|
wilfredmerriweathr posted:I have limited success using usb 3 ports in ml. Sometimes they work, but often they don't. I just use my usb 2 ports to be safe. I think Mavericks is supposed to fix this. Suppose I'll take a crack at it. Will report back.
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:02 |
|
|
Figured out how to solve my kernelcache problem: apparently I must put "npci=0x2000" as a boot argument or else my network card's kext won't load from the cache. Ironically I wasn't even trying to solve the problem at that point, I was just trying to read what was going on while the system was booting — I was even going to reboot it preemptively after realizing I didn't put in "UseKernelCache=No" as an argument. Don't ask me how or why this works, it just does.  Now only if I could have figured this out before I did a bunch of clean installs of OS X...
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 08:36
|
|
|
Quine Connoisseur posted:Don't ask me how or why this works, it just does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 14:33
|
|
|
Dumb question, but is the Surface Pro out of the question when it comes to installing OSX? I've seen a video of it booting, but I don't know if wifi works at all. It'd be cool to mess with Final Cut on a touchscreen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
It's an i5 with HD4000 so chances are good, but it's also Microsoft (And thus not a known standard motherboard/chipset like with Gigabyte desktops) so it'll be an amazing pain in the rear end to get working. What I'm saying is it's possible but it'll take a dozen hours of fuckery.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 06:02
|
|
|
I'm knowledgeable about such things, why don't you send me one and I'll get it working.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 07:27
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Dumb question, but is the Surface Pro out of the question when it comes to installing OSX? I've seen a video of it booting, but I don't know if wifi works at all. I don't know if anyone has gotten a touchscreen to work in OSX. I think that would be the main obstacle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 13:50
|
|
|
It really depends on how the touchscreen manifests itself. If it's just a standard HID then there's really no reason it should be any more difficult to implement than a multitouch trackpad. I've got a touchscreen monitor on one of my hacks at work but it just manifests itself as a regular mouse so it's supported OOB. If we can get a Windows 8 device manager report on the touchscreen component it might be easier to determine just how much of a stumbling block it would be 
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
So...ya'll are trying to make "Hackpads" now. Except you are using real hardware and the full MacOS. You are making the iPad that everyone wanted, and no one has the balls to request from Apple because Papa knows best. God speed you wonderful goons.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
So, mavericks is rumored to come out in late october now. Is anyone else sitting on a haswell system waiting to convert it to a hackintosh once apple releases mavericks? release the mavericks tim
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 19:36
|
|
|
I keep looking for an excuse to replace my i7 920 from 2009 but it's literally still pulling everything I need it to, so I can't really justify upgrading right now  Going to spend the money to replace my dying iPhone 4 instead.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
chupacabraTERROR posted:So, mavericks is rumored to come out in late october now. Is anyone else sitting on a haswell system waiting to convert it to a hackintosh once apple releases mavericks? I'm just using 10.8.5 since that supports Haswell too. There's really no reason to wait.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
I've been running Mavericks on my daily rig since a few hours after the DP was released. It's fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 20:20
|
|
|
Oh... I haven't shelled out for a dev account yet. That's the only way to get 10.8.5/mavericks right this second right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
chupacabraTERROR posted:That's the only way to get 10.8.5/mavericks right this second right? Correct.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
Is there anything particularly advantageous for a prospective hackintosh user to getting a developer account? I'm learning to code in my spare time but I'm nowhere near needing to put things on the App Store. Is it useful for hackintoshy things (other than early access to beta OSs)?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 20:54
|
|
Demie posted:I don't know if anyone has gotten a touchscreen to work in OSX. I think that would be the main obstacle. The Thinkpads forum got the x230t going alright.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
I've been toying around with the idea of transforming one of by older laptops into a Hackintosh for awhile now - either a Dell Inspiron e1705 or an Inspiron 9300, but  I've just been reading about OSX available as a VM. What's the opinion on that? Should I Hackintosh one of the two laptops, or run OSX in a VM on an i5 Sandybridge with 16G of RAM? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 00:22
|
|
|
Dual boot on the main machine. Unless your time working is worth fractions of a penny per hour, just buy a cheap hard drive and use it on what would be an excellently supported machine versus struggling with a VM or a laptop.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 00:45
|
|
|
P.N.T.M. posted:So...ya'll are trying to make "Hackpads" now. Except you are using real hardware and the full MacOS. You are making the iPad that everyone wanted, and no one has the balls to request from Apple because Papa knows best. OSX would be terrible on an iPad it isn't optimized for touch at all. Or ARM
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Oops, never mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 02:51
|
|
|
I'm evacuating my mom's failing Macbook hard drive, so I popped it into my x86 desktop to see if I could get FakeSMC.kext into it somehow and not have to use her laptop to get the good stuff out of it. And while I was searching for a way, my computer waked and the myHack flash drive booted it to desktop with no flags. How in the hell? Did the bootloader queue up FakeSMC somehow without it even residing in S/L/Extensions? The list of things I don't understand about OSX-on-x86 just gets longer.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 06:47
|
|
|
Chameleon can inject kexts in its boot2. This is how no-kext-on-/ builds work, with Chameleon + kexts on the little System partition Disk Utility will make when partitioning.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 08:00
|
|
|
eightysixed posted:I've been toying around with the idea of transforming one of by older laptops into a Hackintosh for awhile now - either a Dell Inspiron e1705 or an Inspiron 9300, but 9300 is practically impossible, e1705 is maybe doable if it has the nvidia GPU, but it would be hard with the GMA950. Getting OSX to boot in a VM is about 100 times harder than one would expect, I think people just resort to questionable pre-made VMs in bit torrents to do that. But if you just installed it on that i5 rig, that would be ideal as a first hackintosh build. Take Sinestro's advice and just dual boot off a spare hard drive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
Laptops are incredibly hard to hackintosh because of the amount of proprietary stuff going on, you basically roll a 16 sided die as to whether it has any chance of working or not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
SRQ posted:OSX would be terrible on an iPad it isn't optimized for touch at all. That's why I suggested the Surface Pro to begin with - touch might suck with the current OSX UI layout, but it has a Wacom digitizer which works really well (I've seen artists fire up ZBrush and have no issues sculpting with the stylus).
