Want a Mac thats the price of a PC, and runs like a PC?

[SimonTheMime]

A guy famous for his XBOX hacks has found a way to bypass the TPM so Mac OSX can run natively on your PC (as a main operating system). All you need is to download the Mac OS X image, along with the VMWare patch, and if you don't have two hard drives, then you're gonna need a 6gb external usb drive. I'll be installing this on my laptop.

Newslink (http://wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,68501,00.html)
Guide, screenshots and vid (http://www.uneasysilence.com/os-x-proven-hacked-and-running-on-an-ordinary-pc/)

Funny how Mac runs faster on a regular PC than on it's own hardware. Also, it's great how you need the Ubuntu LiveCD (Ubuntu being my favourite Linux distro - it's all I have/want on my home PC).

Discuss

[billy]

http://www.osx86project.org/index.php

[SimonTheMime]

Yeah, nice. I hope it becomes a huge growing community with lots of demand, so they'll have patches for support for PC hardware drivers such as wifi cards. I don't want to have to go on a M$ Winblows partition everytime I have to go on the internet with my laptop.

You gonna install, Billy?

[Dexstar]

The fact you use bullshit terms like M$ and Winblows show how fucking ill informed you are about any of these situations.

Shut up and go suck Linux.

[gibs]

Macs are built terrible through all my experiences.

[astinus]

In response to the thread title, NO!

And why would anyone else?

[Dexstar]

In response to the thread title, NO!

And why would anyone else?

BECAUSE M$ TAKE OVER WARLD WITH WINBLOWWS!

[megalomaniac]

well, I call them M$ too and their products often blow, while Billy (Gates, not the L2Blah founder) tries to force those products down the throats of consumers anyway. But I need Windows (I stick with 2k, that's more than enough) for gaming, and Macs are overrated. So why would I want a Mac? MacOS blows, it's more looks than anything else and the fact that I'm using Win2k instead of XP should teach you what I think about looks in operating systems... There's no application I use that runs better on a Mac than on a real PC (usually they don't run on a Mac at all) - so, WHY?

on the other hand I can see some IT freak have use for this, or ppl who just want to experiment...

[SimonTheMime]

well, I call them M$ too and their products often blow, while Billy (Gates, not the L2Blah founder) tries to force those products down the throats of consumers anyway. But I need Windows (I stick with 2k, that's more than enough) for gaming, and Macs are overrated. So why would I want a Mac? MacOS blows, it's more looks than anything else and the fact that I'm using Win2k instead of XP should teach you what I think about looks in operating systems... There's no application I use that runs better on a Mac than on a real PC (usually they don't run on a Mac at all) - so, WHY?

on the other hand I can see some IT freak have use for this, or ppl who just want to experiment...

Right on the T, man, I'm actually going to be majoring in IT. Also, OSx86 installation will be more for experimental pruposes.

The fact you use bullshit terms like M$ and Winblows show how fucking ill informed you are about any of these situations.

You're quite the idiot, smash. Why would I want to use a shitty unstable, malware-prone operating system like Windows when Linux (open-source) has only proven to be much more stable.

"butmg, simon linux is incompatib0h!!11"

Sure, some people have necessities on Windows, that's why there's:

-Wine (WinEmu for Apps)
-WineX/Cedega (WinEmu for gaming*)
-VMWare for Linux (Windows in a window in Linux)

*I actually get higher FPS with CS/WoW than I did on Windows, funny thing o.o

And those are for whatever Win-needs you have that haven't yet been ported to Linux. So if I'm able to do things like what's shown in my screenshots:

1 (http://img80.exs.cx/img80/7034/snapshot0013kb.png)*
2 (http://img198.echo.cx/img198/5759/snapshot65lr.png)*
3 (http://img50.echo.cx/img50/3590/snapshot26mn.png)*
3 (http://img85.exs.cx/img85/5851/ie6underlinux3xf.png)*
*For a full list of my screenies, and captions (http://rfbase.com/simonslinux.html)


Which is everything Windows can do and tons more under a much more stable, and customizable OS with enough working viruses to only fit on a few floppies, then why not? If you ask me, it seems Windows is the one that's incompatible.

-Simon

[Mr.BobDobalina]

Your point?

