digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Leopard Hacked! Install Leopard on your PC

dailyapps.net — Well its been only a day since the Mac OSX Leopard was released officially by Apple and the hackers have managed to create a patched DVD that everyone like you and me can use to install Leopard on PC’s without having to buy a Mac.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • advancedOption, on 11/03/2007, -15/+114Has anyone tried this out? Does it work?
    • tehpwnrate, on 10/29/2007, -4/+25FWIW, I did this with an older version of OSX once, just for fun. It worked pretty well on an HP laptop. I haven't done Leopard though.
      • GawtMilk, on 10/29/2007, -3/+8Anyone got the torrent link? So much ***** out there. If you've got it working, be a doll and post the link here up at the top.
      • mrASSMAN, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2Same here, I've done it with OS X Panther on an HP laptop as well. It's a high-end laptop so it was about equivalent in performance as the latest Macbook Pro. With some tweaks, I got just about everything working on it.

        It does take time though, prepare to spend hours on it.
        • jamie06260, on 11/10/2007, -9/+2pffft. no HP laptop could ever be like a macbook pro :P
          • mickrussom, on 01/05/2008, -1/+1So the shape of the plastic and the keyboard is more important than the OS?
            CPU
            MEMORY
            HDD
            LCD
            USB, IEEE1394, PCMCIA

            What plastic housing all these components are inside of is the "difference" BFD.
      • hottyson, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1I did. I spent HOURS on it trying to install OSX86 on my pc. What a difficult hassle!
        I wasted so much time on it then luckily I found an Intel iMac new for $750.
        Now I have a working WindowsXP machine AND a working OSX machine.
        If I hadn't found this iMac for cheap I probably would have wasted more of my life away.
    • kajoob, on 10/28/2007, -3/+15Haven't tried it yet, but OSX has been hacked repeatedly to run on non-apple hardware, so chances are pretty good that this is legit. w00t.
    • GoatBn, on 10/28/2007, -5/+14more importantly, can I install x-fi and nvidia drivers? I have installed OSX on my PC before, but its a shame to run it @ 640x480 with no sound when I have a 20" widescreen monitor and 5.1 speakers...
    • Muyoso, on 10/28/2007, -3/+11Yes, yes and yes. It works, there are Nvidia drivers out for some cards, not all, same with ATI. Everything is touch and go when running OSX on a PC. Been running it for a couple years now on one of mine, runs very good. BTW GoatBn, no matter WHAT video card you have, you have NEVER EVER needed to run it at 640 x 480. Its a simple addition to a boot file that allows OSX to boot to whatever resolution you want, and sound cards are VERY well supported.
      • kingkilr, on 10/28/2007, -0/+3Their is a great 3rd party nvidia driver, although I was under the impression that Creative sound cards aren't well supported(to be fair, what platform are they well supported on).
      • vorbalhorde, on 10/28/2007, -7/+2X-Fi is not very well supported. I'm running Gutsy Gibbon right now and there are only drivers for the 64-bit version available, which I have, and it still does not work.
        • Killwize, on 10/28/2007, -1/+5...talking abut Leopard not Gutsy.
          • Giga, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4Sad that you need to point that out. Shame on vorbalhorde.
        • cbuddha42, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2Eh? vorbal is just responding to this point: (to be fair, what platform are they well supported on).
    • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -53/+16No offense, but why is this post being dugg up? Did he not even read the article, let alone the the very words under the title of this submission appearing right here on this very page?

      This post easily qualifies for the "Dumbass of the Year" award.

      Obviously someone tried it out and it worked. THAT'S THE POINT OF THE ARTICLE. Nitwit.
      • Bobski, on 11/01/2007, -33/+12awwww did i huwt some wittle feewings?
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -29/+12Apparently so.
          • RpgActioN, on 10/29/2007, -9/+15Are you retarded or something? If you're going to ask if something is legit, why would you accept the OP's description as proof, much less the source? Nobody's questioning the point of the article, just the veracity of it.
          • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -22/+8It still stings doesn't it? Can I put a bandaid on your booboo?
          • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -21/+8Are YOU retarded? If you don't even believe the story, then why in hell would give it any credence at all?
            Digg kid translation: If you don't think it's real, then why Digg it in the first place?
          • Terc, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1...and it's now time for me to report and block Bobski. I suggest others do the same.
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -23/+7Man, the moron level just gets thicker and thicker.
          • RpgActioN, on 10/28/2007, -6/+10You are one of the dumbest assholes I have ever even heard about. Congratulations.
          • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -13/+7Ouch! Such sharp repartee! You wound me to the core!
          • GawtMilk, on 10/29/2007, -5/+4Here's a sharp repartee: You've spent the past four hours making uninteresting, sophomoric comments that don't bring anything to the discussion on an anonymous internet forum on a Saturday night. Your date tonight probably took four AA batteries, and judging by your intelligence-devoid comments, it probably took you quite a while to figure out which way to put them in.
          • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -5/+6Here's some more sophomoric observation: You had no idea how much time passed until you read chad's response and now you are riding his coattails trolling for Diggs. Loser
          • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -5/+6Oh, Gawk
            Unlike most chicken ***** posters on Digg, I'm far from anonymous. I'm very easy to find. I personally challenge you to come and greet me. We'll sit down together and share a bottle of rum, if you like. Otherwise STFU.
        • Maddpaky, on 10/28/2007, -7/+8/block
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -21/+7/check
      • smacksaw, on 10/29/2007, -6/+9Don't forget to check the box with the pills named Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun and AM/PM. Today is Sat, AM. You're supposed to take the Ritalin. Whoops!
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -17/+7Witless, but thanks for playing. Try again later.
      • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -22/+9Wow, you kids are really upset about being called out, aren't you?
        • alz0rz, on 10/29/2007, -5/+7Yet you're the one that seems to be trying desperately for some attention!
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -14/+6Yet another attempt at wit. It's a swing... and a miss.
      • Bobski, on 10/30/2007, -21/+11Not one single solitary cogent response, but few lame attempts a humorous retorts, and many, many votes with mouse clicks. Exactly what I'd expect from a bunch of poorly raised and educated children who think the only time they should actually give thought is during a test or when their boss calls them to the carpet.

        "This is the Internet! We shouldn't have to think! It's all just stream of consciousness! Damn Grammar! Damn Spelling!"

        The problem is that if you only practice those things as you deem necessary and not as a disciplined lifestyle you are easily out thought and out witted at every turn. Sure, you can click a button now and pretend to silence me, but have you? Realizing you have the right to not think and exercising that right is not a measure of intelligence, no matter how you try to skew it. That is exactly what is wrong with liberalism.

        Liberals see nothing wrong with stripping off all their clothes and running free and thoughtlessly through the woods. "We're in touch with Nature! Whee! We're so much more intelligent!"

        Conservatives feel the path to higher consciousness is through disciplined thought - and every established religion on the face of this planet echoes this very same tenet.

        It is what Western Civilization is founded on and what Liberals are dismantling.

        So bring it on girly boys. Try to outwit me with your brains instead of your mouse finger, unless of course your brains are *in* your mouse finger.
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -15/+7Ah. Ah. Ahhh. Knock it off with those negative mouse clicks, else you absolutely and utterly prove my point about the intellectual level of the average Digg user. Respond with written word in intelligent thought or you lose.
        • chad78, on 10/29/2007, -5/+11First of all, this is not an attempt to outwit you. This is not a competition, and I am not comparing the size or placement of my brain, (or any other body part), with yours.

          Secondly, I am not a Liberal. I am not a Democrat. I am not a Socialist. I did attend and graduate from public school. I am not single. I do not live in my mother's basement. I am a college graduate - no, my degree is not in computer science - nor underwater basket weaving - nor video game design or any such related field.

          There are several problems I see with the argument you are presenting.

          1. What is your point?

          it seems to me that you have spent, (if the digg comment timestamps are to be believed) the last 4 hours trying to prove something. I do not know what it is. I chose to reply to *this* one of your many comments - because it is the one that came closest to having some sort of meaning to me. Perhaps that is a failing on my part. Perhaps it is a lack of understanding that I have, but generally, when someone spends 4 hours, of and on, typing something, and it's in English, I can pretty much understand what they were trying to say. I spend a lot of time reading, and, at 29 years old, have gotten pretty good at it. But I guess there is always room for improvement.

          It seems to me that you are very angry. Not at me - you don't know me - but you are very angry at something or someone, and it is coming out in your comments. It also seems to me that you want desperately to communicate something - although, as I said, I have failed to understand what that is.

          2. Why do you care what we think?

          Why do you need, so desperately that you would take 4 hours out of your life to type comments into a website, to communicate this message of anger to and against the commenters on digg? Why does it matter if we are witless, liberal, grammar-less morons who like to click things? Why are you so desperate for a fight?

          If we are half the things you called us - why does our opinion of you matter? Whether that opinion is expressed through clicking a thumb icon or typing a comment? Why do you care?

