Intel's new Sandy Bridge processors hacked to run Apple's Mac OS X

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 69
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Slightly off topic but I wonder if the next generation MBPs will have 1 and 2 TB drives as a BTO or even as a post sale upgrade? I really need more than the .5 TB that is standard in my MBP i7 but Apple politely told me that if I upgrade myself using a 3rd party larger drive I will invalidate my warranty as the late 2010 models are NOT user upgradeable where HDs are concerned unlike earlier MBPs (and I assume I'd screw the extended warranty too). Meanwhile Apple I am told have nothing larger than a .5 TB drive! Anyone know a way around this please tell me.



    my guess no



    the reviews i've read have cheapo SB laptops with 17" screens meeting or beating the 13"MBP in terms of battery life. even with Flash. battery life is one of SJ's fetishes along with thin.



    if i had to guess, then every Apple laptop going forward will only have SSD's. it will keep apple on top in terms of battery life. they can make thinner laptops. and SSD's are expensive which means they can keep the same price points.
  • Reply 22 of 69
    Hmm, putting the 15-month old Core2Duo on eBay looks tempting.
  • Reply 23 of 69
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    When at home office I have many TBs of externals available and a MacPro with all bays full of 2TBs so I guess I am used to having elbow room . I find just having my current Aperture library, iLife and iTunes plus all my apps (as in those I use a lot) which includes FCPro Studio take up 80% of the .5TB so I would love to have at least a 1TB of internal standard storage. I don't need SSD speeds for my MBP. I simply had not realized there was no 1TB or higher internal for the MBP till I strolled into an Apple Store in Boston a few days ago.



    The HDD is one of the few things you can replace on your own without voiding the warranty. Apple wars that if you damage something whilst changing it it could void your warranty, but that?s par for the course. They even offer PDF instructions on their support pages.
    PS: 12.5mm HDDs will fit in the unibody MBP chassis, just make sure the drive themselves are supported in SW. There were some firmware issues that made at least one 1TB drive not perform correctly.
  • Reply 24 of 69
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,471member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    The HDD is one of the few things you can replace on your own without voiding the warranty. Apple wars that if you damage something whilst changing it it could void your warranty, but that’s par for the course. They even offer PDF instructions on their support pages.
    PS: 12.5mm HDDs will fit in the unibody MBP chassis, just make sure the drive themselves are supported in SW. There were some firmware issues that made at least one 1TB drive not perform correctly.



    Unfortunately in the very latest MBPs the case if the unibody has changed dramatically. There is no longer a trap door for access to the battery and HD you have to remove the entire base and only the battery and RAM are user replaceable items, not the HD now. I was of the same understanding as you and was quite taken aback over this change which I had totally missed prior to purchasing. Unless of course the genius in the Apple store was totally wrong which isn't without possibility I guess! I will call Apple to verify ... thanks for the life line



    edit: I see that that was the PDF for the newest version! Looks like it is a user job! Awesome.
  • Reply 25 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akf2000 View Post


    I never understand how these people manage to do this without the source code.



    As a whole, OS X is very easy to hack: it is pretty tolerant with modifications, very modular and ready to run kexts that were compiled out of linux drivers. There is really not that much to it if you have the right kexts for the right hardware.
  • Reply 26 of 69
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Unfortunately in the very latest MBPs the case if the unibody has changed dramatically. There is no longer a trap door for access to the battery and HD you have to remove the entire base and only the battery and RAM are user replaceable items, not the HD now. I was of the same understanding as you and was quite taken aback over this change which I had totally missed prior to purchasing. Unless of course the genius in the Apple store was totally wrong which isn't without possibility I guess! I will call Apple to verify ... thanks for the life line



    That manual I linked to from Apple on how to replace the HDD is from a mid-2010 MBP. They walk you through removing the bottom cover of you MBP, what tools you?ll need, etc.
  • Reply 27 of 69
    ssquirrelssquirrel Posts: 1,196member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    the reviews i've read have cheapo SB laptops with 17" screens meeting or beating the 13"MBP in terms of battery life. even with Flash. battery life is one of SJ's fetishes along with thin.



    if i had to guess, then every Apple laptop going forward will only have SSD's. it will keep apple on top in terms of battery life. they can make thinner laptops. and SSD's are expensive which means they can keep the same price points.



    I'd wager that if we take a look at how the c2d MBP was stacking up against similar WIndows systems running the same chips, we'll see a simlar jump in battery life. OS X has proven itself more power efficient than Windows time and again, so we'll most likely see new MBPs w/even better battery life.



