Ask HN: Anyone here use a Hackintosh as one of their main machines?

132 points by peruvian ↗ HN
I'm not sure if this is allowed here as it's technically "not legal", but while I love my MacBook, nothing beats having a comfy desktop computer at home with a ton of storage. I know I'm in the minority, but I miss it.

Unfortunately I am very much used to OS X and highly productive in it and Apple's desktop offerings are pretty poor right now (correct me if I'm wrong), so unless I decide to go for Linux, I'll try a Hackintosh.

What I'm looking for are experiences with them for someone who just wants a computer to code, torrent, and watch movies from and doesn't care about iMessage working. I probably won't update my OS X much either.

I keep hearing widely different things about Hackintoshes so I thought I'd try HN.

Thanks!

150 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 225 ms ] thread
I don't know about desktop but running Hackintosh in VM oh man what a nightmare, i run different OSes in VMs (Linux, Windows in different versions) inside my OS for testing and i never had any problems but hackintosh works like trying to run windows 10 on pentium 2. It's slow as hell, i have problems with sound, rendering is awfully slow and is losing frames, it hangs without reason from time to time. This are my experiences with hackintosh inside VM, i don't know how it works as standalone OS.
i run them on KVM and have not much of an issue. But i do not use them for much really. However i was actually somewhat surprised that it runs as well as it does... I dont feel much of a difference to running windows on KVM except that RDP works much better than VNC...

Im running these on a Core2 Duo E8400...

I have not used a Hackintosh. But, I have a Mac Mini at home that I upgraded to max out the RAM and add a SSD. With the addition of an external drive for media storage, it ended up being perfect for the needs you describe. In addition to my home use, I take it to trade shows for work to run as a demo web server for our product.
Well that was exactly what OP was not looking for in an answer.
I have looked into them in the past, but I don't really feel like Linux is a huge learning curve coming from OSX, especially if you stick with one of the well-known distros.

Even if it is a learning curve, it's probably one that will be at least somehow useful professionally.

After running a Hackintosh for about 6 months a few years ago I became convinced that they're not really for budget-minded Mac enthusiasts, but for people who enjoy maintenance and troubleshooting.

Unless you're on a tight budget and planning to use existing hardware, I strongly recommend going the way of a Mac Mini and spend the time you would have lost to building a Hackintosh on literally anything else.

This was my experience exactly. Seemed like a great idea at the time, but always required some sort of maintenance at various times that required researching solutions, posting on message boards, and trial-and-error. Basically, it's the same amount of effort required to run a linux based desktop.
I'd argue that it's more effort than running a popular distro like Ubuntu because the hackintosh knowledgebase is generally a lot smaller.
Without intentionally trying to turn this in to an OS War, at least on a linux box, there was source code. So if something bothered you enough you could go in and fix it yourself (which added to your skills as a coder).

These days, it feels like people enjoy digging around on their systems less and less, and they just want javascript to run in a browser.

That's exactly how I felt. Every update had a risk of being a maintenance nightmare. The machine was really fast, but now I ended up buying a top end iMac 5K and a MacBook Pro. I'll never go back to a hackintosh, but if I didn't do it originally I doubt I would have gone Mac full time. My old hackintosh is now relegated to Win7 for those game devs that are making games for Windows only.
Me too -- would add that despite the time I sunk into troubleshooting, I don't feel like I learned anything useful in the process.
Maintenance and troubleshooting with PCs was the reason I switch to Mac in the first place. To me at least, it's worth a few extra dollars if it means I never have to look inside of it (the hardware or the software).
It always was a fun idea for me to run that juicy Unix OS on my x86.

In my case - I tried a lot, albeit back in 2008 and 2009, but wasn't able to get it to work reliably on different machines. I ended up in a quagmire of undocumented problems and errors, forum-hunting, loading kernel modules by hand - kext hell. Do you really want to?

It's not unreasonable to think that a lot might have changed since 2008/9.
I run a multiboot workstation with OS X, Linux, and Windows. My preferable for daily use and coding is my archlinux desktop but since I dabble with iOS dev every once in a while I'll use my hackintosh and end up using it for days.

So yes, it's totally stable and will work for you. Just be sure you get the right hardware.