          3. Your original comment was wrong.

          Asking for confirmation on a report does not make someone foolish. In fact, it is (pardon the pun) the critical part of critical thinking. An intelligent, educated, critical thinker does not believe someone when they say "Eureka!" - they believe them when they see the results of their test - and, an even more critical thinker who realizes that results can be flawed, faked, or faulty, does not believe them until the results of the experiment have been replicated - numerous times, under controlled conditions, by other people.

          Asking for confirmation of the results of an experiment - in this case seeing if Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard would run on a non-Apple personal computer - is standard scientific procedure. Something that is taught in Western societies top schools - and its lesser schools as well.

          The second flaw was made when you said "If you don't think it's real, then why Digg it in the first place?" - some people digg stories in order to go back and read them later. Some people digg stories that they don't agree with, but they want to see what the "other side" has to say. Some people comment on stories without digging them! Did you check to see if advancedOption actually did digg the story? I did. He did not digg the story until after he commented. Therefore, you may have gotten the confirmation that he wanted before digging the story.

          You see, digging a story does not mean you approve of it, or have even read it. Digg can be used a number of different ways by different people. Digg is a tool, and as long as the way you use digg does not go against it's terms and conditions, there is nothing wrong with using it as you see fit. I could, for example, create a digg username called "chadthinksthisstoryisdumb" and start digging every story that I see that I think is stupid, wrong, or pointless. I could even start a blog and start posting all those stories to that blog with the sole purpose of mocking them. Thus, my diggs would not mean "I dig it" in the old sense of "I like it" or even "I understand it". It would simply mean I pressed "digg" on the website. It does not receive my approval or promotion.

          And before you make the statement that digg.com uses those "diggs" as votes as to which stories to promote, and therefore by pressing digg, I am helping to promote those stories, let me remind you that the vast majority of diggs are submitted *after* the story is already on the front page, thus there is very little "promoting" left to do. Most diggers never see "upcoming" stories. So unless my digg, or advancedOption's digg, is the proverbial back-breaking straw that puts a story on the front page - or gets it included in the diggNation podcast - there is little, if any, actual promotional value associated with my digg. (This, of course, does not include anywhere that I, or others, publish my personal diggs, like, as mentioned, in a blog or RSS feed. That could be used as promotional material. But how many diggers are there? And how many people care about what I, personally, digg?)

          So, again, I ask you, what is your point, why do you care, and how do you answer these logic problems?

          I hope you have a good day.
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -6/+8I'll not itemize my response, that is a useless gesture and a crutch as I think you're having done so is.

          That said; You are my point. Thank you for confirming there really are critical thinkers out there on Digg and are willing to express themselves beyond a button click. You gave far more thought to your response that I would have ever expected. Some of your observations are insightful and some miss the mark, but that is of little consequence.

          If I'm angry about anything in particular with Digg, it is the button pushing group thinkers who imagine themselves part of the intelligentsia just because they think they hate all the right people when they really don't know who it is they're supposed to hate. Worse is they make no bones about wishing death upon those they hate. They call themselves Liberals and they hate NeoCons without even knowing the true meaning of the term.

          If I've spent the last number of hours doing anything is was mostly playing a game. My night was spent with my family. I only occasionally popped back to this thread just to see what moronic responses I might get. This *is* Digg, remember? It wasn't until later I decided it might be fun to bait these thoughtless button pushers.

          Asking for confirmation of the results of the subject of this post, that is not a problem, but that is not what was asked. Re-read. I already addressed the dangers of thoughtlessness in the post to which you replied, so let's not argue the semantics.

          There is a total lack of critical thought in the question asked and no one questioned it. That is what I criticized. And the GroupThink Zombies came crashing down.

          Digg can be a tool, to that I agree. I fully understand your argument and I've used Digg as such. But the vast majority of Diggers are children or very nearly child like in their behavior, with little experience in the real world. Digg represents a control over their world they are unaccustomed to, and they find a certain satisfaction in killing anything they don't agree with.

          It has absolutely nothing to do with the Digging of a story up or down, but the wanton burying of any opinion expressed beneath that story to which one disagrees. That is the weakness of Digg and the bane of anyone of dissenting opinion.

          Witness the Digg pattern of your post and my response.

          Do I really need to spell out the results? They will surely become self evident. Mindless GroupThink will rule the day.

          • GawtMilk, on 10/29/2007, -3/+7If there is one thing that annoy me about Digg, it's the attention grabbers who derail an otherwise interesting conversation with such drivel as "YOU PRESSED THE RED BUTTON ON ME =( ". It's a waste of time.
          • GawtMilk, on 10/28/2007, -3/+2For the record, I only clicked the "Submit Comment" button once.
          • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -2/+5I'm sorry, but are you illustrating my point about the ignorance of mindless diggers by suggesting my only concern is that I got Dugg down?
      • alz0rz, on 10/29/2007, -7/+5gtfo.
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -16/+8Oh, so close. Superbly brief, yet totally lacking in any depth.
      • cbuddha42, on 10/29/2007, -6/+6Dude...so much anger. I've never seen someone reply to their own response to themselves before. Anyway, your just annoying people. If not anger then why bother?
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -6/+4Oh ye of little knowledge. Did you get your response que from chad's reply before you came up with "your own" conclusion?
      • bjornski, on 10/29/2007, -9/+2Dang. Accidentally dugg your conservative douche comment up.
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -6/+7Good thing too, otherwise we'd have to hear your liberal douche reply.
          • bjornski, on 10/29/2007, -3/+1You already did, genius.

            And now, you get to hear another one as I digg this comment down for you.
          • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -5/+2Haha. You Dugg your own comment down? That *is* what you just said. Parse your sentence logically. My, my did you even get any sleep last night or did wait up just to bait me?
      • BlackCow, on 10/29/2007, -4/+4Please don't feed the trolls.
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -6/+4But it is so much fun. They follow just like sheep.
        • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -5/+4You all deny it? Well, hell. Look at yourselves. You are behaving exactly as predicted!
          GroupThink Sheep Digging down what you don't like as if this was some kind of FPS game.
          A bunch of children proving my point.
          Hey - don't forget you are all permanently recorded in Digg's archives as complete losers.
          Your children (if you ever have what is takes to produce them) will get to laugh at you for the rest of your lives.
      • Bobski, on 10/29/2007, -6/+5Un-Fscking believable. You all are so hell bent on hate that you are completely willing to prove yourselves total asses just so you can Digg me down.
        There is no longer any question in this world why it is falling to pieces. You have all proven yourselves the reason.
        Unmitigated hate. It's no wonder the Liberals love the Islamists.
    • DMCer, on 10/28/2007, -21/+12More importantly, why the Hell would you want to?
      • mywhitenoise, on 10/28/2007, -10/+7That is a retarded question, everybody knows Windows sucks ass. The main reason people don't like Macs are their price.
        • bjornski, on 10/28/2007, -2/+3And all of that extra software you can run makes it SO worth it!
        • brownr21, on 10/28/2007, -5/+1Go play in traffic.
        • bjornski, on 10/28/2007, -2/+5It's not just the price.

          It's the price, plus the fact that only about 5% of software was written for them.

          Plus, I refuse to associate myself with the crew-cut, turtleneck wearing, Volkswagen driving, Steve Jobs fellating cult.

          It's a damn computer, not a fashion statement.
    • hackmyballs, on 10/29/2007, -31/+2I knew it from loooong time ago.
      This is a direct blow to M$ chin.

      The great migration has just started!
      • hackmyballs, on 10/29/2007, -21/+1You can suck my ***** and lick my scrotum
        I bet you are an M$ employee
        Nobody takes offense for calling M$ what it is, M$!
        Keep licking you goddamn *****!
      • BlackCow, on 10/28/2007, -3/+4lol, if anything to switch is being made to Linux. Apple fails.
        • chad78, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3Well, I do admit this story doesn't do much for Apple, (nor does what it is promoting). Apple gets $0 from this. I mean, if you are going to steal the OS - you are probably going to steal the software you put on it. So, while they may get "Geek Cred" for being stolen from instead of Microsoft getting stolen from - thus meaning people prefer their OS to Windows - it doesn't really help them any.

          However, this article has nothing to do with Linux. Please try again later.
    • mercurysquad, on 10/28/2007, -0/+5I don't know about Leopard, but Tiger dual-boots with Ubuntu pretty well on my dell latitude, with all hardware working.
    • Wildthing, on 10/31/2007, -0/+4Would people who have hardware macs don't support ie. Nvidia 8800 GTX have issues?
    • Dracker, on 11/03/2007, -0/+1YES, it WORKS. I'm posting this from a PC running Leopard right now.
      My PCI wifi and PCI sound card don't get detected, but everything else works perfectly. Even my GeForce 8800 GTS, which wouldn't work when This happened for Tiger.

      Also, to apply the patch from the actual Leopard release DVD, I needed a Tiger installation - using my friend's Leopard Mac didn't work. Of course, you wouldn't need Tiger if you torrented it...