    Switching the entire MBP lineup to SSD and possibly removing the optical drive as well will mean that much more space for battery and/or discrete video card for their Optimus-esque switching technology. My guess would be that the top end 15" and all 17" MBPs would have the discrete card and switching tech. 13" would be just SB APUs, the lowend 15" would be SB only as well.
  • Reply 28 of 69
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akf2000 View Post


    I never understand how these people manage to do this without the source code.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sheff View Post


    A poopton of trial and error? Maybe an emulator of some sort? I'm not strong in coding, but that is how it is generally done in science if you don't know how the whole works, but know how some parts of it work.



    They DO have the source code. The Darwin layer is open source. One you have that running the rest of OS X pretty much just sits on top. Drivers can complicate that a bit, but for the most part the heavy work is all in the open sourced part.
  • Reply 29 of 69
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,471member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    That manual I linked to from Apple on how to replace the HDD is from a mid-2010 MBP. They walk you through removing the bottom cover of you MBP, what tools you’ll need, etc.



    Yep realized that after a while



    Now I just need to source a 1 or 2 TB drive ...



    update: Apple confirm it is OK to add a 3rd party HD and the genius was in fact not OK LOL My guess he was confused by egg nog and thinking of the battery which is NOT a useable upgrade believe it or not.
  • Reply 30 of 69
    akf2000akf2000 Posts: 223member
    Interesting thread, thanks for the replies to my question earlier.
  • Reply 31 of 69
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,471member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akf2000 View Post


    I never understand how these people manage to do this without the source code.



    I wonder why they even bother but I guess it's fun to try



    Humble apologies for off track thread.
  • Reply 32 of 69
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 33 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post


    thats what i used to think. let's see, my 17" mbp with 4gig ram and 2.66 c2d cost over 4 thousand. divide by 3 and get my cost per year.



    I paid $2k for my ancient dual G5 in early 2004. I'm still using it - it runs rather well. Divide $2k by 7, and life is pretty good on my end, even if I added on the $130 or so I paid for the 10.5 upgrade disks.



    (...aren't anecdotes fun? Mine happens to be true, BTW.)
  • Reply 34 of 69
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    update: Apple confirm it is OK to add a 3rd party HD and the genius was in fact not OK LOL My guess he was confused by egg nog and thinking of the battery which is NOT a useable upgrade believe it or not.



    I find that internet forums are much better at answering such questions. MacOSXHints.com is great for troubleshooting and DIYer questions.
  • Reply 35 of 69
    8870 in GB? I just got an 11710 in my machine from my sig...QC Xeons are very underrated!



    "Platform: Mac OS X x86 (64-bit)

    Compiler: GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5490)

    Operating System: Mac OS X 10.6.5 (Build 10H574)

    Model: Empire1,1

    Motherboard: Apple Computer, Inc. Mac-F4208DC8 PCB Version

    Processor: Genuine Intel(R) CPU @ 2.66GHz

    Processor ID: GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 15 Stepping 5

    Logical Processors: 8

    Physical Processors: 2

    Processor Frequency: 3.09 GHz

    L1 Instruction Cache: 32.0 KB

    L1 Data Cache: 32.0 KB

    L2 Cache: 4.00 MB

    L3 Cache: 0.00 B

    Bus Frequency: 1.33 GHz

    Memory: 12.0 GB

    Memory Type: 667 MHz DDR2 FB-DIMM

    SIMD: 1

    BIOS: Apple Computer, Inc. EE16.003C.B15

    Processor Model: Intel

    Processor Cores: 8



    Integer (Score: 12006)

    Blowfish single-threaded scalar -- 1956, , 85.9 MB/sec

    Blowfish multi-threaded scalar -- 16602, , 680.3 MB/sec

    Text Compress single-threaded scalar -- 2685, , 8.59 MB/sec

    Text Compress multi-threaded scalar -- 19836, , 65.1 MB/sec

    Text Decompress single-threaded scalar -- 2351, , 9.66 MB/sec

    Text Decompress multi-threaded scalar -- 18940, , 75.5 MB/sec

    Image Compress single-threaded scalar -- 2566, , 21.2 Mpixels/sec

    Image Compress multi-threaded scalar -- 20059, , 168.8 Mpixels/sec

    Image Decompress single-threaded scalar -- 2477, , 41.6 Mpixels/sec

    Image Decompress multi-threaded scalar -- 16497, , 269.2 Mpixels/sec

    Lua single-threaded scalar -- 4475, , 1.72 Mnodes/sec

    Lua multi-threaded scalar -- 35632, , 13.7 Mnodes/sec



    Floating Point (Score: 19586)

