Darwin is dead.

O.k sorry apple but i just dont see myself purchasing an apple computer

i rather have a windows compatible anyday over mac....

macs crash just in a very attarctive way THE BEACH BALL lol

Bring it on Windows Vista!!! Im ready for you!!! Oh Im already running beta... Oh wel, sorry Apple, have no time to tinker with you.

Great, the door is that way ---->

Cya...

O.k sorry apple but i just dont see myself purchasing an apple computer

i rather have a windows compatible anyday over mac....

 

macs crash just in a very attarctive way THE BEACH BALL lol

pssst... 2004 called. they'd like you to know that macs are now windows compatible machines in 2006.

O.k sorry apple but i just dont see myself purchasing an apple computer

i rather have a windows compatible anyday over mac....

 

macs crash just in a very attarctive way THE BEACH BALL lol

1984 called. They want their mantra back

When theres a will theres a way. There is no such thing as closed source.

I guess apple can do whatever they want, I mean people ARE stealing THEIR operatingsystem.

 

But I am sure that the people who used Darwin is a tool are quite mad.

People would not Steal Intel version of Mac OS if Apple would make it available for sale.

I'll still run Mac OS X Tiger on my Intel box. It is by far the easiest to use and configure.

However, I do have SUSE Linux loaded. It works with the exception of getting a native res on it. Not too big of a deal.

I also have a 64-bit version of Windows on it and it runs pretty good.

I can't say that I would switch from Mac to Windows or Linux. However, I will keep looking at other OS' like Solaris 10 or BeOS.

Steve Jobs is stubborn. OS X Leopard will still be cracked. What's the point of closing down the source? To try to gave points on WallStreet? I don't think so. It's Steve being a steve. Steve, what not show Micro$oft your source code like you showed Bill Gates the Mac! Come on, get off your high horse.

If you can sell records on iTunes, you can sell anything like Tiger x86! Sell it, make some cash!

GT

O.k sorry apple but i just dont see myself purchasing an apple computer

i rather have a windows compatible anyday over mac....

 

macs crash just in a very attarctive way THE BEACH BALL lol

Macs can crash in two other ways:

1. An attactive Kernel Panic: It'll show a message to hold down the power button.

2. I've seen an old 400 Mhz Graphite G4 with 768 MB of RAM become frozen, the pointer, clock and everything freezes. No beach ball either. Again, I would say it was Bad Hardware.

But for G5's and Intel Macs, I don't seem them crash or get a beach ball very often. It's few and far between.

Beach ball usually means that you need more RAM as it is using the disk to swap memory.

GT

Like Mash and Bofors pointed out, there hasn't really been a direct need for darwin, with the average OS X user. It was really only needed very, very early on, when only a harddrive dump was available, and not even an installable DVD. Since then, it's really only been necessary for the odd open source kext or two.

Interestingly, though, I hadn't really thought of it from munky's perspective. Looking at the facts, it does appear that something deeper is brewing here, then simply trying to lock out pirates. If piracy and darwin were really that much of a threat to Apple, they would have locked us out long before going to such lengths as encrypted binaries, and TPM chips.

1984 called. They want their mantra back

Rofl.

There's no way Apple's gonna sell OS X by itself. If it were easy to get OS X to work on a PC with full support.. you can bet your money that it will be pirated. Apple may get some money for selling OS X but the fact that they would lose alot of their hardware business is not worth it.

As for me, OS X is a great OS, but I can't seem to find a reason to really buy a Mac for it. It's the applications for OSX that really make it shine, like iLife and Final Cut. If I were more interested in those applications, I'd consider buying a Mac, but from my experiences, most people are fine with a Windows PC to surf the web, check email, and open up word documents.

...If piracy and darwin were really that much of a threat to Apple, they would have locked us out long before going to such lengths as encrypted binaries, and TPM chips.

If Apple really wanted to lock us out, they would switch back to a proprietary processor.

Why is Apple wasting time with TPM and encrpted binaries? We all know encrpytion must be decrypted in order for the machine to run it. The same machine (a real Intel based Mac) decrypts that info automatically, making it easy for the hacker to find the key.