      Also, GRUB won't boot it for me. Oddly enough, I need to boot off the installer DVD and let it time out. It won't appear as an option if I hit F8.
      • amit6662kaloti, on 12/20/2007, -0/+0hi plz tell me procedure how u do it full procedure plzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz and tell me abt. system requirements ?
  • tokinama, on 11/01/2007, -4/+59Yes this does work.. A lot of people have got it working on their PC's. Some People have troubles getting Sound, etc.. to work but for most, everything seems to be fine so far..
    • TomP, on 10/28/2007, -2/+7Which order do i install it for it to multiboot with windows xp using chain0? is it windows then leo or leo then windows?
      • colto, on 10/28/2007, -1/+13Leo, then windows would work. Windows has a built in bootloader. HOWEVER I would highly recommend that you install windows, then Leopard, and then install the grub bootloader. Grub is generally more robust, runs faster, and looks cleaner. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_GRUB
    • AJRiddle, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3I know that the previous OSX worked on my PC, but unfortunately my network card did not.
    • webcrumb, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2Don't you have to partition the disk first with the OSX installer? I think I had to do that to get it to work last time I tried it, or is it just that it needs a primary partition?
    • undy242, on 10/28/2007, -1/+4Yea, sound really is overrated...
  • allyant, on 10/31/2007, -5/+38Shame it doesn't support SSE2, guess I need a new comp.
    • Roger, on 10/28/2007, -2/+21Yeah. Get me one too.
    • specialK16, on 10/28/2007, -2/+4No SSE2?

      /sobs
    • InorganicMatter, on 10/31/2007, -22/+5Intel has had SSE3 since Prescott's dude. If you don't have it....you seriously need to upgrade (or stop buying AMD parts).
      • allyant, on 10/28/2007, -1/+9Had my laptop for nearly two years now, its running Intel Celeron M, but I can't afford a new PC right now.
      • RustIndy, on 10/31/2007, -1/+7Actually, out of three non-X2 Athlon64's I bought right after the X2 was released, two of them do support SSE3. So keep buying AMD parts ;)
      • fuzzynyanko, on 10/28/2007, -0/+7I agree with RustIndy. AMD added SSE3 support in 2005. Most Athlon 64 X2s, and Socket 939/940 CPUs will have SSE3, and even some Socket 754s have it as well.
      • specialK16, on 10/31/2007, -2/+7Celeron's don't have SSE3. My Prescott P4 does not support SSE3 so quit *****.
      • Markpdotcom, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3So, cutting to the chase here, can people with an Athlon 64 x2 (like I have in my dell inspiron 1501 laptop) install Leopard? Or is it intel chips only?
    • MalDON, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3Someone on the Insanely mac forum has gotten it to work on non sse3 hardware.
    • 2shae, on 10/29/2007, -28/+3Yes you do need a new computer...a Mac.
      If you want to use OS X, why don't you just get it legit and original with a new Mac?
      You wannebe Mac users are weird.
      • maliath, on 10/31/2007, -3/+41Yes, buying hardware that's hundreds of dollars cheaper and running the same OS is weird.
        • 2shae, on 11/02/2007, -15/+2cheap ass *****.
          Get Linux if you don't like to spend money on your pc.
        • specialK16, on 11/02/2007, -1/+8@2shae: LMAO. People like you are weird.
        • timjim31, on 11/02/2007, -0/+7@2shae
          some of us are poor college kids
      • fuzzynyanko, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2Well, why not let PC users try out the Mac experience? It'd be a great way to recruit people to buy official Macs.
    • mauri824, on 10/29/2007, -2/+5http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3861368/Mac_OS_X_Leopa ...
      Trying to get leopard working on amd right now, hoping it'll work this time ;)
    • windohs, on 10/28/2007, -10/+1It'd be a great time to get a MAC then and do it *LEGALLY* so you can enjoy it as its meant to
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1SSE3, hell, my CPU dosen't even support SSE2.

      Damn crappy outdated Pentium 3...
    • redwallhp, on 11/12/2007, -4/+2Buy a mac then! If you need a new computer, there's no point in getting a PC so you can run a hacked version of the Mac OS. Buy a Mac.
    • Tambo3lite, on 07/05/2008, -0/+0http://www.macgeekblog.com/blog/archive/2006/12/05 ...

      here ya go N()()BS
  • iSamurai, on 11/06/2007, -14/+102Wondering if I can dual boot? Can I keep Vista on my lappy and dual boot with Leopard?

    BTW, these are the files : http://rapidshare.com/files/65339534/BrazilMac-9a5 ...
    • sishgupta, on 11/02/2007, -1/+23of course you can. you can multiboot anything if you use the right bootloaders
      osx/linux/xp/vista

      you dont have to be using linux to use grub. grub will boot an OSX/Vista install noproblemo.
      • M4tt3r, on 10/28/2007, -1/+19I love grub.
      • toastgodsupreme, on 10/28/2007, -0/+9Never touched GRUB before, should I use GRUB Legacy or GRUB 2 to mess around with OSX on my XP box?
        • rpgmaker, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2GRUB legacy is what we all use, GRUB 2 seems to be stucked and unstable at the moment.
    • asskicker32, on 10/28/2007, -6/+1I use whatever bootloader came with my installation of ubuntu. SO MUCH better than what I was using before, and of courese I cant remember what that was...
    • rlutterb, on 11/07/2007, -7/+21Please PLEASE don't use the term "lappy". It's really lame.
  • dpr1011, on 10/28/2007, -3/+37Please write your install stories if you have successfully got Leopard to boot.

    I am thinking about installing over my tiger partition to dual boot leopard/vista
    • Forgotten, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1I've tried and gotten it to work a while ago back when I tried with Tiger.

      http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_P ...
    • Dracker, on 11/03/2007, -0/+1Had to install Tiger before Leopard, as to patch the image of the retail Leopard DVD I needed Tiger - friend's Leopard mac applied the patch wrong and the DVD would hang on booting.
      Fortunately, I had a patched DVD from when Tiger 10.4.8 was getting hacked (The JaS disc, by the way). The reason I wasn't running Tiger already was because that patch disc had massive graphics glitches on my 8800 GTS.
      So I installed Tiger, ripped the Leopard disc, applied the BrazilMac patch, booted it, installed Leopard, and it worked.
      My EMU 1212m soundcard doesn't work, but hey, it doesn't even work in Linux and the onboard sound works.
      My Linksys WMP54G wasn't detected either, but Wired networking works, for the most part. I had to set it to Static IP, and every boot I need to toggle it between that and Automatic a few times before I get a connection, and even then it still reads as "unplugged" but hey, I've got internet.
      The 8800 GTS 320MB works great in Leopard, after downloading a hacked driver, with full QE and 3d acceleration.
      You know how on the network it says "soandso's Macbook Pro" indicating what kind of Mac they have? Mine says ACPI there. Dracker's ACPI. Heheh.

