Jump to content

InsanelyMac

Manage articles
Show all categories
  • Swad

    OSx86 10.4.4 Leaked

    By Swad, in OSx86,

    While we knew it would just be a matter of time, OS X for Intel 10.4.4 has leaked. As usual, the recovery disc is being seeded via torrent on a major bit torrent site. The following oh-so-brief note accompanies the 4.2 gig .dmg file:


    This is the Mac OS X 10.4.4 Restore Disc included with all the Intel iMacs. It's unpatched so don't bother trying to install it.
    No word yet as to the integrity of this file, nor is it known the method with which Apple will keep hackers from breaking their hardware restrictions. In other news, somewhere in Europe a man with a name that, when translated, sounds vaguely like Maxxuss, was seen dashing through the snow covered streets towards his computer shouting something like "Viva la x86! I must get to my hackintosh!"
     
    Watch this space for more news as it develops.
     
    [Digg this Article]
  • Swad

    Our New Forum Structure

    By Swad, in OSx86,

    After careful thought and a ton of suggestions from everyone, we've gone ahead and rearranged the forum structure to make things easier to find, as well as to make way for all the new interest in the Macintels!
     
    The biggest change is that there are now two forums for talking about OS X – one on Macs (due to the advent of the Macintels) and one on PCs. This accomplishes several things, not the least of which is simplicity: it’s now very easy to know where posts go, based on where you’re running OS X. Also, the Genius Bar will be transformed into the one-stop place to get started in understanding the world of OSx86.
     
    We also added “Real Life,” “Patches and Tweaks,” and “Dual Booting” forums along with a few other features to make your life a little easier. We want to become the smartest and most accessible Mac forum around, so keep doing what you’re doing – posting!
     
    Also, be sure to stay tuned in the next few weeks. We have a lot of exciting things coming down the pipe (including a celebration for our 20,000th member!). Plenty of fun times ahead.
     
    Let us know your comments here.
  • Swad

    10.4.5 Is On Its Way

    By Swad, in OSx86,

    AppleInsider is reporting that developers should be expecting 10.4.5 this week.


    Apple Computer this week is expected to begin widespread testing of Mac OS X 10.4.5 Update, the next in a series of maintenance updates to its Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" operating system and the first update to address bugs lingering the company's initial release of Mac OS X 10.4.4 for Intel-based Macs, AppleInsider has learned.
     
    Contacts often familiar with Cupertino, Calif.-based company's operating system plans say the Mac maker this week began distributing the first external builds of Mac OS X 10.4.5 Update, which weigh in at approximately 15MB.
     
    Two of the most recent builds are rumored to have appeared as "Mac OS X 10.4.5 build 8H3" and "Mac OS X 10.4.5 build 8H5."
     
    While the specific fixes and enhancements planned for the update are unknown, Apple is reportedly asking that its developers and partners put weight on Safari, Core Graphics intensive applications, Quartz Composer, and the Mac OS X Dock.
     
    The company also reportedly asked that developers test networking, the Mac OS X crash report, File Sync, Software Update and the MSDOS File System.
    One astute OSx86 Project forum member noticed that Apple is already requiring 10.4.5 for some applications, such as J2SE 5.0.
     
    This also marks the first OS X update that Intel users should (presumably) be able to use via Apple’s update system. In the developer builds, updates were not available through Software Update.
  • Swad

    Linux Jumps on the EFI Train

    By Swad, in OSx86,

    Although "mum" is still the word from Redmond (and, for that matter, any English speaker outside the U.S. saying "mom"), Red Hat has announced their intention to support the new Macintels along with their EFI trimmings. That is, as soon as Red Hat actually buys one.
     
    As Ars Technica notes, Linux support EFI has existed for some time.


    Linux EFI support already exists in the form of elilo, a special version of the LILO bootloader designed specifically for Intel systems that use EFI and the IA64 architecture. The current elilo code base will have to be ported to Intel's x86 architecture before it can be integrated into Linux distributions capable of running on Apple's new systems.
     
    Although such a port is theoretically possible, members of the Ars Technica Linux community have pointed out that bootloaders are generally written with plenty of assembly, and consequently are not easily ported. Elilo is not particularly stable and Red Hat representatives have not discussed the methodology they plan to use, so the solution could end up being something else entirely. In other news, Ars also wins the award for Best In Show in the national “Longest Run-on Sentence Competition.”


    Since Mac OS X operating system is based in part on BSD, and since running Linux on Apple's new hardware will not provide any unique or compelling advantage over running it on commodity x86 hardware from vendors like Dell and HP (Apple's benchmarks aside, pretty cases do not improve the performance of a laptop's software), some users and developers feel that such porting efforts are unnecessary.
  • Swad

    iMac Sales Not Leaping Ahead

    By Swad, in OSx86,

    ThinkSecret is reporting that sales of the new iMac have not been as high as Apple hoped.
     


    Apple's decision to unleash Intel-based Mac systems six months ahead of schedule is proving less successful than the company anticipated. Two weeks following the Macworld Expo San Francisco keynote, sources report that sales of the Intel-based iMac are lower than Apple expected, even taking into account the seasonal post-holiday sales dip, suggesting the 2006 transition to Intel may be more difficult than the company has expressed.
    I would have no problem with that assessment, except that they've been out for all of two weeks so far (and no MacBook has shipped yet). Keep in mind that the vast majority of computer users out there have no idea what it means to have an Intel processor as opposed to one from IBM. Few people besides some interested geeks (like most of us) really care about the architecture.
     
