whole reason people want to see OS X on the x86 architecture is because GOOD spec x86 machines are affordable, unlike MAC's.

*sigh* people just don't understand do they?

look, obviously the people that buy macs have no problem paying the price if they have gone out and bought one so why does it matter?

The only people that want osx on x86 are people that are on a budget and build their own pcs.

Let's not forget here that people that built their own systems are in the minority themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advocate    0
Originally posted by Wickedkitten

look, obviously the people that buy macs have no problem paying the price if they have gone out and bought one so why does it matter?

The only people that want osx on x86 are people that are on a budget and build their own pcs.

Let's not forget here that people that built their own systems are in the minority themselves.

Knew that would get your attention Kitten ;)

You're right people who build their own systems are in a minority, but I'd bet that minority is larger than the current installed user base of Mac's just because the installed base of PC's is so HUGE.

I do have to disagree about the "on a budget" thing though. We self-build because we can get a top-notch system for a lot less money. Face it if you could build your own Mac for ?1000 less than to buy you would wouldn't you?

Similarly if building a x86 costs ?1800 inc monitor as opposed to a Mac at ?3500 without a monitor then I would say it's pretty much a no-brainer......

I did argue in the other thread that if Apple ported OS X to x86 they could really challenge M$'s monopoly. I was wrong, it's not the only way the other way is to bring the price of Mac's down to the price of x86 PC's....it's possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dazzla    5
Originally posted by Advocate

...a x86 costs ?1800 inc monitor as opposed to a Mac at ?3500 without a monitor ...b>

That's the Dual 1Ghz, 1.5 GB Ram, 160GB hard drive, 2mb cache and a GF4 Ti.

Now I agree that Mac hardware is more expensive, but that ?3500 is over the top.

and it's because Apple hardware is more expensive that their making money. Imagine if there was no more hardware and they made OS X for x86. Microsoft Office would stop being released, they would have to radically increase support and they would lose all income from hardware.

OS sales wouldn't cover the loss they get from dropping hardware. It's financial suicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KayMan2K    1

The key problem I would see with porting the kernel to x86 is that apple hardware is 128bit while x86 is still at 32bit (excluding Athlon 64 and Opteron). With those new processors.. I would see a greater possibility (of course it is possible now.. just there would be a performance hit... imagine taking a Gamecube game and making it run on Super Ninentdo). another thing is pride. If Mac OS had to run on the pc inorder to survive (which i think it needs to) then Apple would lose a great deal of pride... remember not only is Apple fighting against windows.. but the entire x86 PC world. Of course.. a nice RISC based 128processor on the pc would kick a$$.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advocate    0

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

Not this again. The PowerPC CPU's are NOT 128bit, they have an internal SIMD (single instruction multiple data) engine which is a 128 bit engine (Velocity Engine). The Pentium 4 and AthlonXP also have SIMD engines......

Please let's not argue about this....the PPC's just plain AREN'T 128bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickedkitten    12
Originally posted by Advocate

Knew that would get your attention Kitten ;)

You're right people who build their own systems are in a minority, but I'd bet that minority is larger than the current installed user base of Mac's just because the installed base of PC's is so HUGE.

erm and you are figuring this how? Market Share is based on new sales in the US, that says nothing on the amount of consumers, schools, and businesses that are still using macs across the globe.

I do have to disagree about the "on a budget" thing though. We self-build because we can get a top-notch system for a lot less money. Face it if you could build your own Mac for ?1000 less than to buy you would wouldn't you?>

You self build, I self build, Most of neowin self buildbut> then again I've also bought. Bought an Alienware system for 3300, bought a hp laptop for 1600. Price doesn't matter to me cos on a good weekend i used to drop about ?400 just on cd's and software alone, but for the average user on a budget they aren't going to build their own if they don't have enough money for a top system, they are going to go to Dell and look at the value section because of the fact that if something goes wrong they aren't going to know how to fix it and thats when support comes in handy.

Similarly if building a x86 costs ?1800 inc monitor as opposed to a Mac at ?3500 without a monitor then I would say it's pretty much a no-brainer......

