Macs now use the same Intel processors, Memory, graphics boards, drives, USB devices and monitors the Windows users use how is the Mac hardware different?
Leopard is a Unix variant like Linux? Could I repartition a Mac hard drive and run a version of Linux?
or repartition a Windows hard drive and run Leopard?
I mean at least theoretically, assuming there wasn't some code that either had the hardware check tho op sys or the op sys check the hardware.
Is it a question of the Mac having a different BIOS or chip set? Also, setting aside the question of whether MACs basic applications are superior, are the pros/advantages of Leopard mostly related to its UNIX base and thus Linux would share those advantages or does it have distinct advantages over the best Linux distributions?
It is possible to run OSX on a pretty standard machine, but you have to have a hacked version.
Macs use Intel’s Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) rather than the older BIOS, so OSX has to be hacked in order to load on a computer that uses BIOS.
It’s a fun project to play around with, but nothing I would suggest for a machine you want to do actual work on.
I do this by two methods: by rebooting to the new OS, or by running the OS in a virtual machine with Mac OS X as the base.
For rebooting, you have to be aware of one thing: Macs don't have old-fashioned BIOSes, they run intel's newer EFI system. If you just want to alternate between booting Mac OS or WIndows, you can use Apple's Boot Camp system, which comes with 10.5 Leopard. But if you want to also boot Linux (as I do) you need to find a free tool called "rEFIt". By using rEFIt, I can boot Mac OS X, Vista, or Ubuntu linux natively.
That's the main technological hurdle. Macs use the more advanced EFI instead of BIOS. I've heard that the latest EFI includes some BIOS emulation, but I'm not sure you can just drop Windows on there without the prepping that Boot Camp does. And I'm sure people have Linux running natively on the Intel Macs.
pros/advantages of Leopard mostly related to its UNIX base and thus Linux would share those advantages or does it have distinct advantages over the best Linux distributions
Apple got stability, security and an application base by going UNIX. On top of that are a lot of very useful libraries that set it apart from other operating systems. Want to apply complex filters to your video real-time using the power of the graphics card? No problem to code that into an application using the Core Video library. All those gee-whiz window animations are also available through the Core Animation library and accelerated on the GPU.
Most of the components are the same. Apple chooses good components and packages them better than most PC builders. And I don't just mean pretty boxes -- cooling and accessibility for upgrades are stellar on tower Macs, and they have a lot of small touches that add up to improved usability. If you've ever compared a Sony Vaio to a low-end PC, you know what I'm talking about.
Leopard is a Unix variant
Sort of. It runs on a Unix (BSD) kernel. Apple combined elements of BSD and other Unixes into an open-source OS it calls Darwin. Then it added layers of user interface, APIs and such that aren't open source to create OS X.
like Linux?
Linux is not a Unix variant. Linux is a home-grown alternative to Unix; once upon a time, calling something a Unix meant an expensive and annoying process of getting it certified by Bell Labs. Who owns the IP behind Unix is pretty much a mess, as the whole SCO debacle illustrates.
Could I repartition a Mac hard drive and run a version of Linux?
Yes. As others have mentioned, you can boot to it or run it in a virtual machine.
or repartition a Windows hard drive and run Leopard? I mean at least theoretically, assuming there wasn't some code that either had the hardware check tho op sys or the op sys check the hardware.
Not without hacking OS X and violating the EULA. And I think there is some kind of hardware check, but I don't know the details.
Is it a question of the Mac having a different BIOS or chip set?
That's certainly part of the equation.
Also, setting aside the question of whether MACs basic applications are superior, are the pros/advantages of Leopard mostly related to its UNIX base
In part. It also has what many (including me) consider to be the best user interface on a desktop computer. And it's not that easy to set aside the basic applications, because part of the appeal of the Mac is how smoothly integrated the hardware, the OS and the apps are.
and thus Linux would share those advantages or does it have distinct advantages over the best Linux distributions?
Linux isn't nearly as easy to set up right out of the box, and the user interface is clunky by comparison. XWindows doesn't come close. Some companies like gOS have put a more appealing face on Linux, but it still doesn't have the fit and finish of Mac OS.