Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

OQO Hacker Claims World's Smallest OS X Machine

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the blurry-youtube-always-convinces-me dept.

Hardware Hacking 202

TechRadar writes "A hacker has turned his OQO ultraportable into the world's smallest Mac running Leopard. 'I will warn you this project is not for the plug and play crowd but definitely do-able,' the hacker, 'TRF' says. Interesting, given the OQO was designed by ex-Apple employees." It might run Mac OS X, but one thing this OQO is not is a Mac.

cancel ×

202 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Apple already has that beat (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237060)

My iPod Touch is running a cut-down version of OS X, and it's even smaller.

Re:Apple already has that beat (1)

nano2nd (205661) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237552)

And there was me thinking for a moment that the Apple TV was the smallest. D'oh!

Hans Reiser plays skin flute in the prison band (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237618)

I wonder how ol' Hans fared last night after being impaled on Tyrone's meat log...

NOT running OSX (3, Funny)

alcmaeon (684971) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237846)

More like strolling or sauntering, but definitely not running.

The OS maketh the Mac? (1, Flamebait)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237072)

Given that the OS is what most people interact with all day, is it really so wrong to call it a Mac? Most the purported Mac advantages are to do with usability after all. You're certainly getting more of the Mac experience than a PC one.

Re:The OS maketh the Mac? (2, Insightful)

Farmer Tim (530755) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237546)

You're certainly getting more of the Mac experience than a PC one.

Having installed OS X on an EeePC, I'd say all you're getting is an Aqua interface for a PC experience. When it's completely painless and everything "just works" I might agree with you.

Re:The OS maketh the Mac? (0)

Saint Gerbil (1155665) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237912)

"Just works" is not something which is associated with a Mac in today's world. With all the iphone its more "just works the way we want it too"

Re:The OS maketh the Mac? (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238410)

Yes, I suppose that saying it's "just like a Mac" after all that painful setting up and reconfiguring to get Windows to work is missing half the picture.

Re:The OS maketh the Mac? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237614)

A Mac isn't a PC?

Re:The OS maketh the Mac? (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238454)

Down at the hardware level, it kind of is these days IMO. The only real differences are the controlled selection of hardware (which is probably a bigger deal that I'm suggesting here, mind you) and the OS that's running.

Time for Apple to cede some control? (4, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237074)

Clones like this and the Psystar [macobserver.com] machine must have Jobs and the other control freaks at Apple screaming bloody murder right now. For years, their bread-and-butter has been tying their OS to their (IMHO overpriced) hardware. Now it seems that a lot of people are getting sick of it (if the preorders at Psystar are any indication, a *LOT* of people). Not only that, but the more heavy-handed Apple gets, the more they risk that cool-chique image as they appear more and more like just another greedy corporation (i.e., more like MS).

It might well be time for them to consider doing what they could have done years ago, realeasing a general version of Leopard that will run on non-Apple PC's. They might even consider doing an "Apple Certified" program for Dell and other companies wanting to offer OS X as an option for their customers. If their hardware is truly superior, then it won't cost them much hardware business and will cut deeply into Windows' market dominance. In the end, everyone would win--most noteably the consumer (and those who like building their own machines).

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (3, Interesting)

peragrin (659227) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237150)

This isn't a clone, it's hack like installing netBSD on a toaster, with a remote bread loader.

Second neither this or Pystar systems can receive updates via Apple system updater.

Thirdly Pystar has pissed off the guy who makes the OS X boot on generic hardware software. I am waiting for him to sue Pystar, Apple won't even have to get their hands dirty.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237704)

This isn't a clone, it's hack like installing netBSD on a toaster, with a remote bread loader.


Yes, but does the toaster run Linux?

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23238044)

Obi-Wan: I have to admit that without the clones, it would have not been a victory.
Yoda: Victory? Victory you say? Master Obi-Wan, not victory. The shroud of the dark side has fallen. Begun the Clone War has.

Superior Hardware? (0)

Khyber (864651) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237170)

If their hardware is truly superior? It's not. Like everything else now, it's x86. There is no superior about it, it's the same shit as any other computer built nowdays. The only thing that may be superior is their OS.