      The files I needed were the actual Leopard DVD, a patched Tiger DVD, the BrazilMac patch, and the 8800 GTS driver. I'm posting this from my Leopard PC right now.
  • tallonx, on 11/13/2007, -4/+126If this is anything like the Hackintosh Tiger Project, then this will work, but will be severely crippled. I would suggest to all those who decide to take this route, and install leopard on a pc, that you realize that this is not going to suit, in most cases, as a primary OS. It is also important to note, that there is a good chance, that when an update comes about via software update, it can severely screw things up.
    • Roger, on 10/28/2007, -2/+15Crippled how?
      • chrisbarr, on 10/28/2007, -2/+17I did it once with Tiger 10.4.9 on my Gateway desktop and it all worked except for my network card and audio. Considering I wanted to use th machine in my kitchen to stream iTunes music from my other computers, it was a failure there.
      • FIip, on 11/07/2007, -15/+73You won't be able to play any games on it.
        • afflusso, on 11/01/2007, -19/+84You won't be able to play any games on a real Mac either.
          • MooMaster716, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Even worse I just got through playing the Crysis Single player demo. It makes no since for a gamer to even try OSX.
          • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/29/2007, -0/+6Unsurprisingly, you've been dugg up more for explaining Flip's joke than Flip has for making it.
        • Maddpaky, on 10/31/2007, -8/+17ROFL
        • MalDON, on 10/28/2007, -18/+5Times are changing son: http://www.apple.com/games/
          • GawtMilk, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3When a money-grubbing company like EA only has six games released for the Mac, you know something's wrong.
        • doshindude, on 10/28/2007, -12/+6last I checked, you can't do ANYTHING on a mac (other than graphic stuff).
      • joltjake, on 10/28/2007, -22/+4thanks for stating the obvious........idiot.
      • Shorties, on 10/30/2007, -22/+13Or right click... (Sorry couldn't help it)
        • Jonsey, on 10/28/2007, -5/+14You've obviously never used OS X
        • Zalyster, on 10/28/2007, -3/+1Yeah, if you install it on your regular PC...Well, your mouse has a right-click button, no?
          Then you will have right-click.
        • Shorties, on 10/28/2007, -5/+4I was joking, I am a OSX user, I am typing this right now on my Macbook Pro, and using my mighty mouse. I was just using the usual what macs can't do joke with the crippled question.
        • MalDON, on 10/28/2007, -1/+4You know, Pretty much any mouse will work in OS X.
      • Maddpaky, on 10/28/2007, -8/+4obviously the people who buried ur comment never read bash.org
        dugg
      • Maddpaky, on 10/28/2007, -9/+2obviously the people who buried ur comment never read bash.org
        dugg
      • solidcube, on 10/28/2007, -14/+4By "Severely crippled" and "Not going to suit as a primary OS," he means that it will be like a Mac. A guy I know had a very well done hackintosh. It was basically indistinguishable from a Mac, and was therefore absolutely crippled and unusable. OSX = 100% pure fail.
    • directedition, on 10/28/2007, -2/+8Yeah, it's best just to not deal with the updates. Really, for the time being, you're best off sticking with Tiger. A lot of work has been done on Tiger to make a nice Hackintosh for most any hardware. Leopard still has a way to go before it can be used practically on a hackintosh.
    • Rizin, on 10/31/2007, -4/+31No not really I used the 10.4 Hackintosh as my main PC I was not crippled in any way. Also you dont use Software Update. You wait for a patched update.
      • colincornaby, on 10/28/2007, -6/+3Really? I tried it once and I couldn't even get OS X x86 to use my GPU.
    • deadbaby, on 10/28/2007, -0/+24It IS crippled if you expect every single piece of hardware out there to work. It works great if you spend 15 minutes on osx86project.org and find out what IS compatible before you buy. Before I bought a Mac I built a cheap little clone of the original Intel developers box and it was 100% compatible. Video, Sound, etc. It worked perfectly. You just have to know what hardware to buy.
      • aristotle0dude, on 10/29/2007, -18/+2Wow time is so damn cheap for you thieves isn't it? Do you all work minimum wage jobs or something? Do you like getting paid for your work? Then don't steal *****.
        • cfulp, on 10/29/2007, -1/+10I looked at your comments to see if I could understand more about you. I have come to the conclusion that you are an *****. Because you choose to insult people in every post you've ever made, I've decided that your post is irrelavent. Thanks for choosing cfulps' patented "check your post".
    • InorganicMatter, on 10/28/2007, -6/+1Crippled? Since the Intel Macs, it's never been crippled. Tiger runs flawlessly on my Badaxe 2 + Core 2 Duo PC as my primary operating system.
    • MalDON, on 10/28/2007, -0/+10I have been running Tiger for a long time now as my Main OS. I even have a few games installed and the entire CS3 suite. This is on my AMD 6000+
      http://dawnerd.googlepages.com/screen.jpg
      • Maddpaky, on 10/28/2007, -1/+5why is it only showing up as one core?
        • MalDON, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4It panics when it's set to two. There is no performance loss and as far as I can tell, all the apps show it as multicore.
    • monospaced, on 10/31/2007, -5/+26Headline: November 26th, Apple updates Leopard, PCs running cracked OS reporting bricked machines nationwide.
    • zeeky, on 10/28/2007, -1/+6wow, sir, you have no idea... osx86 runs with 100% compatibility with my hardware. i got lucky, though; every last bit of my 3 year old hardware happened to have mac drivers. once you get all the drivers there is absolutely nothing that distinguishes a hackintosh from a real mac. much to my surprise i could even run vmware fusion (i thought it would kernel panic). ive been running a hackintosh as my desktop computer since 10.4.8 (Using JaS's wonderful automated DVD) so in short you have ho idea what youre talking about.
    • asskicker32, on 10/28/2007, -0/+210.4.8 ran perfectly for me. The only thing I had an issue with was sound and bluetooth. 45 minutes after that, I had that working too. It did screw up my power management on my laptop though... after I reformatted the partition and installed linux on it, the power management came back.

      10.4.8 was great. I cant wait to put 10.5 on this laptop. I just need to wait for my new HDD to come in. These 1.8" drives suck.
    • sgbeal, on 10/29/2007, -8/+3"...that you realize that this is not going to suit, in most cases, as a primary OS."

      You say that as if OS/X is suitable for use as a primary OS at all.
  • Singee15, on 10/28/2007, -7/+48I REALLY REALLY hope this becomes stable
    • fLUx1337, on 10/29/2007, -5/+2It is already stable. It has been for years. Now all we need is every major hardware component to have hacked drivers made for it.....
      • Kardall, on 10/27/2007, -0/+1So you mean... MacOS X Leopard is like getting the early versions of Linux on a PC right? :D *cough* Just look at the long road head and smile if you can :D
        PS. I will try this later.
    • Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/28/2007, -7/+2Why would you want an OS that does less than Windows, albeit better?
      • rageguy, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Perhaps they only want to do a few things and they want to do them well.
    • blackjack75, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1OSX has has hacked version since 10.4.x days. They always ran "pretty well" depending on the machine and hardware but in the end you always get lots of small problems. I played with it a lot as a way to recycle my 3.0ghz pc (SSE2) and it was a nice experience but I wouldn't trust it as my everyday machine, since any system update could break it anytime. Sure you can disable the software updates, but then there's an update for IpHoto that you want and you're not sure wheter it'll prevent your machine from rebooting (by restoring some patched OS feature with a newer unpatched ones).

      If you do it for the fun, just do ti. If you want a mac that can also run windows, just get a mac, as I dit.
  • dirtyhand, on 11/06/2007, -21/+227It's not worth the trouble, 90% of the time your hardware wont be supported...
    • vertinox, on 11/03/2007, -13/+129Official support is for pussies. Be a man and roll your own.
      • bratterscain, on 11/03/2007, -9/+45First time I heard someone say "be a man" and install OSX. Maybe you'll be a less effeminate man if you roll your own OSX.
      • Kanidia, on 10/28/2007, -8/+5@bratterscain
        He meant be a man and learn to experiment with your own hardware.
        • bratterscain, on 10/28/2007, -1/+16I've done that plenty of times and so have the ladies.
        • unloud, on 10/29/2007, -2/+17"be a man and learn to experiment"

          For some reason, that made me laugh really hard.
      • AlexanderBlue, on 10/27/2007, -2/+4Official support is for managers who need to have a vendor standing behind them before they can take a leap and do something different.
      • qbqb, on 10/28/2007, -0/+6Real men write their own device drivers
      • sanotaan, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3boys roll their own; men don't have time for tinkering with ***** that doesn't work (without getting paid for it).
    • AQUANETA, on 10/28/2007, -0/+7Mine works. great.
    • aliguana, on 10/28/2007, -2/+4thats BS. I was reading the forums around the time Tiger got cracked, aside from the gfx card and SOME wireless cards, it worked fine. Of course, the closer you have to the "mac" internals the better your experience will be. Apparently (not tried it)
    • zeeky, on 10/28/2007, -2/+10total BS. ive been running OSX86 for 3 years strong. I went into it with 0 unix experience too.
    • fLUx1337, on 10/29/2007, -2/+3Yep, you have to be very lucky for your current PC to be able to run it nicely........

      Unless you have extremely stock hardware which alot of people have, that is. Then the chances are their are "drivers" to enable your hardware, or somebody is working on it...

      But if you go into it wanting to build a Hackintosh, you can build a decent machine, which has the maximum chance of working (because it uses the same hardware as real macs) for about 10-20% off the retail price of a real Mac, but to be honest - why?

      I can see how running OSX perfectly on a computer you already own is amazing, but is it really worth building your own to save very little cash?
    • deadbaby, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4That's not really true. A lot of hardware works. The key is to get a graphics card that actually exists in a real Mac. Intel GMA and specific NVIDIA/ATI chipsets are the way to go. You can actually flash some NVIDIA cards with a MAC EFI BIOS for maximum compatibility. On-board sound is usually fine. (AC97, RealTek, IntelHD, etc) Network cards mostly work (3COM, Intel PRO, many models of RealTek, etc) Wifi is probably the weakest link but it's pretty easy to pop out your old wifi card for a supported chipset. Even stuff like Bluetooth & Firewire work in most cases.
    • asskicker32, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1youre an idiot. I tried it on three laptops; a thinkpad and two dells. Close enough to get it to boot and I just had to update the library files.

