I am looking to buy a new laptop, and I want to make sure that it can run OSX on it (dual booted with XP) Is there a defacto x86 laptop that has been found to work wonderfully with OSX?

I actually found myself at the apple store looking at powerbooks last night, but then I decided I should probably get an x86 box that is compatible. As I stated in the topic my budget is around $2000, does anyone have any suggestions?

Get an hp notebook. They're reliabvle and cheap.
Get at least a Pentium 4 processor, (centrinos are pIII's).
Get 512mb RAM, (minimum), and at least n 80gb hard drive. Trust me.
Oh, and a dvd reader too.

Yeah... except centrinos kick the {censored} out of P4's, and are hella better on battery life.

I'd say centrino and a gig of ram. Or wait for x86 powerbooks, if you can wait.

Centrinos are worthless when it comes to power, (applications and processor wise).
Sure their battery lives ar eawesome, but they have the processors of 3 years ago. Stick with a P4.

are there any specific ones that work 100% with x86 OSX?

Never installed it on a laptop, so I don't know.

Yeah uhh.. you do know 2.0GHz Centrino outperforms a 3.4ishGHz P4, right?

Yeah, don't speak unless you know what you are talking about, because you obviously don't.

I've used centrino's before. We've got 2 1.7GHz centrino's, (both with 512mb RAM), and, performance wise, are the same as a 1.5GHz P4.

Ummm... you're fulll of crap Fuzzlet!!!

A 2ghz Centrino outperforms a 3.4ghz P4, yeah right!!!!

Have you tried doing video editing on a centrino? How 'bout music editing? Any 3d apps? Hardcore games? You can't tell me that a Centrino outperforms a P4. (Except for battery life and heat issues. But with a PIII, what do you expect?) LOL!!! So, YOU should not speak since you're full crap. Or should I say, full of Fuzz!!!!

I'm not trying to be an a**hole here but you shouldn't down other people with your ignorance. Be nice!! How does it feel?

If the pentium m's are so f***ing bad, why would Intel BE DROPPING THE CURRENT P4 ARCHITECTURE IN FAVOR OF PENTIUM M ARCHITECTURE.

Yes, that's right, BECAUSE THE P4 ARCHITECTURE IS DEAD. It's pushed as far as it can go and hit a wall. The P-III architecture was a much more efficient architecture, just couldn't scale as well. Newer technologies are available now, that weren't back then, that let it scale.

Ok I exagerate'd a tad, a 2.0GHz centrino is close to on par with a 3.2GHz, especially if they are both 533MHz busses, as the centrino's are limited to. However this a comparison of CPU performance, not FSB.

To truly test which one is faster, get 2 systems with same fsb and same ram, then chuck mathematica or something on each one and calculate like a million digits of pi... compare times that it took to complete.

you all are missing the point, I want one that can run x86 OSX well..

I personally have decided to spend as little cash as possible until it is crystal clear what the final release hardware requirements are. Honestly at that point I'll likely pick up an actual x86 powerbook. Partially because I've always liked Apples hardware designs.

The Pentium 4 will do your job.

Screw the Centrino, it's rather worthless for running more than3 things at once. Hell, it's bad for photoshop. My frickin' 450MHz PIII, (older pc) is faster than my dad's 1.7GHz centrino.

I have os x on my 3GHz.

Don't buy anything to run OSx86. It's stupid and will get you stuck with an OS that is guaranteed to be end-of-lifed in a few months, when the security for the updates is better. I'd recommend waiting for the PowerBooks if you want to run OSx86, or otherwise just buy something to run Win/Lin and look at OSx86 as an afterthought.

lol you guys are so funny! i think that what he is trying to find is a laptop that is almost, really, greatly, compatible with os x I've herd of a dell that had graphics working as well as the wireless card wich one is that one? i bet he'd like that one

@hevnsnt

I can't believe no one is giving you a direct answer, which is any Intel setup with a 900GMA (915 G/L/V chipset) graphics board.

such as:
http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?ac...ghlite=inspiron

Dell Inspiron 6000

Intel Centrino 1.6ghz
512DDR
Integrated Intel 900GMA Graphic Card (128mb shared)
Broadcom 440x NIC (Which works when running native)
AC97 Sound (Which also works when running native)
60gb HD.