If building a x86 costs ?1800 including a monitor, and you can get a 800 mhz imac with a superdrive for ?1800 yes I belieisis pretty much a no braine

I did argue in the other thread that if Apple ported OS X to x86 they could really challenge M$'s monopoly. I was wrong, it's not the only way the other way is to bring the price of Mac's down to the price of x86 PC's....it's possible. .

and as said in the other thread if Apple were really trying to challenge a monopoly they would have done it ages ago. The fact that they haven't should say something along the lines that they obviously don't give a monkey's about x86 users wanting osx on x86.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advocate    0
Originally posted by Wickedkitten

erm and you are figuring this how? Market Share is based on new sales in the US, that says nothing on the amount of consumers, schools, and businesses that are still using macs across the globe.

So now you are trying to tell me that Apple have a larger installed base than PC's? Or are you just pointing out that there are thousands of Mac's in use, if not hundreds of thousands? Erm...yep no doubt there are but there are MILLIONS of PC's in use.

You self build, I self build, Most of neowin self build but then again I've also bought. Bought an Alienware system for 3300, bought a hp laptop for 1600. Price doesn't matter to me cos on a good weekend i used to drop about ?400 just on cd's and software alone, but for the average user on a budget they aren't going to build their own if they don't have enough money for a top system, they are going to go to Dell and look at the value section because of the fact that if something goes wrong they aren't going to know how to fix it and thats when support comes in handy.

Funnily enough you said that people who are on a budget self build in your last post now you are saying people on a budget don't.....make your mind up;))

If building a x86 costs ?1800 including a monitor, and you can get a 800 mhz imac with a superdrive for ?1800 yes I believe it is/b> pretty much a no brainer.

But the ?1800 PC is about twice as powerful as the Imac, comes with a GF4 Ti4600 AND is upgradeable.....I was comparing like for like. It's the only sensible way to do this otherwise we'd get quite silly like saying I can get a PC for ?400 from Aldi or something....come on be FAIR in this

and as said in the other thread if Apple were really trying to challenge a monopoly they would have done it ages ago. The fact that they haven't should say something along the lines that they obviously don't give a monkey's about x86 users wanting osx on x86.

Ages ago Apple didn't have the killer app that they have now in OS X.. Don;t get me wrong Kitten I'm not arguing AGAINST Apple. I love my iBook I just wish Apple would see sense and build on their market instead of maintaining tis "we're niche so we're expensive" stance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advocate    0

Oh and just for the record I now don't care whether Apple port OS X or not. I'd MUCH rather see affordable "high spec" Macs

:) :) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
unspec    0
I just wish Apple would see sense and build on their market..

That's what they are doing right now.

However changing to an open x86 platform is changing the market they compete in, not expanding the current one. They can't do the former so they must do the latter.

On a personal note I'd love to see Land Rover make affordable "high spec" Range Rovers.

--

unspec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Silvorgold    1

there are rumors that at the coming up macworld, the cheapest G4 powermac to be released will include a 1 ghz processor and will retail for about $1595 US..thats just a rumor ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickedkitten    12
Originally posted by Advocate

So now you are trying to tell me that Apple have a larger installed base than PC's? Or are you just pointing out that there are thousands of Mac's in use, if not hundreds of thousands? Erm...yep no doubt there are but there are MILLIONS of PC's in use.

you said " You're right people who build their own systems are in a minority, but I'd bet that minority is larger than the current installed user base of Mac's"

don't try to change what you said cos right there you said more people build their own computers than the entire installed user base of macs which is bull****

Funnily enough you said that people who are on a budget self build in your last post now you are saying people on a budget don't.....make your mind up ;)

I said "The only people that want osx on x86 are people that are on a budget and build their own pcs." Where do you see me making two different statements?

But the ?1800 PC is about twice as powerful as the Imac, comes with a GF4 Ti4600 AND is upgradeable.....I was comparing like for like. It's the only sensible way to do this otherwise we'd get quite silly like saying I can get a PC for ?400 from Aldi or something....come on be FAIR in thi:):)

b>

How do you know the ?1800 pc is going to be twice as powerful? I never saw you give specs on this ubercomputer.