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 22:54
|
|
|
The problem is a surface pro costs $ and this has no promise of working, unless you have infinite money or a box full of surfaces in which case go hog wild.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2013 23:04
|
|
|
I know 3 years ago they were fooling around with some touch iMacs at Cupertino. I haven't heard anything about the project in awhile so it might be dead.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 01:52
|
|
|
Djarum posted:I know 3 years ago they were fooling around with some touch iMacs at Cupertino. I haven't heard anything about the project in awhile so it might be dead. Steve said the idea was stupid and would never be done because of gorilla arm (Try pawing at a laptop screen for five minutes.). Steve is dead though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 01:58
|
|
|
I'm so not into touch. I like small screens and can't afford to be blocking a quarter of it with my badger paws.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
For anyone who really wants a touchscreen Mac you can just buy a ModBook Pro anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
SRQ posted:Steve said the idea was stupid and would never be done because of gorilla arm (Try pawing at a laptop screen for five minutes.). Steve is dead though. From what I know the reaction to people outside the development group wasn't too great, in addition they couldn't figure out a market for it other than artists which would have crippled the iMac's audience and fragmented the iOS market from people wanting a simple device to watch cat videos and check their email. I wouldn't be surprised for a minute if it was a Forstall pet project. Personally and I have heard similar comments from others, that touch is just not as easy to use on a actual computer as it is on a phone or tablet with a smaller screen and more specialized purposes. Try to use one of the Windows 8 touch All-In-Ones to do more general computing and drive yourself mad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 02:38
|
|
|
Most artists I know absolutely hate finger based touch input and gravitate towards things like Wacom anyway. Touch screen computers are a terrible loving idea and you only have to use one for like ten minutes before you see why. I may not buy into everything Steve sold, but his reasoning (as far as we know it) for not making a touch screen iMac is something I'm 100% behind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 05:33
|
|
|
Touchscreen from a sitting position on a desk is tiring for long periods of time. They work on phones / tablets as there's a smaller surface area and we're often using them aimed towards our center of gravity. Even if you move the monitor down to a surface level or drawing board level, it's still an ergonomic discomfort. Also monitors would have to come closer to our faces and have to reduce in size to keep with fitt's law. The other issue with touch is there's a lack of tactile response. Apparently there's development of converting haptic feedback into a surface texture that would at least allow you to feel around an interface. And even as tablets show, the human finger is a very clumsy and inaccurate tool when paired with touch screen devices. I've yet to see any attempt to use word processing, beyond a few notes, not end up without giving up out of frustration over inaccurate word selection or resorting to paring the device up with a bluetooth keyboard for better typing. BogDew fucked around with this message at 06:39 on Sep 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 06:36
|
|
|
WebDog posted:Touchscreen from a sitting position on a desk is tiring for long periods of time. They work on phones / tablets as there's a smaller surface area and we're often using them aimed towards our center of gravity. Even if you move the monitor down to a surface level or drawing board level, it's still an ergonomic discomfort. The last point is a huge one, note how on touch devices icons and UI elements use a huge portion of the screen, imagine using Firefox and having the tabs take up 25% of the screen, with a further 25% for menu elements.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 06:40
|
|
|
I look at computing in a multitasking and ease of use chiefly. Sadly Windows 8 is by far the best touch friendly OS but as anyone who has been forced to use it for any amount of time can attest it is still clunky. Using it in a "normal" setting you find the limitations to the design. Perfect example of this, a friend recent had to implement a hardware upgrade to a business client. The owner got sold by the vendor on Windows 8 touch screen PCs, even after my friend told him the problems that would arise from changing to it. So after months of training on the systems, tons of money spent on new hardware whenever the update was pushed out productivity went way down due to employees not being able to do the things they were able to do before quickly and easily. There was a panic, the owner first tried to push more training but has ultimately had to move the entire workforce back to either what old hardware is still available or downgrades to Windows 7 if available. Granted this is a worse case scenario but it is still bad. Back on topic again, does anyone have a recommendation for a 24/96 sound card that works in OSX? M-Audio refuses to make drivers for the card I have and I'd like to have something that works in OSX since all my major software I own in OSX. I am tired of doing all the work in OSX but having to boot back into Windows to make sure it sounds right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 07:07
|
|
|
I don't know about specifics but the Soundblaster Recon 3D line has OSX drivers, and the USB Soundblasters generally have drivers too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 10:05
|
|
|
When I was using my Audiophile 2496 in my Shuttle Hack, I was running Snow Leopard with these Envy24 drivers: http://www.audio-evolution.com/drivers/ But I have no idea what the state of drivers is these days.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
Chris Knight posted:When I was using my Audiophile 2496 in my Shuttle Hack, I was running Snow Leopard with these Envy24 drivers: http://www.audio-evolution.com/drivers/ I didn't even know those existed. I wonder if they are 64 bit. I am probably just going to buy a audio interface box at this point instead of fooling with cards. I just need to do some serious research.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 16:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:02 |
|
|
There are plenty of reasons why an external FireWire/USB box is preferable to a card. Look into the Scarlet series for a cheaper 2-input device. I'd stay away from anything that accepts only RCA inputs. They are easily <$50, but are not optimal for analog signals, allowing in more noise than many are comfortable with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2013 19:25
|
|