[Maflynn]

Any of you folks build your own PC? I under took this adventure this past summer. The goal was to build a win7 machine, with an eye towards turning it into a hackintosh some time in the future. I basically chose my components with that in mind, so while there was cheaper parts available, OSX compatibility was high on my list. Plus given that I was building something for my own use, I didn't want to cut corners and/or cheap out.

I use windows 7 via VMware for my work, so I didn't think its a huge deal in going whole hog for this build. I still have a Mac Mini for my Mac/OSX usage and/or needs but after using windows for a few weeks full time, I couldn't stand it any longer and loaded OSX onto it

The cost as you can see is just over 1,100, though this does not include rebates, with those I'm looking at about 1,000. Again, the goal wasn't to build a desktop for the least amount of $$ but rather build the biggest system within my budget and use the best components.

The silverstone FT02 case is awesome, its nearly silent, has a sharp, look similar in nature to the MacPro (industrial/minimalist) and its ability to cool the MB is unparalleled. To increase the cooling ability, I opted for the Noctua DH14 cooler and between the two, I'm realizing idle temps of 33c (ambient temps 75-80c) and 100% load temps of 45c with the CPU over-clocked to 3.25Ghz (stock speed of 2.8Ghz). I could easily push the CPU to 4.0 GHz and keep the temps in check

Case......Silverstone FT02 case...........200
PSU.......Antec Earthwatts 650.............90
CPU.......Core i7-930........................200
MB.........Asus P6T.............................200
Ram.......OCZTech 6GB DDr3-1600...180
GPU.......Nvidia GTX260.....................200
HD.........WD Cavilar Black 500GB........70
Optical...LG Optical Drive....................20




I hadn't built a computer in years so it was a fun experience, though turning it into a hackintosh was a harder experience then I first thought. My biggest mistake in that arena was the motherboard. My initial research led me to believe the asus P6T was very compatible, but rather the P6T Deluxe was. It took me a while to find a process to load OSX on, but now that its running,

If I were to do anything over, it would be choosing a modular PSU, and a different motherboard, but other then that, This machine is great, depending on what I read over on insanelymac.com about loading 10.7 onto a hackintosh may dictate whether I upgrade the mobo to something that is more compatible with 10.7 but since that's not even out yet, I'll not concern myself with such issues.

[The Godfather]

I dual boot an Acer Aspire One with 10.6.4 and ubuntu 10.4.... $200

[Maflynn]

I use fedora, but I limit its use to VMware at this stage.

[Atheist]

I built an i7 Hackintosh:

Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5
Core i7-920
6GB (3 x 2G) RAM ... planning on upgrading to 12 GB (6 x 2GB)
GeForce 9500 GT
Zalman CPU Cooler

I overclocked to about 3.7GHz but it was running rather hot under load 70℃ - 80℃. I've returned it to default settings. I don't use air-conditioning in my home office so the ambient temp is high. CPU still runs around 45℃ under normal load. (Makes use of my Magic Trackpad difficult as my fingers are always a little sticky.)

Setup was easy. I found a great tutorial and post-install script at InsanelyMac.com.

[osiris]

I hackintosh'd a Dell1011 netbook. It now runs Snow Leopard and I use it as a daily use portable. It may not be able to run Steam, but it can run Photoshop and handles administration level stuff quite well. I love this little thing!

[P]

There's a thread much like this one over in Powermac.

I also built a computer that I have dualbooted into OSX about twice, just to see if I could make it work.

[Laminar]

I used to dual boot my wife's Samsung NC10 netbook with XP and Leopard, but the upgrade to Windows 7 killed the bootloader and I haven't bothered fixing it.

[Big Mac]

Nice system. I wrote about my Core i7 build experience months ago. Since Apple finally released ATI 5XXX drivers with its Mac Pro update, I'm seriously thinking about getting my feet wet in the Hackintosh pool. I would have a bigger incentive to do it if not for the fact that M$ did so well with Win 7, but I'm still reminded often enough of the fact that I'd prefer to be running OS X if I had my druthers.

[olePigeon]

I forgot what wires and PS2 ports look like, thanks for the pic.

