Hmm, great question about macs vs hacks...
Having myself come from an IT background and being a bit
of a tech freak I relish something new to get my teeth into.
I have done some pretty idiotic stuff with computers in the past
just to make them do something that they were not meant to,
such as getting dos 6.22 defrag to work on a windows 98 machine.
This was because i felt the dos defrag was more efficient, and it
very efficiently killed my start menu items, but the stuff that was
still there worked very fast........
I first stumbled on the OSx86 project as it was in 10.4.5 days
and found myself a new challenge to get it working on my PC.
Spent much time reading the forums and finally worked out that
I would need an upgrade to get it working properly so bought the
components needed and happily got lots of help on the irc channel
from the great JaS man to get it working.
Not once did he laugh at my dumb questions or stupid mistakes
and had nothing but time and patience, and finally i had a working
OSx86 10.4.5 install and was very happy.
Then came updates to 10.4.6 , 10.4.7 , 10.4.8 etc and along with
minor kext editing and tweaks etc I had a machine that worked flawlessly.
The problem with that is I became bored with no fixes etc needed to
maintain the system, and upgraded to another machine which at first
had problems installing OSx86 and because of time constraints I dropped
mac os until recently, when a rogue virus killed a lot of my media library.
Now i am running mac os almost exclusively apart from a few key
programs that i run in my xp partition.
I think the whole mac vs hack thing doesn't do justice to the amount
us hackintosh users actually learn about the operating system through
owning a hackintosh. It takes much time and patience and a stubborn
streak to keep it going through all the updates etc.
Also I'm sure that the whole OSx86 thing has brought a lot more people
to apple hardware, that have had only a partially working hack and decided
to stop their problems by going for the real thing.
Myself now I have decided to minimise my huge electrical draw and actually
downgraded to a samsung nc10 laptop from a huge dual core overclocked
desktop and have never been happier, especially after swapping the internal
wireless card with one that works.
I have also bought the samsung usb dvd writer and am soon replacing
the inbuilt 160gb hdd with a 500gb and have a personal internet and media
machine which far outperforms an ipod touch or archos.
Also with modifications in the future (adding internal usb broadband dongle)
It will be an ideal machine for what i need it for.
If Apple made a 10.2 inch netbook with the samsungs battery life then I would
be very , very tempted.
I'm only guessing but i think the atom may be about as fast as a 1.6 core solo
mac mini ?????
PS .... will probably also be getting an intel atom dual core desktop board and
getting a friendly engineer to swap the processor into the samsung (if even possible).
He has proper reflow and bga an other soldering stations and will be interesting to try
but not sure I want him near my beloved Sambook / MacSung .... lol
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.5.5 (9F33)
Physical RAM 2048 MB
Drive Type Hitachi HTS543216L9A300 Hitachi HTS543216L9A300
CPU Test 28.81
GCD Loop 61.48 3.24 Mops/sec
Floating Point Basic 18.60 441.99 Mflop/sec
vecLib FFT 24.54 809.72 Mflop/sec
Floating Point Library 35.64 6.21 Mops/sec
Thread Test 50.60
Computation 42.71 865.17 Kops/sec, 4 threads
Lock Contention 62.07 2.67 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads
Memory Test 76.24
Allocate 100.07 367.48 Kalloc/sec
Fill 84.78 4121.99 MB/sec
Copy 42.86 885.28 MB/sec
Copy 88.28 1823.46 MB/sec
Scale 86.41 1785.12 MB/sec
Add 101.35 2159.04 MB/sec
Triad 83.26 1781.07 MB/sec
Quartz Graphics Test 62.57
Line 58.51 3.90 Klines/sec [50% alpha]
Rectangle 55.14 16.46 Krects/sec [50% alpha]
Circle 48.94 3.99 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]
Bezier 59.06 1.49 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]
Text 136.67 8.55 Kchars/sec
OpenGL Graphics Test 58.73
Spinning Squares 58.73 74.50 frames/sec
User Interface Test 29.29
Elements 29.29 134.43 refresh/sec
Disk Test 42.64
Uncached Write 101.75 62.48 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 100.36 56.78 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 55.93 16.37 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 121.31 60.97 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Write 9.59 1.02 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 75.87 24.29 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 65.64 0.47 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 110.59 20.52 MB/sec [256K blocks]