Proof Intel has OS X running on hackintosh machines in its labs

Jonny Evans
|
September 25, 2009
|
Share

Intel offered an interesting tech preview of a new technology, Light Peak optical device interconnect, at IDF this week. The technology enables a computer to drive a greater-than-HD display while saturating an SSD RAID - all over one single cable.

This new tech seems pretty likely to interest any high-end video or graphics professional, and is the kind of interconnect we kind of anticipate will be of use in the future digital home...but what makes this demo interesting is the operating system that's being run on the hackintosh machine - Mac OS X...

 

Seems like poetry to us: After all, we know that Apple had OS X running on Intel processors inside its deepest, darkest, most secret labs for many years before the Intel transition. Now it suggests PC makers may even now have OS X running on their machines, hoping always Apple will one day liberate its operating system from its hardware. And while that seems unlikely, it's nice to know there's always that possibility for Apple to rapidly expand its OS market share.

(Equally, of course, it could be a Mac-based development system used under license to test what the Mac excels at - graphics cabability...)

Via: Engadget

Comments (24)

9to5mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 2:33am

oh no, hope Steve Jobs hasn't deleted Paul S. Otellini from his facebook because of this!

Scott B. (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 2:44am

Wishful Thinking that "Apple will one day liberate its operating system" as quoted above.

It will Never Ever Happen Never.

Having a discussion That Apple will Free Mac OS X OS for everyone and UN-Tie it from it's Hardware is delusional at best and is like trying to have a calm debate on health care with a room full of Right Wing Glen Beck Supporters.

It will Never Happen. ;-)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 3:19am

I'm still waiting to un-tie OS X from Apple hardware, just like I'm waiting to untie my Garmin GPS's software from Garmin hardware to tun it on a Tom Tom.

respect (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 3:26am

So this probably means that there are drivers for Light Peak for OS X, right? As it is optical connection and seems pretty universal, it might replace both FireWire and DisplayPort on future Macs. I would very much welcome that and as it is optical, I guess it would be even possible transfer data in the same cable as power without interference. That would be pretty cool base for connecting Apple Display to a MacBook using a single cable without having to plug MagSafe, USB and DP separately.

NoComment (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 3:43am

Could be a "normal" mac pro board that has been enhanced, and I'm also quite sure that the contract between apple and intel includes the development of new hardware using mac os x.

Khürt Williams (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 4:03am

Or .. it could simply be a stripped down Mac Pro. When I worked in a research lab we sometime took the main boards out of Sun workstation and mounted them in a similar fashion to this demo. It helps illustrate and sell the idea of high-tech.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 4:14am

I'm sure a few years ago Intel said that it preferred using Mac OSX for internal development.

Jonny Evans | September 25, 2009 - 4:22am

Would love to see that quote...

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 6:21am

I think it was simply the guts of a Mac Pro. Could have sworn the board was blue, and personally, I've only seen that with one company.....

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 7:27am

That is a GT-120 card found in macpros, with one DVI and one mini display port. So most likely this is guts of a macpro in a lab.

Tranceaddict420 (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 7:39am

I wonder if Apple will try and sue intel-they sure didn't like me listing my Mini 9 with OS X installed on ebay :)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 27, 2009 - 9:46pm

the probably didn't like it as you were selling it without the original Max OS X installation disks. This is a piracy issue. I recently sold a Mini 9 on eBay with the Mac OS X retail disk and had no problems

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 8:19am

That is a GT-120 card found in macpros, with one DVI and one mini display port. So most likely this is guts of a macpro in a lab.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 10:18am

The Mac operating system is designed to sell Apple hardware; it's where Apple gets its money for research and development. Apple would lose money if it started selling Mac OSX for PC's. Or it would be forced to charge $500 for its legitimate use.

•

The Hackers would continue to steal the cheaper upgrade for Mac only hardware. Many of them are Linux socialists who hate property rights. "Property is theft!" They would say. Or they would contend that they own the software when they actually purchased the right to use it under limited conditions.

•

Part of Apple's market differentiation is to introduce good design, craftsmanship, elegance and panache to computers. Part of that includes the OS. This makes its computers cost more, but you get good value from it or you wouldn't buy. What Apple is doing is to corner the high end consumer market for those users which need very intensive computer uses. Traditionally, these uses are photo manipulation and video creation. But, it can mean an educational setting, too.

This marketing plan runs counter to the Wintel practice of using the cheapest possible components to run the Windows OS. The hackers may rightly hate Windows, but misusing Apple's intellectual property rights is no answer.

•

Iif PC users had a good OS on their side, they wouldn't feel the need to steal Apple's OS and place it on Hackintoshes. One such OS is coming.

•

I have hopes for Google's Chrome OS. It will be running on a 64 bit kernel and have the security which Windows lacks. Google is designing this to keep Microsoft from using it's OS and browser to sabotage them. Microsoft has engaged in underhanded business practices, many times before. Google Chrome will be a lightweight OS designed for running web applications and Google's search engine. But, VMware will be running Windows Applications on it too. So, who needs Microsoft and its expensive software, then? No one.

