Hello was looking to buy a Mac but then came across this site

[ukMinix]

Hi Peoples,

 

Nice to discover such a forum, the home of OSx86.  I was looking to buy a Mac for my kid however they are costly. She basically wants an apple for a photos and video editing. She ain't professional and doubt she will use a mac to its capacity. Anyways I am going to search this forum to see if I can build a cheaper alternative or use vm to stick OSx86 on a ACer i5 using vmware.

 

Any tips will be welcomed and thank you for reading.

 

Min Out.

 

 

[Allan]

Hi and Welcome.

 

You want buy a real Mac, or create a Hackintosh for your son?

 

Consider how much you'll spend.

[ukMinix]

Well I want to create a Hackintosh but it needs to be powerful to run lightroom and video editing software.  I dont mind creating a VM on my Acer i5 if it works but not sure if it will as noone really has anything on acer.

[Allan]

Ok!

 

Take a look in our Wiki: OSx86 Wiki

[ukMinix]

Thank you muchly,  I will try to install this on a vm.

[Allan]

In VM you can't get all the performance you need.

[shhbz]

Well u can get great performance by spending aggregate compared to a real Mac and when Yosemite almost in the final release get an i7 4790k with a gigabyte supported motherboard which will keep you away from other hassle and a good graphic card maybe amd r9 280x good enough for her work or the latest nvidia gtx 970 but not sure of its support as of now,rest of the components is on your choice

[JVene]

Thank you muchly,  I will try to install this on a vm.

 

For what you're attempting I doubt a VM will suffice, but it's certainly worth a try as a first step.

 

In particular avoid AMD CPU's, or even Intel CPU's that aren't the one's Apple uses themselves. This eliminates an entire level of issues, smoothing out your experience.

 

That said, I run OS X in VM's. I have several, from 10.4.x to 10.9.4. The best one at this point is 10.8.4, but then 10.9.x is a bit fresh for squeezing into a VM.

 

The real issue you may face is that inside a VM there are no great solutions for graphics. In an officially supported guest operating system graphics can be accelerated to acheive reasonable performance and compliance, but not so in for OS X.

 

This greatly depends on the applications you're choosing for video editing at the least, possibly photo editing depending on the software and configuration choices. You'll have to try it to find out.

 

That said, with a slight bit of care in choosing components you can, without a doubt, assemble a Hackintosh worthy of high expectations for the amount of a basic PC build. In US dollars, $400 would assemble a respecitable machine easily matching older Mac Pro's, but able to run the newest OS releases (some of the early Pro's don't officially run OS 10.9.x for example).

 

On the other hand, just so you know, there are businesses devoted to selling "reconditioned" used Macs, with short warranties and support, ranging from $350 to $1500 or so, depending on configuration. A higher end Mac Mini, capable of running the recent OS, with 8 GBytes of RAM can be found for around $800 or a little less. Comparable to the cost of a Hackintosh, but a couple of years old (maybe 3).

 

In some ways, considering your plan, a used or refurbished unit is actually MORE of a risk. This is because, especially with the Mac Mini and the MacBook units, the limit of the OS version and the limit of maximum RAM changed over time as new models were released. For example, many of the Mac Mini's could only accept 4 GBytes of RAM. Lots of them were based on DDR2, which is not only outdated by about twice the price of DDR3 these days.

 

That means that when you choose components for a Hackintosh build, you can more easily upgrade as required to match OS requirements of your applications (some must have at least 10.8, for example), and RAM requirements.

 

Audio is one of the tricky things to pay attention to, which I point out because of your video editing interest. You'll want to research the hardware recommendations found all over the web on this subject for known compatible motherboards and/or audio cards.

 

Likewise, video cards must be chosen with care. The last thing you want is to pay for hardware that's less than reliable for video editing, especially when an intelligent selection may actually save a few bucks to get the right item.

 

WiFi, if you need that, is limited to basically one card. There may be kexts you can fit into making other WiFi work, but for all practical purposes there is one known WiFi card that works as expected.

 

Video editing is better served with multiple drives than with a larger, faster drive - all other factors being equal. There many occasions where video editors create preview renderings in scratch, which must read (at fairly high speed) from source drives. Having source and destination aimed at two physically different drives greatly helps performance, because in part of the dividision of workload and in part because there's far less thrashing of the drive read/write heads.

 

SSD is nice, but it's pricey for the benefit, and less applicable to video editing than other uses.

 

Now, about the CPU options. The i7 is the Intel flagship part. They're going to release new versions (I think end of September 2014, but how knows what to expect). That suggests that the higher end parts might slide a notch in price (don't expect much).

 

However, since your target usage is a "learning" system, and not a professional system, I suggest you may be as well served with something from the i3 or i5 line, considering the price difference. You should very likely aim towards the "1150" socket, because that offers you the greatest future expansion options, especially if the investment ends up being re-purposed in the future.

 

The i3 dual cores feature hyperthreading. They support 4 threads which look and function like quad cores to the operating system. The i7's (recent versions) have hyperthreading with 4 cores, which function like 8 core CPU's. This is not the P4 type of hyperthreading. Those old chips often SLOWED down performance with hyperthreading - it was really weak. The hyperthreading in the i3 and i7 line is more like 80 to 90% of a full core. An i3 dual core performs very closely to the level of a quad core i5 of the same speed (maybe 10% to 15% less)...certainly not half. The i5's don't have hyperthreading.

 

The 1150 socket is the current model. It's likely to be replaced, just as all of them have in the past, but will still have powerful i7 (8 thread) options for years. Some of the older socket motherboards, still available, may be cheaper, but their sockets will have less support and fewer options ongoing for upgrading.

 

Finally, don't skimp on the power supply. It is often the least considered component in a build because it doesn't do much. There is no industrial standard as to the meaning of "500 watts", or whatever the rating is. Now, obviously we all know the definition of a watt is scientifically pinned down, but what they mean on the box does not account for HOW LONG it can supply the rated power.

 

Without exaggeration, the cheap units provide the rated maximum power for about 30 seconds. You might get 60 seconds. Then you will get smoke.

 

That's a literal expectation of those units.

 

Brand name, well known designs like Seasonic, Antec and Corsair have a completely different meaning. Corsair intends a 500 watt unit to provide 500 watts for several hours, without smoke, and to SHUT ITSELF DOWN SAFELY if that is exceeded.

 

Some of the Seasonic and Antec units mean to provide the rated power 24/7 for the duration of the warranty.

 

You're probably creating a built that will need 250 to 300 watts, possibly 400 depending on the graphics card you choose. If you add up the power requirements and notice you need 300, purchase at least a 500 (it's a typical size). The reason is simple - the efficiency and longevity of all power supplies is GREATLY improved when operating at 50 to 70% of the power requirement. Efficiency is always compromised as the demand approaches 90% of the rated power. When the cheap units are $30, but the Corsair is $60 - believe those of us who've done this for years - it's worth that $30 extra. Saving that $30 CAN actually destroy the other components you spent $300 for if the power supply takes a dive.

[newhacker1746]

For what you're attempting I doubt a VM will suffice, but it's certainly worth a try as a first step.

 

In particular avoid AMD CPU's, or even Intel CPU's that aren't the one's Apple uses themselves. This eliminates an entire level of issues, smoothing out your experience.

 

That said, I run OS X in VM's. I have several, from 10.4.x to 10.9.4. The best one at this point is 10.8.4, but then 10.9.x is a bit fresh for squeezing into a VM.

 

The real issue you may face is that inside a VM there are no great solutions for graphics. In an officially supported guest operating system graphics can be accelerated to acheive reasonable performance and compliance, but not so in for OS X.

 

This greatly depends on the applications you're choosing for video editing at the least, possibly photo editing depending on the software and configuration choices. You'll have to try it to find out.

 

That said, with a slight bit of care in choosing components you can, without a doubt, assemble a Hackintosh worthy of high expectations for the amount of a basic PC build. In US dollars, $400 would assemble a respecitable machine easily matching older Mac Pro's, but able to run the newest OS releases (some of the early Pro's don't officially run OS 10.9.x for example).

 

On the other hand, just so you know, there are businesses devoted to selling "reconditioned" used Macs, with short warranties and support, ranging from $350 to $1500 or so, depending on configuration. A higher end Mac Mini, capable of running the recent OS, with 8 GBytes of RAM can be found for around $800 or a little less. Comparable to the cost of a Hackintosh, but a couple of years old (maybe 3).