What advantages you see of running archlinux vs Ubuntu? I wonder if I should change my default server distro...
i would not recommend archlinux as a server distro. Things break sometimes and typically in a server environment you care more about stability than about running on the bleeding edge. Its not unreasonable unstable though extra care is needed.
Hi there,

Several years ago I built a hackinstosh workstation for a family member that is still going strong. Now that Macs are on Intel's architecture setting one up is a fairly straightforward process if you pick out the right hardware. This website single handedly assisted me in the creation of that hackinstosh.

http://www.tonymacx86.com

Tony's site is the closest to legal this can get but since your install will be illegal anyways why not go with Niresh's Yosemite Zone?
Thank you for the suggestion as I am unfamiliar with Niresh's Yosemite Zone. I purchased both the OS and hardware. How is that illegal?
The OS X terms and conditions say you can't install it on non-Apple hardware :/
Let's be clear, it's not "illegal" so much as it is against the Terms & Conditions of OSX. Apple could sue you, but they can't put you in jail.

Now, there are some questions as it relates to the DMCA, but generally unless you are misusing the software for something illegal (ex hacking) then you're ok.

IANAL.

I tried running it as my only os on my daily driver laptop a few years ago (mountain lion, I think), checked all the hardware before even thinking about installing it, everything was "fully compatible"... and it was pretty bad. The os itself kinda worked (except for audio dying after a while and standby not working), but the experience in general was horrible (laggy ui, things crashing everywhere, even a few kernel panics).

Keep in mind this was a few years ago, but I wouldn't recommend even trying wasting the time to try installing it.

I used one every day for two years. I loved it. The only time it was unstable was when I did major OS upgrades.
I do, but like with Linux, be prepared for constant troubleshooting after each update.

Also you'll probably get lower performance, especially from your GPU, and also from your CPU if your ACPI tables aren't properly configured.

I ran one as my primary work machine about 5 years ago and then built a duplicate for home. Yes, it saved me money (I built the box for about $600 and it was hardware equivalent to probably a $2000 mac at the time) but you basically couldn't ever install any update (even security updates) unless you were mentally prepared to potentially lose half a day to troubleshooting. Usually they installed fine, but you could never be 100% sure in advance.

This meant putting off updates longer, which would lead to bigger updates, which only raised the chances of things going wrong. By the time OS X had gone up two major versions I just stopped using it and got a Mac mini and dumped more RAM in it instead.

I ran a Hackintosh a few years ago on a Samsung laptop. Like Linux of yore, your key issue is hardware support. To have the best success with a Hackintosh you need to nail down exactly what hardware will work with it, and buy that hardware. Just trying to bung it on a spare box you have lying around is asking for trouble, a lost weekend, and a very cranky spouse.

Hunt around on the Hackintosh forums, find a hardware list that works, get the bootloaders or kexts you may need, and give it a go. I won't say it's not worth it, because I do know people who run Hackintoshes on a daily basis without issue. However, you will not be able to upgrade easily. Every major macOS upgrade will require a rebuild.

A friend of mine has a nice hackintosh running just fine, with some quirks like iMessage not working.

Going the Linux route would mean misssing out on a lot of nice software.

I personally think the IMacs have great value. Have a 2011 model, maxed out ram, running El capitan smooth as hell.

I've used a Hackintosh as a main development machine for a few years. I spent ~ $800 on parts, and an equivalent (top of the line) Mac would've cost about $4K, so the money savings were great.

However, it was a gigantic pain in the ass to maintain and I wouldn't recommend it. Updating the OS is a nightmare, resulting in me staying with 10.7 while everyone was on 10.9. Things that you would expect to work out of the box with a normal Mac do anything but - there's effort required to make anything perform as expected. And there are some things that just never work as intended - like the sleep mode that I was never able to figure out.

Troubleshooting issues is a nightmare - there's no support, and you have to spend tons of time browsing through threads looking for someone with a similar problem. Then if you get to a situation when you have to ask a question, you sit and pray for someone to answer, because if they don't you're stuck.

Eventually, I bought an iMac, and couldn't be happier.

In general, if you're the kind of a person that enjoys tinkering and troubleshooting, and have plenty of free time, then go for it. But if you want to spend your time on other things, and want your computer to just work, I would definitely not recommend it.

Isn't the Mini a much better alternative? You can replace the disc, and don't have to spend money on an expensive screen.
It depends on what you need it for. For me, 5K screen and a very fast graphics card are important. Top of the line iMac is the only Mac that works with Oculus Rift.

But if you're only looking to do web development, for example, Mini should be fine.