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

furball (2853) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237238)

Please point me towards a Dell laptop with motion sensors.

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

rizzo420 (136707) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237282)

Dell may not have them, but HP does.

Re:Superior Hardware? (2, Informative)

Kickersny.com (913902) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237292)

My cheap Toshiba tablet PC has accelerometers for emergency HDD-shutdown.

It's three years old.

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

ajcham (1179959) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237508)

Ditto for five year old Thinkpads.

Re:Superior Hardware? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237544)

I also recall seeing Thinkpad commercials pointing out this feature as early as 2004.

Posting as AC because Apple still has more fanboys than Toshiba/Lenovo.

Re:Superior Hardware? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237304)

Certainly it's superior. It has been tested to run windows faster than other major manufacturer's gear.

Re:Superior Hardware? (3, Funny)

fsmunoz (267297) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237316)

Indeed. It's almost laughable the veiled attempt at pseudo-elitism.

It might run Mac OS X, but one thing this OQO is not is a Mac.

No shit. To be a Mac it needs to be made by Apple. And perhaps have a faulty wireless card (yes, I have a MacBook, and that shitty Airport is a recurring problem, "just works" doesn't really extend to wireless [google.com] ).

There is nothing that separates a "Mac" from a PC: the Mac is, for all purposes, an Intel, IBM-compatible PC. Generally the Mac fans say that "OSX makes the Mac", but when they see OSX running on non-Apple PCs then confusion settles and vague sentences appear, like the above, that seem to be based on some mystical characteristic of a "Mac".

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

Creepy (93888) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237570)

wrong - the cases are unique to Apple.

oh - you meant the guts ;)

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

fsmunoz (267297) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238314)

You're right though, and the cases *are* nice. The design is well-thought and there are some nice details that show a certain amount of attention to little things that in aggregate can make a difference.

Still, hardly enough to position modern Macs as more then Apple PCs; the PowerPC times of yore are over, and I think that deep-down many Apple fans regret that decision, since the Mhz jump has come at the expenses of lack of differentiation.

Re:Superior Hardware? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237654)

For what it's worth, it may not be the hardware. The wireless in my MBP and my wife's MB cuts out periodically in OSX but both are fine when the machines are running windows or ubuntu.

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237922)

The Apple Mac is a known hardware platform.

This adds stability since Apple doesn't have to worry about every $10 video card in existence working on it.

Make it work on generic PC hardware will likely decrease the stability of the OS.

Apple certified systems is interesting, in that they would probably only certify closed systems that are not readily extensible.

Re:Superior Hardware? (0)

Saint Gerbil (1155665) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237964)

Still a 10$ Video card is all they seem to put in the 20" iMac

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

fsmunoz (267297) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238364)

That's one of the reasons why I view the MacBook fuckup as something even more serious: not only does Apple control the hardware they want to supply, they manage to ship sub-par choices!

There are some nice things about an Apple laptop: the design is nice, some details are nice, etc. But it's not like it's in a league of it's own: when one comes down to it it's a PC with selected components.

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

timster (32400) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237330)

What does the binary language of the CPU have to do with the quality of the hardware? Who cares? By "quality hardware", I'm sure that we would mean something more important than that.

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

argent (18001) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237478)

By "quality hardware", I'm sure that we would mean something more important than that.

Indeed. My Thinkpad had my Macbook Pro beat to hell in the quality of the hardware. It was more solidly built, had a far superior keyboard, and came with a mini dock (port extender) so I could just bring it in to work in the morning and set it down and go straight to work... no fumbling around for cables or having the stupid "magsafe" connector come out without my noticing it when someone drops a pile of books on my desk...

And I didn't have to go cap-in-hand to the genius bar to replace the hard drive or void my warranty. And it didn't overheat to the point that I had to pull the battery pack out to cool it down when I was doing something CPU-intensive.

And to my eyes it even looked better, the way a stealth fighter looks better than an Airstream caravan.

Apple's hardware is pretty, but there's more to quality than expensive clothes and heavy makeup.

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

jcgf (688310) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238380)

having the stupid "magsafe" connector come out without my noticing it when someone drops a pile of books on my desk...

I have been trying to duplicate this by dropping books onto my desk next to my MacBook and have yet to do so. Is it a feature unique to the pro? Or did you mean that you dropped the books directly on the adapter?

Re:Superior Hardware? (4, Interesting)

nano2nd (205661) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237538)

I'm a long time Mac user who recently made the switch - to a Hackintosh. The OS really is central to the Apple proposition. But.. the hardware is also a big part of it - in terms of the reliability that only comes with total control of hardware and software.

Hardware is also important in terms of the user's perception of quality. I'm using the Apple Cinema Display I previously used on my Powermac and it is still far superior to the Samsung panel I bought recently for my kid.

But all that said, I like the fact that my Hackintosh cost me a lot less than the new top of the range iMac (granted, I already owned the Cinema Display), and it still outperforms the real deal.

However, 10.5.3 may be the end of the road for Hackintosh as I'm sure all the recent noise around this and Psystar will have Apple bringing down the hammer and breaking OS X for non-Apple hardware very soon.

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

Creepy (93888) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237640)

Most interesting to me is the processor - it's not AMD or Intel - it's a Via C7M. Via owns Centaur technology, the Texas based owner of the Cyrix IP, which they acquired from National Semiconductor. They still release chips 2-3 generations behind the leaders at larger form factors, but apparently quality control is much better than Cyrix (at least I haven't read of anything horrible about them).

I didn't even know that chip supported SSE2 or better, but that was ignorance (see wiki [wikipedia.org] )

Re:Superior Hardware? (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238160)

Even if they use the same commodity chips, there's still the engineering behind the boards, power supplies, case and so on.

Re:Superior Hardware? (0, Offtopic)

the_B0fh (208483) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238284)

--
When we impeach Bush, can we do something about Memphis' "King Willie" please?


Umm... you can't. Remember, while Bush talks to God, King Willie was chosen by God to run Memphis. He said this as he was hard at work on that baby that he refuses to support.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237206)

Uhm, so how many have preordered psystars systems? Compared to the amount of machines Apple sell? Compared to total PC sales?

I already have a hack-compatible mac system, and a real macbook pro, and I would never buy psystars system, and can't understand why anyone else does either.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237224)

And btw Apple would probably not "win-win", atleast they don't seem to think so. And it's Apples property so they don't give a shit about what you belive.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237300)

Well, I'm assuming they one day want to gain at least a modicum of market share. They're certainly not going to do it by forever staying in the niche.

Now, maybe they like it in the niche market. But I doubt it. And it certainly doesn't help consumers.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (3, Insightful)

ObiWanKenblowme (718510) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237424)

Maybe they'll start to worry more about market share once they're done counting the piles and piles of money they're currently making. Seriously, how hard is it to grasp that market share != financial success, and financial success != market share?

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

Saint Fnordius (456567) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237510)

I think Apple is playing a different game than you imagine them to be playing. Market share isn't as important as influence. They aren't playing Monopoly or Risk, but instead it's a sort of race game where the goal is to lead the pack in "coolness points".

I think that's been the source of the friction between Microsoft and Apple since the Seventies: Apple was more interested in making neat stuff, whereas Microsoft has always been about the profits and dominating the market.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237628)

No, the goal is to make a huge profit. Coolness doesn't have shit to do with it, unless it makes you more money.

Of course both wanted profits, it's just that Apple failed more so to speak. And yes, back in the days Steve Jobs may have cared about what the consumers wanted/should be getting. Nowadays it seems less so.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

Saint Fnordius (456567) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238070)

That's the meta-game. The game which rewards how well you play the chosen game.

Microsoft: "We can ensure long-term value by dominating the playing field!" (the Monopoly/Risk way)

Apple: "We can ensure long-term value by being better and doing new, cool stuff!" (the race/exploration game way)

Both methods are risky. Microsoft's risk is that they trap themselves into only defining themselves through comparison. Apple risks ignoring the competition too much. But in the end, I think Apple's approach is better in that it tries not to lose sight of what they are good at. Trying to play Microsoft's game got Apple burned badly under Spindler and Amelio.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237720)

I seriously doubt Apple shareholders would buy the "Sure we could be making you more money, but what we really want to do is make cool stuff" argument.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

Saint Fnordius (456567) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238152)

Like I said in a different response, there is a subtle difference. It's not making cool stuff instead of making a profit, but ensuring a profit by making cool stuff. And that is an argument that seems to convince enough shareholders that Apple's stock is still doing well.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237606)

If they can choose from say 80$ in profit of average OS sale, $150 for OS + low-end designed PC or $600 for high-end PC with some options I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Two years ago everyone was complaining how dead Nintendo was because their sales was so low, but atleast they made a profit of their products. Sure Microsoft sold more Xboxes, but at a loss ... And sure Sony sold more consoles, but they (eventually, I don't remember the numbers, so don't trust me on this one:) didn't earned as much money.

And in this case it's probably the "custom PC"-market which is a nche. Companies, schools, governments, laptop buyers, many people who buy desktops are just fine with pre-selected components.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237438)

Not only that, but the more heavy-handed Apple gets, the more they risk that cool-chique image as they appear more and more like just another greedy corporation (i.e., more like MS).

Most people interested in hardware Apple doesn't already sell are techies/enthusiasts and businesses. None of them should hold any illusions about Apple being anything other than another greedy corporation (just like Microsoft).

If their hardware is truly superior, then it won't cost them much hardware business [...]

Of course it will. Most people don't buy "superior", they buy "cheap" (because that's all they can afford).

Apple will cater to the crowd looking for a machine between the Mini and the Mac Pro long, long before they cater to the crowd looking for OS X on generic PCs - and they're unlikely to do the former anytime soon because it would take a significant chunk out of higher-margin Mac Pro sales.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (2, Interesting)

dogzilla (83896) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237468)

What makes you say that "a lot of" people are "sick of it"? It seems pretty clear that a majority of people buy Macs because they don't want to deal with the hassle attached to using Windows and Linux computers. Hacking OSX to run on non-Apple hardware isn't easy, so the folks doing aren't really Apple's target market anyway. In any case, I find it hard to believe that the folks jumping through these hoops represent "a lot of people".

Let me repeat that because so few people seem to get it: hackers are not Apple's core market. Apple doesn't market to hackers, they don't have the infrastructure to support hackers, they don't design products for hackers. It's a different market, just like you won't find aftermarket performance minivan parts (requisite car allegory).

Also, why do you think this stems from frustration with Apple's hardware? Do you also think that people porting Linux to run on watches and PDAs are doing it because they're sick of commodity PC hardware? Seems more like they're doing it to see if they can.

Devil's Advocate here (1)

Serenissima (1210562) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237572)

But if Apple did a "Certified Program" they'd lose their compatibility and optimization. Right now, since everything is in-house, they can write their software/firmware around the exact specifications of certain pieces of hardware. If they had to broaden that field, they couldn't optimize for specifics. The system would bog down more. And as far as compatibility goes, you'd have to start getting drivers for every other piece of hardware you buy. If it's in-house, that's not a problem.

The only time it becomes a problem is when you have a sales model and market base of "people-who-never-used-computers". I think we can all agree Apple cornered the market by selling their computers as "the easiest to use" or "plug it in and go". The customer base for that type of model doesn't need the complexity. And even though their "Power User" market is growing which makes that model less sustainable, I would imagine that they'll want to hang on to the "ease of use" as long as possible.

Even though Slashdot readers revel in the complexity of computer systems, I'm pretty sure Apple isn't going to change their model for us. I think we all know that for all of us that know a thing or two about computers, there's way more people out there who know jack-diddley about them.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (2, Interesting)

trolltalk.com (1108067) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237578)

Clones like this and the Psystar machine must have Jobs and the other control freaks at Apple screaming bloody murder right now.

I doubt it. The psystar is a *noisy* pc, the first thing most people notice about the iMac is it's QUIET!

People will pay a couple of hundred bucks for quiet, hardware and software support, updates, and the ability to just walk into a brick-and-mortar and pick one up off the shelf, etc.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238254)

The psystar is a *noisy* pc,

Back that up. Just because it's a PC, doesn't mean automatically it's noisy. So far, there aren't any reviews or measurements made that I've seen so far.

I've owned quiet Xeon workstations, as well as quiet desktop systems too. Heck, my G5s have been noisier than my PC Xeon workstation. Among other things, I think the ATI 1900 that Apple used in their Mac Pros have been excessively turned down in speed, they seem to go flaky after a year. Apple has had similar problems with GFX chips in the aluminum iMacs too. The G5s are pretty quiet at idle, but at 20% load the fans can spin up to make them louder than my other systems.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238286)

I meant the fan speed on the ATI 1900. I had to have mine replaced by Apple a few weeks ago. Hopefully it doesn't happen again, but I just can't help but think the fan runs too slow for its cooling needs.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238628)

The psystar is a *noisy* pc,


Back that up. Just because it's a PC, doesn't mean automatically it's noisy. So far, there aren't any reviews or measurements made that I've seen so far.


How about the video on Gizmodo [gizmodo.com] showing one in operation?

Sure it's not a scientific measurement of noise, but the fan whirr is definitely noticable. The Dell workstation on my desk at work is quieter, as is my Mac Pro (think - the real noise comes from the hard drives, not fans, and that's the standard seeking noises when they're busy.).

Heck, I think you can get some whitebox PCs that are quieter.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238432)

What most people ask in my environment about the iMac's (from the G5 onwards but especially the new batch): where is the computer? since they expect a big bulky or at least some type of tower where you put the CPU in. I have a dead iMac G5 next to a same size dead LCD screen in my office and sometimes one of the passer-by's ask: if you're throwing away those monitors, can I have them.

I like the new iMac's for desktop environments. They take up less space, are quite powerful and they're also easy to repair (3 screws gives access to everything).

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (1)

Orion Blastar (457579) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237608)

Can't fight the Hackers without getting even more fascist than Apple already is right now.

Might as well license an OEM copy of OSX to a few PC Makers, in exchange for 10% of the sale and a small fee per machine OSX is installed on.

Apple makes most of its money via iPods, iPhones, iTunes, etc now. It isn't the old 1990's Apple that bled money via Newton, Printer, Scanner, Pippin, etc support and sales that cost more to support than they brought in. That is what really killed the Mac Clones in the first place, Apple losing money due to things that didn't sell enough like the Newton. Though many Mac Clones were cheaper than what Apple could sell. But that establishes proof that Apple's Macs are overpriced and consumers want a lower cost Mac. If Apple can't do it or only offers the crippled Mac Mini, then bring back the Mac Clones.

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? Nope. (2, Interesting)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237706)

They won't do it because of two and a half fundamental reasons:

1. MSOffice
2. Profit Margins
3. History as Computer Maker

If Apple put MacOS onto other machines, MS would pull support for MSOffice on MacOS in a New York Nanosecond. That would seriously batter Apple computer sales, because many of us (myself included) are forced by our employers to use MSOffice. Yes, OpenOffice is a lovely thing, but our IT dept and management doesn't give a flying fuck about OpenOffice, and never will. It's an MS shop and that's that. They don't care what COMPUTER you use - so I have a MacBookPro - but the software for our daily interactions Must Be MS. (sigh - I know, I know)...

So, That's Reason #1 (with a gun to the head) why Apple won't open up.

2. Apple makes Serious Bank on their high end machines (desktop or laptop) and opening up would blow those margins to the wind because if you're so up on a high end machine, you could probably build something to rival today's fire breathing dragon [gizmodo.com] at a substantially lower cost than what HP and certainly Apple would charge you.

Also, Apple depends on that margin, as it allows them to use that money to seed other projects, some few of which might pan out (iPod, iTMS) and some more that won't do so well (AirTunes, AppleTV) some that seriously Tank (20th Anniversay Mac) and some that leave expensive craters in the ground (Pippin, Newton, The Cube). Without the margins Apple pulls from their high-end gear, none of those ventures would have happened, and while Pippin was a fucking disaster, the iPod is anything but.

So, they're not going to cannibalise their bovine cash dispenser.

3. History as a computer company. They are known first as a computer company, that happens to make totally hip consumer items. This will change over time, as computers slowly fade into the woodwork, but until then, their flagship product is MacOS - it's the one thing that ties all their products together, and it is intimately tied to their vision as a computer company.

So, for all those reason (and I am sure, many more) Apple will not open up their OS. It would be suicide.

RS

Re:Time for Apple to cede some control? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237734)

Apple doesn't sell superior hardware, at least not in terms of quality. They sell stylish hardware.

The Apple products I own have actually broken more often than any other piece of electronic equipment I have. The form is good though, I would rather have my small smooth broken iBook on my lap that my fully functional blockly hot uncomfortable Dell.

OQO isnt a "clone" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237890)

The OQO was out way before the MacBook Air, it has held the ultra-portable record for a long time. And it's always been, obviously, a Windows machine.

What you are talking about isn't "opening up"... it's about breaking down the Apple monopoly. Thats... not going to happen. Ever. You are going to have to tear the Apple monopoly from Steve Job's cold, dead fingers for that to ever occur. He put a LOT of work into creating that monopoly.

You guys forget: Jobs is old-school. Jobs was formed in the time of IBM, ATT, Novell, etc. They were all the brutal monopolies, that was how business was done. All your stuff is in-house, and it STAYS in-house. The only reason IBM-PC clones happened was because IBM saw it was losing ground to Apple. IBM has never been afraid to destroy themselves in order to destroy their competitors (and that spirit is still alive today, just look at all the money they are flushing down Lunix).

As soon as Jobs took over, he destroyed any companies making Apple compatibles, destroyed companies selling Apple equipment, and destroyed companies making gear for Apple. Anything involving Apple computers, be it sales, hardware, software, service/repair, etc... would be handled by Apple, and ONLY Apple. Unless you like being sued into oblivion, that is.

So yeah, it's nice that OSX doesn't have copy protection, aside from checks to make sure it's not installed on non-Apple hardware. But if enough people start doing that... expect that to change REAL quick.

Re:OQO isnt a "clone" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23238208)

So someone needs to call out a hit on stevie?

Re:OQO isnt a "clone" (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238306)

Wouldn't help. Evil never dies.

iPhone? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237082)

I'm pretty sure the iPhone is the smallest machine running OS X.

Yes, it's kind of kiosk-style, but it is OS X.

Re:iPhone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237584)

The iPod touch is smaller: it's an iPhone without the phone and camera, so it isn't as bulky.

Re:iPhone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237792)

Yea, and win-ce (aka pocketpc/windows mobile) is windows- it has all the same API's and most straight win32-core code compiles without modification for CE.

My point is that the iPhone is no more OS X than Windows CE is Windows. You won't be able to copy your desktop version of Word to either and run it, and its not just due to screen real estate.

just how big is it? (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237098)

The artical doesn't give dimensions or shoe something in the picture for size comparisons, so it may be the smallest but is it the size of a football pitch or the size of an apple?

From TFA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237162)

The artical doesn't give dimensions or shoe something in the picture for size comparisons, so it may be the smallest but is it the size of a football pitch or the size of an apple?
'All this and it only measures 14.2cm wide by 8.4cm tall and 2.6cm deep."

Re:just how big is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237194)

Available with a 60, 80 or 120GB hard-disk, the OQO e2 is supplied with Windows Vista as standard. All this and it only measures 14.2cm wide by 8.4cm tall and 2.6cm deep.

Re:just how big is it? (1)

electronerdz (838825) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237980)

It's an OQO [oqo.com] .

But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237106)

...does it run Linux

he may want to consider (1)

OrochimaruVoldemort (1248060) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237112)

work at Psystar

why Wikipedia links all the time? (2, Insightful)

with a 'c' (1260048) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237120)

Why oh why does everyone insist on using Wikipeda links instead of direct company links?

Re:why Wikipedia links all the time? (1)

Saint Fnordius (456567) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237332)

My guess is that Wiki links are more "trustworthy". That means they look less like pure PR (or like a misleading goatse-like link). Wikipedia isn't unimpeachable, but more flagrant troll-edits would get quashed soon.

There's another thing that may play a role here as well: slashdotting the site. The Wiki can handle the tonnes of Slashdotters out to RTFA (including all 23 of you who actually read it) better than a small company or a private page can.

Hmmm, now that I think of it, that /.-effect deflection makes even more sense than my first guess.

Re:why Wikipedia links all the time? (2, Funny)

stoofa (524247) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237390)

So, for instance, You'd prefer this [wikipedia.org] to this? [wikipedia.org]

"Is not is a Mac"? (0)

Apple Acolyte (517892) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237138)

From the summary: "It might run Mac OS X, but one thing this OQO is not is a Mac." Is not is a Mac. That's interesting. So it is a Mac? ;-)

Re:"Is not is a Mac"? (1)

Icarium (1109647) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237260)

Please tell me that English is not your first language.

Re:"Is not is a Mac"? (2, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237334)

Him write fine. Your a grammar-Nazi!

Re:"Is not is a Mac"? (1)

Chelloveck (14643) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237596)

Him write fine. Your a grammar-Nazi!

Him right fine.

Fixed that for you. HTH.

Re:"Is not is a Mac"? (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237794)

Me thank you.

Re:"Is not is a Mac"? (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237702)

He writes fine. You're a grammar Nazi!

Re:"Is not is a Mac"? (1)

LS (57954) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237622)

I think you might get his grammar if you add a comma:

one thing this OQO is not, is a mac.

Doesn't make it any less dumb of a sentence.

hm (3, Funny)

virgil_disgr4ce (909068) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237164)

Is the new /. meme going to be "does it run OS X?"

--Ted

Re:hm (1)

OrochimaruVoldemort (1248060) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237340)

Is the new /. meme going to be "does it run OS X?"
probably, but does it run linux

Re:hm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237386)

exactly let's check the give o' shit meter...

Re:hm (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237840)

Give-A-Shit-O-Meter(tm):


YOU FAIL IT! |***.......|.......| YOU PWN3D iT!


Nope, looks like he failed it.

The new black? (2, Funny)

pzs (857406) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237192)

Is cramming MacOS onto a wholly unsuitable machine the new version of doing the same thing with Linux?

I want a dock on my watch and my microwave to make that *DNNGGG!* noise when I open the door.

Re:The new black? (4, Interesting)

Ford Prefect (8777) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237458)

Is cramming MacOS onto a wholly unsuitable machine the new version of doing the same thing with Linux?

I'm reminded of this [mactalk.com.au] - Mac OS X running on a Centris 650. 68MB RAM, 25MHz 68040.

No, not even a PowerPC processor. Fully software emulation.

Running? Well, booting. Sort of. Excruciatingly, glacially slowly!

Oblig. blurry YouTube (1)

necro81 (917438) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237246)

The article links to a fuzzy YouTube video [youtube.com] of the device going through what looks like a boot loader, then booting Leopard, then flipping through a variety of Mac applications.One can also hear what I think are the OQO's fans working overtime to keep up.

The video looks credible, but it would be nice if it were recorded with something that could focus in closer.

Why is this Slashdot-worthy? (1)

Tatsh (893946) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237256)

Hackintoshes apparently are Slashdot-worthy now. Ridiculous.

As with relation to this post, 90% of the work is done with the hacked ISO of Leopard you get off where you want (Google is your friend) by people like Zephyroth. He might have done a little hacking, but I do not care really. This is not ground-breaking. The Psystar article was more ground-breaking because if Psystar exists it is a company trying to market 'clone Macs' without sanction from Apple. I bravely say, anyone (who knows about osx86 and only even has a decent amount of skill of playing with OS's) could achieve what was done in this article.

Re:Why is this Slashdot-worthy? (2, Funny)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237832)

Lol, I love the way you say Slashdot-worthy, like slashdot is some great and highbrow institution. Hello, Lego cases are slashdot worthy. Saying 'Slashdot-worthy' is like saying Karaoke-worthy, or gutter-worthy, or rubbish bin-worthy.

Re:Why is this Slashdot-worthy? (1)

Tatsh (893946) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238332)

I guess I find it funny too, but I thought Slashdot was meant to push out stories other places would not, with some moderation. And if I were final decision moderator, this story would not be posted.

Re:Why is this Slashdot-worthy? (1)

avanderveen (899407) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238058)

I would argue that this is ground breaking because with each new piece of hardware is hacked to run Mac, Apple loses hardware some hardware sales (maybe not so much with this one) and it loses it's whole "Macs have superior design" thing (not that they actually do).

The thing is that if Apple started offering Mac on more than Apple hardware (as one commenter suggested) then they would lose a lot of hardware sales. Apple's hardware isn't superior, it just looks nice. It's like going to a car dealer and saying, "I want the red one" without even looking at the make and model or specifications. More important than specifications here is the make and model. Apple doesn't even manufacture it's own hardware, Asus and Quanta do (among others) and coincidentally these companies also manufacture hardware for PCs.

It's not as if Apple's hardware is superior (if what I've been reading online is any representation it isn't at all), it's just that Apple gets to bundle their software with a shiny new package that "just works" because it's 100% compatible with their hardware and everything compliments each other with Apple products. When Mac starts running on other hardware there will be issues, just look at the number of Windows Vista issues cause solely by bad nVidia drivers.

So it's smaller than an OS X iPhone? (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237268)

From the picture in TFA it looks bigger than an iPhone...

"this OQO is not is a Mac" (0, Flamebait)

ThirdPrize (938147) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237346)

So you don't have to be gay to use it? Cool.

Wait but... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237358)

but Isn't the IPod Touch the smalls OS X ever?

Sony VAIO UX does it too. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237364)

This is hardly anything new, Leopard has been running on the Sony VAIO UX for awhile now. The UX is about the same size, and double the performance of the OQO http://micropctalk.wetpaint.com/page/Installing+Macintosh+OSX+10.5+(Leopard)?t=anon [wetpaint.com]

"It might run Mac OS X..." (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237406)

"but one thing this OQO is not is a Mac."

Forget the weird grammatical structure, what exactly is this supposed to mean? That it runs OS X poorly? That it is not Apple hardware? That it's not authorized? Thanks for the enlightening comment Timothy!

"I just put my dick in your moms mouth, but one thing your mom is not is a condom."

An important development because... (1)

astroblaster (600838) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237426)

This is the first usage of a non-intel or -AMD x86 CPU to run desktop OS X on non-Apple hardware. There are no known guides to running a VIA C7 variant, so if this guy's not bluffing and provides some info, this helps other ultraportables using the C7 to run OS X. Regardless of the complete un-kosherness of running OS X on non-apple hardware, it has opened the gates for tons of free enthusiastic public user testing.

not the smallest (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237442)

iPhone and iPod touch already run Leopard. OQO > iPhone/iPod touch

Wait, (0, Offtopic)

Canosoup (1153521) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237482)

Don't all the Ipods have a tiny chunk of OS X on them?

Re:Wait, (1)

Constantine XVI (880691) | more than 6 years ago | (#23238106)

Only the Touch and iPhone. All the other iPods run a custom, 100% unreleated OS called Pixo.

Hard Hack? Really? (1)

andreyw (798182) | more than 6 years ago | (#23237680)

I don't understand people tagging stuff like this "hard hack". Sure, it's not as trivial as installing XP or even Linux or some flavor of BSD, but let's see. Is there any original development done? Nope... just leveraging existing OSx86 work and other odds and ends around Darwin/x86. You're doing the work of an OEM. All you need to do is find a hardare platform reasonably close to one of the Macs (not hard, it's all Intel based), or pluck and pick some third-party drivers. Yay. Is it a hack? Yes. Hard hack? No... the dude that cracked the iPhone was a "hard hack".

timex/sinclair keyboard (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23237786)

or is that a tandy keyboard. I can't tell from the picture.

$1500 ? ouch.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?