No. The closest you could get is to install Darwin on a PC, which you can download from links on linuxiso.org. (Darwin is the Unix-based core of Mac OS X, and it's been ported to x86.)
Currently, there is no commercial/free version of MAC OS for x86. However, there have been rumors for a while of an x86 compatible version of MAC OS in alpha form floating around under NDA. The code-name of the MAC OS x86 project is Marklar, so do a search on that for more info.
I've heard rumours that Marklar keeps up with the PowerPC version of Mac OS. This isn't necessarily indicative of an imminent OS X shift to x86 as it's also a good debugging method.
If you don't mind running an older Mac OS on an emulated 68K processor, try Basillisk II. It's free, emulates a 68040, can access networks (including other Macs over Appletalk) using the host's card and is quite fast. The most recent version of Mac OS it can run is 8.1.
You'll need ROMs from a 68K Mac to use Basillisk II. I don't know if it would be illegal to give you them or what the acceptable use policy would say .
You can download Mac OS 7.5.5 legally from ftp://ftp.apple.com but you'll have to hunt elsewhere for Mac OS 8 disk images. Basillisk II can boot from Mac OS floppies and CDs.
Emulators Inc. claimed to have a PowerPC emulator in the works but it looks like vapourware.
Aplogies for the thread resurrection, but you may be interested in http://pearpc.sourceforge.net. Emulates a PowerPC Mac capable of running Mac OS 10.3, but you'll want a fairly fast PC for reasonable performance.
Originally posted by stoo Aplogies for the thread resurrection, but you may be interested in http://pearpc.sourceforge.net. Emulates a PowerPC Mac capable of running Mac OS 10.3, but you'll want a fairly fast PC for reasonable performance.
Yeah well he emulation is supposed to make it really slow, osx is not something I want in that sort of setting if you know what I mean. If you want to run osx, just go buy a mac. They are probably the best systems I have ever used.
Originally posted by SkyDog No. The closest you could get is to install Darwin on a PC, which you can download from links on linuxiso.org. (Darwin is the Unix-based core of Mac OS X, and it's been ported to x86.)
I thought that OSX was based off of BSD...
Asus Maximus III Formula | Core i5 650 | Xigmatek Dark Knight | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3-1600 | eVGA GeForce GTX 570 SuperClocked | OCZ Vertex 2 120GB, Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB | Corsair HX Series 750w | CoolerMaster HAF 932 My Heatware
Great PC/Mac hardware comments have come from Anand (http://www.anandtech.com) who went Mac for his primary machine a while ago. His blog has Macdates every now and then, although I couldn't find the old ones after the site redesign
And the stock answer to Mac OS on PC would be: if it's an Apple box. They like to make money out of selling hardware. This might of course change, but as they've so far been a 'platform' company, they'd lose their advantage. Great products, great profitability - better not screw it up.
Originally posted by MrDigital I take it you've only ever used Windows 9x and Max OS 9.x.
-MrD
I think you are a fool for thinking that, but here are a list of oses I have used for many purposes, server oriented and for programming:
FreeBSD (workstation and server related tasks)
OpenBSD (server, packet filtering firewall router nat)
OSX
Gentoo Linux (SUCKS!)
Slackware Linux (More acceptable than Gentoo)
Red Hat Linux
Solaris (mainly just for dbx and the sun compiler, nothing more)
Windows 9.x-server 2003 (all the server series and nt from 4 and up)
Right now I prefer the first mentioned 3 over all else. For that lame comment about what experience I have my answer is: shove it!
OSX has the the bsd base I am accustom too, the stability I have been used to from using the bsds (yeah like any os it will hang if the drivers or hardware is bad, but that goes for everything in that list), great apps out of the box, great opengl and pdf rendered ui, and a great ide form me to write programs for a Unix environment. Nothing else gives me all of that all in one package. So screw you buddy!
Originally posted by AstroCreep I thought that OSX was based off of BSD...
darwin consists of the freebsd stuff with the Mach kernel stuff from carnegie melon's project running underneath. The actual kernel is called xnu, it mainly just takes the mach microkernel and runs the freebsd (fbsd 5) components on top. It is not exactly a microkernel but it is pretty close, nt is also sorta like a microkernel but of course the gui is rendered in the kernel and the kernel doesn't lie in the hardware abstraction layer like a standard microkernel should. ms did a few things to get things running a bit faster in the gui which is fine, considering it is primarily used on workstations
Anyways they are very nice systems, I want to get my hands on a powermac g4 cheap so I can put my scsi drives in a system I actually use.
Originally posted by pudad Right now I prefer the first mentioned 3 over all else. For that lame comment about what experience I have my answer is: shove it!
Whatever works for you chief, but OSX is still not as good as Windows 2000/XP for desktop/workstation use. In a couple of years, perhaps. After they work out compatibility issues and better program implementation, as well as continue adding features that should've been there already (such as the new finder in 10.3).
If you need a UNIX environment to make UNIX apps, good for you. That's a specialized need which limits your choices of OSes anyhow.
And looking at your list, it's not very hard to see why you think OSX is the best. You've been too busy running Linux and BSD with probably Gnome or KDE, both of which pale in comparison to 2000/XP and OSX, so I'm sure from your viewpoint OSX is a step up.
-MrD
There is the theory of the moebius. A twist in the fabric of space where time becomes a loop.
Originally posted by MrDigital Whatever works for you chief, but OSX is still not as good as Windows 2000/XP for desktop/workstation use. In a couple of years, perhaps. After they work out compatibility issues and better program implementation, as well as continue adding features that should've been there already (such as the new finder in 10.3).
If you need a UNIX environment to make UNIX apps, good for you. That's a specialized need which limits your choices of OSes anyhow.
And looking at your list, it's not very hard to see why you think OSX is the best. You've been too busy running Linux and BSD with probably Gnome or KDE, both of which pale in comparison to 2000/XP and OSX, so I'm sure from your viewpoint OSX is a step up.
-MrD
I agree, but I didnt know OSX was a KDE/Gnome GUI. I thought it was still the custom apple gui.
Sorry for the noob, but havent worked on OSX, and I dont really care to get back into Apple OS.
But yes KDE/GNOME/etc falls quite short to 2000/XP.
I still prefer to run Linux from a command line. But I dont really use Linux as a desktop, more as a server role.
Reply With Quote
.
Bookmarks