[Maflynn]

Win7 isn't bad, I use windows every day, my workstation is XP which is horrible at this point, I used vista but that was a dog, so MS a great job with win7. With that said, I'm so used to OSX, that I really like using that over windows. I prefer OSX's Mail.app over MS counterpart. UAC is better in win7 over vista but OSX is superior.
I prefer OSX's terminal over using windows cmd shell.
I also hate what they did with the file explorer.
They start menu easily becomes unwieldly. OSX has an elegant solution to lots of apps.

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

I forgot what wires and PS2 ports look like, thanks for the pic.

If I opted for a modular PSU, you'd not really see any wires and for what ever reason, mobo makers still make PS2 ports, even though most if not all keyboards are usb now a days.

The case that I'm using has lots of cutouts to hide the wires, but clearly I still needed to power the GPU and there's a wire or two for the fans.

Kudos to apple for always making a great simple design, I do love how their MacPros look.

[Big Mac]

I didn't go with a modular PSU either, but depending on your case and the cable routing strategy you use, you don't necessarily have to go with a modular PSU because you can hide the cables effectively anyway. I've actually read that modular PSUs aren't as high quality as their non-modular counterparts. On our system the cable management came out pretty well such that there are only a few exposed wires when you open the case; everything else is hidden in the back and you don't have to see it.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I used to dual boot my wife's Samsung NC10 netbook with XP and Leopard, but the upgrade to Windows 7 killed the bootloader and I haven't bothered fixing it.

Yeah, dual booting on a laptop can be tricky, since it's generally one hard drive. Windows always wants to hog the bootloader. I think the rule of thumb is: always install Windows first, then the OSX partition and Chameleon or whatever bootloader to take over from Windows.

On a desktop- always keep OSX and Windows on separate drives to preserve sanity, and when installing Windows, always, always, always detach any already installed OSX drives as if the Windows drive was the only drive in the system. Then there's never a problem and multi-booting is easy.


Maflynn: I've been a big fan of building PCs as Hackintoshes since I first learned it was possible. Nice machine. I'm also already curious about how running 10.7 will go, or if Apple's got some new tricks up their sleeve. (I recall 10.6 took a while for the OSx86 crowd to figure out completely).

[Big Mac]

CH, are you saying that even assuming installation on a separate hard drive, you should physically disconnect your OS X drive before rebooting into Windows? If I'm not misunderstanding you, that seems unnecessary.

[Atheist]

^Big Mac, I think he's referring to when you install Windows. Unplugging your OS X drive will keep Windows from inadvertently trashing the bootloader.

[Big Mac]

Ah, I see. He was talking about dual boot support. Thank you for the clarification.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Atheist 

^Big Mac, I think he's referring to when you install Windows. Unplugging your OS X drive will keep Windows from inadvertently trashing the bootloader.

Fixed.

[P]

Originally Posted by Maflynn 

If I opted for a modular PSU, you'd not really see any wires and for what ever reason, mobo makers still make PS2 ports, even though most if not all keyboards are usb now a days.

That's marginally understandable, as there are many enthusiasts that keep using old mice and keyboards with older attachment options, and there are also situations where you might need to run an OS without stable USB support, but please explain to me why the parallel port is still there. There are both USB and Ethernet adapters plenty for the parallel port, and the stuff you connect to it isn't that important that it has to run directly at boot.

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

I've been a big fan of building PCs as Hackintoshes since I first learned it was possible. Nice machine. I'm also already curious about how running 10.7 will go, or if Apple's got some new tricks up their sleeve. (I recall 10.6 took a while for the OSx86 crowd to figure out completely).

I'm expecting to stay on 10.6 for some time after 10.7 goes gold. I may even find it expedient to upgrade the mobo to one that can easily be upgraded to 10.7. I'll burn that bridge when I get to it.

If apple releases an i5 13" MBP next week, I may jump on that, but I'm highly doubtful of that. I expect to see a MBA refresh. My point is that I may have a Mac that will run 10.7 so I'll not be terribly anxious. Plus I do have my kids Mac Mini which will handle 10.7 as well

[Salty]

I keep debating building a hackintosh. But I never have the money to blow on it... heck I'm still typing on a MacBook that just crossed four years. My next machine is probably gonna be a 13 inch Pro whenever they drop the Core2.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Ah, I see. He was talking about dual boot support. Thank you for the clarification.