I am sick of the linux arguement. Yes, it may be more stable and secure but this is not the reason it does not have virii. The reason is that coders of virii ussually want to effect the most people possible. The logical OS to code your virus for would be Microsofts Windows which dominates the market. Why effect what? 1-3% of the market (A guess....) when you could effect 90+% of it.

Also, the use of all those emulation programs is the reason that Linux will always be an "alternate" OS. I also highly doubt that games run better on Linux, mabye you just don't have the right drivers. I ran Linux on my computer, Gentoo, and was very disatisfied with my results. No it was not any worst then Windows, but the constant hassle of emulators needed for programs just didn't warrant a conversion to Linux.

I am really sick of people hating Windows because its from Microsoft. People seem to think that hating Microsoft is the "cool" thing to do. Linux over Windows, Fire Fox over Internet Explorer.... Who gives a shit?

Could you please give reasons on why someone should switch over to Linux other then it is free and the lack of virii?

It really isn't hard to not be infected on windows, I have been using computers since a young age (around 4-5) and to this day (I am now 17) have not gotten ONE virus. All you need is an Anti Virus (Avast is free) a spyware program or two (Ad Aware, Microsoft Anti Spyware, Ewido) and update them atleast weekly and your computer will be clean.

If you want to use Linux then please be my guest and do. But could you please stop shoving it down peoples throats? If they don't want to change then they don't, no need to convert them.

[SimonTheMime]

Your point?

I am sick of the linux arguement. Yes, it may be more stable and secure but this is not the reason it does not have virii. The reason is that coders of virii ussually want to effect the most people possible. The logical OS to code your virus for would be Microsofts Windows which dominates the market. Why effect what? 1-3% of the market (A guess....) when you could effect 90+% of it.

Have you met any real hackers? Most of them are great Linux fans and highly respect it, and a lot of them contribute a lot in code.

Also, the use of all those emulation programs is the reason that Linux will always be an "alternate" OS. I also highly doubt that games run better on Linux, mabye you just don't have the right drivers.

Or maybe it's Linux's unique utilization of CPU usage and cache, and how greatly it's supported by nVidia (and nVidia how greatly supported by Linux distros, over ATI).


I ran Linux on my computer, Gentoo, and was very disatisfied with my results. No it was not any worst then Windows, but the constant hassle of emulators needed for programs just didn't warrant a conversion to Linux.

It's to bad, Gentoo's a piece-of-shit imo, that's why I always tell people who are starting out t get a Debian-based (Ubuntu, for example), because of apt-get (and compiling is much quicker than any Gentoo/-based's emerge/porthole).

Apt-get/Synaptic (fav UI) is something where you can startup the program, and literally choose from (last checked) 13,000+ applications, all sorted however you want (you can search, see them in categories, anything), and it will download and install that program along with it's dependancies.

If you want an SNES emulator, a screensaver, or even Winamp for Linux, with a few clicks, it's all downloaded and installed.


I am really sick of people hating Windows because its from Microsoft. People seem to think that hating Microsoft is the "cool" thing to do. Linux over Windows, Fire Fox over Internet Explorer.... Who gives a shit?

Because it's cool, since when? People disliking an OS because it's malware-prone and common crashes/freezing and great history of BSODs isn't hating because it's cool and trendy, it's mindful disliking of the OS - common sense.


Could you please give reasons on why someone should switch over to Linux other then it is free and the lack of virii?
Stability, security, customizability, free(dom to change code), and free (of charge - in nearly all distros).


It really isn't hard to not be infected on windows, I have been using computers since a young age (around 4-5) and to this day (I am now 17) have not gotten ONE virus. All you need is an Anti Virus (Avast is free) a spyware program or two (Ad Aware, Microsoft Anti Spyware, Ewido) and update them atleast weekly and your computer will be clean.

Well, I don't use any antiviruses, no firewall, no spyware blocker, no popup blockers, no worm remover, no keylog-killers, and no anti-trojans, most of which are common necessities amongst Windows users, and I'm yet to be hit with any malware on Linux. :)


If you want to use Linux then please be my guest and do. But could you please stop shoving it down peoples throats? If they don't want to change then they don't, no need to convert them.
Hey, smashmethod threw an argument at me, and I'm not one to back down, and hey, didn't you make a thread about your leave from this board and L2O? Oh right:

Well this is my last post here or on orphus, I messaged Arnie about a week ago and told him to take away my mod status. I don't even play Lineage 2 anymore, so I think it should go to someone who

You, 7-01-2005.