    The article does raise an interesting question about Apple’s relationship with its software developers.
     


    The earlier release of the Intel-based systems—"a little ahead of schedule," in the words of Apple CEO Steve Jobs—caught some developers off guard. Last June, Apple only told developers that the new Intel systems would begin shipping by June 2006, suggesting that they might have a year to convert their applications to Universal Binaries. Sources report that many prominent software developers have expressed their displeasure over the move to Apple management.
     
    Major software vendors like Adobe and Microsoft have been careful not to shed any light on when their popular and performance-critical programs will be ready as Universal Binaries. Both companies' products are extensively Carbonized—a result of Apple's transition to Mac OS X—which are far more difficult to convert to Universal Binaries than Cocoa applications written from the ground up for OS X.
    Should Apple have let their developers know ahead of time that January was the date? Some companies, like Quark, were able to release their apps at MacWorld. Whence Adobe and Microsoft?
  • Swad

    Intel (Errors) Inside

    By Swad, in OSx86,

    Welcome to the world of processors politics, or "How I learned to stop worrying and love the errors."
     
    It appears that Intel's new Core Duo - which was released less than a month ago - has errors out the wazoo serial port. Its errata documenation reveals 34 known issues with the processor. That averages out to almost an error and a half a day being discovered. Now, it's nothing new for processors to have errors; the Pentium 4 has 65 known errors. But those 65 have been accumulated over the life of the chip. Should be we concerned? Some think so.
     
    It makes one wonder if the Core Duo was rushed out of the gates at Intel. Should they be shipping such an error-prone chip? Worse yet, should Apple be using it?
  • Swad

    MacBook Pro Performance Analysis

    By Swad, in OSx86,

    Craig "The Guru" writes to us to share his benchmark analysis of a new MacBook Pro at MacWorld. Although we’ve seen several benchmarks for the new iMac, Craig is one of the first to test the preproduction MacBook’s abilities with several different benchmarks. His results seem legit… and he can’t be all that bad since he likes the Dandy Warhols. His findings?
     
    The overall results of this analysis indicate that Apple's new MacBook Pro is an improved machine in many ways. While some areas are yet to be examined, it is safe to say that the new MacBook is Apple's fastest laptop yet.
     
    Thanks for the great info, Craig!
  • Swad

    How Much Does an iMac Really Cost?

    By Swad, in OSx86,

    To be honest, stories like this BusinessWeek article "Is the New iMac a Cash Machine?" are always a little hard to accept - ya know, the ones where industry analysts dissect a new computer to determine manufacturing costs, etc. It's especially hard to gauge when you're dealing with Steve Jobs, who could probably sell ice to Eskimos... or at least get cheapo prices from Intel. But, nonetheless, here are the findings:
     
    Silicon Valley research firm iSuppli conducted a teardown analysis of the $1,299 17-inch iMac containing the Intel chip. Researchers use such analysis to estimate how much a computer maker pays for components and what profit may be wrung from sales. It costs Apple $898 to assemble the iMac before loading it with software and packing it in a box, iSuppli says.
     
    The most expensive component in the iMac is the Intel Core Duo processor. Apple's paying about $265 apiece for the chip, iSuppli estimates. "We made a conservative guess that Apple is getting a 10% discount on that chip," says Andrew Rassweiler, manager of iSuppli's teardown team. "But Apple is Apple. It's such a tough negotiator, that discount could be higher."
     
    Two other Intel-made chips, which sit between the Intel Core Duo and other systems in the computer, cost $14 and $31, respectively, iSuppli says. That makes Intel's total silicon content in the new machine worth about $310, or more than one-third of the cost of materials, using the researcher's estimates.
     
    But how does that compare to the last PowerPC-based iMac G5, released just last October? Comparisons, it turns out, are tricky. First, Apple rarely sheds any light on the costs of components it buys from its suppliers -- and those suppliers rarely talk about the prices they charge their customers.
     
    Some analysts suggest that Apple might have been paying less than $100 for the IBM single-core PowerPC 970 chip that went into the final iMac G5, which would imply an increase in materials cost of more than $200 per unit.
     
    "I don't know how much Apple pays for that IBM chip, but you can bet it's absurdly low," Nathan Brookwood, head of market researcher Insight64. "Apple has this crazy idea that it shouldn't have to pay as much as everyone else. And whatever it's paying for the IBM chip, I'm sure it's paying more for the Intel chip."
  • sHARD>>
    The folks at ArsTechnica have gotten their hands on a new 17" iMac Core Duo and run it through it's paces. During their review, they tried their hand at answering one question we've all been pondering: Can the new Intel based Apple machines run Windows? It seems no, for now.
     
    "In the 36 hours I've had this machine, I've spent a fair amount of time scouring the Internet looking for clues on how to get Windows installed. Unfortunately, I came up empty, and due to time constraints I wasn't able to spend the time I wanted to trying to hack the iMac."
     
    While it may be theoretically possible, it seems that no one can quite figure out how to use the new EFI-based system - yet. While this doesn't rule out the possibility of current generation Windows XP, it could be awhile before users are able to take a good look at the new machines and figure out just how to do it. As for the future? Windows Vista is slated to support EFI, so unless Apple has instated a bootlock, which they deny, all should be groovy in the Windows world.
     
    Check out the Windows booting attempt, or just read the full article on ArsTechnica.
×
×
  • Create New...