Yeah, I should have clarified, just at the install stage. After that, plug all drives back in. The main OSX drive with Chameleon set as the default boot. Chameleon is awesome- it'll detect any installed drive/partition and boot either OSX or Windows.

The only confusing thing I've seen with this is Windows 7 (at least the 64 bit Enterprise edition) if left to its own devices creates a separate partition called System Reserved. That's actually the bootable partition to select with Chameleon, not the main Win7 partition which will just throw up an error if selected.

[The Godfather]

If you don't have money for a Hackintosh, you don't have money for a Mac.

However, getting a Hackintosh now would be not too smart, as it will certainly not support 10.7, which is around the corner.

[Big Mac]

I read something yesterday that has kind of deterred me from going forward with Hackintoshing. I read that the revision of my Gigabyte board has spottier OS X support. It's not yet officially supported by the special Gigabyte installer package created, and people have said they have to rely on things like add-on LAN cards because on-board Ethernet isn't well supported. Makes me think twice.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Big Mac, I'm guessing you have the UD3R Rev 2 with RTL8111E? If so, unfortunately, only the Rev 1 with the Realtek D Ethernet controller works.

However, it's really not a big deal. You could pop in a $12 PCI Gigabit card like this one, that works perfectly. The card doesn't officially list OSX support, but it works since it's based on a fully OSX supported Realtek chipset. (In fact, if you look under Feedback on the newegg page, the reviewer dal20402 lists it as perfect for Hackintosh and specifically that crappy RTL8111E controller.

As far as 'Hackintoshing' your system, just wait until you need an extra hard drive for storage. All it really is, boiled down, is installing OSX on a hard drive. You're not really doing *anything* to the PC itself, as the components don't really give a crap what OS is running.

When you need a large capacity storage drive, carve off a 12GB partition, grab your Snow Leopard disk, Kakewalk or whatever specific Hackintosh installer you want to try, and give it a shot. Unlike installing Windows, the SL installer doesn't mess with any other system drive, so there's no issues with jacking up your Windows install, no need to disconnect other drives.

If the OSX install works- which it should- then you have OSX, bootable from a partition. Install Chameleon as a bootloader, and set that drive as the default. The rest of the drive space is still storage for the system. You have BOTH a Mac and a PC and it cost you the price of a hard drive.

Doesn't work? Big deal. You've got your extra storage drive which hopefully you needed anyway. (Of course, in your case the only additional complication is the need of a PCI ethernet card, which you could get only after you're positive OSX runs.)

[Big Mac]

Thank you for all of the great advice, CH. The funny thing is, I don't know with certainty what version of the EX-58A-UD3R board I have. CPU-Z reports it as Rev 13, which some people have called Rev. B3. I assume that's Rev 2, but I'm not sure. People say that it's clearly marked on the board, but I don't feel like opening it up right now to see. Based on when I purchased it, I assume it's Rev 2.

My Ethernet is identified by Windows as RealTek PCIe GBE Family Controller, but I assume that's too generic to tell you anything.

As for not damaging anything, I understand that point in theory and mostly in practice, but I also know that if you screw with the lower-level configurations in the wrong way you can damage the hardware. Of course, I don't plan to be altering anything that low-level.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

I think the only thing that could literally wreck hardware is using one of the custom BIOSes, like Cartri's . Those go the extra step and add the startup chime and grey apple-logo boot right from the start, as well as no need for any DSDT patches. But any BIOS update can be risky- if applied wrong they can brick a motherboard. Personally, I've never tried the custom BIOSes because it's too radical a hack for my tastes, and only gains mostly cosmetic details I don't care about.

Other than things that flash the actual hardware, I don't know of much possibility of hardware damage at all. Usually the worst case scenarios are a BIOS reset - SL used to do that before it was fully figured out- or a non-booting OSX.

Also: assuming the same pattern as 10.5 and 10.6- 10.7 will likely boot on lots of current motherboards. SL runs great on many boards that are 2 to 3 years older than it is. But of course for anyone buying hardware right now that will definitely want 10.7. it'd be better to wait and see what will work for sure.

