OS X on x86dvd (HOAX! os x will go x86, but apple only)

Fash · Post by **Fash** » June 12, 2005, 7:03 pm

word is, an apple leaked dvd image installs OS X Tiger on x86 hardware... and that they were using this at the most recent WWDC.

I'm currently acquiring a copy of this and will confirm it.

edit:

it's a scam.. and when os x does go to x86, it will only run on apple hardware.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 12, 2005, 7:50 pm

Interesting if it can be dual booted with XP. Apple has been working on a x86 based OS X for the past 5 years.

Man...if this is true, I can load up OS X, look at the pretty UI...and then go back to Windows XP to actually do stuff!

Even if it's out, there's no driver support except for whatever Apple has written drivers for so it wouldn't be much use yet.

Keep an eye on it Fash! I see OS X 10.4 on the newsgroups but it's Mac verision.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » June 12, 2005, 9:58 pm

release notes:

º þ Release: MAC OS X "Tiger" þ Filename: tiger-x86-xiso.iso º
º þ Type: OS þ Format: iso º
º þ Archives: 21x50MB þ Date: 06/2005 º
ÉÊÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍËÍÍÊ»
º þ Hardware requirements: ºÛ²°º
º 133MHZ/128MB RAM/1GB HD ºÛ²°º
ºÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ¹Û²°º
º ºÛ²°º
º R E L E A S E N O T E S ºÛ²°º
º ºÛ²°º
º Mac OS X Tiger will change the way you use a computer. Breakthrough ºÛ²°º
º search technology, stunning graphics and media, unparalleled connectivityºÛ²°º
º an intuitive user interface and a virtual toolbox chock full of cleverly ºÛ²°º
º integrated features - all atop a rock-solid UNIX foundation - give you ºÛ²°º
º the most innovative, stable and compatible desktop operating system on ºÛ²°º
º the planet. Period. ºÛ²°º
º ºÛ²°º
º ºÛ²°º
ÌÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ I N S T A L L N O T E S ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ¹Û²°º
º ºÛ²°º
º 1. UnRAR, Burn, Install. ºÛ²°º
º ºÛ²°º
º 2. Enjoy ºÛ²°º
º ºÛ²°º
ÌÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ¹Û²°º
º ºÛ²°º
º For all you eager guys out there waiting to get your hands on the ºÛ²°º
º mac os x. There have been rumors about it getting released on silly ºÛ²°º
º p2p and newsgroups, but it's completely fake. We are proud to bring ºÛ²°º
º Mac OS X for the x86 processor, pre retail. Yes, you heard right. ºÛ²°º
º Pre Retail. This comes fully cracked and all you need to do is just ºÛ²°º
º unrar and burn with your favorite software. We hope to bring you guys ºÛ²°º
º more stuff in the near future and thanks for the support from ºÛ²°º
º everyone. ºÛ²°º
º ºÛ²°º
º ºÛ²°º
ÌÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ Brought to you by XiSO ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ¹Û²°º

i'll have it installed sometime tomorrow afternoon.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » June 13, 2005, 8:16 am

the dvd did not boot in my system. i hafta go but will look into it later.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » June 13, 2005, 8:23 am

DO NOT DOWNLOAD THIS.

running it through VMWARE booted up to the goatse.cx picture....

hoping it's not a new undetected virus or bios hack.. beware!

Fash · Post by **Fash** » June 13, 2005, 3:04 pm

ok.. just got home and took a further look at it... 977 megabyte textfile of "GNAA" on the dvd... was looking at the ISO in a hex editor, still worried that it could be a virus of sorts.

this hoax was done just for slashdot, i'm assuming.... as i've seen GNAA posts there.

so lame!

Fash · Post by **Fash** » June 13, 2005, 3:43 pm

Will I be able to run Mac OS X on my Dell?

No.

"We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac." - Phil Schiller, Apple Computers

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 13, 2005, 3:59 pm

Fash wrote:
Will I be able to run Mac OS X on my Dell?

No.

"We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac." - Phil Schiller, Apple Computers

Well that's lame. Sounds like Apple will still be cloneless. They'll never learn. I guess they're happy with their mighty 2% of the market.

Note to Apple: Microsoft Windows runs on x86 everything and Bill Gates alone is worth more than Apple. Hint, Hint. Sell your OS by itself fucksticks and not just attached to your overpriced proprietary hardware.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 13, 2005, 4:02 pm

well considering that Intel is making the CPUs for the next generation of Macs, maybe that is in their business development plan.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 13, 2005, 4:34 pm

Voronwë wrote:well considering that Intel is making the CPUs for the next generation of Macs, maybe that is in their business development plan.