It sounds like a complete waste of time and money for Apple to keep using encrypted binaries. They might as well use that encyption for DNA samples, retina scans, and to take digital fingerprints of legitimate Intel Based Mac users. Users would like have give a retina scan, figureprint, hair or blood sample just to use their Legal Mac. Welcome back 1984. Welcome home.

Apple's biggest fear was Big Blue protrayed as big brother.

Apple has become what it has feared most, Big Brother.

Long live Maxxuss. Go "V" Go!

To me, the article sounded like it was written by a fan who was biased to Apple in general. Apple didn't outwardly say that their motive for doing this was to combat piracy. The author is being very presumptuous and lays the blame saying "the pirates ruined open source for the rest of us. Wah. Not fair."

Not the case necessarily...

If you look at this decision logically and avoid scapegoating, you'll realize Apple has announced that they plan on revamping their operating system substantially. They're not just dropping mach kernel, they're changing a lot of things apparently.

Anybody who has managed to get 10.4.x to run on their system is almost guarenteed to successfully run all later builds of Tiger x86 at this point, each build "dealt with" as it arrives. Apple isn't going to do anything drastic to Tiger, especially since 10.5 is near.

When Leopard rolls around, will we be faced with a huge roadblock? Of course. But within a year after release, people will be running 10.5 as successfully as they run 10.4 today with or without darwin.

I guess apple can do whatever they want, I mean people ARE stealing THEIR operatingsystem.

 

But I am sure that the people who used Darwin is a tool are quite mad.

Hi,

I’m new to this site, and this is my first post. I have a Dell 8300 with a similar config to your PC…… Pentium 4 with a ATI Radeon 9800 PRO and 1GB of Ram. I’m so disappointed with all the BS associated with the windows world. I have to use it for my Forex trading. I just purchased DX115 StorCase removable drive system, so I could use various interchangeable hard drives (4) without dealing with PC issues. I can have one drive for trading only. … turn off the PC insert another drive and start up….alas no corruption issues. Each drive is a boot drive.

I’d luv to just drop in one of my Mac drives in. I have not followed all the chatter. It can’t be that simple. What are the hoops I have to jump thru?

Thanks…………..fjorgyn

http://www.storcase.com/dataexpress/dx115.asp

No new news. But still, interesting. I sincerely hope they reevaluate, open source is important to me. I already own a mac, and I have a hackintosh. The latter isn't because I can't afford additional, its because at work there are hardware contracts that mandate purchases from certain channels. The ability to run OSX is a luxury there, I'll just switch back to one of the various *nix if I have to. Why won't apple sell it? I don't know, but I hope they just haven't gotten around to it yet. .. working on maturing the code base and increasing driver support. The latter I don't forsee until the MacPro.

I've read the stories back and forth, maybe they eventually will, maybe they won't. In the mean time, I purchased an additional Tiger License (that shipped with a powerpc disc) and I am making the best of it. I agree, there is no stopping piracy, but you can't turn a blind eye either. In the past, they lost the ability to compete with Wintel, and took the "high road", IMO, creating the Apple that exists today. As things sit now, they can and should compete in my opinion. Try to configure an equivelent hardware (spec for spec) and the macbooks aren't that much more. So when I can choose either OSX or Windows, why not let the hardware be hardware and start making money on the software side of things as well? People who want the Apple hardware will buy it, regardless, it isn't a cost issue in my opinion. And there are lucrative opportunities to sell the OS. In the past, the OS & apps was what kept me and others putting up with inferior (read slow) power pc chips. It wasn't always that way, agreed, and from time to time, Apple had the edge, but always at a significant price.

Now its a different story.

Closing the source permanently, that would be a mistake. Temporarily, I appreciate the foresight and gladly will wait while things stabilize. This doesn't effect my hackintosh of today, and tomorrow is still to be determined with the release of the MacPro and Xserve next gen. Apple, if you are reading, please don't shoot yourself in the foot, yet again.

to fgorgyn, i dont see why a drive with osx installed on it wouldnt work. there are answers to that in the support, mac, and pc forums.

I dearly hope that this is only because they are dropping the kernel and revamping osx. i do understand why they did this though. there would be an amazing amount of piracy if they sold it to the general public to be installed on a beige box system though. think about how often windows is pirated. OSX would be the exact same way. for the time being, apple only has to deal with people who can actually use their computers to the fullest extent. only people who really know computers pirate osx. nayone can pirate windoze.

Hmmm, maybe Apple now has to make a desicion what another well known computer company hat to do: Let's take a look 16 years back to Commodore.

In 1990 Commodore showed the Amiga 3000UX, which was equipped with a real Unix System V, Version 4 which was capable to use the Amiga graphics and multitasking capabilities. Sun Microsystems wanted to build it in license as a cheap Unix workstation (about $7000). This could have been a way to establish this machine in another professional sector, not only video/graphics or as a game machine. But Commodore don't wanted to, wanted to have thir own systems only by themselves. Four years later they werde dead.

How about Apple: Do they want to have a great operation system only for themselves and a few people who bought the expensive machines or give it to the people? If there was a sellable version of MacOS x86 for any PC, the people would run for it. I have Win XP Media Center, Server 2003, x64 and Vista 64bit and I'm only using MacOS now. In 60 Hz and with frustrating slow internet. But it is so an great OS - if there was a sellable version of MacOS for PCs, I WOULD BUY ONE! IMMEDIATELY! And I'm not the only one here, I think. But other than Commodore Apple lost track to the common people, and they knew it. The iPod took them a step closer, but has ths thing something to do with their professional computers? The Mac Mini should to the trick. But for the same price you'll get a better PC with more software, better hardware expansion and better spreading. It's much easier to find software for Windows as for MacOS. Offering a version for the people would be a great thing and the right (and maybe the only) step back to the people.

Now about the crackers thing: Apple first don't wanted to support running Windows on their intel machines. After crackers got it running, they officially released their tool which helps installing Windows on an intel mac. I'm also wondering: the osx86 developers image was so early in the net, months before the first intel macs were released, including an hint to the TPM chip and things like that. All people who know operating systems knew that MacOS is a great one, it was sure that it would be a challenge for all hackers to make it run on normal PCs. And let's see it from another view: A forum like this is a great way to check experiences and problems, on various configurations. In some way we are all beta testers! If Apple really don't want to allow this forum in the net, haven't they found already a way to ban it?

Let's take it together: MacOS x86 runs stable on PCs. But you can't use it like a full OS now, mostly 'cause of the drivers problems. Maxxuss is gone, so we'll stuck here, maybe forever. Now Darwin's dead, too. Should this be the end? Or a new beginning, maybe on an official way? Let's see what the future brings.

GreetinX from the Other Side!

Hey all is not lost. You guys still have to remember that we are some of the smartest people in the world, so in my words "this is not the end."

I by no means mean to bash, but smartest people? Perhaps! But a very small minority compared to windows x86 hackers.

No offense, but they haven't even figured out how to create a decent driver for ATI or Nvidia to run the CARDS in their native modes. Again, no offense, but when comparing Darwin hackers, and OS hackers to PC hackers, they are probably out weighed by the 1 to 1000 if not more.

Add this to the fact the MACBOOK just came out (I know, cheap GMA950) but pretty powerful none the less and I say apple is changing their tune. The only difference between the MACBOOK and PRO is FW800, Aluminum, larger LCD, and a few other things, hardly worth the price difference, however, done the road I think the PRO series will move to quad cores and memrons....while Vista is still on the shelves and the prices will drop and I think we'll see the move to the low end to better GPU.....then it will be worth the price.

For now, I am not sure.

I don't want to pick a fight, but those of you trying to argue for a store-bought version of OSX are wasting your time. Apple is a hardware company, its a package deal so give up on the pipe dream. I don't see how this news is a big deal yet either, there are already working versions of OSX and they will probably be sufficent until the newest versions are cracked, there will just be as always a little bit of a wait.

There's no way Apple's gonna sell OS X by itself. If it were easy to get OS X to work on a PC with full support.. you can bet your money that it will be pirated. Apple may get some money for selling OS X but the fact that they would lose alot of their hardware business is not worth it.

WHAT? Do you even look on the internet man? You can buy Tiger as just the OS. Yes, it is the PPC version now, but what happens when 10.5 Leopard comes out? Have to buy a NEW Mac to get it? I don't think so. Think before you post.

Right now OSX86 isn't being sold I think for 2 reasons:

1) No need to sell the OS when the Intel Macs are new and selling it right now wouldn't benefit the PPC Macs.

2) Keep pirates down.

When 10.5 comes, it will HAVE to be sold in a box. You think those that bought a Macbook Pro or a high end Intel iMac will buy a new one for the new OS? HAH! Don't kid yourself. Steve Jobs knows it is a matter of time and he can only delay what is coming. I hope Apple doesn't go like Commodore. I love OS X and I want to convert to Mac fully; but I will not pay outrageous money for hardware I could build for less. Over time I might just have to build me a Hackintosh. Right now my PowerMac G3 400mhz is ok.

Here's my thoughts on the article:

- It seems that the article is built on very limited information; making a grand inductive leap from what seems like one unattributed quote. More of a think piece than news really.

- The Darwin Developer site makes no mention of closing off x86 Darwin; in fact, it seems to flaunt Apple's involvement with the OSS community. The x86 version of Darwin still has parity with both the PPC version and OS X.

- Should Darwin remain at the core of OS X, but with a change in license to a closed source one; surely a fork could be started, allowing the reverse engineering of future Apple developments.

- It seems likely, though, that the Mach microkernel structure will be ditched in favour of a monolithic kernel. This could be based on FreeBSD (maintaining it's open source status) or become a proprietary kernel. Neither would preclude the cracking of the kernel by ambitious hackers. Plenty of proprietary software programs (Cubase, Logic e.t.c.) have been cracked and will continue to be cracked. Now that OS X runs on essentially the same hardware platform as beige-box PCs, it will always be possible to get it to run on the same beige-box PCs.

- Could an emulator / virtualiser like PearPC be created to emulate all features of the Intel Macs on beige-box PCs? It would run at near native speeds and would obviate the need to crack the OS itself.

cy8erpunk

I by no means mean to bash, but smartest people? Perhaps! But a very small minority compared to windows x86 hackers.

 

No offense, but they haven't even figured out how to create a decent driver for ATI or Nvidia to run the CARDS in their native modes. Again, no offense, but when comparing Darwin hackers, and OS hackers to PC hackers, they are probably out weighed by the 1 to 1000 if not more.

 

Add this to the fact the MACBOOK just came out (I know, cheap GMA950) but pretty powerful none the less and I say apple is changing their tune. The only difference between the MACBOOK and PRO is FW800, Aluminum, larger LCD, and a few other things, hardly worth the price difference, however, done the road I think the PRO series will move to quad cores and memrons....while Vista is still on the shelves and the prices will drop and I think we'll see the move to the low end to better GPU.....then it will be worth the price.

 

For now, I am not sure.

Yes you are right, but I NEED dedicated graphics, so the Macbook isn´t for me. The MBP is too overpriced, especially when you consider this: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=199840

I don´t like Windows at all, but Linux is fine and I really hope to be able to buy Photoshop or other pro programs for Linux in the future. It is also nice to know that much Linux freeware is pretty good like GIMP and Digikam, so the gap between them and expensive pro programs is narrowing.

I especially like the light windows managers ICEWM so you can use your all your hardware power for your tasks rather than for the overhead of the OS.

Apple seems to be growing too much as the big brother for my liking, and are selling products for the grandmothers, like the Mini and Macbook, while the pro machines cost far too much. I´ve been burned once by buying these all in one desktops like the iMacs and won´t buy them again. It is pretty frustrating to upgrade the whole computer just because on of its parts is too obsolete for your needs.

OK, Just a Idea but What do you think if the osx comunity came together and started to pay for there OS. What I mean is starting up say a paypal account and sending the money to apple. we can send messages to apple allong with the payments. like ( I really want to see windows go down steve ) Money talks!. And if apple seen how willing people where to pay for there OSX then maybe they would consider releasing to pc. I know one thing and that is the osx86 comunity is one strong comunity. What we need to do is pull together and find out how to pay for our OSX. How much would you pay to accutally be able to go to the store buy osx and intall it on your PC . $129, $200, $250, $300 ????? This is it people. Time to come together and figure out something.

while I can't blame apple for the decision, it still upsets me a bit. I would be more than happy to pay for a copy of osx that would run on non apple hardware (maybe this is where they are headed?). This forum is proof that it can be done, and done well. I guess now we just sit, hope, and run with the kernel we have for as long as possible.

I agree with you. I would happly buy a legit copy of X to run on my X86 computer. I love apple, but I can't justify paying over $2000 for a computer expecialy when the X86 machine that I built for under $800 benchmarks a hair under a Dual G5.

Kage_

Seems like alot of people have this same problem. Mac is great, but the "Hey I am a Mac, pay double for me cause I am cool looking" isn't cutting it. The only Mac I would buy is a Mini, but they aren't that great. The Intel Mac Mini is nice with more power, more ports, but if you want to have enough memory and such, you are looking at around $1000. That is just stupid. Pay a little more and get an iMac, but then if you buy an iMac you are stuck with the whole design. Nothing Mac has, barring a PowerMac, is upgradable and not some custom built machine. Plus $2000 starting for a tower? PLEASE! Don't think so when you can build towers for a few hundred dollars that can do alot if not the same work. *sigh* I am so irrtated right now. I love OS X, but I hate Jobs and his ego. It would be so sweet if for some reason the government found something wrong with Apple only allowing OSx86 on their Intel machines and forced Jobs to put out an general version. I know it won't happen, but one can hope.

Right now I use my old G3 PowerMac. I like it, but it is so slow. I have two options:

1) Take the P4 system I got and try OSx86 on it.

2) Build a brand new machine that totally works for OSx86.

Buying a true Mac is a waste of money.

O.k sorry apple but i just dont see myself purchasing an apple computer

i rather have a windows compatible anyday over mac....

 

macs crash just in a very attarctive way THE BEACH BALL lol

To be honest, I have been using Mac OS since 10.4.1, and the system have NEVER crashed, not even once, if a program fails I just quit that program and everything is Ok, as you can imagine i have tested a lot of programs to see which fits what i need, then I erase it and test another, so If you have seen the Beach ball, you have done a very bad thing.

There's no way Apple's gonna sell OS X by itself. If it were easy to get OS X to work on a PC with full support.. you can bet your money that it will be pirated. Apple may get some money for selling OS X but the fact that they would lose alot of their hardware business is not worth it.

 

As for me, OS X is a great OS, but I can't seem to find a reason to really buy a Mac for it. It's the applications for OSX that really make it shine, like iLife and Final Cut. If I were more interested in those applications, I'd consider buying a Mac, but from my experiences, most people are fine with a Windows PC to surf the web, check email, and open up word documents.

Why wouldn't they sell OS X as stand-alone? How much do you think it cost to press a DVD compared to constructing a MB and case and assembling it? I will NOT by Apple's crappy underpowered Intel hardware. Why the HELL would they use 2 year old processors in their NEW computers? I bought my 3Ghz Pentium D almost a year ago. And where are the Intel Power Macs with expansions slots and stuff? What garbage hardware for such an elegantly designed user interface....

Why wouldn't they sell OS X as stand-alone? How much do you think it cost to press a DVD compared to constructing a MB and case and assembling it?

I don't think the problem is on the cost but the compatibility issues that represent to support all kind of Video cards, sound cards, motherboards and everything else.

I will NOT by Apple's crappy underpowered Intel hardware. Why the HELL would they use 2 year old processors in their NEW computers? I bought my 3Ghz Pentium D almost a year ago. And where are the Intel Power Macs with expansions slots and stuff? What garbage hardware for such an elegantly designed user interface....

That's completely true, why they don't use the newest intel Processor?, that's something anyone can explain...