    Mandelbrot single-threaded scalar -- 2238, , 1.49 Gflops

    Mandelbrot multi-threaded scalar -- 18072, , 11.8 Gflops

    Dot Product single-threaded scalar -- 4056, , 1.96 Gflops

    Dot Product multi-threaded scalar -- 34074, , 15.5 Gflops

    Dot Product single-threaded vector -- 3151, , 3.78 Gflops

    Dot Product multi-threaded vector -- 28989, , 30.1 Gflops

    LU Decomposition single-threaded scalar -- 1512, , 1.35 Gflops

    LU Decomposition multi-threaded scalar -- 15777, , 13.8 Gflops

    Primality Test single-threaded scalar -- 5583, , 833.9 Mflops

    Primality Test multi-threaded scalar -- 33585, , 6.23 Gflops

    Sharpen Image single-threaded scalar -- 6371, , 14.9 Mpixels/sec

    Sharpen Image multi-threaded scalar -- 50864, , 117.2 Mpixels/sec

    Blur Image single-threaded scalar -- 7855, , 6.22 Mpixels/sec

    Blur Image multi-threaded scalar -- 62084, , 48.8 Mpixels/sec



    Memory (Score: 2281)

    Read Sequential single-threaded scalar -- 2468, , 3.02 GB/sec

    Write Sequential single-threaded scalar -- 2944, , 2.01 GB/sec

    Stdlib Allocate single-threaded scalar -- 2837, , 10.6 Mallocs/sec

    Stdlib Write single-threaded scalar -- 1568, , 3.25 GB/sec

    Stdlib Copy single-threaded scalar -- 1591, , 1.64 GB/sec



    Stream (Score: 1973)

    Stream Copy single-threaded scalar -- 1828, , 2.50 GB/sec

    Stream Copy single-threaded vector -- 2170, , 2.81 GB/sec

    Stream Scale single-threaded scalar -- 1948, , 2.53 GB/sec

    Stream Scale single-threaded vector -- 1969, , 2.66 GB/sec

    Stream Add single-threaded scalar -- 1891, , 2.86 GB/sec

    Stream Add single-threaded vector -- 2273, , 3.16 GB/sec

    Stream Triad single-threaded scalar -- 2029, , 2.80 GB/sec

    Stream Triad single-threaded vector -- 1682, , 3.15 GB/sec"
  • Reply 36 of 69
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post


    I'd wager that if we take a look at how the c2d MBP was stacking up against similar WIndows systems running the same chips, we'll see a simlar jump in battery life. OS X has proven itself more power efficient than Windows time and again, so we'll most likely see new MBPs w/even better battery life.



    Switching the entire MBP lineup to SSD and possibly removing the optical drive as well will mean that much more space for battery and/or discrete video card for their Optimus-esque switching technology. My guess would be that the top end 15" and all 17" MBPs would have the discrete card and switching tech. 13" would be just SB APUs, the lowend 15" would be SB only as well.



    if the MBP gets 9 hours life compared to say 6 hours for a Wintel laptop 1/2 to 1/3 the price it may be enough for a lot of people to not buy a MBP
  • Reply 37 of 69
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post


    Switching the entire MBP lineup to SSD and possibly removing the optical drive as well will mean that much more space for battery and/or discrete video card for their Optimus-esque switching technology. My guess would be that the top end 15" and all 17" MBPs would have the discrete card and switching tech. 13" would be just SB APUs, the lowend 15" would be SB only as well.



    You?re playing my song.
  • Reply 38 of 69
    bwikbwik Posts: 564member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nkhm View Post


    Safari uses webkit, which is at the core of the operating system, Safari updates have always required a restart. I suspect you don't understand as much about computing as your rant would have us believe. My 24" iMacs are running snow leopard, and are performing incredibly well - best check your system and see what you've done to mess it up.



    Safari is a ram hog. My 4GB machine frequently runs low. Granted, it can be expanded, but still.
  • Reply 39 of 69
    ratsgratsg Posts: 53member
    That is the deal. They do have the source code. You can download it yourself. The majority of OS X is opensourced as darwin. The Aqua based GUI is the primary item that Apple has kept locked up.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akf2000 View Post


    I never understand how these people manage to do this without the source code.



  • Reply 40 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post


    thats what i used to think. let's see, my 17" mbp with 4gig ram and 2.66 c2d cost over 4 thousand. divide by 3 and get my cost per year. uggh.

    and my 24" imac. cost 3 thousand all said. runs like sh*t with 10.5.6 compared to my dell with ubuntu.

    os x is the new windows. bloated and a pain. even itunes and safari updates are requiring a reboot now. stupid.



    Rubbish, plain and simple rubbish.
Sign In or Register to comment.