It’s time for an official ‘Hackintosh’

“When was the las time Apple upgraded the Mac Pro launched back in 2013? It’s a trick question,” Wil Gomez writes for Mac360. “The new generation Mac Pro has never had an upgrade. Ever. Never.”

“What does that mean? Either Apple is preparing 2017 to become the Mother of all Upgrade Years [or] the handwriting is clearly on the wall,” Gomez writes. “[That] the Mac is an appliance once again, and Apple does not care about the so-called professional market at all. If that’s the case, then a case can be made that it’s time for an official ‘Hackintosh.’”

“If Apple is planning to shutter professional level Macs,” Gomez writes, “I would appreciate an official Hackintosh that could work under specific hardware requirements from Apple. I’m not holding my breath.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: When
Pink Floyd Animals - Algie the pig


  1. never officially.

    can already be had unofficially with way way way more power per dollar value.

    the one on my desk runs circles around any mac available now (including the new macbook “pros”) and it cost less then $2500 in parts.

    apple hardware is dead to me.

  2. The very suggestion of an official Hackintosh is enough to awaken dark, decrepit old nightmares from the past. Been there, suffered that.

    Let’s do it some more! Any cattle prod applied to Apple’s backside regarding Macs is a good cattle prod.

      1. @Almux: Quick little side note to your non sequitur: “homosexual” is an adjective, not a noun. It isn’t appropriate to pluralize it, unless you are deliberately trying to dehumanize the subject, which I don’t believe you intended to do.

  3. I love how these guys constantly try to force the MS business model onto Apple. Their ENTIRE business model was an accident of history, and an aberration. They even admit this themselves now since they’re selling their own branded hardware. Apple’s way is the right way, control the whole widget from top to bottom, and why they are such a strong company. Having standard connectors that work between operating systems is where the only “commodity” common ground should be, i.e. Every machine should be able to talk to one another without issues (which basically happens now because of standard networking protocols and Remote Desktop become mainstream with something like parallels access), but commoditzing macOS ala the “clone” era is not the right way to go. Those of us who remember that and cringe would never approve of that.

    1. The Clone era did not work for one simple reason: The clone manufacturers went after Apple’s installed base rather than after new customers. It was much easier to sell less expensive (and in some cases *cheaper*) boxes with a certified MacOS on them to people and organizations already using Macs than to go out and find new customers.

      Thus the clone manufacturers stole customers from Apple, which only hurt Apple’s bottom line even more. Apple ended up selling software licenses for MacOS to the clone makers for less than the projected profit on Apple Mac hardware (which included MacOS).

      If in 1994 Apple had stopped all hardware sales and just became a software house, Apple might have made the transition to working with clone manufacturers. We might have had a viable version of Pink and then Red, and maybe a better version of QuickTime, etc. But, we would not have the Apple we have today.

      If Apple does go the approved Hacintosh route, I hope the specify the hell out of it and require rigorous testing and require those manufacturers to have top notch support. Anyone that does not meet all three is extremely publicly dropped from the program.

      I hope Apple wakes up and does a truly leading edge Mac Pro late spring or early summer of this year. I’m not confident they will, but I am very hopeful. If not, by fall I may be building a Hacintosh myself, and this from someone who has used only Apple products in their home (Apples in late 70s & early 80s and Macs since 1984) with predominantly Macs in the workspaces I control.

      1. You’d be right if Microsoft wasn’t the only company to be able to pull of that strategy. They are the exception not the rule. In general consumer electronics and computer companies the ones that control everything from the ground up do well. (Sony, Apple, Microsoft w/Xbox & new beaded hardware, etc…)

        The reason the clones failed wasn’t because they went after Apple’s core business, but because at the time the macOS wasn’t viable outside of Apple’s own hardware, and Macs have never been seen as a “commodity” piece of hardware. So people didn’t trust a Motorola or PowerMax Mac simply because it didn’t have an Apple logo on it, and therefore it was a self defeating problem.

        Let’s look at the modern example of the Microsoft model, android: yes, it’s on a majority of smartphones, but it has security issues, upgrade issues, and stability issues. Despite all of that, it’s on 80% of all smartphones on earth. But! (And this is a big but) none of those companies make any real money since Apple takes 95% of the profits for the entire industry. This automatically makes the greater share OS economically un-viable, and is only sustainable because the parent company license it for free. However, when that parent company starts releasing its own hardware because it’s licensees have corrupted the system? It’s an admission that they are on the wrong track.

        The Microsoft model isn’t what companies should try to do, they should do the opposite, since ALL of Microsoft’s OS business is directly related to having locked down contracts with DOS peddlers, and not anything resembling actual market success.

        1. I used one of these clone Mac about 20 years ago or so. Though it was a sponsors lean (and therefore ignored the price of it) it was a tremendous good workstation (200mhz and much Mo RAM)!

    2. Only works if you sell the motherfucking widget. When all you sell is a four year old trash can, a four year old laptop glued to the back of an LCD screen and a hockey puck loaded lightly filled with hardware that is the toast of 2012 you have a serious fucking problem. If Tim isn’t interested in selling mac desktops, fine, let someone else sell the goddamned thing.

  4. I still like the ancient Power Mac G4 looks, plus, they are a little smaller.

    Wouldn’t mind seeing someone publish the specs using one of those old boxes along with the necessary modifications.

    Power Ryzen G4/1700, $2,500. (G4s on eBay for under $100.)