Ages ago Apple didn't have the killer app that they have now in OS X.. Don;t get me wrong Kitten I'm not arguing AGAINST Apple. I love my iBook I just wish Apple would see sense and build on their market instead of maintaining tis "we're niche so we're expensive" stance. /b>

Let me know how your Aston Martin for the price of a Skoda campaign pans out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest deadzombie   

Always lovely to hear from you Wickedkitten. you're posts always fill me with the warmth and happiness that comes from knowing someone else has been schooled...:evil:

It is possible that x86 PC users are going to have access to the same quality & power as OSX through future Linux distros. We've seen in the past 2 months that KDE & Gnome interfaces are moving toward more of a Mac like structure...seems to me the Linux crowd is really pushing forward to become a legitimate option for the home desktop.

Linux looks to be the the final destination for everyone. Its jumping up everywhere, from palms to tablets to Xbox's...I really, really think that Linux will end up being Microsoft's worst nightmare...it's just going to take quite awhile longer than everyone has predicted.

I have no factual basis for any of that...it's just an observation of long term trends in the Linux market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glowstick    3

Too bad there are better UNIX OSes than Linux, but are ignored by the mass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vidar    0

Walmart already has contracts for their OS-less PC's to have Lindows ::Gags:: or Mandrake Linux. Its only a matter of time. Muahahaha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
usr.bin    0
Originally posted by Vidar

Walmart already has contracts for their OS-less PC's to have Lindows ::Gags:: or Mandrake Linux. Its only a matter of time. Muahahaha!

Not to get off topic, but what is really quite amusing is that I don't know many 'techie' computer users who go out and buy a computer from wal-mart. I know that if anybody I know personally goes out there and buys a computer for whatever the cheap price is when they come out, they will be calling me up and having me delete that bull**** and put what they call "a real Operating System" on there. (Windows, in case your not following along).

I myself am quite looking foreward to getting a couple of these dirt cheap computers, bringing them home, getting rid of that crap *nix, installing a true desktop OS on there, and hooking my family up to a network. Don't get me wrong, *nix is a great OS for servers, but it has no place in the desktop arena for the fact that most people who use a computer know how to turn it on, find MSN Explorer, check thier e-mail, and might...just MIGHT know how to shut down. Unfortunatly everyone around where I live just flips the switch off or *trembles* reaches for the surge protector and flips that off to turn off the system. This is the reason that if Linux gains a good foothold in the desktop marketplace, it's going to take a good long while.

--dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
L33T P3NIS    0

i will have to agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advocate    0

So Wickedkitten you are trying to tell me that a 800Mhz iMac with a GF2MX and SDRAM is more powerful than an Athlon 2000+ with a GeForce4 Ti4600 and DDR Ram (thats the machine that cost ?1800)?

So YES in the PC World you CAN get an Aston Martin for the price of a Skoda......whereas with the Apple you pay for a Skoda and that's precisely what you get! (The iMac)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advocate    0

Sorry if I sound pee'd off Wickedkitten but comparing those two computers is just not on really.

1.66Ghz CPU vs 800Mhz CPU (equivalent to probably a 1.2Ghz if I'm being fair)

GeForce 4 Ti4600 vs GeForce2 MX

DDR RAM vs SDRAM

Not fair now is it? Plus the PC is upgradeable. I don't know why you just can't agree that Macs are expensive. Yes they're lovely, yes they probably are worth the money to those willing to pay it but no Apple are never going to take a significant chunk of the market with the prices as they are.....and I would still argue that the self build market of the x86 arch is bigger than the whole Mac market, certainly here in the UK.

If you still want to insist on comparing a Mac Skoda with a PC Aston Martin then I'm afraid there's just no hope for you ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickedkitten    12
Originally posted by Advocate

Sorry if I sound pee'd off Wickedkitten but comparing those two computers is just not on really.

1.66Ghz CPU vs 800Mhz CPU (equivalent to probably a 1.2Ghz if I'm being fair)

GeForce 4 Ti4600 vs GeForce2 MX

DDR RAM vs SDRAM

Not fair now is it? Plus the PC is upgradeable. I don't know why you just can't agree that Macs are expensive. Yes they're lovely, yes they probably are worth the money to those willing to pay it but no Apple are never going to take a significant chunk of the market with the prices as they are.....and I would still argue that the self build market of the x86 arch is bigger than the whole Mac market, certainly here in the UK.

If you still want to insist on comparing a Mac Skoda with a PC Aston Martin then I'm afraid there's just no hope for you ;)

Nothing ****es me off quite so much as people that want to compare a ****in self-built pc to a retail one. If it were possible to build your own mac system don't you think people would?