[Big Mac]

Wow, haven't heard of custom BIOSs until now. Sounds pretty intense. Sweet cosmetic payoff it works out, though.

I was talking about hacking of P-State and C-State variables for proper SpeedStep support. I've read disclaimers that doing the wrong calculations of those sorts of things can damage hardware.

[reader50]

After some internal debate, we finally figured out where Hackintosh threads go. They go with the antigravity machines.

[Maflynn]

[QUOTE=CRASH HARDDRIVE;4016769]I think the only thing that could literally wreck hardware is using one of the custom BIOSes, like Cartri's .
The risks for using a custom Bios are far greater then dealing with custom dsdt kexts or wanting to hear the boot up chime. Also it looks like they're only focusing on gigabyte motherboards (I own an asus).

Originally Posted by reader50 

After some internal debate, we finally figured out where Hackintosh threads go. They go with the antigravity machines.

As so this thread will now die a premature death

[Atheist]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Wow, haven't heard of custom BIOSs until now. Sounds pretty intense. Sweet cosmetic payoff it works out, though.

I've been involved in the Hackintosh thing for about 4 years now and thought I was up with all the goings on but hadn't heard of the custom BIOS. It's awesome and scary at the same time. He hasn't released a BIOS for my EX58-UD5 but it's high on his list. I know I'll be tempted to give it a try. I like the idea of minimizing the number of needed Kexts. Looks like he can handle all of the power management issues and eliminate the need for a custom/patched DSDT (that has always been one of the things that confounds me.... I think I'm just too impatient to deal with trying to create one).

[ort888]

Okay, what's the cheapest easiest way to get a hackintosh?

I don't need a lot of power or the latest OS. I just want a computer for my basement that I can surf the web on and hook a shared printer up to.

Is there an out of the box solution for a bargain basement PC? One I wouldn't have to build myself? For $300 or less?

[Atheist]

Check the OSX86 Wiki for a list of compatible hardware components and desktops/portables.

You can also check out InsanelyMac.

When you're first starting out it can be overwhelming. I ended up building my own box but you can more likely get a cheap dell core 2 duo desktop that would work. Typically it's the networking and graphics that gives you the most trouble.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Ort,
I'd highly recommend building yourself, and stick with specific Gigabyte boards. If you run into any problems, you can always look up a guide from someone who's dealt with the same thing already.

A fairly cost-effective and easy to set up build:

GIGABYTE GA-G41M-ES2L $57 (hugely well-supported mobo- a good number of the newegg customer comments are Hackintosh builders.)

Intel Pentium E5500 $70

G.SKILL 4GB DDR2 $70

SPARKLE GeForce 9500 GT $45

Those are the basics that total about $245.

Add the cheapest possible case (say, microATX w/ a barebones PSU) around $40, 500GB SATA hard drive (about $50) and SATA DVD-R drive, $20. You're looking at around $400 shipped.

If you have a Snow Leopard DVD, you can set everything up with Kakewalk which makes this super easy to setup. (The latest DVD and USB versions are compatible with the G41 motherboard.)

That's an average baseline for a cheap 775-based Hack. As spec'ed, this build woud be surprisingly speedy even for normal desktop chores. You can shave down the price with lesser components- say a cheaper CPU (I'd avoid anything below a Wolfdale) less RAM, a cheaper compatible GPU (stick with nVidia and be certain OCL/CI/QE work), cheaper hard drive (stick with SATA only, no IDE anything).

For your intended use, the added cost of Nehalem/DDR3 hardware would be a waste, so socket 775/DDR2 is still very cost effective.

A compatible atom/ION system might be even more cost-effective, but I'm really not up on the latest hardware that works, or how to set it up.

[finalizedsven]

I might try to hackintosh my workstation...though I feel like the parts might not exactly meet HCL standards...

I have a 6-core AMD (T1055) overclocked to 4.3GHz
4GB of ram in 128 bit mode
the MSI 870A-G54 motherboard
the MSI ugly heatsink 460 something or the other GTX (very speedy 'fermi' nvidia card)

I glanced at some of the AMD/Snow Leopard installs and immediately thought "ugh" so I figured I'd get some feedback here before attempting anything with that many steps.

