You still get to run Windows as normal and have Linux running without messing around or playing with display servers, drivers and the like.
I know Linux has this reputation for being difficult to use, no hardware support, etc and if this were 2009 I might agree with that. However, Linux couldn’t be easier to use right now.
Wayland works fine. Pipewire? My speakers on the laptop work good and plugged into a dock with conventional speakers works fine.
I’ve seen this repeated over and over and I don’t believe people are lying, I’m sure some have had the experience recently but I’d like to know what hardware they’re using.
The only reason I can see to use Windows is software support for something proprietary.
And if you care about dedicated graphics, especially Nvidia, those drivers have a very different level of support for Windows.
If you care about obscure cases, I have some really cheap Asus laptop (almost a netbook) where Linux mostly works, but the fans stop spinning any time it wakes from sleep, until the next reboot. Somehow not an issue in Windows.
That's the problematic part to me personally. I want a HDPI convertible/tablet form factor, that means no DELL, and linux support is currently not an option.
I had high hopes for the 12" Framework, but again it's resolution is 1200p, which is so much less than a Surface Pro for instance.
Same goes for WiFi. Good luck trying to get WiFi6 to work properly, ignoring the fact that you have to go out of your way to find an adapter that will even work in linux.
Who does that? Not Linux users at least as all drivers are usually shipped by the distro. If my memory is correct, this is on an OS built at Redmond that devices used to come shipped with a cdrom full of drivers because the OS didn't care providing them.
There is a certain attraction to the Linux being safely contained but I'm just not getting it at all. I don't want my Linux in a container, I want to live there.
So basically that's why I now use macOS, because it doesn't have to use hacks like WSL in order to be like Linux, it just already is Unix.
Also in general I tend to find that Apple is more detail-oriented than Microsoft, they are probably autistic as fuck and that is a very good thing. (in my opinion)
I'm not yet fully happy with the state of affairs on desktop Linux, although GNOME is to a degree shaping up to a decent experience (partly by copying macOS, though). Their trackpad support is far better than Windows, for example.
If my knowledge is up to date, you still have to run a linux VM (hidden behind whatever tool you are using) to run linux containers right?
And work well it did. Incredibly well actually. But now the doors are closing. macOS will soon be ARM/Silicon only and that will be the end of a Hackintosh era. That's the reason I'm not willing to invest the time or energy to do the same again.
Hopefully sometime another era of Hackintoshers will find a way to make macOS run on non-Apple ARM hardware. Perhaps it's already happening? :)
After 20 years of Hackintosh and Apple hardware I eventually lost hope in Apple due to their unsustainable practices (mostly unserviceable and unupgradeable soldered memory and storage) and moved on to Linux (https://getaurora.dev/). Couldn't be happier with KDE Plasma.
Just depends on your priorities and what you value I guess.
I'm not on board with the iOSification of macOS either. IMO, it's has gotten progressively worse with every version since Snow Leopard. Atomic Fedora distros and KDE Plasma has made me look forward to upgrades again (and yeah, they happen automatically in the background).
With macOS I just stuck around as long as I could knowing that there'd be no upsides to getting the next macOS release.
Eventually I went back to debian linux after a main disk failure and kept the machine going a few years longer by progressively lightening the software load, from gnome -> xfce -> lxde, but the time came when it was just too slow to browse any more, and it had to be retired.
Need it be so ? There will be a "final" version for Intel and it might have a lifetime on non-Apple HW of many years.
Do you have a source/evidence for this claim (other than a reddit comment)? Apple's processors are (should be) not only fully compliant with the ARM64 ISA (AArch64), but Apple actively contributes to defining new revisions of the ISA.
It's true that M series has had some private extensions. eg: the TSO memory model to support Rosetta, and the AMX matrix co-processor. But that doesn't mean they aren't fully compliant with the ISA. And in any case, as of the M4 CPU, Apple have reportedly replaced AMX with the new, official ARM SME matrix instructions anyway.
1: https://www.pcworld.com/article/410627/why-linux-pioneer-lin...
For some people, this may math out. But it's probably easier to worry less about buying a new laptop every once in a while, and more about driving a bit less or getting a more efficient car.
[1] https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/notebooks/14-... [2] https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calc...