    Multiple Ryzen 7 1800X, with 8 cores, each priced at $499

    Could a similarly configured Ryzen G4 hold it’s own against a:
    Mac Pro with
    2.7GHz 12-core with 30MB of L3 cache
    64GB (4x16GB) of 1866MHz DDR3 ECC
    1TB PCIe-based flash storage
    Dual AMD FirePro D500 GPUs with 3GB of GDDR5 VRAM each

    and costing $8,800?

      1. Maybe some people think that because AMD pulls out a new chip, Apple will immediately build a new OS architecture around it?
        Might come, some day… but this takes time, and professional heavy clustering users need to work now.
        Apple seams more inclined to satisfy shareholders by selling gadgets than pros… Of course there are more consumers around buying light stuff.

  5. Apple’s neglect towards the Mac Pro is tragic and unacceptable for a company of its size – they have the resources to walk and chew gum.

    All most pro users want are regular, predictable, and incremental upgrades of hardware with occasional major changes as Apple sees fit.

    Sure, there are rumours that Apple might be planning something big for pro Macs but that doesn’t excuse total inaction on the hardware in the meantime.

    Apple holds the mantle of responsibility regarding macOS, which is the heart and soul of the Mac. If they aren’t willing to invest in hardware to bring out the very best of macOS, then they need to bring in trusted partners to do it. Maybe an OS X equivalent of Haiku could eventually surface.

    1. Am I the only one for whom the “Recent Articles” links at the bottom of the page no longer work? I have to keep going back to the MDN home page to open articles.

  6. How about a “It is not supported, but we will ignore it” policy? If they (end user or reseller) purchase the OS, they are free to self support the system.

    If the registered serial number and hardware configuration is not from Apple, the only OS upgrade option is by purchasing a new copy from the App Store.
    Apple Mac users get free OS upgrades, users of third party hardware can upgrade the operating system, but have to pay for it.

    Apple gets sales, and does not have to support the device. The users can get the OS and upgrades, but must pay for them.

    “About this Mac” and elsewhere there should be non support notices.

  7. or Apple could, you know, just upgrade the damn hardware

    I just built my first hackintosh – love it. I have NO plans to buy any Apple hardware (other than phone probably) again.

    And if they break the Mac OS, then I’ll grit my teeth and go back to windows. Running a dual boot now and Windows 10 isn’t so bad.

    The only “must have” OSX only software I use is Mail. Everything else (photoshop, protools, etc.) runs under Windows as well – and usually faster.

      1. Alas, his statements can be scientifically verified…
        Apple has to make it clear for heavy duty pro users one for all, wether Apple drops definitely the needed “trucks” or not.

  8. I’m going to be building a Hackintosh once Apple releases new systems, so newer hardware is going to be supported. i.e. NVIDIA 1080 video card. 🙂

    I wish someone could figure out how to make macOS Sierra run on the new AMD Ryzen 7 1800X processor without any hacked drivers. 🙂

  9. Apple is getting to much of a pain. They are going to price themselves out of the business in the Mac world. There is no reason we cant get a cheaper mac. Apple could still make allot of money and still be cheaper. The Mac Pro sespcailly doesnt need to be all pretty it just need to kick butt and take names. Pro macs sit under a desk allot and are not used.

    The imacs are decently priced (Stil high but closer to affordable) but for some reason when you get into the Pros and the laptops are just outragiously priced

      1. blame my MB Air i don’t have the money to fix it and the delete key and several other keys on the right side don’t work anymore
        WHO Cares if you get the jest of it lol

  10. Apple hasn’t been interested in the “PRO” market for quite some time, and I see nothing that will change that. Despite the fact that the Mac enabled tons of content creation, Apple has shifted almost completely to content consumption. You don’t need a desktop to watch TV or listen to music. All you need is an iPhone, or an iPad, and that is the future, at least as Apple sees it. Apple considers shooting video with an iPhone content creation, and one could easily make a good case for that stance. Trust me, as a content producer, I own a recording studio, what happens next with the Mac Pro is very important to me, but I have long ago come to the conclusion that my MacPro is the last of computers from Apple that are capable of doing the work I need them to.

  11. Hackintosh

    If Apple simply won’t build the pro’s a good looking box with plenty of slots then they need to let someone else do it.

    I don’t mean hackintosh, I’ve built one of those and although the hardware is easy, getting the OS running isn’t.

    You can get it there, but forget about wireless networking, sleep, audio etc working as well as it does on legitimate hardware.

    No, they need to let Adobe do it.

    Apple can keep their phones, watches and skinny laptops, simply let someone like Adobe make the pro hardware as a clone maker.

    They could tightly integrate their software with that cloned hardware, and completely own the creative market end to end.

    I for one would switch in a heartbeat.

    1. Hey Cold,

      bite your tongue and shame on you. With either Apple original hardware, or a Mackintosh I would at least own the hardware.

      Adobe would charge me a rental fee every month for all eternity, I’d never actually own anything. Hardware doesn’t fit Adobe’s business plan. If hardware ever did, it would be like a chromebook; worthless without an internet connection. Only an Adobe product would phone home, charge a connection fee, a subscription basic fee, and a per use usage fee + 2 other fees I’m not feeling snarky enough to make up at the moment.

      Everyone is either laughing cause they don’t use Adobe, or going Oh Damn its true cause they do.

  12. Give me 20 people and 2 years and you would have an entirely new lineup of desktop Macs. A year after that, a whole new lineup of laptops. The current mess that Apple sells is overpriced and underperforming compared to the competition. That is unacceptable.

    Hacking is a partial answer at best, the problem is best solved by replacing dumbass Apple leaders who think abandoning mac pro customers is a decision without consequences.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.