 

In some ways, considering your plan, a used or refurbished unit is actually MORE of a risk. This is because, especially with the Mac Mini and the MacBook units, the limit of the OS version and the limit of maximum RAM changed over time as new models were released. For example, many of the Mac Mini's could only accept 4 GBytes of RAM. Lots of them were based on DDR2, which is not only outdated by about twice the price of DDR3 these days.

 

That means that when you choose components for a Hackintosh build, you can more easily upgrade as required to match OS requirements of your applications (some must have at least 10.8, for example), and RAM requirements.

 

Audio is one of the tricky things to pay attention to, which I point out because of your video editing interest. You'll want to research the hardware recommendations found all over the web on this subject for known compatible motherboards and/or audio cards.

 

Likewise, video cards must be chosen with care. The last thing you want is to pay for hardware that's less than reliable for video editing, especially when an intelligent selection may actually save a few bucks to get the right item.

 

WiFi, if you need that, is limited to basically one card. There may be kexts you can fit into making other WiFi work, but for all practical purposes there is one known WiFi card that works as expected.

 

Video editing is better served with multiple drives than with a larger, faster drive - all other factors being equal. There many occasions where video editors create preview renderings in scratch, which must read (at fairly high speed) from source drives. Having source and destination aimed at two physically different drives greatly helps performance, because in part of the dividision of workload and in part because there's far less thrashing of the drive read/write heads.

 

SSD is nice, but it's pricey for the benefit, and less applicable to video editing than other uses.

 

Now, about the CPU options. The i7 is the Intel flagship part. They're going to release new versions (I think end of September 2014, but how knows what to expect). That suggests that the higher end parts might slide a notch in price (don't expect much).

 

However, since your target usage is a "learning" system, and not a professional system, I suggest you may be as well served with something from the i3 or i5 line, considering the price difference. You should very likely aim towards the "1150" socket, because that offers you the greatest future expansion options, especially if the investment ends up being re-purposed in the future.

 

The i3 dual cores feature hyperthreading. They support 4 threads which look and function like quad cores to the operating system. The i7's (recent versions) have hyperthreading with 4 cores, which function like 8 core CPU's. This is not the P4 type of hyperthreading. Those old chips often SLOWED down performance with hyperthreading - it was really weak. The hyperthreading in the i3 and i7 line is more like 80 to 90% of a full core. An i3 dual core performs very closely to the level of a quad core i5 of the same speed (maybe 10% to 15% less)...certainly not half. The i5's don't have hyperthreading.

 

The 1150 socket is the current model. It's likely to be replaced, just as all of them have in the past, but will still have powerful i7 (8 thread) options for years. Some of the older socket motherboards, still available, may be cheaper, but their sockets will have less support and fewer options ongoing for upgrading.

 

Finally, don't skimp on the power supply. It is often the least considered component in a build because it doesn't do much. There is no industrial standard as to the meaning of "500 watts", or whatever the rating is. Now, obviously we all know the definition of a watt is scientifically pinned down, but what they mean on the box does not account for HOW LONG it can supply the rated power.

 

Without exaggeration, the cheap units provide the rated maximum power for about 30 seconds. You might get 60 seconds. Then you will get smoke.

 

That's a literal expectation of those units.

 

Brand name, well known designs like Seasonic, Antec and Corsair have a completely different meaning. Corsair intends a 500 watt unit to provide 500 watts for several hours, without smoke, and to SHUT ITSELF DOWN SAFELY if that is exceeded.

 

Some of the Seasonic and Antec units mean to provide the rated power 24/7 for the duration of the warranty.

 

You're probably creating a built that will need 250 to 300 watts, possibly 400 depending on the graphics card you choose. If you add up the power requirements and notice you need 300, purchase at least a 500 (it's a typical size). The reason is simple - the efficiency and longevity of all power supplies is GREATLY improved when operating at 50 to 70% of the power requirement. Efficiency is always compromised as the demand approaches 90% of the rated power. When the cheap units are $30, but the Corsair is $60 - believe those of us who've done this for years - it's worth that $30 extra. Saving that $30 CAN actually destroy the other components you spent $300 for if the power supply takes a dive.

I would suggest a build with this:

Core i5 with locked multiplier-2.6-3.4 Ghz Clock speed

Gigabyte motherboard LGA 1155 with preferable Realtek ALC 88x,

Atheros 8151 ethernet, or Realtek 8111, 8102/8103, 8101, etc.

Radeon HD 6870

Seasonic 430-600 watt PSU

 

If I had the budget that's what I would do, perfectly compatible.