I take Fash's quote to mean that even when Apple moves to Intel, they will have specific intel chips (proprietary) that their OS will run on so anyone with an x86 (much less Athlon based PC) still won't be able to use Apple's OS as an alternative.

Kguku · Post by **Kguku** » June 13, 2005, 5:11 pm

The new Mac OSX for the x86 architecture is being run on a P4 3.2Ghz PC. My friend already ordered the developer kit, and should be getting it within a few weeks (still another week or so before they start shipping).

It was already noted by some people that there's a good chance the developer copy can be run on several x86 setups, and once the developer version is released, I'm sure within a few weeks you'll see people getting it working on some x86 setups without much of a fuss.

One of the big issues with the Mac that my friend really didn't like (he owns a G5 right now) was the video card requiring a special BIOS to run under the PowerPC architecture. It seems that will no longer be the case for the current developer platform, and simply requires drivers from the video card manufacturer and you can use the current video cards in your x86 PC.

Speculation is the reasons they are switching to this is that IBM cannot keep up with production requirements that Apple will be demanding, especially when they start doing production work for others (Xbox360 etc). Also the G5 runs too hot to get a laptop version of it going, which severely limits Apples market there.

Personally I'm sad they opted to go this route, part of the mystique of the Mac was it running on a PowerPC.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 13, 2005, 5:18 pm

none of the people i know who have Macs in their home even know what "powerPC" means, so i dont think the switch to intel will hurt them.

in fact it will help them tremendously. Even though most people probably dont know what a processor even is, they know that Intel makes them, and they know they are in computers, and they know they are important, and they identify Intel as predominant brand.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 13, 2005, 5:21 pm

Kguku wrote:
Speculation is the reasons they are switching to this is that IBM cannot keep up with production requirements that Apple will be demanding, especially when they start doing production work for others (Xbox360 etc). Also the G5 runs too hot to get a laptop version of it going, which severely limits Apples market there.

Personally I'm sad they opted to go this route, part of the mystique of the Mac was it running on a PowerPC.

IBM has it's hand in both the PS3 and Xbox360. That's a ton of chips.

A pro Apple view:

With IBM’s semiconductor capacity soon to be thrown headlong into production of Cell processors for Sony PS3 and PowerPC processors for Microsoft XBox 360, Apple was compelled to look elsewhere for a reliable horsepower vendor.

Enter, Intel.

Microsoft’s alliance with AMD has brought high-calibre multi-core processors to the PC world and brought it discord with Intel. Intel is bracing itself for the announcement that its pre-eminent customer will be shipping AMD-based systems. Riding on the colossal Dell marketing machine, Athlons and Opterons will get the exposure that AMD would like to give them but cannot afford. In short, Dell is about to take AMD mainstream. Not that Dell particularly wants to lose its cosy relationship with Intel but it wants to lose customers to AMD vendors even less.

The real action will come from Apple and Intel who are too savvy to let their long-standing differences prevent them collaborating in a new PC venture of gargantuan potential. Furthermore, Jobs won’t find the move to Intel quite so distasteful now that his nemesis, IBM, no longer manufactures PCs.

Apple’s receipts from its 76% dominance of the MP3 market plus Intel’s cash mountain gives them the financial clout to take on Microsoft and Dell. Luckily for the Apple-Intel team, they have superior technology too. Granted, Intel’s latest processors are dogs but the main event is eighteen months out, when Microsoft ships Longhorn, so Intel have the interim to get their act together. The next revision of Mac OS X, named Leopard, will be launched then too. Expect to see games running on x86 Leopard as fast as on x86 Longhorn: no need for gamers to run Windows.

In the meantime, Microsoft have the distraction of XBox 360 that will soak up cash in its futile battle against Sony’s PS3. PS3 not only has better hardware but is backward compatible with its predecessors. Dell has seen the writing on the wall and tried to pre-empt Apple by announcing, just a few days ago, its intent to produce upmarket PCs. Well, Dell, you can put lipstick on a pig but that won’t make it more appealing.

