New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Yosemite image with Multibeast in /Post-install: http://195.154.106.14/yosemite.img.gz
Multibeast work on AMD CPU? Hackintosh scene seems a bit more quiet than it used to be.
Multibeast itself is platform independent and works on any recent Intel (2006+)/AMD (2008+)/VIA (2010+) CPU - You however need a patched mach_kernel for AMD to boot even the installer (and obviously also for the OS). Updating on AMD is MUCH harder as you again need to patch the kernel and might not even be able to boot chameleon/chimera without it.
I would HIGHLY advise against using AMD for hackintosh - The trouble is not worth it at all.
If anyone is serious about building one there are guides with part lists here* - Gist of it is: Any recent Gigabyte mainboard (1150, 1155, 2011), any recent Intel CPU that supports VTd/VTx (basically anything besides the cheap Atoms), any recent AMD/Nvidia GPU (or Intel onboard HD3000+, best case 4000+) (AMD 4XXX+, Nvidia 6XX+). Some people love Nvidia but you need their driver package (web something) for it (which works in general very well) - i rather use AMD which has integrated drivers. I never had much luck with the Intel GPUs despite them being very well supported by the kernel (it's what the iMacs and older Macbooks use/d).
Re: Windows not ready for the desktop. I'd answer in detail, but feel it would seriously derail this thread. Suffice to say that I was partly joking because I do know that many people are able to make it work well for them. They have more computer smarts than I do, that's all. I also know that they can make it work because they've spent a lot of time learning how to work around limitations and are also used to the things which don't work well and they don't get bothered by them. That's the way I am with DOS and *NIX. Hell, even the MS TOS is gobbledegook to me! So when I encounter Windows as a newbie and can't get things to work the way "I think" the world of computing should work, (FTP, cut/paste from desktop to web address, etc.) then I jokingly say "not ready for the desktop" because that's what people say about FreeBSD and Linux even though from my perspective those operating systems can run circles around Windows. They, no doubt, feel the same.
eh, i used all of them both privately and in business - OSX (from 10.6), Linux (*buntu on Desktop, Debian on Servers, besides others), BSD (FreeBSD) and Windows (from 98). All have down and up sides.
For general usage i prefer OSX - it is just pretty intuitive unlike BSD/Linux and still easier to use than Windows. Has a lot of config options if you dig into the plist files. Very stable and updated for many years. Simple basic config. Most software/games (games 50:50) is available for OSX by now and the app store is great for easy search/install. Learning curve is simple even for beginners.
For server i prefer Linux/BSD, more config options and in general deeper insight into OS due to being open source (kernel etc.). Extremely stable and usually updated for 5+ years (or even longer if you are willing to put some manual work into it). For gaming nearly entirely useless, which is why i don't use it on desktop. Very hard to configure if you have a rare setup (dual GPUs, 3 screens, PXE boot etc.).
For pro usage/gaming you likely do not get around Windows, much is either only available for or only works correctly/good on Windows (Autocad, Photoshop and alike). Works pretty well if you stay away from the "bad" versions (roughly every second release, thus ME/Vista/8 = bad, 2000/XP/7/10 = good, server editions are usually pretty good regardless of base OS (2008 is based on Vista, 2008 R2 on 7, 2012 on 8, 2012 R2 on 8.1).
@william yosemite link is 404 ...
Fixed.
Hackintosh has a cool name; I was going to install it just based on that. Then I thought, "am I doing this because I really need to run Mac, or because Hackintosh is a cool name?" Then I decided to stick with Ubuntu.
Whats the best version for a core2duo? I would,like to test it
Almost what I wanted to ask... Which one should I take for an Core2Quad Q6600
What mobos do you two have?
A gigabyte mainboard improves some features that i don't care about but are probably important for others - notably native standby without crashing the kernel on resume. This probably applies to 775 as well.
A Q6600 easily runs 10.11, especially if you OC it by like 250-400Mhz (which is easy even if you have a stock cooler and shitty RAM) - However, this is fairly old HW and most MBs for 775 socket have non-supported network chips (Realtek, Marvell, Killer) so you likely need an e1000 driver based Intel PCIe (NOT PCI!) card (costs like 35EUR) (there are other options like some specific Atheros chipset and the rare/obscure Realtek RTLsomething but that drivers are problematic plus Intel floods the market with cheap NICs that are all somehow based on the e1000 driver which is now at version 2.0+ and rock stable, because the Mac Pro 1,1-4,1 had e1000 based nics).
A C2D (which one?) might have issues with 10.10+, but this depends on model (there are a LOT of C2D, much like there are a lot of i5s), if older (socket 775) same as above applies.
I do not know much specifics about the 775 chipsets plus hackintosh but due to age and wide adoption you should be able to get at least 10.8 with all required drivers and some minor hacks (standby). I personally would not use anything older than 10.9, ideally 10.10 or 10.11. You can in general upgrade from one version to the next but you'll likely (depending on HW; especially if your GPU needs the Nvidia web driver) run into some issues - Rule of thumb, if it boots in safe mode (-x) and you have a way to get Multibeast (or the kexts themself on it (Network, Store beforehand, USB) on it you'll likely be able to get it running again within a few minutes work.
Also keep RAM in mind - Much like Windows 7+ you'll want 8GB+ for good experience, 4GB is near the limit, 2GB or less not recommended at all. You'll ideally also want an SSD as OSX is not really optimised for HDDs anymore (due to all new Macs being based on very fast SSDs the code got a bit messy from Apples side and "needs" a lot of IOPS).
I've got a Lenovo M57e with the stock mainboard (so a lenovo one, q33) some time ago on ebay for 25€. Network chip is indeed a Marvel. I'll just try it out, nothing to lose. But first I have to download that Image at 370KB/s -.-
Thanks four you help!