[Mr.BobDobalina]

Have you met any real hackers? Most of them are great Linux fans and highly respect it, and a lot of them contribute a lot in code.

No I have not, your response has nothing to do with my statement. This goes for the OSX also. The reason that OSX and Linux based machines are virus free is that no one takes the time to write one. That and that there are to many distros of Linux to effectively make one.

Or maybe it's Linux's unique utilization of CPU usage and cache, and how greatly it's supported by nVidia (and nVidia how greatly supported by Linux distros, over ATI).

I remember you saying you have both Linux and Windows on the same computer. Would you mind giving me a few ingame screen shots of you playing a certain game under Linux and Windows?

Because it's cool, since when? People disliking an OS because it's malware-prone and common crashes/freezing and great history of BSODs isn't hating because it's cool and trendy, it's mindful disliking of the OS - common sense.

That is only be partly true. The under dog is always loved by everyone. This is the case with the internet explorer/FireFox debate and is the same reason here. Everyone and their great uncle are rooting for the "Open Source" programs.

Stability, security, customizability, free(dom to change code), and free (of charge - in nearly all distros).

Stability? If your not a lazy bum, this can be achieved on Windows. Customize? How about theme Xp? Free? Techiclly you could get WIndows for free :P

Well, I don't use any antiviruses, no firewall, no spyware blocker, no popup blockers, no worm remover, no keylog-killers, and no anti-trojans, most of which are common necessities amongst Windows users, and I'm yet to be hit with any malware on Linux.

You really do not need that many programs for safety, and they hardly use much of your computer. Only 4 things are needed for safety on your Windows Based Computer. A router with a built in firewall, Service Pack 2 which includes a built in pop up blocker, and Microsofts Anti Spyware which give you real time protection agianst spyware, and An anti Virus. And only two of which are actually programs. Is this really that hard?

Hey, smashmethod threw an argument at me, and I'm not one to back down, and hey, didn't you make a thread about your leave from this board and L2O? Oh right:

So what? I changed my mind.

Also wasn't it you who came begging to me after you got banned from Orphus?

I can hardly take anything serious from an arrogant racist.

[SimonTheMime]

No I have not, your response has nothing to do with my statement. This goes for the OSX also. The reason that OSX and Linux based machines are virus free is that....

*is that both are based off Unix.


I remember you saying you have both Linux and Windows on the same computer. Would you mind giving me a few ingame screen shots of you playing a certain game under Linux and Windows?

Too bad I removed Windows completely from my computer months ago. Here's my running Starcraft under Linux (http://img80.exs.cx/img80/7034/snapshot0013kb.png)



That is only be partly true. The under dog is always loved by everyone. This is the case with the internet explorer/FireFox debate and is the same reason here. Everyone and their great uncle are rooting for the "Open Source" programs.

Only because it's proven much more secure, has nothing to do with being an underdog. If MS released Firefox and had it been propietary software, it had have had the same amount of use. There have been many OPenSource browsers before FireFox (Netscape, Mozilla, to name a few)



Stability? If your not a lazy bum, this can be achieved on Windows.
Windows is an OS for lazy bums - it's a Point-and-Click obvious OS, there isn't much of a problem with that, but if the OS lacks a lot to begin with, it shouldn't be marketted as such.


Customize? How about theme Xp?
Customizing code to your wishes.. not the GUI (which you can also do)

Free? Techiclly you could get WIndows for free :P
Yet there is no freedom to edit with propietary software say if you want to run your system a unique way, ie have everything skinned to your wishes, to match, and even that (also the most common way of obtaining Windows for free) is illegal.



You really do not need that many programs for safety, and they hardly use much of your computer. Only 4 things are needed for safety on your Windows Based Computer.
I'd rather have none on my Linux box so it won't be wasting CPU usage :)

A router with a built in firewall, Service Pack 2 which includes a built in pop up blocker, and Microsofts Anti Spyware which give you real time protection agianst spyware, and An anti Virus. And only two of which are actually programs. Is this really that hard?

Of course it's not, it shouldn't be needed. If an OS requires all that to prevent malware, then it's not a good OS.


So what? I changed my mind.

It's too bad, I thought I'd never have to see your face here again :(.

Also wasn't it you who came begging to me after you got banned from Orphus?

Sure! http://www.l2guru.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif


I can hardly take anything serious from an arrogant racist.

