xanketsu Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Hi everyone :pirate2: I have a situation regarding the question, and I'm looking for advice. After some bumpy installation, I managed to create my first Hackintosh. I use ASUS P5K/EPU & ASUS 7300GT & Kalyway 10.5.1. Now here are some breakdown of what I did during the many reps of installation: 1. Checked the vanilla kernel, one of the VGA driver, one of the sound driver, the network, and EFI GUID. "Installation Failed". 2. Partition the HD as MBR. Checked as in point #1, but now EFI MBR. "Installation Succeed". Restart, but the Welcome Video never came out (I've got eternal spinning beachball). So I did a hard restart (shutting the machine down by holding the power button). 3. The same as point 2, but now I remove the DVD right after the installation. The Welcom Video never came out, but no spinning beachball this time. Just a black cursor, and that's it. Another hard restart. 4. Partition the HD as GUID. Checked only the vanilla kernel & EFI GUID. "Installation Succeed". Restart. Left the DVD in. The spinning beachball came out. I thought, oh, another failure, so I removed the DVD. To my surprise, this time it worked! After playing around with it, I upgraded it to 10.5.2 by using the Netkas method. It didn't work. So I have to re-install the whole thing. Remembering that the point#4 was a success, I tried to duplicate the process. It failed. What seems to work now, is point #2. Seems to work everytime. In other words, I'm forced to use MBR partition. Now since Apple used GUID & the description says MBR is for Windows/ FAT32, I'm under impression that MBR is the inferior choice, hence my question. But I don't know that, do I? So... is there any disadvantage in using the MBR partition scheme? Anything that limiting OSX feature? Thank you for your time. P.S. The only difference between the first round of installations & the second one is that I changed my DVD drive - the first DVD drive broke while I was playing with OSX. The second one seems to work fine under OSX. Not sure if this counts. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/119741-is-there-any-disadvantage-for-choosing-mbr-instead-of-guid/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
xanketsu Posted August 7, 2008 Author Share Posted August 7, 2008 Wait. I take back what I said. The MBR partition scheme seemed to have been a succesful install, but alas, it is not. If I leave OSX (restart/ shutdown), I won't be able to boot again into OSX. In other words, time to reinstall. So I guess I have to make the GUID partition scheme work again in one way or the other. Ouch. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/119741-is-there-any-disadvantage-for-choosing-mbr-instead-of-guid/#findComment-847892 Share on other sites More sharing options...
00diabolic Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 I see no difference between them in performance as long as you use EFI. Ive heard GUID is a lil faster but I cant see it. The only other difference between GUID and MBR would be there flexibility as a partition table. Supposedly GUID should be easier to add more partitions to and the total number of partitions it can offer is higher. However I was never able to work with GUID very easily and I would end up with a junk table after trying to add to it. So in the end i still say MBR is better. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/119741-is-there-any-disadvantage-for-choosing-mbr-instead-of-guid/#findComment-848001 Share on other sites More sharing options...
xanketsu Posted August 7, 2008 Author Share Posted August 7, 2008 Ah, thanks for the explanation. Unfortunately my MBR installation didn't work as I previously thought. However it is nice to know that I'm not limited to GUID, if I have to choose. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/119741-is-there-any-disadvantage-for-choosing-mbr-instead-of-guid/#findComment-848044 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burpethead Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 What about imaging? GUID is what a real Mac would use - you can image drives to a file, then image them back later - keeping the directory, and partitions intact. I'm not sure if you could properly image a drive with MBR (keeping partition tables intact) - it's not "Apple Supported" and OS X native. I don't know if a MBR drive that was bootable originally would be so after being re-imaged. Has anyone tried this? - Burp Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/119741-is-there-any-disadvantage-for-choosing-mbr-instead-of-guid/#findComment-867577 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 GUID vs MBR is one of those endless debates that can keep your fingers warm long into the night. The general tendency is to say that MBR is better for multibooting etc, whereas GUID is more Mac'ish & modern etc. Personally, I'm a GUID fan, as it supports up to 256 primary partitions and works with Mac disk tools etc. I found it was fairly straightforward to dualboot OS X & Win XP but many people report problems with it. MBR will work easier with older windows tools, but supports only 4 primary partitions.. Like I said.. it's one of those discussions that can go on & on & on.. Oh, & P.S. I think GUID is faster & sleeker [edit] oh, yes, and you can non-destructively resize GUID more easily as well Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/119741-is-there-any-disadvantage-for-choosing-mbr-instead-of-guid/#findComment-867581 Share on other sites More sharing options...
willpower101 Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 GUID vs MBR is one of those endless debates that can keep your fingers warm long into the night. The general tendency is to say that MBR is better for multibooting etc, whereas GUID is more Mac'ish & modern etc. Personally, I'm a GUID fan, as it supports up to 256 primary partitions and works with Mac disk tools etc. I found it was fairly straightforward to dualboot OS X & Win XP but many people report problems with it. MBR will work easier with older windows tools, but supports only 4 primary partitions.. Like I said.. it's one of those discussions that can go on & on & on.. Oh, & P.S. I think GUID is faster & sleeker [edit] oh, yes, and you can non-destructively resize GUID more easily as well I personally think guid is better in all scenarios and it's only a matter of time before more things move towards it. BUT if you're like me and can't get a freakin dual boot setup to work unless it's MBR than I say screw it, it's not worth the trouble. @Hagar - how did you get guid to dual boot with xp and could the same be replicated with vista 64? Which installer did you partition with? Which os did you install first? Which second? Did you run any commands between installs? After both were installed what steps did you take to have them properly boot? Did you use the chain0 or similar method in xp or just use flags to tell darwin which one to boot from? Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/119741-is-there-any-disadvantage-for-choosing-mbr-instead-of-guid/#findComment-892215 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts