3 ms·

As a Mac user disappointed with Apple's current direction with its hardware line, there are some risks with using Hackintoshes: 1. It requires considerable mo

As a Mac user disappointed with Apple's current direction with its hardware line, there are some risks with using Hackintoshes: 1. It requires considerable more work to set up and maintain a Hackintosh system than using Linux or *BSD, and it's completely unsupported. When I researched this last time, there were three sore points: (a) Upgrades between even minor point versions could sometimes mess up installations, (b) finding compatible hardware can be difficult (especially in the case of laptops), and (c) using Messages and iCloud on a Hackintosh could risk getting locked out of those accounts. 2. Installing macOS on a non-Apple product is a violation of the macOS EULA. Because of this, a Hackintosh may be a liability in professional environments. 3. Apple could make moves, intentional or unintentional, that could disrupt or even end the Hackintosh ecosystem. In the early days of Hackintoshes Intel Atom processors were supported, which resulted in people installing Hackintoshes on netbooks such as the Dell Mini 9. This ended when Apple stopped compiling support for Atom processors. A more serious showstopper would occur if Apple abandons the x86-64 in its Mac lineup. Then the Hackintosh community would be stuck with whatever is the latest version for the x86-64 architecture.

arvinsim 8y ago
I agree with your first point. But something must be said when people still forge on creating a Hackintosh system despite the considerable effort required to do so.
- linguae 8y ago
  I wholeheartedly agree. I wish one of the following three things would happen: 1. Apple notices the popularity of Hackintoshes (as well as certain long-time Mac users switching to Windows or Linux) and makes Macs that fit their needs in order to win these customers back. 2. Apple legitimizes the Hackintosh by selling licenses for PC use. 3. A competing operating system with a well-polished UI designed with time-tested UI practices and is built on a stable and secure foundation emerges for generic PCs. I have a dream of an operating system with a Mac OS 8/9 interface with a foundation that is highly influenced by Lisp machines, the Smalltalk environment, and Apple's OpenDoc component UI.
  - simonh 8y ago
    Apple have noticed high end users complaining, hence the iMac Pros and upcoming new Mac Pros. Outside that, there is no perceptible loss of users. The much maligned Macbook Pros with butterfly keyboards and the touch bar are selling like there's no tomorrow.
  - auslander 8y ago
    > A competing operating system ... for generic PCs. Never gonna happen. Mac's are very secure and polished exactly because there is no PCs and only Apple hardware. Think Secure Enclave and EFI. No freaking vendors and their requirements, done right because they can. Amen.
    - WaltPurvis 8y ago
      >Mac's are very secure and polished exactly because there is no PCs and only Apple hardware. This seems obviously false, given the untold thousands of people running Hackintoshes (i.e., non-Apple hardware) with no reported security issues. I've run a Hackintosh for 5+ years and I've never had a problem with security. As for polish, my selected hardware is far better than what I could get from Apple, at 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of the nearest comparable (but still inferior) offerings from Apple. I'm talking desktops. Laptops might be a different story. For desktops, Apple engineering has been lagging and just generally underwhelming for at least half a decade now, and I don't think they have the interest or even the ability (culture, etc.) to regain their hardware chops.
      - auslander 8y ago
        > false, given the untold thousands of people running Hackintoshes ROFL :)) Had you read above? I'm running one myself. Your 'false' refers to what exactly? My statement was that there is no point for Apple to release MacOS for PCs. They will not be able to lock it down security wise. BTW, how did you secure your hack from booting from install USB and resetting admin password on the main drive? Or from booting to Recovery partition and do stuff? Asking, because you said you never had a problem with security, well, I Am the Problem, I will access your hack tomorrow :D Cool, just got your home address ! www.youtube.com/watch?v=76wSk1j02_4
danieldk 8y ago
4. Installing a Hackintosh often requires installing binary kexts of questionable origins. It is beyond me why people give some random person on the net ring-0 access.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  People do that all the time, though, for software like drivers or network extensions.
bpye 8y ago
If Apple stopped supporting x86-64 everyone with a current Mac would be stuck on the last version, not just people with Hackintoshes.
rprime 8y ago
With the right hardware, installing macOS is easier than installing Windows. I've been using hackintosh on and off for the past 10 years and if you buy tested hardware, installing it is a breeze most of the time, something that I cannot say about installing Ubuntu, which I do before going the hackintosh/windows route. I've had a very hard time to get Ubuntu/Arch to play well with my multiple monitors setup, including one 4K. The biggest downside in my opinion are the updates, as they're mostly guaranteed to break the setup. Overall, I recommend to at least try it, having a beast of a PC AND macOS cheaper than Apple can offer might be worth for some, it certainly is for me. Again, I want to emphasize that's necessary to have the right hardware.