Right now it's running Windows 7 64-bit...and it's ok.....literally, all I use this thing for is compiling Quake 3 maps, the reason for the beefy video card is to aid compiling when the CUDA-enabled compiler is released. But I'd love to migrate away from windows.....that'd be great.....

[driven]

Originally Posted by Maflynn 

Win7 isn't bad, I use windows every day, my workstation is XP which is horrible at this point, I used vista but that was a dog, so MS a great job with win7. With that said, I'm so used to OSX, that I really like using that over windows. I prefer OSX's Mail.app over MS counterpart. UAC is better in win7 over vista but OSX is superior.
I prefer OSX's terminal over using windows cmd shell.
I also hate what they did with the file explorer.
They start menu easily becomes unwieldly. OSX has an elegant solution to lots of apps.

Not the least of which is iPhoto, etc. After 2 years of trying to make Windows Live Photo work for me, I gave up and went back to iPhoto. (As soon as I had a Mac as my primary machine again!)

I have not yet attempted the Hackintosh thing with any real seriousness. I dorked with it on a Dell D810 (laptop), but I have so little free time and it seems to take so much to get it working ... Perhaps if life ever lets me take a breather. I'd love to do it, mostly because I enjoy building my own hardware.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by finalizedsven 

I might try to hackintosh my workstation...though I feel like the parts might not exactly meet HCL standards...

This is pretty much what you can expect trying to run OSX on that motherboard/CPU.

I can sum up the problem in three letters: AMD

[finalizedsven]

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHH

yeah, fair enough...I love my AMD though, that system, being 6 cores at 4.3GHz, cost me about 600 without the video card. I'm ok with the loss of the ability to run....software it's not supposed to run. Does mean I'll have to put up with linux though, ugh.

thanks for the link

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Keep in mind, it IS actually possible to run OSX on an AMD machine- just not in unmodified retail form (IE: vanilla). It could still be a fun experiment to try, if you locate a proper hacked kernel version (like Modbin or Voodoo) that will run on AMD systems.

It's just so hit and miss; chances are still great that it'll still be a mess of errors like the link, or even if installed, be ridiculously unstable.

[RockPortTech]

Congrats on the nice build! I had (at one point) installed and used our existing Acer Aspire desktop with Leopard OSX. In the end, after trying it for a while, it was like a Mercedes-Benz kit car you know? Yes it looks like the real deal, and it gets you from point A to point B, but in the end it's still something else. I plan on getting my very first Mac, a Mini, in the upcoming month or so.

[Cronocide]

I LOVE hackintoshing antiquated PCs! I put leopard on a VAIO PCG-GRS700, and although it wasn't fast enough to play chess on, it's Finder is still far superior to windows explorer. If you've got an old PC lying around, or find one in a dump somewhere, try hackintoshing it. I learned SO much about the OSX kernel and extensions that I can now fix a lot of kernel problems on my real mac.

You don't have to have a nice or even a compatible PC to hackintosh it (These things are still VERY helpful), just try it for fun!

[wfriction]

No SSD!?!
I think you should grab one if you don't yet have an SSD... Let me know if you need any help choosing which one to get

[driven]

Originally Posted by Cronocide 

I LOVE hackintoshing antiquated PCs! I put leopard on a VAIO PCG-GRS700, and although it wasn't fast enough to play chess on, it's Finder is still far superior to windows explorer. If you've got an old PC lying around, or find one in a dump somewhere, try hackintoshing it. I learned SO much about the OSX kernel and extensions that I can now fix a lot of kernel problems on my real mac.

You don't have to have a nice or even a compatible PC to hackintosh it (These things are still VERY helpful), just try it for fun!

Just curious ... what is it about Finder that is far superior to Windows Explorer?

I'm a HUGE Mac fan and I'd take a Mac over Windows in 90% of nearly all situations I could be presented with. That said, I actually like Windows Explorer over Finder (with the exceptiosn that I can use a key sequence to create a new folder ... that's pretty awesome, and that I can create search folders.)

I'm curious. What is it that I'm not seeing here. (and I'm very sorry for introducing a fork into this thread.)

