

How To: Hackintosh a Dell Mini 9 Into the Ultimate OS X Netbook - rogercosseboom
http://i.gizmodo.com/5156903/how-to-hackintosh-a-dell-mini-9-into-the-ultimate-os-x-netbook

======
jrockway
I really like the Hackintosh movement.

Who ever would have guessed that installing OS X would be harder than
installing Linux, and would have less hardware support? It almost makes me
want to giggle.

(Oh, I love how you have to boot into the CLI. If this were Linux, everyone
would be up in arms about how unintuitive it is. But if you're hacking OS X,
ITS SO SUPER COOL. I am amused.)

~~~
dangrover
That's not quite a fair comparison. Apple isn't presenting OS X as something
that's meant to be easy to install on different computers. So of course
anything you have to hack to install is going to be tricky.

~~~
jrockway
Sure, I know. You still have to muck around with the command-line, and you
don't get full hardware support. People seem perfectly happy to make these
compromises to install OS X, but they will whine and whine if it's Linux.
What's the difference?

Anyway, all I said was that I find this amusing.

~~~
sam_in_nyc
OS X is quite clearly different than your average Linux distro.

~~~
SwellJoe
OS X is quite clearly inferior to your average Linux distro.

Fixed that for you.

~~~
unalone
Joe, you've been around longer than I have, but I still feel like it's worth
saying: nobody likes these OS dick-waving contests. I'm a Mac user, and I'm in
love with my computer, and to me, using it feels like the most magical
experience in the world. Like, I just got Quicksilver at long last, and
suddenly ever hour I figure something out with it that _blows my mind_. But
that's me. I like the things that OS X provides. You like Linux because it
gives you some stuff that _you_ really like. Elsewhere, some guy is using
Windows because _he_ really likes the stuff that _that_ does for him.

I understand the sniping elsewhere, but on Hacker News it's unnecessary, and I
and other users would really like to see people _stop_ saying stupid stuff
like this, and that means people on all sides. We're here because we love
talking about stuff and having debates, and there's _no_ debate here, because
everybody sees their computer in different ways. So can we go back to saying
useful, intelligent things rather than provoking the people on both sides?
(For the record, I'm one of these people: when people get antiMac I flip out,
and that's not a good thing, and I'm trying to stop getting so involved.)

~~~
jrockway
Why is it always the Mac users that get upset over "dick waving contests"?
When someone tells me "Linux sucks" or whatever, I just kind of laugh at them
and move on. But if you say "Macs suck" to a Mac user, you get a long lecture
about the _experience_ and how awesome it is to use a computer like it's 1995
and blah blah blah (or something, I usually zone out after the first
sentence).

Anyway, Mac users (and people that use Linux "to be cool") tend to behave like
members of a religious cult. Instead of providing actual reasons for anything,
they make up some emotional bullshit to justify their strong feelings for
something not worth feeling strongly about.

