New Motherboard Promises Out-of-the-Box Hackintosh Support

[vailr]

A new custom motherboard from Quo Computer promises to provide built-in support for multi-OS booting, including OS X. Hackintoshes built on the platform will be able support Ivy Bridge CPUs, Firewire, USB 3.0, and Thunderbolt right out of the box. TMO will have more to share once we get our hands on a shipping board.
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/cool...rd-promises-out-of-the-box-hackintosh-support

projectQ

http://quocomputer.com/projectq/

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/quo/projectq-run-any-os-the-unique-motherboard

In 2009 QUO created a buzz by introducing the first Quo Retail Store. This allows customers to walk-in and test add-in cards and peripherals.
In 2013 Quo is introducing the first motherboard ever made from the ground up to run any OS, thus the AOS at the end of the name of Z77MX-QUO-AOS. Run any OS you choose seamlessly on this board with high-end components with a 3 year warranty.
Quo now allows system builders worldwide to purchase a motherboard specifically engineered to meet their needs.
It is the only motherboard available in the industry with Firewire 400 and 800 on board (1394A and 1394B). The motherboard also includes Intel certified Thunderbolt, Intel LAN for high demand network sharing and complian audio in a compact but expandable microATX form factor. Most importantly we will include custom firmware and UEFI that allows booting of OS in under 10 seconds!
Pricing

During the introduction period the Z77MX-QUO-AOS will be available for pre-order at $219.00

 

[TheStu]

Interesting, though the price is a little high. I appreciate the inclusion of Intel LAN and all that, but 6 SATA and 6 USB (4 2.0 & 2 3.0) is a little crummy.

 

[vailr]

Does the board allow direct booting of an OSX install disc or an OSX USB memory stick installation? And: whether Apple would have any legal basis for complaint if it did?

 

[rivan]

Does the board allow direct booting of an OSX install disc or an OSX USB memory stick installation? And: whether Apple would have any legal basis for complaint if it did?

Expect Apple to take action in one way or another.

 

[Wreckem]

Apple hasn't messed with Quo in the past nor will they now. They aren't technically doing anything that breaks Apple EULA.

Plus a motherboard doesn't = mac clone. Its a motherboard not a computer.

Also, what this sounds like is, they have built a motherboard made up of components that are natively supported by OSX(and every other OS). Right now its fairly simple to set up a hackintosh with Gigabyte boards, but a few things don't work or don't work without a lot of "hacking". It sounds like Quo has specifically selected components that are 100% compatible with OSX, not that its going to boot an osx install disc directly. This will allow everything on the board to work "seamlessly" when hackintoshing.

Edit: looks like its the above + built in boot loader, but still doesnt look like it will direct boot a OSX install disc directly, says it will require "minimal" effort to install, it takes a few steps out of hacintoshing, but not everything.

Edit: I doubt they ever sell that many.

 

[vailr]

Anyone remember "Cartri" (from Brazil) and his failed attempt at modding Gigabyte bioses to support "direct boot an OSX install disc"?

 

[Zaap]

Plenty of Gigabyte boards already work just fine for OSX right out of the box.

Seems all these people are doing is flashing a custom UEFI on a stock Gigabyte board (which you can already do yourself for free) and charging extra for it. Kind of a slightly more legal attempt at being the next Pystar that was just going the full step of selling assembled/installed systems. If they're actually manufacturing something unique, that'd be interesting, but based on past history with Hackintosh-shysters, I'm doubtful.

 

[TheStu]

Plenty of Gigabyte boards already work just fine for OSX right out of the box.

Seems all these people are doing is flashing a custom UEFI on a stock Gigabyte board (which you can already do yourself for free) and charging extra for it. Kind of a slightly more legal attempt at being the next Pystar that was just going the full step of selling assembled/installed systems. If they're actually manufacturing something unique, that'd be interesting, but based on past history with Hackintosh-shysters, I'm doubtful.

I tried looking up that board on newegg, Gigabyte doesn't seem to have anything like it. MicroATX with intel LAN and dual thunderbolt? They may have worked with Gigabyte to make them a custom board though, that would make sense with the SKU that silkscreened on there, along with some of the other stuff. It sure smells like a Gigabyte board.

 

[Wreckem]

Plenty of Gigabyte boards already work just fine for OSX right out of the box.

Seems all these people are doing is flashing a custom UEFI on a stock Gigabyte board (which you can already do yourself for free) and charging extra for it. Kind of a slightly more legal attempt at being the next Pystar that was just going the full step of selling assembled/installed systems. If they're actually manufacturing something unique, that'd be interesting, but based on past history with Hackintosh-shysters, I'm doubtful.

Its not just a stock gigabyte board. It has onboard firewire 400/800 and different audio than any stock Gigabyte board.