If you want to sit around and call Mac's skoda's it's fine by me but I'm getting sick and tired of your bitching about how much they cost. Go complain to Dell, and Falcon, and Alienware about how expensive their pc's are then go look at mac prices at resellers since thats where most people go since they are cheaper there (yes I know the idea of a cheaper mac than at the apple store must be ****in foreign to you)

And while you're at it I suggest you pick up an economics book and read up on 'luxury items'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
usr.bin    0
Originally posted by Wickedkitten

Nothing ****es me off quite so much as people that want to compare a ****in self-built pc to a retail one. If it were possible to build your own mac system don't you think people would?

If you want to sit around and call Mac's skoda's it's fine by me but I'm getting sick and tired of your bitching about how much they cost. Go complain to Dell, and Falcon, and Alienware about how expensive their pc's are then go look at mac prices at resellers since thats where most people go since they are cheaper there (yes I know the idea of a cheaper mac than at the apple store must be ****in foreign to you)

And while you're at it I suggest you pick up an economics book and read up on 'luxury items'

lux?u?ry (lgzh-r, lksh-)

n. pl. lux?u?ries

Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort.

Something expensive or hard to obtain.

Sumptuous living or surroundings: lives in luxury.

adj.

Providing luxury: a luxury car.

-------------------------------------------------

i?tem

n.

A single article or unit in a collection, enumeration, or series.

A clause of a document, such as a bill or charter.

An entry in an account.

A bit of information; a detail.

A short piece in a newspaper or magazine.

A romantically involved couple: ?[They] soon began seeing each other... and were an item for a year and a half.? (Peter J. Boyer).

adv.

Also; likewise. Used to introduce each article in an enumeration or list.

There you have it. I'll let you lot add it together. 1+1=10.

--dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
unspec    0
There you have it. I'll let you lot add it together. 1+1=10.

Base 2!

--

unspec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advocate    0

....and I'm sick of Mac zealots saying they can get a Mac for the same price as my PC cost to build and then pointing out that it's a skoda compared to my Aston Martin....Don't you see?!

That is EXACTLY my fr**gin point! Apple don't realise just how much they are hurting their own market by not making Macs more affordable. I don't need to look up luxury items because as far as I'm concerned only the top end Macs are a luxury item. Why would anyone want to buy an inferior product for more or the same money???

The only people that buy those under powered and over priced machines are those that either buy "because it's a Mac" (which admittedly I nearly did) or those that don't know any better.

I don't need to bitch at Dell or Falcon or Alienware because in the PC market I have a choice! That choice is to self build, this is my whole argument which you don't seem to quite grasp! I do self build because I CAN self build. Apple merely restrict consumer choice to maintain an inflated profit on their products. And before you start yes I know other manufacturers do this (Nike, Adidas etc) but not when they have quite the competition that Apple do.

Apple seem quite content to perpetuate the myth that "Apple is better because it is Apple" when in reality the guts of an Apple aren't that much different to a PC and to be honest are more often than not a whole generation (or more in the case of graphics cards) behind the PC market.

Maybe I'm wrong about the direction Apple should go in, maybe what Apple really need to do is make sure that $ for $ an Apple Mac is at least equal to the performance of a PC. Generally when a manufacturer charges more than a product is "worth" because of branding etc the price has been built on the fact that the product is also superior to other similar products (Sony) as well as having a certain premium for the brand.

Now let's tackle the "luxury" bit, which is quite easy. Every PC is a luxury according to the dictionary definition so kindly provided by Dave. The difference I suppose is that an Apple is an over priced under powered luxury compared to a PC.

You really need to get over this WickedKitten and just accept that Apple can never compete with PC's while their price/performance ratio is so poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advocate    0

...course, we could always take ?1800 each and me build a PC and you buy a Mac and see who gets the more powerful system;))

Interestingly enough I've just been speaking to a programmer friend of mine who has suggested with the downloadable version of Darwin we may just be able to disassemble the rest of OS X and reverse engineer/recompile for x86. An interesting thought and may be worth it just to see how you react when you see the perfromance on a ?1800 PC as compared to your iMac :evil:

/me pats his Aston Martin safe in the knowledge it'll be overtaking quite a few skodas for a while

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.