You just say that 'cause yer part-nig.

Go watch RevolutionOS - a documentary on Windows, GNU, Linux, Unix, Linus Torvalds, Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer. An excellent watch.

[megalomaniac]

1) StarCraft rocks
2) Mozilla rocks, not that Firefox garbage :lol:
3) underdog software FTW
4) Windows vs. the world flamefests for the win too

nuff said :D

[billy]

I used to use gentoo, I liked it. I'm more of a fbsd fan though ^^

The thing with m$ vs *nix/open source is M$ neglects a lot of reported security holes and fixes them when a worm breaks out. Most open source projects will patch security holes pretty quickly.

I am/was a big win2k fan, and only upgraded like 2 weeks ago to winxp because it was a time for a format and I just went with winxp. I don't run any anti-virus/anti-spyware/anti-anything software and my computer hasn't been compromised ever (as far as I can tell :p). I used to run a firewall but most of the ones now are all bloated to shit, and I usually turn them off for some reason and forget to turn it back on. iptables > *

Oh and KDE blows.

[Mr.BobDobalina]

*is that both are based off Unix.



Too bad I removed Windows completely from my computer months ago. Here's my running Starcraft under Linux (http://img80.exs.cx/img80/7034/snapshot0013kb.png)




Only because it's proven much more secure, has nothing to do with being an underdog. If MS released Firefox and had it been propietary software, it had have had the same amount of use. There have been many OPenSource browsers before FireFox (Netscape, Mozilla, to name a few)



Windows is an OS for lazy bums - it's a Point-and-Click obvious OS, there isn't much of a problem with that, but if the OS lacks a lot to begin with, it shouldn't be marketted as such.


Customizing code to your wishes.. not the GUI (which you can also do)


Yet there is no freedom to edit with propietary software say if you want to run your system a unique way, ie have everything skinned to your wishes, to match, and even that (also the most common way of obtaining Windows for free) is illegal.



I'd rather have none on my Linux box so it won't be wasting CPU usage :)



Of course it's not, it shouldn't be needed. If an OS requires all that to prevent malware, then it's not a good OS.



It's too bad, I thought I'd never have to see your face here again :(.


Sure! http://www.l2guru.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif



You just say that 'cause yer part-nig.

Go watch RevolutionOS - a documentary on Windows, GNU, Linux, Unix, Linus Torvalds, Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer. An excellent watch.

So you allow this type of trash on your forums Billy. I am not going to even bring myself to your level Simon.

[Hyakku]

Exactly Bob, I don't even deal with that type of stupid people that resort to racism to get their point across. If Billy patroled the off topic section this guy would be banned in a minute, but I'm sure once Billy sees it he will ban him. He's a good admin.


Edit: Who the hell watches documentaries on Operating Systems for the computer?? Thats the apex of nerdom...

[Palanthas]

this guy knows a lot of nerdy compubabble, you should believe him!

windows is the OS for the lazy bum. who the hell would really wanna waste all that time messing with shet on linux? only thing im really disapointed about with windows (xp specifically) is the language packs :( i cant 2 client or alt tab when i have them installed

[cip]

Your point?

I am sick of the linux arguement. Yes, it may be more stable and secure but this is not the reason it does not have virii. The reason is that coders of virii ussually want to effect the most people possible. The logical OS to code your virus for would be Microsofts Windows which dominates the market. Why effect what? 1-3% of the market (A guess....) when you could effect 90+% of it.


The OSes are designed differently. There ae huge fndamental differences in dsign that make writing viruses and malware much easier on windows. Yes there are linux root kits etc. But you will not get owned by viviting a webpage in Linux but you will in Windows. Even if someone wrote viruses for Linux at most you will fuck someone's /home partition but you will not bring the whole system down.

[megalomaniac]

one of the greatest problems in Windows is how all the programs like IE, Outlook Express and Messenger are tied to the OS. A security hole in IE will affect the whole Windows installation, everytime you use the computer. And while M$ takes their time to fix those issues, you can't do anything but hope and wait. If you're using Linux chances are you're gonna find someone who fixed a potential security flaw in much faster time, and you could always switch to another program which hasn't been compromised yet. But you can't easily disable IE or your whole "Winblows" ceases to function

[SimonTheMime]

Good to see there are some people here who know what they're talking about (billy, mega, cip).
Edit: Who the hell watches documentaries on Operating Systems for the computer?? Thats the apex of nerdom...
Somebody who'll be majoring in IT? You know a Linux admin gets paid $5/hr higher than Windows admins for example. It's just good to know about these types of things.

