Posted by blkhp19 10 hours ago
Surely, it must be a better option than Linux if you want to get the most out of a PC computer? At least for 10 more years.
I'm not sure why it would. Why would anyone want to hack on different proprietary software with no supplier support and whose days are clearly numbered (Apple's move to ARM)?
For usability I mean. It's clearly an interesting technical feat.
So to have a fully fledged and more usable computer, for those who don't want to purchase the Apple hardware.
And the latest Mac OS still supports Intel, so you'll get many more years out of a machine. For what I know, the last 10 versions of MacOS are still very usable.
I dual-booted Mojave on 2 Wintel machines back during the Clover bootloader days, I could only tolerate it for ~2 weeks before giving up. Spoofing OEM Apple hardware is basically impossible, even with configuration-matched CPUs your motherboard will still mismatch the ACPI overrides that macOS expects. Any variety of modern GPU is basically forfeit, hardware acceleration is flaky, Metal is inhumane (with or without Hackintosh), CUDA is unsupported, Vulkan is MIA, filesystem support is a joke, and OTA updates have to be disabled or else your system volume will overwrite the partition table and erase everything that's installed. Reinstalling from scratch can take multiple days if you don't back up your EFI configuration, so you really want to avoid bricking your install while you tweak the configs to stop being broken.
Even as a developer, using a Hackintosh was a waste of my time back in 2018 when "everything was supported". In 2026, I cannot comprehend a single objective reason why you would use an x86 Hackintosh instead of a better-supported and more fully-featured Linux or WSL installation. x86_64-apple-darwin is a partially depreciated target triple that's not suitable for any macOS or Linux development work, and for prosumers the architecture is already unsupported by many professional apps. Hackintosh is a museum piece now, even OpenCore can't save it: https://blog.greggant.com/posts/2025/07/16/open-core-is-dead...
Not to distract too much from the main topic, but what do you think about the Hopper disassembler? I have only used Radare2, IDA Pro, and Ghidra. Though, I haven't used the latter two on MacOS. What do you prefer about Hopper? I have been hesitant to purchase a license because I was never sure if it was worth the money compared to the alternatives.
I like using it for disassembling UIKit (for my day job working on iOS apps), and overall, I like the UI/UX and how it feels like a native Mac app.
I've tried Ghidra, and while extremely impressive and capable, it might be the most Java-feeling app I've ever used. I'd love for someone to whip up an AppKit + SwiftUI shell for it.
You are correct about the UI/UX. I do think Hopper is ahead of others in that regard. Though, Radare2 being a CLI tool is nice as well. Though, I haven't attempted to use Radare2 for MacOS/iOS disassembly. Though I must ask, why are you disassembling UIKit? Looking for private API behavior or working around bugs? I've been learning more about iOS in my spare time, because despite my love for Swift, I have never used it for iOS. I only have used Swift for MacOS automation, i.e., AppleScript replacement via the Accessibility, Core Foundation, AppKit, etc..
> Ghidra, and while extremely impressive and capable, it might be the most Java-feeling app
I chuckled while reading this because I had the exact same thought when I first used Ghidra. I haven't tried Ghidra on MacOS because I will not taint my machines with the impurities of Java. I also do not want to enable Rosetta, so that was another obstacle in trying Ghidra on MacOS. In Ghidra's defense, using Java was a pragmatic choice. The "write once, run anywhere" promise of Java is likely a near-necessity for a disassembler for government operations.
Exactly this!