And 20% of the cost is the electricity to use the product, so that should be discounted if you’re comparing buying new to reusing an older computer, and you should compare the power efficiency.
Assuming an average four year replacement cycle (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1021171/united-states-el...) and excluding use phase power use, we can napkin math annualize it to 243 * 0.8 / 4 = 48.6 kg co2E ~= 5.5 gallons of gas per year ~= 1.2% of average annual passenger car gas consumption.
Which is about an hour's walk, or about twenty minutes cycling.
But the title is more of a click bait rather than backing that claim.
The power source I guess is also a factor, since newer Macs are much more power efficient than Intel days.
Since 2016, Apple made their machines less "sustainable" in the sense of upgradability (my MacBook Air 2013 was borderline with 8GB of RAM and ended with 2TB hdd), I'm happy the new Mac minis are also going that "hackable" direction.
Anyway, Software wise, the "Hackintosh" scene is also valuable for true macOS users just as enabling Windows 11 on unsupported hardware, you can get up to Sequoia with running those custom EFIs.
According to the fine print, the lifecycle of the computer is determined by some ISO standards and I spent a good 10 minutes searching the web to determine a ballpark figure for this (3 years? 5 years? 10 years?) and came up completely empty.
[1] https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/desktops/Mac_...
---
Are you sure your 68000 machine had 32Gb of ram? If memory serves me well it was most likely 32 Mb.
68020 has a 32 bit address space, so the maximum RAM it can handle is 4Gb
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/94189/i...
If you really care about forced obsolescence, refuse to upgrade and push back strongly whenever you can against the wildly wasteful web and its effective browser monopoly. Write and prefer native code. Add drivers for hardware that's "no longer supported". What does this have to do with Hackintoshing? No idea.
What does that mean (like what should one do to actually follow what you're saying?) I hate how the web is progressing, but there's nothing I can do to stop it. I use the free-est browser I can use while still being able to access most stuff (Firefox), I use old computers (my newest machine is from 2018 which I just bought second-hand a few months ago), and I use open source OSes (OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Linux).
Anyway, that person has already directly "refused to upgrade" by using existing hardware, so I'm not sure what you're actually criticizing. Hackintoshing happens to be the way they reached this goal, and they made a blog post about it. Nothing wrong with that.
And since you mentioned wasteful web, medium.com is a prime example of that.
The answer is a pleasing 1337 miles (198kg lifetime CO2 of the macbook / 148g mile CO2 average for the 2011 Prius).
This is pretty surprising. I’d always thought laptop purchases had a much higher impact than an average couple of months of driving.
148g CO2/mile is ~45mpg using 95 octane E10.
still surprised ?
~122g/km at stated 45MPG.
oh also i remember why i mentioned the water wheel. this doesn't take into account the manufacture of the car, nor any other "externalities" and that's fine, but when you say 148g/mile it sounds like that's all included.
Perhaps you meant it as a gotcha, and if so, ensure your value is correct, as i don't think it was. 197 if ~8900g/gallon of gasoline is correct. I couldn't get a quick answer to if RON 95 is fundamentally different than say 91 octane in the US, which some pages assures me means the same thing. If so, it is closer to 200 than 150 grams per mile.
> In 2025 the question is: why Hackintosh? And after being in the different communities for so long and observing reasons people install Hackintosh they are:
the way they construct sentences is so distinctly recognizable: [And after [being in [the different communities] for so long] and observing [reasons people [install Hackintosh]] they are:]
It's like they use Scratch blocks to assemble their language. It's hard to explain, but you can know it when you see it.
I also had a MacPro5,1 I used extra long, thanks to some of the tooling mentioned here. Great machine. But seeing how it used 200W and I had to buy a new RX580 for it to be usable, idk if that really helped the environment, nor was that the reason I had it.
1) If you can hack a current version of macOS to run on non Apple hardware, you can probably also hack a current version of macOS to run on older Apple hardware (see OpenCore Legacy Patcher). 2) Support for macOS on x86 hardware will be discontinued in the not so distant future, putting Hackintoshes into the same category as old x86 Apple hardware.
It's worked well so far. I will keep using it, and then eventually perhaps pick up another refurbished machine when it finally comes time to replace it.