 

[Wreckem]

I tried looking up that board on newegg, Gigabyte doesn't seem to have anything like it. MicroATX with intel LAN and dual thunderbolt? They may have worked with Gigabyte to make them a custom board though, that would make sense with the SKU that silkscreened on there, along with some of the other stuff. It sure smells like a Gigabyte board.

I does look like Gigabyte is the one manufacturing the boards but it isn't a stock model and I highly doubt it will be Gigabyte branded. I wish gigabyte would come out with a mitx with thunderbolt. I'd take that before this board(no need for firewire).

 

[Zaap]

I tried looking up that board on newegg, Gigabyte doesn't seem to have anything like it. MicroATX with intel LAN and dual thunderbolt? They may have worked with Gigabyte to make them a custom board though, that would make sense with the SKU that silkscreened on there, along with some of the other stuff. It sure smells like a Gigabyte board.

It's not a currently for sale Gigabyte board for certain, but the photo circulating is definitely a Gigabyte model, probably an upgrade to the GA-Z77MX-D3H TH. The only things (right down to the GA identifier) that don't scream "Gigabyte" are the two places that say QU or QUO that frankly look like stickers.

Why would a board supposedly custom-commissioned for OSX feature SLI and ATI Crossfire support?

None of it would be a big deal, it's just that it's always sketchy when people try to commercialize Hackintoshing, and then they usually start in with all these dubious claims to do so. (Finally a way to run OSX on a PC motherboard!) Oh yeah, sure. No one can do that already! It's all just netbooks and iPads.

We see what happened when Pystar tried to get clever. Apple took them to the cleaners, and rightly so. The last thing Hackintosh enthusiasts need is anyone bringing heat directly on Gigabyte which has been quietly doing whatever it is they do to make boards that work particularly well with OSX for years now.

 

[vailr]

The photo shows a model number of: GA-Z77MX-QUO-AOS

 

[Zaap]

Just looks to me like someone 'shopped the Gigabyte logo off from next to the FC symbol, and possibly just 'shopped QUO in place of Gigabyte across the south heatsink.

 

[Kaido]

From what I understand, they are using Gigabyte as an OEM. Depending on the response, there may be more models forthcoming. I believe the idea is to use a customizable BIOS that allows you to load up, say, Chameleon. The only thing that isn't supported OOTB is audio.

I think it's pretty cool, if you want onboard Thunderbolt, Firewire, Intel NIC, and a low barrier of entry as far as the technical side of things goes. Personally I like to use USB sound, a natively-supported PIC NIC, and just a small USB stick for the bootloader - that way you get a 100% vanilla hard drive, and using Tonymac's Unibeast & Multibeast systems, loading & booting the OS is pretty easy.

Overall not a bad deal for $250 or so, if you want something easy. Sort of like EFI-X but in motherboard form...

 

[Wreckem]

It's not a currently for sale Gigabyte board for certain, but the photo circulating is definitely a Gigabyte model, probably an upgrade to the GA-Z77MX-D3H TH. The only things (right down to the GA identifier) that don't scream "Gigabyte" are the two places that say QU or QUO that frankly look like stickers.

Why would a board supposedly custom-commissioned for OSX feature SLI and ATI Crossfire support?

None of it would be a big deal, it's just that it's always sketchy when people try to commercialize Hackintoshing, and then they usually start in with all these dubious claims to do so. (Finally a way to run OSX on a PC motherboard!) Oh yeah, sure. No one can do that already! It's all just netbooks and iPads.

We see what happened when Pystar tried to get clever. Apple took them to the cleaners, and rightly so. The last thing Hackintosh enthusiasts need is anyone bringing heat directly on Gigabyte which has been quietly doing whatever it is they do to make boards that work particularly well with OSX for years now.

Quo has been selling custom systems without OS's installed since 2009. Apple has yet to go after them. As for Crossfire/SLI, the board is being marketed for all operating systems not just osx. Probably to try and give them extra cover just in case. And technically they don't even mention OSX by name.

As for Gigabyte, they aren't doing anything wrong. They just happen to make boards that use components that are native to OSX. Thats why its easier to use Gigabyte boards, the components and drivers are compatible/native for OSX because they are the same components that are used on the Intel Boards Apple uses. Gigabyte uses the components they do, not because it makes for slightly easier hackintoshing, but because the components have better compatibility and stability across different flavors of Windows and Linux.

 

[Zaap]

From what I understand, they are using Gigabyte as an OEM. Depending on the response, there may be more models forthcoming. I believe the idea is to use a customizable BIOS that allows you to load up, say, Chameleon. The only thing that isn't supported OOTB is audio.

I'm curious how this is any different than Clover, or custom BIOSes already in use by OSx86.

As for Gigabyte, they aren't doing anything wrong. They just happen to make boards that use components that are native to OSX.

True, but then I haven't thought many companies did anything wrong that Apple has gone after. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if they used some of their mountains of cash to urge Gigabyte into making the Hackintosh process harder to achieve if too much attention is called to it. How much cash would prompt Gigabyte to change features like other mobo makes so that the possibility of installing OSX is that much harder? If QUO can pay them to make a board that makes it easier, don't see what's stopping a gazillion dollar corporation like Apple from doing the opposite.

You'll have to forgive my cynicism over these kinds of efforts to commercialize OSx86. Based on past experience, I predict a lot of the same things: making dubious claims (finally a board that does what 10 other boards already do!) selling otherwise available hardware as unique (if Gigabyte doesn't come out with its own update to the GA-Z77MX-D3H TH that's got all the same features, just minus some middle man installing a custom BIOS on it, then props to QUO for that, but we'll see...) and worst of all, passing off stolen source from OSx86 projects as their own. I guess time will tell.

 

[vailr]

While "Cartri" was still providing his custom OSX-friendly modded bioses for Gigabyte boards, he was still working with the older non-UEFI bioses. And he was always commenting about the outdated bios compilers that Gigabyte was still using at that time, just to retain compatability with Microsoft O.S.'s. So: he couldn't do anything too "adventurous" with his modded bioses, or else there would be problems running any O.S. other than OSX.
So: I'm wondering whether Gigabyte has now updated their standard bios compiler software, and also whether it would now be possible (for anyone interested) to sufficiently modify a Gigabyte Z77 UEFI bios to finally enable direct booting an untampered Apple OSX boot medium (either DVD or an 8 Gb USB flash drive) for "native" OSX installation, audio safe Apple updating, etc.

 

[amdhunter]

With something like this, you still wouldn't be able to install updates and so on, without a huge headache, right?

 

[SKORPI0]

With something like this, you still wouldn't be able to install updates and so on, without a huge headache, right?

Hopefully that will be a thing of the past. Fixing kexts/permissions and correct video, working audio, etc. is a PITB.

 

[Zaap]

Curious why people have all these issues updating? Sure, I know it can be a problem, but I'm trying to remember the last point update that presented any sort of a real problem, and that didn't let me just run the system updater as with any Mac, or maybe (at worst) required a new audio kext or something if I wasn't using better USB audio anyway...

...um... I think it was 10.5.6

 

[KeithP]

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if they used some of their mountains of cash to urge Gigabyte into making the Hackintosh process harder to achieve if too much attention is called to it.

That will never happen. The hackintosh market is tiny, nearly invisible to Apple and a high percentage of those taking part in it would never buy a Mac anyway. Besides, if they did pay Gigabyte other motherboard vendors would hold there out their hands for a pay off or they would just step into the space that Gigabyte previously occupied.

Psystar was selling complete Apple clones. If Apple had let that stand, others would start doing the same thing and it would be a problem for Apple.

What I don't understand is why Apple hasn't killed the hackintosh community entirely buy doing a hardware check and having the OS phone home from time to time for validation. I am guessing as long as a company isn't selling a complete system, they just don't care.

-KeithP

 

[Zaap]

That will never happen. The hackintosh market is tiny, nearly invisible to Apple and a high percentage of those taking part in it would never buy a Mac anyway. Besides, if they did pay Gigabyte other motherboard vendors would hold there out their hands for a pay off or they would just step into the space that Gigabyte previously occupied.

I agree they don't care that much so long as it stays a 'hack' that most people won't ever attempt. But companies trying to commercialize, bottle, and sell it can easily become too much for them to ignore.

I think people misunderstand the scope of the Pystar case. Yes, they got taken to the cleaners for selling systems with OSX installed, but that was only part of it. They also got slapped hard by the courts for selling tools to circumvent Apple's copyrights, such as custom EFI bootloaders/kexts and everything that makes Hackintoshes possible. So it is more than just blatantly selling pre-installed OSX, it's selling anything that can be said to purposefully violate Apple's copyrights.

Given Apple's track record with using courts to get thier way, I don't even see it as a stretch that they could claim Gigabyte knows what it's doing making some board that's a purposeful tool for violating their copyrights, not just an accidental discovery of some OSx86 hackers, and then throw money around/sue/whatever to scare everyone else with the threat of being sued to the point motherboard makers go out of their way to make sure their boards can't run OSX rather than look the other way if they can.

You can say it's paranoid, but this is a company that spends billions suing grocery stores over logos that look nothing like theirs, and having injunctions slapped left and right to ban the sale of competing products that I'd argue in reality are far less in violation of any of their copyrights than running OSX on non-Apple hardware is.

What I don't understand is why Apple hasn't killed the hackintosh community entirely buy doing a hardware check and having the OS phone home from time to time for validation.

Because it's a process that would cost tens of millions to run and maintain, and would in reality snag a whole lot of legit Macs along with Hacks. The bother and user-annoyance of an activation system simply hasn't been worth it to Apple just to put a minor speed-bump in the path of a few Hackintoshes/VM installs.

 

[Wreckem]

I agree they don't care that much so long as it stays a 'hack' that most people won't ever attempt. But companies trying to commercialize, bottle, and sell it can easily become too much for them to ignore.

I think people misunderstand the scope of the Pystar case. Yes, they got taken to the cleaners for selling systems with OSX installed, but that was only part of it. They also got slapped hard by the courts for selling tools to circumvent Apple's copyrights, such as custom EFI bootloaders/kexts and everything that makes Hackintoshes possible. So it is more than just blatantly selling pre-installed OSX, it's selling anything that can be said to purposefully violate Apple's copyrights.

Given Apple's track record with using courts to get thier way, I don't even see it as a stretch that they could claim Gigabyte knows what it's doing making some board that's a purposeful tool for violating their copyrights, not just an accidental discovery of some OSx86 hackers, and then throw money around/sue/whatever to scare everyone else with the threat of being sued to the point motherboard makers go out of their way to make sure their boards can't run OSX rather than look the other way if they can.

You can say it's paranoid, but this is a company that spends billions suing grocery stores over logos that look nothing like theirs, and having injunctions slapped left and right to ban the sale of competing products that I'd argue in reality are far less in violation of any of their copyrights than running OSX on non-Apple hardware is.


Because it's a process that would cost tens of millions to run and maintain, and would in reality snag a whole lot of legit Macs along with Hacks. The bother and user-annoyance of an activation system simply hasn't been worth it to Apple just to put a minor speed-bump in the path of a few Hackintoshes/VM installs.

You are paranoid, because Gigabyte isn't doing any of the above. They don't do custom UEFI, they don't do kexts. They don't allow you to directly book a Mac installation disc. They don't circumvent anything so there is no DCMA trouble for them either. They solely use components that are universally compatible, which is more for Linux than OSX. And if they are the manufacturer for this board, they wouldn't be the ones liable if Apple does take action against the Quo board(if the Quo board actually exists).

Psytar was a small time company without much in the way of legal counsel. They did things that Gigabyte isn't doing.

Could Apple go after those that freely distribute custom EFI that allows people to install OSX on PCs? Yes technically they could try under DCMA provisions, maybe under copyright law if they are using copyrighted code, but not under their EULA. But as of now they haven't tried to sue anyone that is not commercially distributing stuff. They don't seem to be going after those not trying to making money. And Gigabyte has not done anything that can get it legitimately sued by Apple. Making hardware that contains universal components is nothing like Pystar, or selling custom EFI. Apple would be laughed out of court if it tried to sue Gigabyte for using commonly available universal components when creating their motherboards.

I don't believe Apple is going to waste its resources unless someone tries to commercialize a mac clone. Quo its treading that line carefully, or has been up to this point(the motherboard). Until there are actual real production boards for sale, we don't know what the boards are actually capable of.
As for Gigabyte, again, they have done nothing wrong.

Is hackintoshing a violation of Apple's EULA? Yes it is for the person installing OSX on a pc. Is it a DCMA violation? Again possibly for the person using the custom EFIs to circumvent protection to install OSX on a PC. Are they going to go after Hacintoshers? I doubt it. Its DCMA violation to rip DVD/Blurays, how many people are being sued for that?

Honestly I feel Apple likes the Hackintosh community, so long as it doesn't try to commercialize anything. Sure occasionally they drop support for certain components(like the Atom), but they could do a lot more to limit hackintoshing of desktops but they don't. And lets be honest, Apple doesn't really give two shits about the desktop market. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple kills off their desktop products in the next few years.

 

[Zaap]

As for Gigabyte, again, they have done nothing wrong.

You keep saying that, but that QUO board IS a Gigabyte motherboard. That's the issue, not their standard motherboards that just happen to work with OSX. Purposefully manufacturing something for someone else to sell as a product to circumvent Apple's copyrights wouldn't let Gigabyte off the hook. (And I'm sure they know that, so it's why I'm doubting the whole thing is real in the first place.)

We are talking about a commercial enterprise and therefore it does become something that Apple could go after. Again, read up on the Pystar case; courts have already ruled on the matter and as I said it went far beyond merely selling a system with OSX on it. Anyone who thinks they can make a commercial effort out of OSx86 could easily be sued based on the judgements in the Pystar case, which was pretty broad. Has nothing to do with individuals Hackintoshing their own systems by the way, only with businesses trying to commercialize it.

 

[Durvelle27]

Rather stick with intel branded boards for my hackintosh