Lenovo t420
mhm, i'd say you are out of luck - The GPU is too old to be supported.
Hackintosh on laptops is HIGHLY complicated unless you buy the exact right one (some HP Probooks are the best supported). You likely need to change the wifi miniPCIe card to a supported one, ethernet being Intel will likely work.
Your board and GPU is good supported up to 10.10 (10.11 with hacks) - If you have one with the Intel GPU, knowing IBM (i have a thinkpad) there is likely also a version with AMD/Nvidia which might be better or not supported at all.
You will run into a lot of issues while installing i guess; i did not manage to get it running on mine and wasted like 10hours on it.
If you want an OSX laptop i recommend getting a (used) Macbook (Air|Pro), less issues. Or a HP one that is supported near native.
You can't print images of currency on a Windows PC using most drivers, while you can on Mac and Linux!
There's an HD 5450 in the pcie slot ;D
Should be supported in 10.9 and possibly 10.10 - Research which was actual when the card was released and install that OSX.
My turn to troll
If some one make me a gift MacBook Air, first thing I'll install is Linux Mint /Debian Edition 
think it answers the question about I value the most from apple it same old sh*t just a shiny case
Seems good for 10.9, needs some very minimal manual work and some testing to get a config that enables you all (or all required) outputs but else natively supported: http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/293049-guide-mavericks-yosemite-amd-radeon-hd5450/
Fuck it, 5 hours downloading for that
So let's try it again....
Ten hours? Why didn't you just watch this instead?
This discussion has devolved into Why Macs?, so I will respond to that first.
Initially I got a Mac because it gave me a nice big-endian platform to test low-level code that I was writing on PCs. (That's changed. Macs are no longer big-endian.) I stay with Macs because they are versatile and robust computers. All of the Macs I have given away were still running at the time - and they were at least 7 years old when I gave them away. I currently have two 2005 Macs running at home - an original Mac mini server and my wife's PowerBook G4.
Full disclosure: The motherboard battery on the PowerBook G4 ran out, so the clock has to get time from the time server when it reboots. She leaves it plugged in, so we don't have to bother with replacement batteries.
I want to retire both of the PowerPC Macs, but I am not yet ready to give my wife my 2008 17 inch MacBook Pro. I still use it. Often. It is currently running OS X 10.11 El Capitan. It is not super fast, but it does what I need.
In general, the motivation for replacing a Mac is when the "administration effort" is not worth it. The PowerPC Macs have reached that point after 10 years of ongoing hard use.
Macs are versatile. They are great development platforms, and can run virtually (pun intended) any operating system - Unix (built-in), Linux, Windows.
Our family server (an Intel Mac mini) is running a business class software firewall appliance in a virtual machine. The firewall appliance uses bridged networking to isolate itself and provide router/firewall services for our Internet connection and the local LAN. At the same time, that Intel Mac mini provides separate and independent server services. It does it all without breaking a sweat.
True, I could do much of the above with an ordinary PC. I have used many PCs, running a variety of OSs (DOS, Windows, Linux, and even OS/2). I have also run workstations and larger systems with Unix, Vax VMS, etc. and all kinds of CPUs, and even those darned Rational R1000s which ran Ada native in the CPU.
I consider myself platform agnostic. I am definitely not a "Mac fanboy." I feel reasonably competent and comfortable on almost anything. Still, none of those computers has had the versatility and durability of the Macs.
Would I recommend Macs for a datacenter? No, of course not.
To answer the question, "Hackintosh vs Mac (OS X)", I would recommend buying a Mac. If you plan to use it for a while, why buy into the extra hassle of a Hackintosh and fret over the unknown future compatibility issues?
huh, you gave me shivers for a second there, reuploading 5.5GB...
But i unpackaged fine on the server:
https://paste.ee/p/AntSn
I see it like that - If you have the money and don't mind spending it by all means buy a Mac Pro/Mac Mini/iMac, they are not great value compared to ordinary PCs but still good.
If you want a laptop buy a MBA/MBP, they have very good value for specs.
If you want a Mac on the cheap and are willing to invest some time you can/should/have to go the hackintosh route. If you do it right you get a very stable system (as said, tested components. If you want a Mac on the cheap and power is free/cheap buy a used Mac Pro 1,1 plus a new GPU, runs still fine with 10.11 (requires bootloader patching, so boot once from USB, required after updates, 3,1+ run it native).
I have two hackintoshes.. One x99 setup and one using a modified AMD kernel on my old AMD FX 8150.
As you said, initially there can be really annoying teething problems and finding the correct boot flags for your hardware can take sometime. However, since setup I've had no problems, including the update to the patch that included Apple Music etc.
An example of one of my issues was that I was unable to install OS X using my r9 290 tri-X, I had to use my old gtx 570 - after the install I was able to put the r9 card back in and it worked fine..
If you want iMessage and FaceTime to work, again this can be another ball ache.. But there's always a solution in the end.
I like MACOSX however, if you intend to do any higher end gaming you'll prob find Windows is the way forward.
Hmm, tried it with your yosemite image, and just get a black screen after selecting yosemite.
Do I need to inject those codes in the image before I try to install it?
Edit: GraphicsEnabler=Yes, PCIRootUID=1, npci=0x2000 does wonders
Now I stuck at [PCI configuration begin] -.-
Try 0x3000 instead of 2
-x is safe mode too..
Now it stop's at SMC: successfully initalized
Tried -v -x npci=0x2000 ?
Also, I don't know what was in @Williams image with regard to additional kexts for power management etc? I've used tonymac86x to create a bootable USB
I've just gave up and installed manjaro ;D
Don't got the time to experiment with that longer.
I see.. initial install can be a pain..