 _everybody sees their computer in different ways_

Maybe, but it's possible you have settled on something that's acceptable,
rather than "the best". Reminding people of this from time to time is not
necessarily a bad thing.

~~~
unalone
_Why is it always the Mac users that get upset over "dick waving contests"?_

I can't answer for "Mac users", because I'm one person (who, incidentally, has
seen more than his share of Linux users get upset over similar contests), but
here's how it works for me. I take discussion of stuff like this seriously.
When somebody says that an OS sucks, I try to legitimately find out _why_ they
dislike the OS, because very often it teaches me something about my computer
that I didn't know. So I find myself drawn into every fight that goes like
this.

Part of it is because I _hate_ the antiMac backlash that pops up just because
it happens to have a very firm following. I love debating OS with people. It's
a fascinating subject. I love talking with Windows enthusiasts and Ubuntu
enthusiasts: I find out new stuff about their respective systems each time. I
like talking about people who legitimately have criticisms for the Mac,
because oftentimes it makes me go looking for better solutions to problems
I've been having, and that makes me enjoy the experience of using my computer.
And when somebody insults the Mac without saying anything meaningful, that
sets me on edge. It's like somebody who disses Shakespeare or The Wire (two
other things I have passionate feelings about). If they give criticism, it
becomes a discussion. If they insult it needlessly, then it becomes personal,
because this person is dismissing something that to _me_ is a culmination of a
long, long process.

 _But if you say "Macs suck" to a Mac user, you get a long lecture about the
experience and how awesome it is to use a computer like it's 1995 and blah
blah blah (or something, I usually zone out after the first sentence)._

This is exactly the problem: when I use a Mac it _feels_ awesome. Perhaps you
feel the same about Linux, but I _never_ hear Linux users talk like this. When
I open my Mac, I feel a sheer childlike joy at the computer I'm using. Every
time I find out something new, it's this incredible marvel for me. It's this
wonder that somebody else anticipated what I would try to do and made it
_work_ that way. As a result, I'm not just a fan of my Mac, I'm an
_enthusiast_. That's the right word for it. I actively talk about my Mac to
people. I find it incredibly exciting. When I meet other people as
enthusiastic as me, I talk to them about it and it's the thrill of meeting
somebody with a similar taste as me. I'd call it the thrill of discussing art.
That's how I see my Mac, both the hardware and the OS and pretty much every
aspect of Apple. I view the entire thing as a masterful work of art.

Other people don't see computers like this. I'm aware of that. When I open an
OS, the first thing I do is drag the cursor on the desktop to make a selection
of material, and look at what the OS does when I drag over the initial point.
On Windows the line disappears; on Ubuntu the line becomes 1px; on a Mac, with
a 3px width the entire selector box moves over 2px as you drag, so that the
line on the one side replaces the line on the other side as the boundary.
That's the level of introspection I focus on my computer - and I _talk_ about
it, too! I was thrilled when I saw that. To me, there's a visual poetry to
that one simple action, to the mindset that decided on that course of action.
That's a feature, to me. That's something that I find wanting in other
operating systems.

Do you at least comprehend that mindset? I understand why you Linux users like
Linux. Some mindsets like picking things apart and tinkering with them. I, on
the other hand, look for products of human creation. I look for a powerful
controlling mind determining everything. I call that the "artist" mindset
because every artist I meet has it. It's the feeling you get when you
understand that everything you do ought to be plastered with your personality,
ought to work according to your mind, and when you start to appreciate the
results of other people's minds. When I use my Mac, I _don't_ see it as a
tool. I don't open it with the mindset that this is built just to let me do
things. I look at it as an experience to be had. Every small little detail is
a part of that experience.

It's why Mac users photograph and document the process of their opening their
cases for the first time. Why they gossip about the welcoming video. Why they
watch the keynotes. It's why _I_ watched the keynotes when I _wasn't_ a Mac
user yet. It's the thrill of exhibition. My Mac is a gallery, not just of my
own work but of the incredible work that went into making this computer what
it is.

 _Instead of providing actual reasons for anything, they make up some
emotional bullshit to justify their strong feelings for something not worth
feeling strongly about._

It's because they _feel_ that. It's not bullshit. I could take your need to
tinker, to customize your computer, and call that bullshit, and I would be
just as wrong. "What sort of dumb motherfucker wants to type shit into a
terminal? Who the fuck cares about programming languages if you can do
anything with pretty much one if you know the basic commands? What sort of
stupid turd would want to use an application library or think about window
management?" But I don't say that, because I understand that different people
see different things in their computers. The reason I get so pissed off at
people who blindly attack the Mac - as you do every time you post anything OS-
related, from what I've read - is that you don't seem to have that similar
comprehension.

When I talk about stuff I like, I don't talk about technical details. You
might call it cultlike, or you might call it simple emotional response. (Last
time I checked, emotion was natural.) Say I'm explaining to you why I like
Arrested Development. I could say, "There's a running arc of a joke between
episodes 1.01 and 1.03, there are several cleverly twisted stereotypical
characters, and the concept of an overall narrator allows for certain clever
jokes to be made." Or I could say, "You _have_ to see it. It's seriously the
funniest show I've ever seen. I can't even explain to you how wonderful it
is." And if you were to say, without having seen much of Arrested Development,
something along the lines of "Arrested Development sucks, 2 and a half men is
better," my initial reaction WOULDN'T be the same as if the position was
reversed, because with Arrested Development I've devoted a considerable amount
of time to something that I consider is worth an extended intellectual effort
on my part. Damn right I'm going to get pissed off, because this represents a
valueset that I have, and if you insult this then you're insulting my
standards. (Arguing that there are no standards at all, or that standards
aren't worth passion, is disgusting.)

 _Maybe, but it's possible you have settled on something that's acceptable,
rather than "the best"._

No. Here's the problem with that. I've used everything. I've run varieties of
Linux. I've used Windows XP and Windows Vista. I've tried everything I could
get my hands on. After that, after years of painstaking research, I settled on
the Mac as the clear victor in every way that matters for me. I know my Mac
in-and-out. I know all the keyboard shortcuts, the various drag-n-drop
effects, the menubars and how they're laid out. In my mind, the design of the
Mac is as close to perfection as any computer's had, and it continues to
improve. I have nitpicks, absolutely, and I'm vocal about how irritating those
small little things are, but that's like nitpicking the first line of Lindsay
Bluth on the pilot episode of Arrested Development. Yeah, I'll say I "really
dislike" that line, but it only stands out because the rest of the series is
so close to perfection. So I might gripe because right now, my Command-
Control-D is broken and I don't know what's breaking it, but the fact remains
that C-C-D is a command that no other operating system has, and that it does
something incredibly elegantly, and that my not having that doesn't make my
Mac less than the very best, because it absolutely is.

If you want to tell me my Mac isn't perfect, ready your list of critiques.
I've got several virtual Linux boxes running, and if need be I'll open them up
and point out specific things with screenshots to explain what I mean, because
this is what I do. I compare operating systems and software with a
ridiculously anal eye. I do that to everybody. I fight with people over things
that are very, very good, because I think they could be better. And if you
want to join in on that debate, then you have to be prepared to do the same,
otherwise Mac users _will_ get pissed off. A lot of us spend this incredible
effort constantly because it's our passion. People who dismiss the stuff that
we love without any sort of thought really, really piss us off. The reason is
this: you see your computer as a tool, some efficiency system. But us? The
hardcore Mac users? We see it as an essential part of living.

