Join 3,497 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)

Tags:

Mac OS X Intel "Hacked"
August 11, 2005 2:21 PM   Subscribe

Well it's happened the developer release of Mac OS X Intel x86 has been "hacked" to run on a PC Laptop. Here's the video torrent. (via)
posted by Livewire Confusion (47 comments total)

 
VIDEO TORRENT MY ASS! Where's the hacked copy, son?! *pants*
posted by cavalier at 2:25 PM on August 11, 2005


I have been looking for that hacked copy myself for the last month or so. Last thing I found was a 2 gigabyte text file.
posted by Livewire Confusion at 2:32 PM on August 11, 2005


I *wish* I found a 2 gig text file. I got the Gay Porn Avalanche.
posted by mosch at 2:35 PM on August 11, 2005


I have a sneaking suspicion that Apple may be leaking these deliberately, to get the hacker community to break the TCM protection. Apple then has another 8 months or so to go through this process and come up with a final product that will be a lot more difficult to crack.
posted by Rothko at 2:38 PM on August 11, 2005


Rothko, I don't think there IS TCM protection...
posted by Livewire Confusion at 2:40 PM on August 11, 2005


You're right, it's called TPM. Sorry for the typo.
posted by Rothko at 2:43 PM on August 11, 2005


infact this says there is no DRM at all
posted by Livewire Confusion at 2:43 PM on August 11, 2005


i was gonna say, "what does Turner Classic Movies have to with Apple?" Then i was gonna put on my tin foil hat.
posted by Livewire Confusion at 2:45 PM on August 11, 2005


I think this is a myth. Like Livewire I've been looking for a copy (in some pretty dark corners) since it was first reported and haven't come up with a thing. I can't believe that it wouldn't be all over P2P and the torrent sites if it was real.
posted by cedar at 2:45 PM on August 11, 2005


infact this says there is no DRM at all

That link is a quote from a third-party developer, not a source from Apple. In any case, he was referring to the Mactels distributed through the Apple Developer Connection program, which must be returned after the developer program ends. Who knows what Apple's official policy is, let alone what will be in the final product?
posted by Rothko at 2:50 PM on August 11, 2005


I think Dvorak's prophecy is coming to pass. DRM spells death for any operating system. IMHO I don't think Apple with ever have a hardware or kernel based DRM.

THAT SAID:

I have a sneaking suspicion that Apple may be leaking these deliberately, to get the hacker community to break the TCM protection. Apple then has another 8 months or so to go through this process and come up with a final product that will be a lot more difficult to crack.

Well since there is no TPM to crack; I think I have to disagree with your theory.

As for the future, who knows...
posted by Livewire Confusion at 2:58 PM on August 11, 2005


Also... APPLE RULES!
posted by Livewire Confusion at 2:59 PM on August 11, 2005


I think this is a myth. Like Livewire I've been looking for a copy (in some pretty dark corners) since it was first reported and haven't come up with a thing. I can't believe that it wouldn't be all over P2P and the torrent sites if it was real.

I didn't believe it till I saw the video. Download it.
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:03 PM on August 11, 2005


IMHO I don't think Apple with ever have a hardware or kernel based DRM.

On the other hand, Apple makes most of its money from its highly profitable hardware revenue. Being able to run OS X on a $500 Dell box instead of a $500 Mac Mini means lost profits. I'd be hard-pressed to see why Apple shareholders would allow that situation, unless licensing would somehow make up the difference.

Anyway, all of this is moot speculation. Apple never shows its cards until the last second, unless someone spills the news a few days beforehand.

Well since there is no TPM to crack; I think I have to disagree with your theory.

Weren't the Rosetta kernel extensions protected? I might be wrong but that was the going theory for the last few weeks. It might explain why there are a lot of screenshots of native Intel binaries but (to my knowledge) no PPC apps.
posted by Rothko at 3:04 PM on August 11, 2005


BTW, I have watched it several times and subsequently my girlfriend is now breaking up with me. Be warned.
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:05 PM on August 11, 2005


Weren't the Rosetta kernel extensions protected? I might be wrong but that was the going theory for the last few weeks. It might explain why there are a lot of screenshots of native Intel binaries but (to my knowledge) no PPC apps.

The Steve ran PPC binaries on Mac OS X intel at the last con. As far as PPC Apps running on hacked boxen.... I have seen nor heard nothing about them either way. But I don't see why they wouldn't run especially third party apps...
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:09 PM on August 11, 2005


BTW, SOMEBODY FIND ME A VAILD OS X INTEL TORRENT. DAMN, MAN!
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:10 PM on August 11, 2005


That is the fastest torrent I've ever seen. It instantly maxed out my cable connection.
posted by letitrain at 3:16 PM on August 11, 2005


Apple makes most of its money from its highly profitable hardware revenue

This is not true. 40% of its profits come from hardware IIRC.