      The beachball spins too fast, though.
    • kuujjuaqguy, on 10/29/2007, -2/+2You mean just like Vista!
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 11/04/2007, -2/+1LOL Leopard having compatibility issues?
  • HappyScrappy, on 10/28/2007, -3/+4You have to turn off all the packages?
    • Audacitor, on 10/28/2007, -1/+7You want to mess it up?
    • zeeky, on 10/28/2007, -0/+5they wouldn't all fit on a single layer DVD so they took them out to trim down the size... that's all.
  • vickers500, on 11/01/2007, -29/+14Is this the first apple OS that has been able to run on a pc?
    • specialK16, on 10/28/2007, -0/+7No. Google for OSx86. I think the project has been going on since 10.4.1.
    • oilcan, on 10/27/2007, -1/+1no, there's an ongoing scene devoted to running OSX on pcs. google the osx86 project
    • vickers500, on 10/28/2007, -1/+12Why the hell am I getting dugg down for asking an honest question? I swear, if you dont know everything there is to know about Apple, the ravaging fanboys just freak out.
      • AdmiralKarelia, on 11/02/2007, -1/+3Dugg you up in defense. As for your question, Apple themselves has a PC-compatible copy of every version Mac OS X. It's never been released, but it's a fail-safe measure in case Apple hardware sales die out.
      • Aythun, on 11/01/2007, -2/+1Maybe you should stop treating the Digg userbase like a search engine.
  • alekies, on 11/01/2007, -41/+14But will it blend?
  • nycmac247, on 11/01/2007, -23/+2-
    • MeltedUFO, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4My thoughts exactly.
    • logandurand, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1I swear people are doing this on purpose now. It just isn't funny anymore, people!
  • wafflez, on 10/28/2007, -4/+17D:
    I would do this..but anyone know about graphics card compatibility? I can't seem to find any drivers for mac for the 8800gts ;_;. also, there are no mac sound card drivers either.
    • TocsinFilms, on 10/28/2007, -28/+5Most of the new cards aren't going to work. Of course there are no drivers you ***** idiot, it's made for a Mac, not a PC.
      • chedabob, on 10/28/2007, -1/+8People write .kext files for the hardware though...
        • TocsinFilms, on 10/28/2007, -11/+2And half the time, it doesn't work with new cards. I'm not ***** retarded.
          • GeckoSlayer, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4Haha dugg down just because everyone else is!
    • deadbaby, on 10/28/2007, -0/+5Most on-board audio works fine. The physical hardware on the board isn't very unique and everything is done in software. You usually have to edit your specific device ID into the kernel module and it works. I would say (complete guess) upwards of 80% of on-board audio works. You are of course out of luck with a Sound Blaster card. (they barely even support Linux/Vista) If your on-board doesn't work you can buy a cheap $20 PCI card that is compatible.
    • willynilly, on 10/28/2007, -9/+3Which is exactly why this is a major waste of time. Find someone with an educational discount and buy a damned Mac if you want to run Mac OS. Windows runs way better on a Mac than Mac OS will ever run on a generic computer.
      • habys, on 10/28/2007, -2/+5I've got to say that claim is pretty unsubstantiated. A guy I know had a lot of luck with an Intel DQ965GF, a PCIe gigabit network card, and uphuck's 10.4.9. Final cut and Logic say "this works pretty well."
        And from $2500 down to less than a grand for the exact same computer, where exactly do you see a waste of time?
        Well, I might say that if I couldn't pull it off.. eh, I mean he would say that.
        • fLUx1337, on 10/29/2007, -1/+3Well, you have to be seriously good in a Unix enviroment to be able to do it perfectly.

          Imagine your getting error XXXXXXXXXXXX on a windows/linux box, you google it, "oh, I just need to do this"

          On OSX, and its not common problem in the hackintosh scene, umm...your pretty much on your own, posting on forums, hoping somebody knows what the problem is...

          Most people move to a Mac to avoid those kind of problems....
      • zeeky, on 10/28/2007, -0/+7definately NOT a waste of time. saves you over a grand if u wanna build the equivilant of a mac pro...
    • Roger, on 10/28/2007, -0/+7AGP cards are the most problematic since OSX only has PCIe support on Intel systems.
      • sk2134, on 10/29/2007, -5/+2yeah thanks but there are NO AGP 8800GTS'.
  • SilverBlade2k, on 10/29/2007, -8/+62that was quick...
    • Roger, on 10/28/2007, -1/+12Actually the beta versions of Leopard have been hacked for a while now.
    • fLUx1337, on 10/27/2007, -0/+3From what I can tell, Apple pretty much puts little effort into the protection now due to the fact as soon as its cracked, their is no activation, and no chance of battling the hackers with firmware updates, because you can just skip them and download hacked firmware updates.... so whats the point of trying to implement protection when you want it released ASAP?
      • fridx, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Because Apple has no protection on their OS sways me to upgrading from Tiger, even though I don't see any need for me to do so.
    • mercurysquad, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Actually it had been cracked quite some time ago, but the release was being kept back until Leopard's actual release, so as to not give Apple a chance to patch it.
  • EXreaction, on 10/28/2007, -9/+5I think I'll have to try it...
  • ucg1, on 10/28/2007, -4/+14How hard is it to get OS X (Tiger or Leopard) running in VMWare? I'd like to get OS X running on both VMWare for other OS's or VMWare Fusion/Parallels (OS X on OS X).
    • cardinalb, on 10/27/2007, -1/+2Not hard at all but its like trying to run through treacle unfortunately. Not useable at all which is a pity. As someone who has never had a mac it would have been interesting to have given it a go.

    • specialK16, on 10/27/2007, -0/+3OSx86 does run on a Vm machine, as long as your CPU is supported. For Leopard, if you CPU handles SSE3, then you can run OSx86 in VMWare. Do note that you need the patched DVD. Also, it run a bit choppy in VMWare.
    • afflusso, on 10/27/2007, -0/+1Tiger runs in VMware ok. I haven't used it much, but it was really easy to get it working. It's kind of slow on my computer, though, which is to be expected because it has to share RAM with windows.
    • estvir, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1OSX86, Tiger, works perfectly fine in VMWare under Windows. How do I know this? Well, because of my mobo+DVD drive setup I wasn't able to physically boot to the installer by just having the DVD in so I'd install it in VMWare, add chain0 to my bootloader and than Tiger worked perfectly, DVD included.

      That also means my PC wasn't out of action while installing, I could still browse the net, etc.
  • rglover, on 10/28/2007, -4/+16Probably a dumb question, but will this only work on Intel?
    • specialK16, on 10/28/2007, -13/+3Mac computers use Intel chips nowdays, hence, the answer to you question is yes, OS X runs without any patches on Intel CPUs. Now, if what you are asking is whether you can run OS X on a non-mac PC, then the answer is that you can as long as you have compatible hardware (CPU capable SSE3, compatible Audio device, etc) and the patched DVD.
      • limoo, on 10/28/2007, -0/+7I think he's asking whether he can run OSX on AMD CPUs. I believe all recent AMD CPUs support SSE3. I'm not sure if there are other unstated requirements (mobo chipset, etc).
        • specialK16, on 10/27/2007, -1/+2OH yeah, miss that. Read to quickly I guess. Also forgot to mention that thet also work on AMDs.
    • Zalyster, on 10/28/2007, -1/+5You can get 10.4 Tiger running on AMD machines. I don't think Leopard has been out long enough for an AMD compatible hack, however. And of course, it will work on Macs...
    • cl0n3x, on 10/28/2007, -5/+2Yes and yes.
  • canthraxp, on 10/29/2007, -2/+19Best to try in virtual box.
    • specialK16, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4Does it actually work in Virtual Box, I've never tried it.
  • inkswamp, on 10/28/2007, -17/+4Dear dailyapps.net's web designer:

    padding-left:10px;

    Learn it.
    • neoian, on 10/27/2007, -2/+3http://5thirtyone.com

      Go cry to him. (He made it)
    • fLUx1337, on 10/28/2007, -1/+5If your looking at the same part as me.....

      Dear inkswamp,

      1. Get a bigger screen
      2. Learn efficient CSS you dumb #*****
      • inkswamp, on 10/27/2007, -1/+2I have a big screen.
        I've used CSS for many, many years professionally and know it inside-out.
      • robdazomba, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1Efficient CSS wouldn't require a bigger screen.
        And if you can't discuss things without resorting to swear words, you need to grow up a bit.
        • Markpdotcom, on 10/27/2007, -0/+1It was a css colour joke my dear boy...
          • robdazomba, on 10/29/2007, -1/+0I understood that but it would have been funnier not used as an insult. Calling someone a "dumb *****" (even if you disagree with them) is not necessary.
  • thecheatah, on 11/03/2007, -26/+106pfff... looks like linux...

    *ducks*
    • Kanidia, on 11/01/2007, -5/+30You don't need to duck, most of us can't aim.

      Oops, dugg you up. I guess I can't aim either. (jk)

      Damn now I need to duck.
    • jellomizer, on 10/28/2007, -13/+6It sure does... But it doesn't work like Linux. Linux Developers have the misconception that if it looks like and has the same features of the competing OS then it will work just as well. That isn't the case. There are a lot of subtile difference that actually do help out. The right level of Window Shadow, how the animation actually helps the eye follow what is happening. SMART NAMES for features, etc.
      • sv650touring, on 10/28/2007, -8/+6The name thing is so true. Linux has some random cryptic names for ordinary commands and applications. Sometimes I think they are trying to make it hard for non-geeks to understand.
      • webcrumb, on 10/28/2007, -0/+3cat ../* > /dev/null
    • ubergeek09, on 11/07/2007, -13/+10Uh, don't even compare Mac OS to Linux there is no comparison Linux is so many times better.
      • ShogunWarPig, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Linuxians save this man!!!
      • johnnykwest, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1If you want a finely polished closed and proprietary system, go with OSX (seriously). If you're interested in freedom and choice in your OS and not interested in lining the pocket of Apple or MS, then go with Linux. And btw, I don't think it's evil to want the first thing. But if you do, then the Linux community likely doesn't want you anyway.
    • nathan42100, on 11/07/2007, -4/+2Isn't that because mac OSs are *nix based?
    • sanotaan, on 11/07/2007, -1/+1odd; make that comment in an ubuntu thread and all you'll hear is how different its desktop environment is to OS X's. one thing you cannot do and be taken seriously is chew on both sides of your mouth.
    • supermanred, on 11/01/2007, -1/+2Actually, the OS X is UNIX, and yes its core is the same as Linux, but the UI is the best around.