Also, as for MS security, yes, it is much easier to write viruses for Windows. And one must wonder why in the fuck does Microsoft still make it so that the default account is administrator, it's idiotic, and that's just a gaping hole for security issues.

On a Linux machine, to even get a virus to do anything, you'd have to go (should you choose to do it in shell):

$ su (Logging in as an administrator in shell)
[password]
# chmod 777 [directory/filename] (Changing file permissions)
# sh [directory/filename] (Executing the file)

Of course, there's a point-and-click way of doing it, but from what I've seen, most people on Linux prefer sticking to the shell. http://www.l2guru.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif

Unlike Windows, things don't automatically have permission to write over other files, and should Windows follow the *nix example, it'd be a much harder OS to write effective virii for.

[Cycon]

one of the greatest problems in Windows is how all the programs like IE, Outlook Express and Messenger are tied to the OS. A security hole in IE will affect the whole Windows installation, everytime you use the computer. And while M$ takes their time to fix those issues, you can't do anything but hope and wait. If you're using Linux chances are you're gonna find someone who fixed a potential security flaw in much faster time, and you could always switch to another program which hasn't been compromised yet. But you can't easily disable IE or your whole "Winblows" ceases to function
Not true. I don't have IE, Outlook, or Messenger on my computer and theres no trace of them on my computer. I run a virus scan maybe once a month and a spyware scan whenever my computer starts running slow. I haven't had problems in a while.

[SimonTheMime]

Because you have IE, Outlook and Messenger removed.. that was his point, that a security flaw in those leads back to the OS itself.

[megalomaniac]

taking IE, OE and Messenger out (and I mean completely out) of WinXP (minus Messenger for Windows 95C till Me) isn't easily done. It's possible but 99.99999999% of all Windows users don't remove these programs, in fact most of them USE them because they're conveniently installed already - why bother downloading and installing Firefox as an example, and getting all the plugins and setting it up so you don't get "need to enable scirpting here and cookies there" errors all the time? All while Microshit's shit is by default set to "allow almost every crap to happen on my admin account with medium to low security settings", because that's the only way the user gets to see all the funky multimedia websites and plugins :roll:

[Hyakku]

Good to see there are some people here who know what they're talking about (billy, mega, cip).

Somebody who'll be majoring in IT? You know a Linux admin gets paid $5/hr higher than Windows admins for example. It's just good to know about these types of things.

Also, as for MS security, yes, it is much easier to write viruses for Windows. And one must wonder why in the fuck does Microsoft still make it so that the default account is administrator, it's idiotic, and that's just a gaping hole for security issues.

On a Linux machine, to even get a virus to do anything, you'd have to go (should you choose to do it in shell):

$ su (Logging in as an administrator in shell)
[password]
# chmod 777 [directory/filename] (Changing file permissions)
# sh [directory/filename] (Executing the file)

Of course, there's a point-and-click way of doing it, but from what I've seen, most people on Linux prefer sticking to the shell. http://www.l2guru.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif

Unlike Windows, things don't automatically have permission to write over other files, and should Windows follow the *nix example, it'd be a much harder OS to write effective virii for.

Most people I know that are or have majored in IT have not watched documentaries on Operating Systems, as far as I know.

Secondly, like bob said, it only takes an ounce or two to know that even if Linux is harder, thats just another reason for them not to even bother wasting time to write viruses for them. Your own argument supports this theory, if you want to infect a bunch of people and quickly, your not gonna waste time on desinging something for a few people when you can infect the masses.

Here's the problem though, if you are doing something to get viruses on your computer, EVEN WITHOUT firewalls and what not you generally deserve it. Doing P2P programs? Illegal. Going to knock off brand porn sites? Pathetic and cheap you broke bum. Clicking on links without even checking what they are? Stupid. And not running antivirus programs if your so worried about viruses? Illogical.

If you are using a computer legally and morally, you won't have problems with viruses. If you are smart, you will not have problems with viruses, don't go downloading crap that you don't know what it is, and definetly don't go to porn sites that have you clicking 1000 links, and finally, if you are that paranoid just run an antivirus.

And to the topic title: Why would I?