The Mini hasn't been updated in 2 years, and was already slow on release. For normal users it's the better option, but if you're a developer and need to actually get something done, a hackintosh is a very attractive alternative to $4k or more for a similarly beefy iMac / Mac Pro.
Sad that this is what Mac users have to resort to now.
So true.
I have a mini and after upgrading to an SSD (the HDD was a terrible terrible mistake) I'm happy with it. For just coding, torrenting, and movies, it's great. Picking my own monitor was a huge plus. I went with a 34" ultra wide screen, which is perfect for coding and movies look amazing since they fill the whole screen without any letter boxing. No problems with my current setup.
It always depends on what you do. If you do graphic/GPGPU intensive processing, the Mini just won't cut it, and my own Go projects would need over a minute for every compile pass.
A docked rMBP was the best compromise for me as of two years ago.

Personally I'm going to hold out for the new rMBP with the touch bar function keys.

For less than the price of a mini I got an old aluminum-tower 2010 Mac Pro on craigslist, swapped in a used hex core Xeon, 32GB of ECC, raided SSDs, and a GTX 750Ti. It does use kind of a lot of power, but watching node compile in a minute or two (about 4X faster than my iMac at work, sigh) is nice. It Geekbenches just below a 'bottom end' new Pro.
While I agree with you that years ago (>3) a Hackintosh wouldn't be a wise choice to go for a productive environment, a LOT has changed. I am running mine since 2 years now and am on the newest Mac OS version, most of the time the App Store updates work flawlessly (even though it's not recommended), alternatively you could just go for a small SSD, put everything else on another SSD and/or HDD and you can reinstall the SSD with the newest version which shouldn't take longer than 15-30 minutes. I am not doing that, I am just saying it would be a choice. I completely reinstalled my Hackintosh only once in those 2 years and that was from Yosemite to El Cap.

Sleep isn't a problem anymore if you buy the correct hardware, the question is also why you even would want to use sleep when it's booting within some seconds anyways...

In the beginning, like with the first setup, it probably takes some hours, you should probably even calculate a day to set it up like you want it. But in the end I probably saved 2k EUR going the Hackintosh route and don't regret it at all. I don't even notice it's a Hackintosh anymore...

> Sleep isn't a problem anymore if you buy the correct hardware, the question is also why you even would want to use sleep when it's booting within some seconds anyways...

To keep your open programs?

Well, isn't there an option to just do that also on reboot?
Sure, if you don't mind diligently saving all documents on shutdown, or your browser loading every single tab anew after starting, …

Applications are stateful. Sleeping keeps all that state.

Have you ever used OS X? Application state can be preserved and restored across reboots. Most apps do this automatically. Actually I haven't encountered one that doesn't.
I do occasionally, I can't say I noticed it – but that's probably because I spend 99% of my time in a terminal.
iTerm2 keeps state in this way for all my open tabs, except that it does a new login shell, so my history doesn't stay consistent: they all get the same history after a restart.

Still, not having to open all the terminals I use for different things and resize and position them is a win. It's the small things. :)

iTerm2 v3 beta doesn't keep tab state across relaunch for me. The tabs come back but on a fresh command prompt without stdout from the previous session. For me it's no better than starting fresh.
Which shell are you using? With fish I find that it's history is somewhat context sensitive based on the present directory. Because of this I've found myself less frustrated when working with the history across multiple tabs.
I run almost exactly three things on this MBP: screen (shells), emacs, and Chrome.

- My nested screen sessions with a ton of shells doing things all over the place don't get restored on reboot - My emacs state doesn't get restored on reboot - Chrome reloads all the pages from the network instead of just serializing its entire state and restoring it on reboot

(All of the above are true on linux too.)

I've heard it's possible to persist some of the state of shell sessions across reboot using tmux + the resurrect plugin.
You might check out the latest version of iTerm2. I think it supports saving sessions (including tmux?) over a reboot.
I use OSX and I'd much rather sleep than reboot. Lots of productivity programs will lose state - offhand the Adobe suite comes to mind, for instance. And if you have a bunch of tabs open in a web browser it takes forever for them to reload. If you use multiple desktops there's no guarantee of windows popping up on the same desktop after a reboot, even with Apple apps.

Waking the machine from sleep takes seconds; rebooting with stored state takes minutes.

Most of my post-startup routine in Linux is doing things like re-seeding my development database after the ramdisk has been mounted, starting up screen with database clients, and booting up the local servers (the ones that make up our application) all connected to one another - a single script, but still takes a few seconds to get going and can only happen after the database on the ramdisk has been configured.