      I wouldnt install it on my PC without any drivers... If you really want to try it, get a macbook and dualboot windows and os x. It is a great laptop, and I originally bought mine to run WIndows Vista.
    • mesmeriffic, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2pfff... i think you mean:
      *penguins*
    • PixelEater, on 11/07/2007, -3/+1The environmental difference is OS X's graphics are sexy and compliment each other while LInux is kind of a blend of volunteer graphics and pillow shaded icons.
  • derekivey, on 10/31/2007, -7/+21Anyone know where to get the "Patched DVD Image" that they are talking about?
    • colto, on 10/28/2007, -1/+9Pirate Bay.
      Probably Demonoid too.
      • TomP, on 10/27/2007, -0/+1hardly any seeds though
      • tomis, on 10/28/2007, -0/+6That's because pirates like to steal, they don't like to share.
        • specialK16, on 11/01/2007, -1/+2I like to share. In fact, I always seed all my downloads for a around a week or two full time.
      • bbardlbradd, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Checked Pirates this morning, the number one seed is Leopard. I have it so I don't need to wrr0y! ;^)
      • pyrodude, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4we all know what sites to use. i think he is wondering as am i what exactly the torrent that is used. or if you dont want to link the torrent then give use the exact keywords you used to search for it and then the number in the list.

        i know i have searched the major sites and cant seem to find the patched dvd.
    • ksong12, on 10/28/2007, -1/+5Torrents are your friend.
  • hyphyleopard, on 10/29/2007, -37/+1LOL THIS ISN"T ANYTHING NEW!
    Its been out since WWDC betas and tiger dawg!
    YEEEYEE
    it works on amd sse2 and 3, and sse2 and sse3 intels!!
    CHECK OUT THE THEPIRATEBAY.ORG TO GET THE KERNELS!
    come into our irc and learn more about what this is about
    terrible.moofspeak.net and join #osx86scene
    CHECK OUT THE FORUMS AT osx86scene.com

    P.S: 8800 graphic cards run fine with full res and core animation!!
    Accelerated graphics. The x86 project supports most hardware
  • kreatre2007, on 10/31/2007, -78/+4If you cheap ass skanks like Mac OS X so much, just buy a Mac. It totally cheapens the OS when you install it on some third rate, cheap box that has no class or original thought built into it. Yes, I'm a Fanboy. DEAL WITH IT. You're a cheap ass loser and a closet Mac Fanboy if you pull ***** like this.
    • hyphyleopard, on 10/31/2007, -27/+49MY HARDWARE SMOKES ANY ***** THAT APPLE HAS RELEASED
      ITS NOT OUR FAULT WE DONT PAY FOR OVERPRICED HARDWARE WITH ***** GRAPHIC CARDS
      8800 gtx ftw!, core 2 duo, core 2 quad core! water cooled ram! raptors! kilowat powersupplies! cool cases! nice motherboards with so many more features that you could dream of
      • soopafly, on 10/29/2007, -7/+20I bet you get all the chicks
      • lateralus, on 10/28/2007, -7/+1Full tower case with Alien on it?
      • tao52nyc, on 10/28/2007, -7/+1Yeah, except it runs a POS operating system.
        • specialK16, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4Windows? Yeap. Linux? Nope, better than OSX in fact.
        • AdmiralKarelia, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2Linux has it's share of merits, but I've yet to see it surpass Mac OS X.
      • specialK16, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2OWNED!
      • AdmiralKarelia, on 10/28/2007, -3/+2Wow... just, wow. Shut the ***** up. Hardware features mean nothing when the OS is a dilapidated piece of garbage. Besides, it's not all about GPU's and games, asshat.
      • crazzy88ss, on 10/28/2007, -0/+3your penis is clearly larger than his.
    • jamima69z, on 10/28/2007, -1/+16nice attempt at trolling-but you're not quite doing it right.
    • gidiv, on 11/01/2007, -0/+3i could just like the challenge of getting a PC to run the Mac OS. The OSX86 community is kinda neat. Don't get me wrong, I own 2 Macs and 3 PCs so if leopard won't go onto my other box the I guess I'll settle for a Mac running a Mac OS.

      Sometimes I worry about people who get so angry about something so petty.
    • AdmiralKarelia, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1In the name of experimentation, I can see where OSx86 is a good idea. But I have to agree that it seems like it cheapens it when everyone and their dog installs it on a ***** P4.

      Kinda like people who think they are the king of FPS when they play Halo 3, but have never heard of Marathon.
  • CrazyRussian, on 10/28/2007, -12/+3Quick question... will it work on my computer?
    AMD 64 X2 3800+, Asus A8V, 2gb Corsair mem, ATI Radeon 9700 PRO, Creative Soundblaster Audigy 2???? I really want Leopard.....
    • istatic, on 10/29/2007, -2/+12No
    • PopeOfDope, on 10/28/2007, -1/+5Well it does say Intel Only on the page so I guess it won't work for now. However Tiger did work on AMD CPUs so its only a matter of time before Leopard is available to us.
    • wing05, on 10/27/2007, -0/+4Tiger, yes. 10.4.9 is the last AMD one I got running before I got hold of Intel hardware.

      I'm not sure about Leopard. But if it isn't, it's only a matter of time before the community gets it working.

      The only thin that Hackintoshes can't do reliably -

      - Software updates from Apple
      - Sleep

    • bratterscain, on 10/28/2007, -1/+242
    • erkokite, on 10/28/2007, -1/+5I hate it when people post the specs of their machine and ask, "Will Crysis/UT3/Leopard/Vista run on my machine?" How about you read about the software and figure it out yourself.
      • sv650touring, on 10/27/2007, -0/+2And why ask in the Digg comment section? Oh that's right. If he's too lazy to check his hardware compatibility, then joining an appropriate forum for such discussions would be too much work too.
    • lateralus, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3Stock heatsink? You might need to modify your Config.sys.
    • RustIndy, on 10/27/2007, -0/+3It'll probably run - your CPU is *probably* SSE3-capable (use a program like CPU-Z to make sure, though). You might not be able to get your SoundBlaster to work properly, but on-board sound will most likely work fine (the A8V uses the nVidia chipset, right?). Ditto network connection - probably will work, but might not. You won't know until you try.
    • supermanred, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1I know it works on 256mb of ram.
  • neoian, on 10/28/2007, -10/+8Where do i get the DVD?
    • hyphyleopard, on 10/28/2007, -7/+5its on thepiratebay.org
      LOOK FOR THE x86 version!
      thats the intel sse3 version, but we are working on releasing a version that can run on any pc no matter amd sse2 or intel sse2
    • bratterscain, on 10/28/2007, -4/+742
    • LostRiot, on 10/28/2007, -0/+3umm, oink..

      oh, wait.
  • hyphyleopard, on 10/28/2007, -13/+3VISIT THIS LINK TO SEE IF UR HARDWARE IS COMPATIBLE
    http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/HCL_10 ...
    YOU CAN ALSO CHECK OUT THE insanelymac.com forums to see if you have compatible hardware!
    AND YES, YOU CAN DUAL BOOT xp/vista/linux/mac !!!
    • keviniskool, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1WOW! BAD SPELLING, SPAM, & CAPS LOCK ALL IN ONE!!!!
  • linkerjpatrick, on 10/28/2007, -5/+18What if this is the secret feature? I respect the fact Apple wants to create the OS that runs on their hardware and their hardware sales are good enough to justify not doing it but what if they did a three-tiered support system? Full support on their own hardware, second tier with a major vendor like Dell, HP and no official support with anyone else?
    • wing05, on 10/28/2007, -0/+17I'd buy it in the blink of an eye as I'm sure a whole lot of others out there would.
    • hexydes, on 10/28/2007, -1/+16Yeah, Steve Jobs will never let that happen. You want Apple, you're going to play by Steve's rules.
    • neodorian, on 10/28/2007, -2/+6No, because they make their money on premium hardware. They build a good OS to sell the hardware. If you pirate the OS and build your own compatible computer, they make nothing because you have just built yourself a half-off Mac in a less-pretty case.
    • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1I don't tend to rule things out often, but that just isn't gonna happen.
    • logandurand, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1The Apple business model is built upon the interdependence of their hardware and software. They don't want to sell OSX, they want to sell "Mac", and that unfortunately means buying their one-size-fits all hardware.
  • truegodofwar, on 10/28/2007, -21/+7okay, but why do I want to do this? Ubuntu works great.
    • willynilly, on 10/28/2007, -3/+13Aren't you ashamed to parrot this same old *****, over and over? What a caricature.
      • BevansDesign, on 10/28/2007, -2/+10SQUAWK! POLLY USE UBUNTU! SQUAWK!