Apple's gross margins on hardware are 30%, while the gross margin on an OS X DVD is 95%+. Apple's average hardware sale is $1500, so if it averages $500 profit on a box and $100 profit on a DVD it needs a 5:1 sales ratio (one lost hardware sale begets 5 DVD license sales) to break even.

This is ignoring the profits it gets from software sales, which were very sizeable in the MRQ.

I don't think Apple will abandon the PC hardware market, or even wants to, but as of now I'm not seeing any logical reason why they should want to continue making their own machines for all eternity (logic being making better PCs than Wintel, making more money as an PC OEM rather than a licensor to OEMs).
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 3:19 PM on August 11, 2005


It certainly looks convincing, although the elapsed boot/login time seems suspiciously short for a 1.6 Ghz Pentium.

DRM spells death for any operating system. IMHO I don't think Apple with ever have a hardware or kernel based DRM.

Why would OS X only running on Apple's Intel-based hardware be any different than OSX only running on Apple's PowerPC-based hardware? Once the user has bought the hardware, it makes no difference to them, unlike, say DRM on media.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 3:20 PM on August 11, 2005


I have been looking for inconsistencies in the video and all I can see is that on the dock there is no dashboard icon. However, I do see the Dashboard / Expose system preference.
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:22 PM on August 11, 2005


It certainly looks convincing, although the elapsed boot/login time seems suspiciously short for a 1.6 Ghz Pentium.

Well it IS Unix ;-)

Linux boots just as fast on my 1.4 pentium tower... But I did a net install of gentoo so it's way tweaked. My powerbook books almost as fast as that and Mhz wise it's much slower...
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:26 PM on August 11, 2005


Man, if all of you folks want an Apple so much then why don't you just BUY one?
posted by fenriq at 3:26 PM on August 11, 2005


Livwire, there's no Dashboard on my dock either and I'm on an iMac. I removed it.

The Torrent ain't working for me.
posted by dobbs at 3:26 PM on August 11, 2005


Livwire, there's no Dashboard on my dock either and I'm on an iMac. I removed it.

So did I and programed it to the F8 Key... BUT this video torrent *should* be what a clean install of Mac OS X Intel looks like...
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:28 PM on August 11, 2005


The Torrent ain't working for me.

I am seeding it now...
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:29 PM on August 11, 2005


I have been looking for inconsistencies in the video and all I can see is that on the dock there is no dashboard icon. However, I do see the Dashboard / Expose system preference.

I see he did some other dock modifications too...
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:32 PM on August 11, 2005


This is not true. 40% of its profits come from hardware IIRC.

A good chunk of the rest probably comes from iPods. The gross margin on an OS X DVD may be 95%+ (debatable, since developers need to be paid and Apple goes through revisions much faster than Microsoft) but if it's only 7-8% of your sales it doesn't seem (to me, anyway) to add nearly as much profitable revenue as hardware. Getting rid of hardware sales is the sort of decision that would probably raise a red flag in most Apple investors' minds.

FWIW, I don't really care what solution Apple comes up with. I just don't see it as likely that Apple would throw away a huge chunk of revenue, nor that Steve Jobs would want to relinquish that amount of control over the user experience, which is a big marketing point for Apple. Forcing users to buy an Apple to run OS X will require the very technology found in the developer's boxen.
posted by Rothko at 3:37 PM on August 11, 2005


(gross margin is just revenue - cost of goods sold)

Getting rid of hardware sales is the sort of decision that would probably raise a red flag in most Apple investors' minds

Dunno. Apple sells 5M machines a year now. That's good business, but chickenfeed compared to Dell.

I just don't see it as likely that Apple would throw away a huge chunk of revenue

Agreed, but there's a lot of overhead associated with this revenue. For all I can see the Apple store could feature Dells and HPs in the not distant future. What would be the difference?

nor that Steve Jobs would want to relinquish that amount of control over the user experience

if history is any guide... he already did this with OPENSTEP.

Plus getting in bed with Intel is pretty clear evidence that he already has relinquished control over the user experience, in that I don't expect Apple hardware to be meaningfully differentiated from eg. Asus hardware in the future.

The PC market is 200M machines a year. To get a 10% share of that is an order of magnitude increase in relevancy, and 20M licenses @ $50 a pop is a billion dollars of profit.

Not saying Apple is going to pull the trigger on this, but it is an interesting direction to consider.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:01 PM on August 11, 2005


I personally think we will see both an Apple hardware division and an Apple Software division.

Apple will continue to sell glossy high speck design master pieces... but their op says will be the dominate platform.

Jobs has the last laugh and Bill Gates eats out of the trash can or goes *nix.
posted by Livewire Confusion at 4:09 PM on August 11, 2005


*op SYS not op says... LOL
posted by Livewire Confusion at 4:10 PM on August 11, 2005


heck Dell has already offered to switch over to Mac OS X.