Application state for all three GUI apps I use is pretty much restored on every platform. Thing is, there are only three of them.

Since 10.7, application state is automatically saved on log out. Some 3rd party software took longer to properly support it, but 5 years has gotten everything up to speed.

Can be disabled while logging out (untick the checkbox) or holding shift while logging in.

Mostly true, but not completely.

There are still important state details that aren't preserved, like how far down the page I've scrolled in an article I'm reading, a form in progress, or the text that I have highlighted in a tab. How about my active terminal sessions in iTerm? It would be a joy if that state preserved across restarts.

I think the latest version of iTerm2 (3+) supports this actually.
Kinda. I just tried it on 3.0.7.

For example, in tab #1, I cd and run a bash script to start a web server process. In tab #2, I split it into two panes, and in #1 run workon to start a virtual environment then start the Python REPL. In pane #2, I run top.

After quitting and restarting, tab #1 returns to the proper directory but with no output. Pane #1 shows previous output and returns the proper directory but without the virtual environment activated. Pane #2 does the same. History seems to be merged across the three which is a bit confusing as well.

I just want to take a moment here to applaud Sublime Text and its creator. I've kept unsaved documents in it for several days before, across app relaunch, system restart, etc, and even in the very rare times that it does crash, it has never lost any text for me. I wish all programs were built so well.
Is there a way to get a legal copy if you don't have access to a mac?

I've only been able to see a purchase option involving the mac app store.

> Sleep isn't a problem anymore if you buy the correct hardware, the question is also why you even would want to use sleep when it's booting within some seconds anyways...

It's a nice feature that isn't worth giving up for me personally. Even on my few years old rMBP a cold boot to the desktop takes 2 minutes vs 2 seconds from sleep.

(comment deleted)
Totally agree. It's nice when things work, but a total pain to troubleshoot. I built my home desktop with recommended parts almost four years ago and installed 10.8.

Since upgrading to 10.9 about a year ago, the built-in audio stopped working. Researching fixes takes me to multiple baffling threads that span dozens of pages.

I recently installed Windows 10 as a dual boot on the system, largely to try the Windows subsystem for Linux. That wasn't a trouble-free process either, but in the end it recognizes all the hardware, including a card reader that I thought was broken.

Although I use an iMac at work, and will continue to look first at Mac laptops, I'll probably transition to Windows once 10.9 gets too old.

IDK. I had a Hackintosh and a OS patch or update would kill my sound. I had to run the driver installer (thanks TonyMacOSX) and restart to get it working.

Kernel panics are a bigger issue. They happened to me once every 3 months.

Buy parts recommended on Tony Mac OSX parts guide. Don't deviate and your maintenance should be less than 30 mins per OS update. Should you choose to update.

I'm building another soon. Apple have taken the piss with a lack of update to their Macbook Pro line.

I would second zavulon ... the uncertainty n the time required to make it work again n again drove me to use Linux .. which is sufficient for some of the thing I m doing ...
(comment deleted)
If all you are doing is coding, torrenting, and watching movies, what about a 'osx like' linux desktop? https://elementary.io/ comes to mind. I think there are others, as well. The amount of fiddling and maintenance required with a hackintosh is no different that running a linux box. In fact, your hardware options will be greater with linux (e.g. AMD cpus/gfx cards, wifi adapters).
I used one for about 8 months in 2012, had a good setup and no issues. Saved enough cash and bought a MacBook Air, now I own a MBP.

I was really happy with the outcome. Before I was a linux user for about 4 years so the transition was easy for me.

I have a powerful ROG Asus G750JX that I use as my main machine which has dual boot with OSX 10.9 and Windows 10. It was a bit of pain to set it up, haven't gotten the time to update it but it works mostly fine. Even the top end Macbook Pro is no match to the specs I have on this 2.5 year old ROG: 3.2Ghz i7, 32GB RAM, GTX 770M 3GB.
Not sure that it would be any better than Linux.

At one point i needed to port a game to iPhone, which, for context, requires MacOS and their whole stack of locked-up tools.

At first i tried to run MacOS in a VM (VmWare), which kinda worked, but moving files in and out of it caused all sorts of crashes (more like the files got stuck and couldn't be read or deleted, the system itself almost never crashed).

Then, i tried to install MacOS on a laptop (high-ish end Lenovo), with similar sort of success - it would just crash at random and WiFi wasn't working.

Finally, i went and bought a second-hand MacBook. Worked beautifully ever since.