        Sorry, couldn't help myself.
    • Roger, on 10/28/2007, -10/+7Because Ubuntu < OSX
  • hyphyleopard, on 10/28/2007, -47/+0LOL THIS IS NO SECRET FEATURE. THIS HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE TIGER, PEOPLE ACTUALLY HAD TO HACK IT TO WORK
    APPLE DIDN'T MAKE IT LOL
  • CyberSteve, on 10/28/2007, -8/+12anyone have a link to a patched DVD torrent?
    • Tuffleo, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Try reading up before writing a comment
  • subrato, on 10/28/2007, -7/+2Probably a dumb question but I clicked on iSamurai's link and downloaded the files but I am not sure what I should be doing with it... Also if anyone can tell me where I can grab that nice lil dvd.. though I need a new machine to to install it
    • KevinRoseMustDy, on 11/10/2007, -7/+1You need to put those downloaded files in to a RAR file, call it 'Leopard.x86.[XP/Vista].' copy it on to a Floppy using Windows Media Player. If you are using XP, then you have to wait 3 days to install it. If you are using Vista then you have to wait 7 days. I recommend installing XP, so you don't have to wait an additional 4 days. Good Luck.
      • ispshadow, on 11/10/2007, -1/+3Please leave. You're a waste of bits.
  • stoppedcode12, on 10/28/2007, -8/+4What the hell is with the CAPS thing going on today?
  • err404, on 11/06/2007, -5/+99OSX86/Hackintoch is a gateway drug for Apple. It's good enough to wet you apatite, but not enough to leave you satisfied. Last year I ran the Tiger builds for a a few months and really liked it, but was frustrated by little things being unstable or not working "quite" right. In the end I bought a MacBook Pro. Since then I have bought many other Apple products, including a second Mac.
    • 0xFEEDFACE, on 10/29/2007, -0/+31Exactly. That's probably why Apple seems to turn a blind eye to it.
    • weirdlookinguy, on 10/28/2007, -0/+3AMEN brutha! That completely sums up my feelings for Tiger osx86. Ran nice on my Pentium 4/ATI 9600 but not enough to be used as a main OS. It was more of a "look ma, OS X!" type of deal.
    • sanotaan, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1very good if seldom-made point. not to mention the possibility for sale of extended support/warranty.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2Apple threatened to sue them. Years ago.
  • kabitoSDMF, on 10/28/2007, -8/+3FINALLY!
  • joltjake, on 10/31/2007, -3/+6does it work on vmware?
  • dodgyd55, on 10/28/2007, -2/+4mac has been patched before but i could never use it because i was running AMD, but my question is, will this run on an AMD processor?
    • DeFex, on 10/28/2007, -3/+1i doubt if they will support it unless some time in the distant future they make a chip that performs better then intel. you can say what you want about apple but they usually do not cheap out on the CPU
      • OAKsider, on 10/31/2007, -0/+1So you're saying AMD has gone from the underdog dominating Intel's face to "cheaping out" in a couple of years. "They're not worthy!!"
    • RustIndy, on 10/29/2007, -0/+3If you CPU supports SSE3 (and recent AMD processors do, in fact, have SSE3 - use CPU-Z to find out), you might be able to run Leopard. Otherwise, wait for the fully patched version which should run with SSE2 support.
  • CyberSteve, on 11/01/2007, -4/+31http://www.demonoid.com/files/details/1402044/3100 ...
    • DuraznosTJ, on 11/01/2007, -7/+3Who here has a demonoid invite code?
    • catylist, on 10/28/2007, -1/+6No for Canadians :(
    • Yazoo, on 10/28/2007, -0/+5I'll be nice. Demonoid invite code:
      19yvmy9qfs87002p56qtozwpv6rkngshua
    • mikiupdown2, on 10/28/2007, -0/+3I'll also be nice like Yazoo and give out a few...

      o3spc7gsmk0u7e9ha1k29f60u2ntso6htuolw9tcmfhs
      00mtpy8oaz3tv1999eyjhgedmy3fjsjtkexxy77
      0dqcxajt9qqs6luir2kk96mw112rz9i3dfqk9i
      fkncn2ubeauzeatv06pp4ril9hde65mt42xnj3n
      swhhfp9hfo5d80x5cw171exryypaebgc369b7szv
      • kutateli, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Thank you. :)
      • mikiupdown2, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1Sorry people, those are all my invites gone for now. All of the above codes have been used.
    • vsLAN, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2
      n8bizfar0f21aacpl3odqsxng09fgda3f09992bo1x
      gmwdh6k7grfzazjuv83zqhr72vyf11x8
      p74s80zlgemlq4rnds067agsgnzh4l19i67mjs
      3jbo85rrqcj3l0y2gce0am6i4qsr9zfkpo2uz776f73
      clfcgq0yoyd6f6y52jrhb39jx2g0u5whsr4i0jd3kpfhs
      • Zector, on 10/28/2007, -0/+0Thanks :D
        I was able to nab
        2lgejk52czoprms5tvs3cnu5p3n4q67154o541dkwd
        I really appreciate it. :]
    • aubska, on 10/28/2007, -0/+12lgejk52czoprms5tvs3cnu5p3n4q67154o541dkwd
      ozj9dkjuoqdcpaxcp591rjat89jpiqa0lv8cjnavi7ks
      hnpnfrwtp7cou86qq20d37b3owsysfwzyd69ucuc
      aaduzu58rni7ldl8y2tyk44ly4dhybomg4xobr8j8
    • DuraznosTJ, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2None of the invite codes worked :(
  • froggiestone, on 10/28/2007, -1/+2just hit up one of the major torrent sites like mininova, torrentspy or thepiratebay and search for os x or mac leopard :} That said, i tried this a few weeks ago, but it couldn't find my harddisk or mouse, there's also alot of driver issues, so dont get your hopes to high..but feel free to try it out..
    • CyberSteve, on 10/27/2007, -0/+1it has to be the patched version I believe, I posted the link above
  • thepisstaker, on 10/28/2007, -3/+2That worked then! The forecast for Mac sales in March 2008 just went up by thousands!- Hackintosh fans mesmerized by the overall experience but annoyed at the niggles of poor hardware support, will be buying new Apple computers in droves.
    • Mier, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1why in the hell would i want to buy a freakin mac when I have their precious OS running on my spare PC. IDIOT.
      Not like I can play games on it, so it makes a decent PC to do other things on.
  • eberhardt333, on 10/28/2007, -15/+6why would you want to? it's still a PC.
    • Ubermann, on 10/28/2007, -4/+1Good one.
    • gfnw, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2Right, because the core 2 in your mac works so much better than the exact same chip in my PC.

      Protip: Since Apple started using Intel chips, a Mac IS a PC, with a pretty case and a proprietary OS.
      • eberhardt333, on 12/10/2007, -0/+1except my Mac doesn't give me blue screen of death every few hours.
  • grapesofbaath, on 10/28/2007, -8/+3This sounds way too good to be true. The OSX Tiger x86 project was terrible. Just getting sound and internet to be supported was just about impossible.
  • BevansDesign, on 10/31/2007, -14/+19I just can't imagine why you'd ever want to do that.
    • logandurand, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1I'd do it to free myself from Apple's hardware-software lock-in. If you want/need OSX, this gives you a chance to use it on the machine you want to.
  • BayAreaKing, on 10/29/2007, -8/+4There's no way Apple is going to let this stand!
    • InorganicMatter, on 10/27/2007, -1/+1Sure they don't, they do some crazy thing with running all the data through a TPM chip on Macs when installing to make sure it only goes on Apple hardware. As you can see, it took less than a week for the community to circumvent this preventation. ;)
    • deadbaby, on 10/28/2007, -0/+5They haven't really done much to stop people so far. 10.4 has run on generic PCs since before the first Intel Mac even shipped to customers. They could have been suing people left & right if they wanted to. Apple probably understands there are not many people running hacked OSX on PCs and, those who do, end up buying a Mac sooner or later anyway.
  • Vipersfate, on 10/28/2007, -3/+14There is no difference in an Apple Computer and a normal "Beige Box" PC.

    My MacBook has the Intel GMA950 chipset. Which is easily found on many Intel motherboards that are available for retail.
    The only major difference is the hardware supported and the software. When I worked with OSx86 for about 2 years, I found that it worked great! It would play world of warcraft better than windows did! It's all about the hobby and the enjoyment of what you are doing. If you want OSx86 just to work on and not mess with, don't bother.
    • 0xFEEDFACE, on 10/27/2007, -1/+0Darwin seems to work well on most PC hardware I've thrown at it -- provided I don't have to try and run X. I built a box with it recently, serving http/ftp/ssh/smb/nfs/dns -- it actually worked pretty well. It took a bit more work (esp, since there are precious few prebuilt binaries, and there's no apt-get), but once it was all set up, I found Darwin to be a suitable server OS. I didn't benchmark it against Linux/BSD, but I didn't notice any performance problems.