[The Godfather]

Cheapest hackintosh is an Acer Aspire or HP Mini.
If you find that WiFi (Airport) is not working, you'll need to swap that mini-pcie module with another buddy with a laptop.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by driven 

That said, I actually like Windows Explorer over Finder (with the exception that I can use a key sequence to create a new folder ... that's pretty awesome. . . .

You actually can make a new folder with a keyboard shortcut in Windows Explorer - Control-Shift-N, which is very similar to the Finder shortcut for the same command.

The OS X Finder and Windows Explorer are pretty well matched in a comparison. They excel at different things, so it comes down to a subjective call as to which is superior.

[driven]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

You actually can make a new folder with a keyboard shortcut in Windows Explorer - Control-Shift-N, which is very similar to the Finder shortcut for the same command.

The OS X Finder and Windows Explorer are pretty well matched in a comparison. They excel at different things, so it comes down to a subjective call as to which is superior.

The CTRL-SHIFT-N tip just made my day. Thanks.

[Cold Warrior]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

You actually can make a new folder with a keyboard shortcut in Windows Explorer - Control-Shift-N, which is very similar to the Finder shortcut for the same command.

The OS X Finder and Windows Explorer are pretty well matched in a comparison. They excel at different things, so it comes down to a subjective call as to which is superior.

Really the only thing I miss in Finder is a 'cut' option, b/c otherwise I'm stuck opening two windows and holding down Command for a move to avoid a copy.

[Big Mac]

Glad I could be of assistance, driven.
I reflected on the issue of Explorer versus Finder a bit today. (To reiterate my overall stance for those who aren't aware, Mac OS X is a far superior OS in general, in comparison to Windows 7.) My opinion is, the Finder is more elegant/usable, friendlier and stylish. In contrast, Explorer has more options and is therefore more powerful, but a lot of that power is lost on the average user because there are too many options available in a cluttered, complicated interface. Granted, most will never interact with those options, but I've found that when I've wanted to use those options, I don't usually succeed in setting them so that what I wanted to accomplish is achieved. Explorer is also substantially uglier, and while that may sound like a very superficial critique, I believe that style contributes a good amount to overall usability. Perhaps I'm just more comfortable with the Finder because of my years of using OS X as my primary OS, but I just enjoy using the Finder to manipulate files much more; using Explorer kind of feels like a chore to me. I do, however, give Explorer an extra point for having MP3 tag editing functionality. So my vote goes to the Finder, but it's definitely a matter of taste.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Glad I could be of assistance, driven.
I reflected on the issue of Explorer versus Finder a bit today. (To reiterate my overall stance for those who aren't aware, Mac OS X is a far superior OS in general, in comparison to Windows 7.) My opinion is, the Finder is more elegant/usable, friendlier and stylish. In contrast, Explorer has more options and is therefore more powerful, but a lot of that power is lost on the average user because there are too many options available in a cluttered, complicated interface. Granted, most will never interact with those options, but I've found that when I've wanted to use those options, I don't usually succeed in setting them so that what I wanted to accomplish is achieved. Explorer is also substantially uglier, and while that may sound like a very superficial critique, I believe that style contributes a good amount to overall usability. Perhaps I'm just more comfortable with the Finder because of my years of using OS X as my primary OS, but I just enjoy using the Finder to manipulate files much more; using Explorer kind of feels like a chore to me. I do, however, give Explorer an extra point for having MP3 tag editing functionality. So my vote goes to the Finder, but it's definitely a matter of taste.

Style does not, in fact, contribute to overall usability unless some aspect of the style is literally causing confusion or inefficiency to you. Style contributes to user experience.

[driven]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Style does not, in fact, contribute to overall usability unless some aspect of the style is literally causing confusion or inefficiency to you. Style contributes to user experience.

Does user experience not contribute to usability and efficiency? In the commercial world, user experience is a main factor in user adoption of any new technology. If the users don't adopt it, it fails regardless of the technical merits.

So, I don't think the "style" or "user experience" argument is completely without merit.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by driven 

Does user experience not contribute to usability and efficiency? In the commercial world, user experience is a main factor in user adoption of any new technology. If the users don't adopt it, it fails regardless of the technical merits.

So, I don't think the "style" or "user experience" argument is completely without merit.

Usability has nothing to do with the adoption rate of technology though, although I might be misunderstanding your point here...