AppleTV Becomes OSX Workstation

An anonymous reader writes "AppleTVhacks published a full howto install guide with 12 easy steps to turn your AppleTV into a full blown OSX workstation. With a processor emulation, hacker Semthex of hackint0sh.org, managed to get full blown OSX working on a AppleTV. The kernel for this hack is freely available under APSL and opens the legal way to a really cheap Mac Nano. With 300$ difference to the Mac Mini, this is becoming a fairly interesting deal." April Fool's, btw.

Re:I dont get it?

[Constantine XVI]

The hack is legal because he just modified the kernel, like the ASPL lets you.
However, note the little bit in the OSX license that says you may only run OSX on Apple hardware. The A.TV is still Apple hardware. Your Dell isin't.

Re:I dont get it?

[Megane]

Is there something I'm missing? If that's legal, what's to stop me putting a (legal) copy os OS X on any common-or-garden x86 box?

Two things:

• 1. The OS X lincense states that you can only run OS X on Apple hardware. Guess what? The AppleTV is Apple hardware!
• 2. There is no way at this time to buy a boxed copy of OS X x86 at a store, because... they don't sell it in stores! Right now all the boxed copies of OS X are PPC-only. When Leopard comes out, then things should start to get interesting.

1/2 the price, less than 1/2 the performance

[PrescriptionWarning]

the 600 dollar mac mini comes with a core duo 1.66 Ghz processor (maybe soon even a core 2 duo)... so how exactly is turning a 300 dollar machine with less than 1/3 the speed make sense economically? especially since you'll still have to somehow acquire OSX by some means.

granted the apple tv is tiny and cool, but if you're looking for a super cheap PC, you might as well go ahead and grab a mini for a little extra for the total package. Besides I'm sure you can find them for 500 bucks or so since they've been around for so long...

Re:I dont get it?

[Jim Hall]

The problem with this (for me) is that you have to install the Intel version of OS X. As far as I know you can't get the Intel version without buying an Intel Mac (something I don't have). So basically you'll have to wait until Leopard before you can buy an Intel version of OS X.

Apple's store [apple.com] sells MacOSX Tiger for $129.

That said, the cost of Apple TV + MacOSX Tiger is only $170 less than buying a Mac Mini with MacOSX pre-installed. And Apple TV doesn't come with a DVD/CD drive, and it's hard drive is 20GB smaller than the Mac Mini. Hmmm.. I think I know which one I'd buy.

Re:I dont get it?

[catseye]

The retail version of Tiger is 10.4.6, and is PPC only. Apple didn't combine OS X versions into a universal install until 10.4.8. Right now, the only way to install OS X on an Apple Intel machine is with the system disks that come with the computer.

One presumes this would change with Leopard (10.5), which should be the first retail-available install of OS X that would work on Intel or PPC machines.

Re:Don't play dumb.

[daveschroeder]

Yeah, this is another common thing people bring up.

While it may get you around your own personal moral qualms (and isn't a bad argument, frankly), Mac OS X 10.4.x (Intel) and Mac OS X 10.4.x (PowerPC) are simply not the same product, and you can't juggle licenses between them. Your family pack license is for Mac OS X 10.4.x (PowerPC) only.

There already is standing precedent for this: Mac OS X Server 10.4.x (PowerPC) and Mac OS X Server 10.4.7 (Universal) are not the same product, and have different part numbers, and the license for the former does not entitle you to the latter: it is a separate product that must be repurchased.

Let me reiterate I don't think the argument is fundamentally a bad one! I'm sure that people with family packs will feel they're well within the "spirit" of things if they then pirate or otherwise obtain Mac OS X 10.4.x (Intel) for their AppleTV.

The only product I can see, right now, today, that could theoretically be purchased and run legally on AppleTV is Mac OS X Server 10.4.7 (Universal). In the future, of course, Mac OS X 10.5.x (Leopard) gets added to the mix.

The final question, though, still stands: if legal push came to shove, would Apple consider AppleTV a "computer", since that's what the license agreement specifies? It's exactly that kind of legal gray area, lack of support, and the fact that it currently requires using a hacked kernel (making OS updates difficult, etc.), that will keep this to the hobbyist/hacker/experimenter crowd, and out of any kind of mainstream/business/institutional applications.

I will agree it's very interesting, though: AppleTV's basically just a little Mac!

Yes, it's a Hoax.

[sakusha]

You are correct, it's a hoax. It's not even a very convincing hoax. The Dell monitor he used has two inputs so he could easily switch between video sources, and there's obviously a second Mac nearby since it's running other software from another system before the demo. Notice how the video cuts off part of the Mac screen (like the Dock) when he launches apps. And everybody knows how easy it is to fake the contents of the System Profiler screen. More evidence: notice how there are two disk drives mounted on the AppleTV.

Re:MythTV?

[corychristison]

I, personally, am waiting for the hackers to produce step by step instructions to install some flavour of GNU/Linux on it. Gentoo would be my personal choice, but really anything would be good. Since they have already made it possible to install Gentoo on 'full' Mac's, so I think it would be the best choice, since it is a lot easier to install. After one person installs it, then they could just push a disk image out on a torrent for everyone to enjoy.

Anyway, my reasoning for wanting to install Linux on it: Mostly it's small footprint. There is very limited amount of RAM in it.. and Linux, i think, would utilize the least. Thus leaving more RAM and processing power for running video's, etc.

Also, since it is so low powered, it would be great as a system to run all night to download torrents, etc. It has a decent sized drive, enough to download a DVD or two. ;-)

Re:MythTV? -- working on it

[mk500]

I'm working on getting MythFrontend running. That was actually the main driver behind me getting this working, as I'm a big MythTV user. My main backend has 500GB and 2 HDTV tuners. I'd love to get this box running in my bedroom with the 24" HD LCD I have on the wall (Dell). I'll post back when I have MythFrontend running....just need to configure my backend for remote frontend access and install the OS X MythFrontend which has already been compiled for Intel OS X. Oh yeah, I'm the guy in the video.

Re:MythTV?

[kmo]

Anyone know if you can run MythTV under OSX? This thing would make a great myth frontend.

Yes, MythTV runs just fine on OSX [mythtv.org], both Intel and PPC.

NOT AN APRIL FOOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Who was the idiot editing the headline? It is NOT an april fool...

http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5 41 [hackint0sh.org]

Not an aprils fool

[Anonymous Coward]

This hack runs fine here...

The anonymous idiot that answered before me is a retard, and probably some well known enemy of semthex.

Why would someone be as stupid as that UGLY dude from over there I think I would sMash him if I knew who he was ;)

Wow /.

[heyyou_overhere]

Ok, April 1st was retarded enough since the April Fools jokes weren't even funny. Now you have to tag REAL stories as "april fools" and "omgponies (what the hell?)".

semthex: Seems like someone on Slashdot got drunk and marked the news of AppleTV as April fools. No it is not. Please read up on the forum, download the kernel, read the guide and test yourself. AppleTVHacks.net is currently down, possibly because of the monster traffic currently. I already contacted the owner about it but so far not got an answer. Once it is back [sic] again I will let you know.

from http://www.hackint0sh.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5 76 [hackint0sh.org]

Jesus .. Slashdot loosing quality

[Anonymous Coward]

AppleTVHacks.net is back online and as you can read on the linked forum as well, it is NOT A APRIL FOOL. To sad that it seems to be really true that editors now not even read the storys anymore they write about, or before writting shit even check something about it.