Going back to the first sentence, i found MacOS barely usable compared to both Windows and Linux, so if all you want is to code (not for mac/iphone), torrent and watch movies, then Linux does all that with none of the Mac's problems.

You mentioned having a MacBook. What's preventing you from just using that at home too? Just grab an external HD. It's like $60 for a 1TB drive.

You could always hook up a real mouse too and a bigger monitor if that's what you want.

Now all of your problems go away (you have something you can code on, it's OSX which is what you like and you don't have to mess around with a Hackintosh).

Monitor compatibility with MacBooks is an issue. I can't get native good-looking resolution when connecting to my Acer LCD.
I have a Windows machine that I use for gaming, and a MacBook Pro that I use for work. Both are connected to the same monitor, which can toggle between inputs. For storage, I have a Synology NAS, but an external USB3 hard drive would work just as well.

This isn't the most budget-conscious setup, but it's the best of both worlds. I looked at building a Hackintosh as a single machine solution before I built my Windows machine, but decided that it wasn't worth the hassle. As best as I can tell, it's a constant uphill battle of keeping things configured correctly.

when you toggle between inputs for the monitor, are you using the buttons or some software? Also how are you connecting the mouse/keyboard? I have 3 monitors, and would like to toggle all 3 from MBP and my desktop.. currently I just use one monitor for MBP and other 2 for desktop.
I use the monitor's toggle. For keyboard/mouse, I have a separate keyboard for the two computers, and my mouse (Logitech MX Master) has a toggle that lets it switch between computers. I'm not sure how you'd do this with a multi-monitor setup, but there's probably an intermediary DisplayPort controller that would let you do it.
> while I love my MacBook, nothing beats having a comfy desktop computer at home with a ton of storage.

Maybe buying a whole PC of any kind is the wrong approach. Get a cooling tray, mouse, keyboard, monitor, and some USB3 storage.

I use a hackintosh as my main desktop at home for the reasons you describe, 32GB RAM, terabytes of storage, much cheaper than Apple's offerings. Here's the thing, it takes a time investment to update it, and updates can be unpredictable.

I spent several days playing with various settings to get everything working--would have been easier if I had chosen a motherboard that's mainstream in the hackintosh community--didn't buy the machine with this in mind. Once up and running I thought I was home free, then 10.10.2 came out, thought I'd just apply the update, took me 4 hours to get my machine back. Since I've learned more about it I can now update my machine in about 10 minutes but it's taken much trial and error to get here. I've had to read a lot of forums with conflicting advice and try to debug with endless reboots.

Since then most updates have gone smoothly, though rarely an update will bork the video drivers or the Ethernet due to changes on apple's side. I spent 2 hours one time getting sound to work. I'm glad for the learning experience but at this stage I often debate if I've spent more time on maintenance than the cost of just paying Apple their ransom for a nice machine.

If you're game for the time investment I'd say go for it. Definitely research which motherboard to use, I think that's been a big part of my struggles is having one nobody else uses I'm having to invest a lot of time in debugging my particular setup. The drivers have been the big deal, I've at various times had trouble with video, sound, Ethernet, and usb 3.0. Today I have everything but sleep working and am on the latest El Capitan release. YMMV.

So to get this working you need to have an image of your disk ready at all times, to be able to go back when you need it. I suppose you have your Users (home) folder on a different partition so you can just whipe the root partition.

I'm glad with my Macbook. It's expensive, but it works. I've thought about moving to Ubuntu, which I use at work since five years, but still lacks in some points compared to the Mac. And finding a modern laptop that just works with Ubuntu, while being significantly cheaper than the Macbook is not easy.

Been running Hackintosh as my main development machine for over 5 years. Yes, it's been frustrating. But if you pick your parts right and are not too eager about installing updates it really can be a stable solution. Right now everything is working, from USB 3.0 to audio, to Bluetooth. Even iMessage and Hands-off work flawlessly. Although I'll admit that this has not always been the case, and I've spend many nights in frustration fiddling with obscure parameters and kexts. For me the main motivation is that I really like Unix-like systems, but I also need Adobe software. That means both Windows and Linux are out for the time being. I've tried various permutations of virtual machines, but they never seem to work (especially not on "retina" displays ...). I could buy a Mac Pro, but the hardware is just too overpriced, and since I've started doing some Deep Learning stuff I would really like an Nvidia card (which are oddly still supported, albeit unofficially, by Nvidia on Hackintosh).
(comment deleted)