~~~
pavelludiq
Last time I had a debate with you, I forgot to tell you that you were crazy :D
That's a good thing. I'm crazy too.

I can understand all that you have said

But still, if we look at macs as pieces of art, and get a 40 years old soviet
radio, make it in to a pc box, stuff it with hardware, install OSX on it, that
would still kick ass. Is that equal to taking the Mona Lisa, writing a
graffiti tag on it, and hanging it upside down in your living room, using duck
tape? Probably, but its still awesome! You see, chaos is sometimes also an
art, not as good art as perfection, but still its pretty cool.

ps.
[http://www.kaldata.com/articles.php?action=show&showarti...](http://www.kaldata.com/articles.php?action=show&showarticle=71)
It runs windows, but it's still super awesome.(Bulgarian language)

------
voidpointer
All whining about how running OSX on non-apple hardware ruins the "Apple
Expiience"... Isn't this supposed for "love" of OS X cannibalizing the exact
same thing it is evangelizing?

This is based on the assumption that Apple is able to develop a superior
operating system because they can support the effort with hardware sales. If
everyone would install their copy of OSX on hardware where Apple doesn't make
money, how can they continue to improve OSX?

They might start to license the "right" to run OSX o hardware manufacturers
but that would get them into the same compatibility hell Microsoft has gotten
themselves into. I can very well understand how they don't want to get into
that spot.