OMG< PLEASE not a Dell.
They suck ass for SO many reasons.
1-Bad support
2-Their notebooks tend to be problematic
3-Ugly and heavy
4-Crap components
5-Lower end models are equivalent to 3 year old technology.

This tone is simply inacceptable.

Yes, of course. That's the state of affairs. And just a sidenote: When we're talking about CPUs, we're not talking about Centrino. There is no Centrino processor. The processor is called the "Pentium M".

The problem is slow memory here. You're certainly right in these respects. But the speed of an ordinary Pentium M is still acceptable (for a mobile system).

There are numerous tests on the web showing it. Simply read them. On the same board, a 2.13 GHz Pentium M 770 is a tad faster than a Pentium M Extreme Edition with 3.73 in DOOM 3 benchmarks, although the Extreme Edition costs 400 Dollars more, is clocked 75% higher, has twice the FSB speed, and consumes four times more power. This review is in German, but you should be capable to comprehend it if you let it run through Altavista Babelfish:

Miserable Extreme Edition: Pentium M 770 thrashes Intel's 3.73 GHz behemoth
http://www.pcwelt.de/news/hardware/109219/

Pentium M 770: Fastest Games CPU from Intel
http://www.pcwelt.de/news/hardware/109635/index9.html

Tom's Hardware also ran a big comparison of these two processors with a focus on games, it's available in English.

Dothan Over Netburst: Is The Pentium 4 A Dead End?
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050525/pentium4-21.html



In any way the P4 is a very bad choice for notebooks, therefore you'll find very few of these processors in notebooks. It is so hard to cool them that either you have to take big cases or live with the fact that the processor slows down in heavy use because of thermal throttling. The question is, what do you intend to use a notebook for? Ordinarily, and by classic defintions, a notebook has to be a portable computer, which must be small and lightweight, and run on batteries for a reasonable amount of time. All of this is not possible with a P4. And as the Pentium M is so fast, there's also no reason to go for a P4.

First off, the Pentium M is no Pentium III. It is a direct descendant, yes, but the basic design is called P6, and stems from the even older Pentium Pro. Besides that, in all direct comparisons the Pentium III has always been faster than a Pentium 4 at the same clockspeed. The only difference was that the Pentium 4 was designed for higher clockspeeds, and so it could eventually fly away.

This statement, together with the lines with which you initiated this posting, disqualify you as a person that can be taken seriously. I'm just answering in order to set the records straight.

The same holds true for you. You should've done your homework.

That's simply ridiculous.

This is rather true, although I wouldn't exactly say the Pentium M is "bad". It simply doesn't shine here.

While I certainly agree that hardware like this and even older boxes still can do a great job (I find myself often working on an old subnotebook with a Pentium II 333Mhz CPU, which runs Windows XP and all office apps perfectly well), this is utter and complete nonsense. Why are you trying to cheat the original poster and spread such misinformation? Of course there is absolutely no way that a Pentium III at 450Mhz is on par with or even faster than a Pentium M with 1.7 GHz. What you say isn't even remotely true.

Everything boils down to configuration. Sure I can make even the fastest netburst Pentium 4 feel unresponsive and sluggish, I just have to install the whole Symantec software portfolio on it to achieve that. This way, even your clean Pentium III computer may feel faster than this system, but in reality it IS NOT.

Thank you Terry.

If you need to do work or if you somehow are to depend on having OSX working, you NEED Apple hardware. Even if it were acceptable to have broken functionality, I still recommand that you wait. Buying an actual Mac is the guarantee that you won't have any weird hardware issue that will bit you in the ass when you expect it the least.