Oh, and if Microsoft does go *nix, then and only then will the Linux, Windows, Mac OS X triad be truly compatible with each other, and hence a level playing field.
posted by Livewire Confusion at 4:12 PM on August 11, 2005


I thought Apples profits came from cutesy MP3 players?
posted by Artw at 4:24 PM on August 11, 2005


I haven't paid retail for an OS since OS9 back in 2000 thanks to Linux. I even run Linux on my semi-functional Lombard (after an ass-full of kvetching on discussion boards and hours of trial and error). This would change instantly if Apple were to open OSX.x for x86.

Just in case you're reading this, Steve...
posted by Suck Poppet at 4:30 PM on August 11, 2005


OSX.x for x86
...as in, freely installable on non-Apple x86 boxen...
posted by Suck Poppet at 4:31 PM on August 11, 2005


Faster than my mini.
posted by smackfu at 4:32 PM on August 11, 2005


It's a 1.6GHz Pentium-M. They're much faster clock-per-clock than Pentium 4s (hmm.. sound familiar?). The next generation Pentium-Ms are rumored to be in the first wave of Intel iBooks and Mac Minis.
posted by zsazsa at 4:54 PM on August 11, 2005


Related: deadmoo got it working.
posted by blag at 4:58 PM on August 11, 2005


What's the 0day "scene" release name for this?
posted by starscream at 5:23 PM on August 11, 2005


I haven't paid retail for an OS since OS9 back in 2000 thanks to Linux. I even run Linux on my semi-functional Lombard (after an ass-full of kvetching on discussion boards and hours of trial and error). This would change instantly if Apple were to open OSX.x for x86.

Just in case you're reading this, Steve...


yeah I would totally buy a retail box version of that. I wish The Steve would put us temp coders back to work writing drivers for other peoples hardware as well. i could use the cash.
posted by Livewire Confusion at 5:35 PM on August 11, 2005


Livewire Confusion:
There is so much more to life than brand loyality. Grab a few more unrelated hobbies to get as deeply into :-)

(Not trying to be nasty, jus' saying you're giving a strong impression of overly narrow horizons, and that's not usually interpreted as a good thing by others).
posted by -harlequin- at 4:30 AM on August 12, 2005


Livewire Confusion:
There is so much more to life than brand loyality. Grab a few more unrelated hobbies to get as deeply into :-)

(Not trying to be nasty, jus' saying you're giving a strong impression of overly narrow horizons, and that's not usually interpreted as a good thing by others).


-harlequin-:

Not into brand loyalty (yeah that's how you spell it) per se. I have several computers with several different operating systems. I think it would be awesome to run Mac OS X on a PC. I LOVE computers. I am also a musician and artist. I also dig cooking.

However, what I am not is a nasty little troll like yourself.

Why do you have to piss in my cornflakes, huh?
posted by Livewire Confusion at 6:10 AM on August 12, 2005


All analysis aside, I really think that Apple will make the transition and eventually offer OSX for non-Apple hardware.

How many PC users will not switch to new hardware, but would be willing to switch OS (easy to dual boot and stick with the one you like). I really think there are a lot more OS switchers than hardware switchers - no new hardware needed.
posted by tomplus2 at 8:11 AM on August 12, 2005


It is against Apple's interests to officially offer OS X for commodity Wintel hardware. The reason being that "The Mac Experience" requires complete control over the hardware on which the OS runs -- the nightmare of trying to support all of the possible commodity hardware configurations is something they really don't want, and would destroy both their brand and their value-add.

I'm sure we'll see an OSX-on-commodity-hardware underground (much like Linux-on-XBox), and it may even become somewhat legitimate. But Apple will never officially support it.
posted by xthlc at 10:49 AM on August 12, 2005


HERE IS THE TORRENT AND INSTRUCTION MANUAL
posted by Livewire Confusion at 3:40 PM on August 12, 2005


Livewire:

Typos aren't spelling errors, they're proofreading errors. (Or in my case, the normal and expected result of the complete absence of proofreading).

You can mistakenly call me a troll, but I'm wasn't trying to provoke a rise, I'm serious - brand worship is not a good look, quite the opposite, and if a friend of mine has some sauce on his cheek in public, I'll tell him, as I expect my friends to tell me. I don't know you, I'm not accusing you, I am telling you that while you may not be aware of it, you were starting to come across as That Guy that makes people wary of Apple. Don't be That Guy. That's all. Not pissing in your cornflakes. Or at least, it wasn't my intention to.
posted by -harlequin- at 10:44 PM on August 12, 2005


I am glad you are concerned about my supposed brand worship. Now could you kindly go be an asshat somewhere else? You are totally splitting hairs. By the way you have troll sauce all over your post.
posted by Livewire Confusion at 7:37 PM on August 13, 2005


« Older Did the discovery of evolution lead to Darwin's ag...  |  Siberia's permafrost is meltin... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments