MacOS X Panther & Tiger

2»

Comments

  • From what Stitch said about the project itself earlier, and that from what I learned elsewhere, they wouldn't run as smooth compared to OS X being on a real Mac. Might be wrong but.

    I will admit though, I had attempted to build a Hackintosh under VirtualBox before (with Snow Leopard) but I didn't want to violate Apple's policy upon doing it so instead, just played around with OS X Jaguar under PearPC when I'd think you'd be safe from doing that, even when that's unsupported also.
  • It's also highly and blatantly illegal - Apple would have every recourse to go after you, Psystar style.
  • edited February 2016
    ampharos wrote:
    It's also highly and blatantly illegal - Apple would have every recourse to go after you, Psystar style.
    I don't think Apple cares too much about an individual doing it. Now a large(ish) company violating their copyright, on the other hand...

    Last I checked, Mac OS X Tiger was pretty much a PPC thing.

    If anyone is interested in Pystar, here's a Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psystar_Corporation

    Also, It seems there is another Mac cloner - PearC. They're in Germany, and also sell Linux (yay!) and Windows machines. I won't link to their website (not sure if it's legal) but you can find it using Google. https://www.google.com/?q=PearC
  • [double post]
  • Last I checked, Mac OS X Tiger was pretty much a PPC thing.
    It's mostly known for being the last version of OS X to run well on basically all post-1998 PPC machines, however it was the first version to ever be released for Intel Macs, so it wouldn't get unnoticed that easily.
  • garirry wrote:
    Last I checked, Mac OS X Tiger was pretty much a PPC thing.
    It's mostly known for being the last version of OS X to run well on basically all post-1998 PPC machines, however it was the first version to ever be released for Intel Macs, so it wouldn't get unnoticed that easily.
    But weren't they only distributed in machine-specific disks? I believe Leopard was the first one offered in a generic form.
  • Leopard was universal from the start.
  • ampharos wrote:
    Leopard was universal from the start.
    That's what I meant.
  • garirry wrote:
    Last I checked, Mac OS X Tiger was pretty much a PPC thing.
    It's mostly known for being the last version of OS X to run well on basically all post-1998 PPC machines, however it was the first version to ever be released for Intel Macs, so it wouldn't get unnoticed that easily.
    But weren't they only distributed in machine-specific disks? I believe Leopard was the first one offered in a generic form.
    Yeah, I did say that in an older post. I meant to say that Tiger is still kinda famous for being the first one released on Intel, so I wouldn't say it's a "PPC thing".
  • edited February 2016
    garirry wrote:
    so I wouldn't say it's a "PPC thing".
    But it kinda was... if you count the fact that no generic OS X 10.4 Tiger version was offered as Intel and Retail. Leopard was the first Intel version of OS X in retail markets.
  • garirry wrote:
    so I wouldn't say it's a "PPC thing".
    But it kinda was... if you count the fact that no generic OS X 10.4 Tiger version was offered as Intel and Retail.

    Not quite. Tiger Server version 10.4.7 was also Universal and sold in a retail package.
  • Tronky wrote:
    garirry wrote:
    so I wouldn't say it's a "PPC thing".
    But it kinda was... if you count the fact that no generic OS X 10.4 Tiger version was offered as Intel and Retail.

    Not quite. Tiger Server version 10.4.7 was also Universal and sold in a retail package.
    But I was talking about the generic retail version. I'm not talking about server or machine-specific versions.
  • ampharos wrote:
    It's also highly and blatantly illegal - Apple would have every recourse to go after you, Psystar style.

    On one of my travels to Tokyo, I bought a Hackintosh magazine from a book shop out of interest back in 2012. I wonder what Apple thought of that being published? I was surprised such magazine could be published, perhaps less likely in a western country.

