Why do people do this? Is it only for fun? I would think that any GNU/Linux system could provide similar or better tooling and most likely results in a less painful upgrade process.
Also, the UX/UI of OS X is just miles ahead of anything on Linux. Same for 3rd party software.
I still remember having to write a Bash script on Ubuntu to move the mouse every 2 minutes because the screensaver couldn't detect VLC was running in fullscreen. Or having to reboot because the audio driver crashed randomly.
Even xkcd has a strip about something similar https://xkcd.com/196/
I remember when compiz came out and it was supposed to make the UIs really pop with a good graphics card. It really bridged the gap a lot, but the physics in the animation lacked a bit of timing finesse. The animations weren't terribly clunky, but they lacked a certain fluidity with the interaction. When interacting with a mouse or finger, certain things like input speed wouldn't be taken account for. Like on MacOS, a fast moving mouse cursor travels more across the screen than a slow moving mouse cursor. When scrolling, moving the scrollbars faster increase the scrolling speed while slowing down the movements slow things down proportionately in a very intuitive fashion, while a similar concept on Linux may do something very similar, it doesn't quite hit the nail on the head. It usually requires adjusting ones input and getting used to the tool.
Even when the OS UI improved, individual applications also needed appropriate UI updates and UX. Since a lot of GUI apps were wrappers for underlying command-line utilities, they felt a lot like thinking in command-line mode for a GUI app or were unapproachable unless one came from a technical background.
But even for people who may only use a browser, when starting a browser, the default set of fonts in a given browser were usually not that great. Not sure how much it has improved now, but I think the main culprit lies in the font rendering settings and available fonts. Getting prettier fonts have improved slightly, but a lot of the system feel comes from these fonts, especially in things like menus. So reading a webpage in some standard sans-serif may be fine on Windows & Mac, but just look slightly off on Linux. Functionally, nothing was wrong, but maybe the text box slightly overflowed outside of a div that was sized well for MacOS and Windows, but not Linux.
Small things like these add up and make people feel like desktop Linux is just not quite there. I think Canonical has done a tremendous amount of work getting desktop Linux closer to being viable. This is coming from someone that's on 14.04 ubuntu. I haven't tried the lastest 16.x series, but I'm guessing it will get closer.
The other challenge outside of UI/UX improvements really is commercial support that comes along with 3rd party products. When you purchase some printer and you see there is included productivity software, it will 100% work on Windows, 20% chance there is a Mac port, and usually 0% chance that it has a Linux port/version. Even when you purchase something OS agnostic like a cable modem, there will be Windows/Mac Compatible logos, but no Linux Compatible sticker making one feel like desktop Linux is relevant or even a prudent choice for someone non-technical to use.
I thought the same, but I spent the last few days surveying the field and it's not actually the case anymore. ElementaryOS and LinuxMint have top-notch desktop managers (Pantheon and Cinnamon respectively) and provide a really polished experience. After a few hours on Elementary in a VM, I am really tempted to format my rMBP and see if it can be my main OS going forward.
A few years later, after Apple released the first intel macs, I discovered the osx86 wiki, gave it a shot and it worked! I built a Hackintosh that was almost as powerful as a full MacPro, Intel Q6600, 16GB RAM, RAID10 HDD, for 1/3 of the price.
I've always enjoyed using a Mac since the System 7 days. But in this day and age paying >$1500 for a laptop just seems ludicrous. I'm typing this from a 2011 MBP. I anticipated purchasing a newer 2016 MBP. After this announcement I'll probably look into a refurbished rMBP.
Sadly, I believe the entry level xMac is never going to happen. the Mac mini gets no love, the MacPro gets no attention, the iMac gets and it appears the focus is mobile and laptops. So I'll be back on the OSX86 wiki making my shopping list and doing my research once again.
Do not even bother to mention Wine, or Linux native alternatives, because there are non that are good enough for most professional users.
Also, less painful? I spend less time installing and configuring a hackintosh system and upgrades than I do configuring and maintaining most Linux distros.
Making a stable hackintosh system these days is as easy as picking parts from something like OP’s post and following install and configure guides on the same site. Very little pain involved actually.
My preferred work environment is OS X/macOS as host and a Linux distro as guest.
I also prefer a hackintosh system to a Mac Pro for price/performance ratio, and the flexibility of selecting my own hardware and upgrading whenever I feel like it.
Also, curiosity.
Take window management, for example: If I want my windows to fill exactly half the screen, have one window on top of all others or move them from anywhere (just not the title bar), last time I checked it was just impossible out of the box.