•

Also, who would need to steal Apple's Mac OS if PC's had an OS which was secure enough and still ran Windows Applications?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 27, 2009 - 9:47am

Best comment so far!

Speaker to Wolves (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 2:47pm

I'm betting the reason they demo'd it on Mac OS X is because Apple has been working with Intel on this. This is right up there on Apple's wish list: consolidate cable clutter down to one wire. Too bad it doesn't carry power too. 8)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 7:48pm

Imagine, it would sync your 128GB iPhone in about 30 seconds. (Light Peak can copy a Blu-ray disc in 17 seconds.)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 26, 2009 - 2:21pm

I thought Apple didn't do Blu-ray.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2009 - 7:50pm

Imagine, it would sync your 128GB iPhone in about 30 seconds. (Light Peak can copy a Blu-ray disc in 17 seconds.)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 26, 2009 - 5:01am

Well, duh... Hackintosh I think not. You think that Intel doesn't build skunkworks/prototype motherboards for Apple and themselves for testing purposes?? PUHLEEEZE. Especially for their own new technologies? This isn't proof of jack sheist.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 26, 2009 - 3:33pm

mine

9to5Mac are Noobs (not verified) | September 27, 2009 - 8:04am

it's been confirmed that this is a macpro board that is just not in a mac pro case.

hardly 'Proof'. stupid article, once again i've wasted time on this site. last time tho.

rg (not verified) | October 02, 2009 - 12:45am

Actually Apple is again through its policies setting itself up to get stomped. Just as the Macintosh lost oodles of developers (including myself) way when back due to its proprietary natures they will do so again.

I realize Apple wants make money on hardware. Dell does, HP does... any PC Manf. who is'nt running red ink does. The fact Apple thinks that HARDWARE is where MONEY is at shows a foolish nature. Hardware $$$ is in VOLUME and LICENSE AGREEMENTS of pre-installed items.

Apple limiting what hardware the OS can effectively be mounted on is simply stupid. If one thinks there is no money in selling the OS, well again... thats stupid. Microsoft doesnt build PC's yet Windows is its flagship product. Essentially Apple is setting themselves into a position to get battered just like they did before. As Bill Gates did, the MONEY is IN THE SOFTWARE.

This facet is already showing its face in the iPhone/iPod. This time the threat is not from Microsoft but instead Google. Its no secret that Google is not fond of Apple's proprietary regime's. Its no secret that Google is pro a more open environment for all technology of this sort.

I'm considering iPhone development for example but the fact Apple wants me to buy their hardware, their software, their development environment and basically lock me down is EXACTLY the same formula by which the Macintosh almost went south for good. If I want develop for Windows I have a variety of options other than Visual Studio. If I want develop for Windows Mobile or Java platforms, lots of options. Apple? Nope. Sorry.

Clearly Apple does not understand that VOLUME is what money is all about in computers/technology. Google does. My guess is Google will end up taking the wind out of the iPhone/iPod within a year, perhaps two. They've already cut a deal with Verizon and they'll happily cut deals with other wireless providers. They have the capability to readily beat Apple at the "wireless devices" game. This will relegate Apple right back to where it was, Mac People are Mac People. To me, doesnt matter, OS is an OS, not a tribesman.

Winning at the technology game does not happen by sheerly having "the best", just as the Mac was a better box than Windows 3.0/3.1, 95/98 etc. based PC's. That DOESNT MATTER. What matters is MARKETSHARE. If Apple indeed thinks that there is no money in OS/X supporting all Intel/AMD (and video cards/this/that) platforms then they will end up in the same boat they ended up in before. There is FAR more money in OS/X supporting these platforms than there is in Apple Selling Hardware. Google knows this, Microsoft has lived this and its just a no brainer.

If iPhone/Pod development could be accomplished on any standard PC hardware after purchase of OS/X and the SDK development would be a boom-time. Apple would be "The Player" in these moble mini-devices. Some say Apple is. But, Google just entered the scene and the folks at Blackberry would say otherwise.

The argument of buy a MacMini etc. for $600 is stoopid. I dont need another computer. I have a Quad-Core Intel based PC. I paid $350 for Win XP Pro years back, I upgraded to Vista Premium and will probably upgrade to Win 7. I'd happily pay that same $400 lets say for OS/X. What makes Apple more money? Me buying OS/X that supports my current computer hardware or selling me a entire box?

Its amazing to me how smart Apple is and always has been in innovation and going a different direction than the mainstream. Its also amazing to me how absolutely market stupid they are resulting in them essentially giving away markets they should rule if they had a marketing brain.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | October 02, 2009 - 1:58pm

Apple has better envision than you have : in a near future, free (not only open source, just free) software will be the rule. They just can't stop sell hardware, this would be suicide. They won't allow installation of Mac OS X on other hardware. They just can't.