    It mentions building your own equivalent Mac Mini and iMac (both mid-2011 models) for half the price at the time running OS X Lion.
    The "Mac Mini" was based on a ASUS P8H61-M LE/USB3 LGA1155 motherboard, Intel i3 2100 CPU, 4GB RAM, 1TB WD HDD, and a GeForce 210 video card.
    The "iMac" was based on a ASUS Maximus IV Gene-Z/Gen 3 motherboard, Intel i7 2600K CPU, 4GB Corsair RAM, 2TB Seagate HDD, and a GeForce GTX 570 video card.

    Among the articles, there's instructions on how to get it working under Virtualbox, which didn't think could be done. I've only seen it work under Vmware.

    Something unrelated but kind of neat was converting an old G3 iBook into housing an iPad and iPad keyboard. The iPad and iBook keyboards and screens were more or less of the same dimensions.
  • Japan actually has far stricter piracy and copyright laws.
  • ampharos wrote:
    Japan actually has far stricter piracy and copyright laws.
    LOL, that's even more ironic if it was being sold legally. It actually makes me wonder, though, it would be a good idea to turn by busted iBook G4 into an iPad laptop.... hmm....
  • ampharos wrote:
    Japan actually has far stricter piracy and copyright laws.
    LOL, that's even more ironic if it was being sold legally. It actually makes me wonder, though, it would be a good idea to turn by busted iBook G4 into an iPad laptop.... hmm....
    I don't see why not, you could use the iPad Pro as a display and modify the Pro Keyboard or whatever it's called into fitting in the iBook's keyboard space. You could also use a Bluetooth keyboard but that is not extremely convenient for a laptop-like keyboard.
  • ampharos wrote:
    Japan actually has far stricter piracy and copyright laws.

    You just said yourself it's illegal to build a Hackintosh, so this is contradictory. Another example was on a previous trip over there I bought a magazine focusing on downloading files. Apart from things such as ripping Youtube videos and photos off websites, a good chunk of it is basically on using torrents and file hosting sites to download porn and Japanese and American TV shows/movies. Torrenting itself isn't illegal but it falls under that grey area due to much of what it's used for. I just know that back at home, neither building a Hackintosh or openly suggesting using torrents to get the next Hollywood flick would ever get published.

    I'm not an expert at Japanese law but like many things there, there's often 2 extremes to many things in society with many contradictions in between. My observations are that copyright laws are mainly to restrict the flow of counterfeit goods coming over from China, but that's largely targeting designer handbags and accessories. They have many laws, but enforcement is questionable.
  • I'm not an expert at Japanese law but like many things there, there's often 2 extremes to many things in society with many contradictions in between. My observations are that copyright laws are mainly to restrict the flow of counterfeit goods coming over from China, but that's largely targeting designer handbags and accessories. They have many laws, but enforcement is questionable.
    I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that something that could be used for illegal purposes (such as torrenting) is OK, as long as there is a legal use for it. Torrenting can be used for pirating software, but can also be used for downloading Linux distros or other legal stuff. Same with copying programs, for example. Maybe it's illegal to copy that movie and give it to a friend, but it might be fine for personal backups. Of course, there are gray areas everywhere.
  • I'd prefer if we don't speculate about legality here. Only a lawyer can authoritatively answer questions about modern law, and there aren't any lawyers here. And even then, it all boils down to a matter of what the big corps can get away doing to little folks, which is almost anything these days.
  • @KCompRoom2000 said:
    wpblogheader wrote:

    SomeGuy wrote:

    I think 10.4 and 10.5 still need a bit longer though.

    Oh. I checked, and it seemed that Leopard succeeded Tiger in 2007. The last security update for Tiger was in 2009. Safari support for Tiger ended 2010.

    Tiger is the one that really interests me, Leopard is still too new.

    I think part of why Tiger is a little new to be Abandonware is because believe it or not, It's still quite usable today if you know which software to use. It's even more usable than Windows 2000 and Mac OS X Panther. A list of software for Tiger that's still usable today includes: Adobe CS2 Suite, MS Office 2008, TenFourFox, And the last iTunes for Tiger. (Which AFAIK still works with the store.)

    iTunes (store) just recently stopped working under Tiger. I think its about time Tiger be uploaded to the archive.

Sign In or Register to comment.