Package management is another thing where GNU/Linux excels. On Debian, I am usually just a single “apt-get” away from having exactly what I need. The UI for such tasks does not seem to exist at all on OS X without third party tools.
In practical terms, Apple delivering outdated GNU utilities that are by now nine years old is something that should not happen with a modern operating system. I have encountered a lot of (non-developer) Apple users who do not know this and then wonder why something does not work.
If you would explain what makes the “UI being much better” in your eyes, it might help us to understand why exactly we think differently (heh) here.
My blood boils when I hear about linux on desktop because my experience always involved up keeping linux doing millions of easy things all the time just to make the thing run.
Some funny glitch when running Chrome? Oh that's because of the display driver, update it and you'll be fine but to update it you need to install some dependencies and to install these dependencies you need to add some repo. Oh great now the app that worked is no longer working because installing drivers somehow messed to the permissions of some folder, just run this command to fix the permissions and now you are all good. Remember that app that was crashing due to permissions? Yeah, it was due to a bug that is fixed on the new version now you need to run this command o undo the permissions change because the bug was fixed and now it's not working with the hack.
I like not maintaining my tools, I don't maintain my macbook except for installing updates when prompted and cleaning the screen and the keyboard every now and then. My uptime tends to be from OS update to OS update.
First, the argument against third party software to me is irrelevant, after all I use macOS and not, say iOS, because you can install these kinds of applications. Besides, from my point of view, almost all software on Linux is third party software anyway so I don't get the difference. For window management I install Spectacle and for package management I install HomeBrew and call it a day.
The UI to me seems superior because a) it looks better, b) it's more integrated with the system, and c) it doesn't bother me every 5 minutes trying to get my attention. I realize that looks are subjective but Linux has always looked "wrong", like it's unfinished; typography looks wrong, and the dimensions of the elements look wrong, some too big, some too small. Lately it has gotten better but still, the more deep you go, the less finished it gets. I guess one tends to like what one's used to. On my second point, macOS is the UI, not like on Linux where you can tell the Windowing System seats on top of the OS. It feels disconnected somehow, and as soon as something goes wrong, you are back on the terminal trying to hack your way back to stability. Lastly, macOS is not constantly begging for my attention. Windows is much more guilty of this than Linux is, but it still happens, showing you bubbles and messages for non critical tasks that ruin concentration. It also provides the information you need and very little else, the information is there if you want it, but it's not in your face. It gets out of the way, and lets me focus on the application and task I'm really interested in, not in managing the system.
And don't get me started on installing applications. Apt-get is fine if all you try to install is a low level package that is not dependent on anything else. As soon as things get more complicated you think about it twice before attempting to install something out of fear of it requiring a kernel recompile. In my opinion, dependencies and repositories are two words no normal user should be familiar with.
Of course, if you are a developer, or if you spend all day on the terminal I can see how your point of view might be different, or why you would care about your GNU tools being up to date. And I get how macOS might seem to someone coming from Linux, or even Windows, more limiting. But the truth is I don't care about the system that much, I want it not to bother me.
Lastly, and perhaps my strongest and more frivolous point, command-H to hide applications is the best shortcut ever. I haven't minimized a window in years.
These are a must for any front-end developer these days and personally although I like some window managers for X11, I can't afford to go that way, because they don't feel mature enough.
Not to mention iTunes, Photos and all the nice software that comes with OS X.
Right now Darktable seems to be more of an editing tool and less of a cataloguing tool.
UPDATE:
Oh yeah, you can upgrade the various components too.
In other words, you're violating Apples copyright by running MacOS on a Hackintosh, and Apple is well within their rights to sue you for damages. Defending these types of lawsuits are expensive.
IMHO they did the copyright, because they don't want someone to put a stamp "MacOS X - tested" or something on their hardware.
Does Apple really document how to break their EULA on their website: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205041
"Removing or installing memory
You should not manually upgrade or replace the memory in these Mac mini models. Instead, contact an Apple Authorized Service Provider or Apple Retail Store to install memory for you."
Or the other way around. If I take the HDD of a MacBook Pro and put it on my Hackintosh, am I violating the EULA?
So I think the line is so thin and you can argue about anything on that topic.
Contract law, due to the user not abiding by the license agreement, is more relevant than copyright infringement. Apple gives the OS away freely and there's no copying act that you do for yourself that would be infringing (e.g. copy the OS to a Mackintosh's drive and you're still okay), it's only the use of the OS which is a problem and that's not a copyright problem, it's a license problem.
For KDE, the best experience at the moment seems to be Neon, although I've not tried OpenSUSE.