arvinsim 8y ago

I agree with your first point. But something must be said when people still forge on creating a Hackintosh system despite the considerable effort required to do so.

linguae 8y ago
I wholeheartedly agree. I wish one of the following three things would happen: 1. Apple notices the popularity of Hackintoshes (as well as certain long-time Mac users switching to Windows or Linux) and makes Macs that fit their needs in order to win these customers back. 2. Apple legitimizes the Hackintosh by selling licenses for PC use. 3. A competing operating system with a well-polished UI designed with time-tested UI practices and is built on a stable and secure foundation emerges for generic PCs. I have a dream of an operating system with a Mac OS 8/9 interface with a foundation that is highly influenced by Lisp machines, the Smalltalk environment, and Apple's OpenDoc component UI.
- simonh 8y ago
  Apple have noticed high end users complaining, hence the iMac Pros and upcoming new Mac Pros. Outside that, there is no perceptible loss of users. The much maligned Macbook Pros with butterfly keyboards and the touch bar are selling like there's no tomorrow.
- auslander 8y ago
  > A competing operating system ... for generic PCs. Never gonna happen. Mac's are very secure and polished exactly because there is no PCs and only Apple hardware. Think Secure Enclave and EFI. No freaking vendors and their requirements, done right because they can. Amen.
  - WaltPurvis 8y ago
    >Mac's are very secure and polished exactly because there is no PCs and only Apple hardware. This seems obviously false, given the untold thousands of people running Hackintoshes (i.e., non-Apple hardware) with no reported security issues. I've run a Hackintosh for 5+ years and I've never had a problem with security. As for polish, my selected hardware is far better than what I could get from Apple, at 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of the nearest comparable (but still inferior) offerings from Apple. I'm talking desktops. Laptops might be a different story. For desktops, Apple engineering has been lagging and just generally underwhelming for at least half a decade now, and I don't think they have the interest or even the ability (culture, etc.) to regain their hardware chops.
    - auslander 8y ago
      > false, given the untold thousands of people running Hackintoshes ROFL :)) Had you read above? I'm running one myself. Your 'false' refers to what exactly? My statement was that there is no point for Apple to release MacOS for PCs. They will not be able to lock it down security wise. BTW, how did you secure your hack from booting from install USB and resetting admin password on the main drive? Or from booting to Recovery partition and do stuff? Asking, because you said you never had a problem with security, well, I Am the Problem, I will access your hack tomorrow :D Cool, just got your home address ! www.youtube.com/watch?v=76wSk1j02_4

danieldk 8y ago

4. Installing a Hackintosh often requires installing binary kexts of questionable origins. It is beyond me why people give some random person on the net ring-0 access.

saagarjha 8y ago
People do that all the time, though, for software like drivers or network extensions.

bpye 8y ago

If Apple stopped supporting x86-64 everyone with a current Mac would be stuck on the last version, not just people with Hackintoshes.

rprime 8y ago

With the right hardware, installing macOS is easier than installing Windows. I've been using hackintosh on and off for the past 10 years and if you buy tested hardware, installing it is a breeze most of the time, something that I cannot say about installing Ubuntu, which I do before going the hackintosh/windows route. I've had a very hard time to get Ubuntu/Arch to play well with my multiple monitors setup, including one 4K. The biggest downside in my opinion are the updates, as they're mostly guaranteed to break the setup. Overall, I recommend to at least try it, having a beast of a PC AND macOS cheaper than Apple can offer might be worth for some, it certainly is for me. Again, I want to emphasize that's necessary to have the right hardware.