On Monday, at the Apple developers’ conference, Steve Jobs demonstrated Mac OS X Tiger running on x86 hardware…without the audience realising that it wasn’t on a PowerPC! Later this month that same hardware will be in the hands of developers. Developers will also get tools to migrate their software to x86. Any software that, due to neglect, doesn’t make it will run on top of a binary translation layer just like the PowerPC version of Microsoft Office did on Monday. The transition is said to be quick and easy and Mathematica was cited as taking just a few hours to recompile with slight tweaks.

Eighteen months and counting. Eighteen months and the choice will be simple: buy a solid operating system running on a PC designed by the coolest computer company ever or buy something of dubious ancestry out of a car boot. Time for fickle investors to repopulate stock portfolios. Time to think different!

This author wants to make it seem like the choice will be clear...there's the matter of software though. PC has it all and that's not going to change in 18 months. It's basically the Mac still with a different chip in it.

Hoarmurath · Post by **Hoarmurath** » June 14, 2005, 10:49 am

Winnow wrote: Well that's lame. Sounds like Apple will still be cloneless. They'll never learn. I guess they're happy with their mighty 2% of the market.

Note to Apple: Microsoft Windows runs on x86 everything and Bill Gates alone is worth more than Apple. Hint, Hint. Sell your OS by itself fucksticks and not just attached to your overpriced proprietary hardware.

I think you're forgetting that Apple is a hardware company, not a software company (of course they sell software, but it is clearly not their focus). And the opposite is true for Microsoft. I just don't think direct comparisons between the two companies are valid.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » June 14, 2005, 11:57 am

People used to say that Apple needed to open up their OS to compete with Microsoft... but those people don't know how important the hardware revenue is to Apple. Apple has a smaller marketshare but they also get high overhead on every machine running the os, plus accessories, care plans, and iTunes.

This is a really neat time in the Microsoft vs Apple fight, and one that could remarkably have Microsoft suing Apple for unfair business practices.

If Apple requires you to have Apple hardware to run the OS.. and they come to the Intel platform.. i see them adding one or more non-standard components to the board and making the operating system require these components to run. What this means is that Apple will now be selling hardware that can run both OSX and Windows.... An Apple machine will likely be capable of dual-booting OSX, Windows, and linux.. while any other computer manufacturer's product will not be able to run OSX.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 14, 2005, 12:00 pm

not sure how Microsoft could sue Apple, since they are partial owners - specifically to buoy the company so they can avoid anti-trust settlements.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » June 14, 2005, 12:07 pm

Fash wrote:People used to say that Apple needed to open up their OS to compete with Microsoft... but those people don't know how important the hardware revenue is to Apple. Apple has a smaller marketshare but they also get high overhead on every machine running the os, plus accessories, care plans, and iTunes.

This is a really neat time in the Microsoft vs Apple fight, and one that could remarkably have Microsoft suing Apple for unfair business practices.

If Apple requires you to have Apple hardware to run the OS.. and they come to the Intel platform.. i see them adding one or more non-standard components to the board and making the operating system require these components to run. What this means is that Apple will now be selling hardware that can run both OSX and Windows.... An Apple machine will likely be capable of dual-booting OSX, Windows, and linux.. while any other computer manufacturer's product will not be able to run OSX.

Hrmm, there's nothing in particular to suggest (given the copy of OSX you have won't run on i686) that the chips Intel are making for Apple will "run" Windows natively, and why the hell would M$ care anyway..

Wintel PC manufacturers would be laughed out of court if they attempted to sue Apple for their anti-competative practices given their likely market share w/ the new machines (they're still going to be expensive, and only geeks dual boot)

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » June 14, 2005, 3:56 pm

Zaelath wrote:...they're still going to be expensive... .

How do you know this?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » June 14, 2005, 4:42 pm

Hoarmurath wrote:
Winnow wrote: Well that's lame. Sounds like Apple will still be cloneless. They'll never learn. I guess they're happy with their mighty 2% of the market.

Note to Apple: Microsoft Windows runs on x86 everything and Bill Gates alone is worth more than Apple. Hint, Hint. Sell your OS by itself fucksticks and not just attached to your overpriced proprietary hardware.
I think you're forgetting that Apple is a hardware company, not a software company (of course they sell software, but it is clearly not their focus). And the opposite is true for Microsoft. I just don't think direct comparisons between the two companies are valid.

If they're so into hardware, why don't they just make the best PC clones? I'll tell you why. Because no one would buy them. Apple overprices their stuff. Dell seems to do OK for themselves selling low cost, quality systems. Apple robs you blind while dazzling you with an OS that doesn't really do anything that windows doesn't. They're all salesmanship.