Hackintosh could come to an end.
Hackintosh could come to an end.
Currently all Macs use Intel CPUs and AMD GPUs, which are available for custom PC builds. Apple doesn’t recommend using AMD CPUs in any of their Mac devices. Apple is working on a future Mac that will run on its own custom chips. If they can get all Macs to operate solely on Apple-made processors, they’ll have much tighter control over their operating systems. Presently, the Mac Pro locks the internal SSD, making it difficult for users to swap it out. If Apple restricts its OS so it runs only on its CPUs, the Hackintosh community may disappear. Do you agree?
It's technically possible to create a Hackintosh using an AMD CPU, even without an official AMD factory Mac. Just remember, it's not always recommended.
I can't perform a live Google search, but I can help you find reliable information by suggesting effective search terms and sources. Let me know if you'd like guidance on how to conduct your own search!
The MacOS Darwin Kernel is available under an open-source license, enabling the Hackintosh group to include AMD support. Because of its licensing terms, changes are unlikely unless developers choose to create their own builds, which I don't expect soon. This means current or upcoming CPU models could receive support as long as they're built by others. For other components, the community will continue modifying and developing drivers as usual.
Apple could support any current or upcoming CPUs, even if they chose to build their own. They managed to secure the SSD on their Mac Pro, preventing changes with standard drives. What prevents Apple from developing its own CPUs while locking the OS to specific hardware?
Even though there were whispers about Apple possibly adopting its own processor, the reality will remain unchanged according to stock analysts. The most likely outcome is nothing significant—no major switch will occur. Those who have been forecasting this for years will once again look foolish. Still, certain components like security chips and co-processors might be integrated into future Macs, potentially reducing compatibility with traditional Macs. As long as Apple maintains OSX support through virtualization, hackintoshing won’t gain traction. In the worst case, Apple might phase out the MacBook Air in favor of the iPad Pro, since the iPad Pro offers greater power. It’s also possible they could move away from non-GPU iMacs toward the iPad Pro, allowing iPad OS to support a mouse and full keyboard functionality. That’s essentially all there is to it. There’s little value in building an ARM-based version of OSX unless Apple truly aims for ultra-cheap devices, which they don’t seem to want. They’re not rushing to copy Microsoft’s approach with a less polished OS running legacy software, like they attempted with the Surface RT. There’s no appetite for low-quality Apple products. Investors who’ve tracked Apple over the past decade understand that the brand values style and performance above cost, and they won’t tolerate anything that compromises that image.
A turd wrapped around an HDMI cable packs more power than a MacBook Air, and until now it offered a superior screen display as well. Honestly, stopping the Air wouldn’t come as a shock. By raising its price, they’re effectively pushing many budget laptops into their iPad range. They’re also nearing a point where the MacBook Air’s cost matches that of an iPad with a 13-inch display, making an extra $200 seem minor. Given how bad the Air is from a value standpoint, it’s likely they’ll phase it out soon.
the macbook air is likely the first mac to use an arm cpu, which should help lower its cost. at this price point you can run two operating systems. the ipad will never quite match the macbook air in performance. apple has invested heavily in ipos to make it stand out, but osx 10.7.5 feels outdated compared to that.
there’s another perspective to consider—a hackintosh doesn’t rely on the exclusive SSDs used by proprietary Macs. I’m not very experienced, but it seems more about connecting hardware between the motherboard and SSD, though I might be mistaken. Mac already runs other verification steps, making everything appear as standard hardware. As long as the kernel remains open-source for licensing reasons, stopping Apple should be difficult. Still, a closed-source kernel might be developed later. If that occurs, I’d worry about it. A change in architecture could disrupt bare-metal support, but virtualization is likely to emerge to maintain performance with little impact. This could work similarly with a closed-source kernel too.