      That said, building up a Darwin server is still better done as a hobby than as a serious venture. You can get good results, but you have to be willing to do some work.
    • limoo, on 10/29/2007, -5/+0Nonsense. If there were no difference, there won't be a need for a patch, just assemble the right parts. One *major* difference is the use of EFI instead of BIOS for booting. Though newer Intel-based mobos support EFI, I believe there's no EFI firmware in the ROM itself, just the regular BIOS.
    • Syphon8, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1The difference is about a coefficient of 2 to the price.
  • SinzenStudios, on 10/28/2007, -13/+1Video or it didn't happen. I could fake it and use similar icons, renaming folders to the ones on the screenshots too. Video or it didn't happen.
    • skinturtle, on 10/28/2007, -0/+4 Maybe in your mind it doesn't just because there's no video but as you can see..nobody cares what you think.

      It works and it happened. It has been happening for months.
  • windohs, on 10/29/2007, -13/+5If you want the REAL mac experience just buy a mac. running osx86 is pointless imo since you're bound to have some hardware issue (sound, internet, etc).
    • opmike, on 10/28/2007, -2/+5Oh really? Thank you for showing the rest of us benighted fools the light.

      I guess it's ridiculous to assume that some individuals may wish to try out OS X for a while to get a feel for how it is (using their current hardware) before they plunk down $1000+ on something they might not like; it's not like Apple offers live CD's. All of this is free so if you doesn't work, you don't like it, etc. all you have to do is uninstall. The only thing to lose is a few hours of your time.
      • windohs, on 10/28/2007, -4/+3Windows doesn't offer live cd's either, and people steal it regardless. If you want to try out a mac go to an apple store. I played with a macbook for a while before I bought one. By your logic it's ok to steal so you can just "try it out". That's what makes it "free".
      • skinturtle, on 10/28/2007, -1/+0Some of us don't live handily to an apple store.

        Everybody has Windows and you can pretty much try it out ANYWHERE..and...you don't have to pay $1000 or so to try or buy it!
        • windohs, on 10/28/2007, -0/+11. where the hell did $1000 come from, it's free to try it at an apple store. Also, stores like best buy have started selling macs and you can try them out on the spot. People buy HP and Dell Computers without trying them out (with the exception of like 2 dell stores in texas)
          2. I don't live close to a ferrari dealership...does that make it ok to take a car w/o paying? Of course not
          3. Windows is everywhere? When did these windows vista stores pop up?
          4. Since you're computer is usually NOT fully supported you don't get to really see if you like it or not
          • shawnz, on 11/14/2007, -0/+11. there are only 2 stores in texas that sell... PCs?
            2. no, but dealerships often offer test drives.
            3. you don't buy broccoli from a broccoli store, you buy it from a grocery store.
            4. not having sound, etc doesn't really impact anything, since its no different between other OSes
        • gfnw, on 10/29/2007, -0/+1"2. I don't live close to a Ferrari dealership...does that make it OK to take a car w/o paying? Of course not"

          Oh this old chestnut.

          Downloading a copy of OSX is not the same as stealing a car. If I were to walk into an Apple store and take a Macbook, then it would be analogous.
  • Stevethegreat, on 10/31/2007, -19/+18And that's the great thing with PCs -in opposition to Macs- they're anything you like, both a Windows PC, a Linux machine AND a Mac. Mac OS X was bootable to PCs ever since Apple made the leap to Intel's processors, it doesn't surprise me that Leopard is made to work too. The thing is -however- that you have to be illegal to boot Mac OS X to your PC but then again how the heck would Apple come to check your computer. At one point I had 3 HDDs loaded with the three kind of OS, one Ubuntu, one Vista and one Mac OS X 10.4.9 (just for flash). Of course I eventually formated the OSX partition as it was useless to my work

    It's funny that with a $300 PC ($450 with the monitor included) you can have a Mac minus Apple's extravagant product. Oh and -to my experience- Mac OS X runs great on PC, there is no difference than running it in a Mac hardware (I haven't tried Leopard, yet, though). It gotta show that Apple is a money-grabbing machine, a lot worse than Microsoft, it actually charge $600 upwards for its software -actually- but being a macaddict won't make you see it.
    • mastermind59, on 10/28/2007, -16/+15Translation: "I can't afford a mac!"
      • 7717, on 11/13/2007, -6/+11Translation: "I'm a *****!"

        While I do agree that a Mac's hardware is very impressive, there is nothing that can counter the versatility and expandability of a PC. Like Stevethegreat said, you can put Windows, Linux, and Mac OSX (though a less stable version) on the same box. Just because you like Mac's doesn't mean everyone else has to, *****.
        • tao52nyc, on 10/28/2007, -8/+1Translation: I'm a cheap poltroon who lives in his parent's basement, who'd rather spend hundreds of hours looking for obscure FOSS drivers for my cheap hacked together POS PC, and put up with all the annoying instabilities, because my time isn't worth anything either. For those of us who just want to Get.Work.Done, we'll spring for the whole package, because our time IS worth something, and we want to add value to the world.
        • mikestatic1, on 10/28/2007, -1/+1If you didn't have your head firmly entrenched in your arse you'd know that a Mac can run Linux, WIndows AND OS X.

          Just because you can't afford a Mac, doesn't mean anyone has to listen to your uninformed opinion. Enjoy your Pentium II.
    • Drax0n, on 10/28/2007, -6/+4Its funny how people who read a couple blogs online think they know what they are talking about than the regurgitate it everywhere they go, with even more foolish people copying them and posting on forums.
      First off if you ran OSX on a PC with no hardware issues you were lucky. Most hardware in cheap pcs have no Mac osx drivers leading to lots of unstable issues and unusable features (such as sound). You other point is totally off the mark too, in lots of cases apple is CHEAPER than a dell or HP equivalent machine do yourself a favor before you go posting things, LOOK them up. You can configure a quad core woodcrest Mac Pro on apples website with the same specs as on HP or dell and every time apple is cheaper 200-600 dollars.
      And at the bottom of the price range a macbook is 999 it comes with ilife and apple is not paid for 50 different pieces of trial crap that only due to slow down your computer, Dell sells a simular laptop for 899 with tons of crap, that will need anti-virus software purchased once all the 3 month trials run out, no ilife, 2 pounds heavier, 1 inch thicker, no magsafe adapter, and it comes with vista basic which by the way runs DOG slow on low end laptops.

      IMO apple seems like a better deal both times.
      Disclaimer I am writing this on my Vista desktop which I use for games and to learn vista so I can fix when I need to. My life is run off my Macbook Pro, Nothing on windows can easily manage your digital life like iLife, Now if apple only got some more game support I could replace this ugly tower.
      • vickers500, on 10/28/2007, -2/+4Cheaper? Do you always spray ***** out of your mouth, or do you get some sense in there now and then?
      • shawnz, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1how does trial software slow down your computer when it's not running?
    • sgbeal, on 10/28/2007, -0/+3"At one point I had 3 HDDs loaded with the three kind of OS..."

      Pussy! Back in the day i had a single 420MB hard drive with Linux, Windows 3.1, *and* OS/2 Warp running on it.
      • PaulRay, on 10/29/2007, -0/+4Phhht! You had a Hard Drive? Well, back in my day, we ran Unix on a bamboo box filled with warm stones and a chipmunk! Those were the days!
        • Kyan, on 10/28/2007, -0/+2Dude, that like totally brings back memories! Did you use the Intel dual-stripe chipmunk or the prototype AMD dotted lines chipmunk?

          I used the latter, but found that I had to keep an extra set of stones simmering on the stove as the AMD chipmunks has more sensitive feet and so you couldn't heat up the stones as much to begin with.

          Later, I created my own hack by sewing some little leather boots for the chipmunk and I haven't looked back since!

          FWIW, "W00t!" come from the sound the chipmunks make when the stones are too hot.
          • shawnz, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1dude, at some point metaphors can go too far.
    • mikestatic1, on 10/28/2007, -1/+3Gee, I can run Windows, Linux and OS X on my Mac. But yeah, those PC's sure are wonderful machines. Do some research, eh? Uninformed opinions are a dime a dozen.
      • logandurand, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1I think the point he was trying to convey is that there is no technical reason you can't run OSX on other hardware, and that Apple only locked it to their hardware to force people to buy their computers.
  • DeFex, on 10/28/2007, -0/+10how about a list of the sound, network and graphics chips which are used by macs. then you could be sure to get the right stuff.that has driver support.
    • lumbergh, on 10/28/2007, -0/+1After all that preparation, you will have saved 200 bucks over just getting a Mac itself, but with way extra frustration. Why not just get a damn Mac? They run windows at full speed, you know...
      • Tias, on 10/29/2007, -0/+2Yeah, but if you do not want the integrated-screen design of the iMac, you really don't have consumer grade alternative besides the Macbook. I want a Mac Pro, I don't deny that. But the starting price for a dual Core 2 Duo 2,66 Mac Pro with 1GB of RAM WITHOUT a monitor is $4053 USD here in Norway - its just not worth it. I mean I love OS X and I run 10.5 on my Macbook Pro, but ***** - $4k is just too much for a desktop