It's a nice pass-time and I don't think it hurts anyone given the small scale
on which this is happening. Plus it may keep the folks in Cupertino on their
toes for coming up with better hardware in the future.

Furthermore, as for the Linux comparisons. This clearly shows how Linux' most
glaring deficiency is the lack of a consistent UI experience. There is a
heavily fragmented mess bolted on top of dear old X11. It works - sort of -
and as long as you stay within your chosen camp (Gnome, KDE...) you might not
be off too bad. Sooner or later when you need other applications you'll get
into toolkit hell.

------
pstinnett
Has anyone here done this? I'm thinking of buying either a Mini 9 or Mini 12
with my tax refund and installing OS X. Curious to know what you think / how
speedy it is.

~~~
Zev
Not very well. Its maxed at 1gb ram, and has a GMA 950 (Apple doesn't even
sell these anymore, its not a good onboard gfx card)

And an Atom at 1.33GHz won't be well. 1.6GHz barely cuts it with the Air.

~~~
minsight
The Dell is sold with a maximum of 1gb of RAM, but it can be upgraded to 2
gigs for OSes that aren't limited during compilation to only deal with 1gig
(hint: OSX). I know this is true, because I spent thirty bucks and upgraded
mine today. It works well.

~~~
nfg
> OSes that aren't limited during compilation to only deal with 1gig (hint:
> OSX)

What do you mean by this? There is no 1GB memory limit in OS X.

~~~
minsight
Indeed, but the versions of XP and Linux that you get from netbook vendors ARE
limited to 1 GB.

~~~
eli
That's a _licensing_ requirement from Microsoft to avoid the "XP Tax." It's
not the case if you get Linux and, anyway, is not a technical requirement.

~~~
minsight
Nobody said it was a technical requirement. Just that they were "limited". The
net result is that netbook manufacturers are selling machines that don't live
up to the capabilities of the hardware or the OSes. There are ways around
them, and recompiling linux kernels and installing Mac OS are just two of
them.

------
critic
I wonder if such an installation would survive any software updates from
Apple. Would Apple in general be able to tell you are not running this on
genuine Apple hardware?

~~~
pertplus
Quote from the article: "and on top of that you'll run into all kinds of
problems should you ever want to upgrade your OS or software via Software
Update."

~~~
critic
This is if you DON'T follow the instructions in the article. I'm asking about
what happens if you do.

~~~
allenbrunson
it is never completely safe to use software update on a hackintosh. certain
files have been hacked to make it work. what if apple sends down a newer
version of one of those files, undoing your hacks?

~~~
redrobot5050
If you're smart you'll use the shareware package inspector, Paranoia, to snoop
through the packages and tell you what the update's really doing before
applying it.

Most software updates (application updates / security updates /
Safari+iTunes+QuickTime will work fine. Its the 10.5.X updates that might
break something.

------
trezor
I've been looking into getting a simple Hakcintosh environment to fool around
with, and this made me check for how well Hackintosh is supported on the EEE.

<http://tigeroneeepc.wikispaces.com/working>

I guess I'm not going to bother.

~~~
redrobot5050
Maybe the EEE isn't the way to go. The MSI Wind Netbook is the de facto
hackintosh. So much that people are selling it as a "Macbook Nano" on Ebay.

------
omouse
Where are the Apple fanboys whining about the ruining of the Apple
"experience"?

~~~
palish
Reddit.

------
pavelludiq
Anything mac fans say about this might be true, but irrelevant. OS X is better
on macs than on pc's, macs are better computers, they feel better, they look
better, this IS illegal, etc. But the problem is with choice. Choice is good.
And some of us LIKE Dells, imagine that.

~~~
unalone
Notice the problems that're being stated about hardware failure. You don't get
that on Macs because Apple controls exactly what hardware gets used on their
computer. That means that their developers can focus on other cool things
instead.

In the end, Apple chooses whether or not we have a choice. With _their
product_ the best choices are they ones they allow. Outside of that, the
choice is between Mac and some other operating system.

