Question: Why not use MacPro6,1 and use Frequency Vectors of iMac17,1 with Piker Alpha script? You won't have to patch graphics or usb right? Just a thought.. correct me if I am wrong.
Because Skylake-X is a Skylake and not a Broadwell-E/EP or Haswell-E/EP Processor and a X299 board is a Series-200 and not a Series-9 Board! A macPro6,1 System is close to X99 and Broadwell-E/EP or Haswell-E/EP, while an iMac17,1 System is closer to Skylake, Skylake-X and series-100/series-200 board technology. You would not either use a Skylake processor and a Series-100 board with SMBIOS mac Pro6,1, would you?
Anyway, apart from the purely theoretical discussion above, it is simply fact that SMBIOS iMac17,1 is absolutely mandatory if one wants to run XCPM by means of Pike Alpha's ssdtPRGen.sh and ssdt.aml. With SMBIOS macPro 6,1, ssdtPRGen.sh does not even compile and it is therefore impossible to derive the ssdt.aml, which is absolutely vital for running XCPM in its most sophisticated way, unless you want to say that Pike Alpha's sophisticated XCPM approach is ********, which would be totally at odd with all the extended brilliant XCPM results gained with Boadwell-E/EP or HaswellE/EP Processor and X99 board technology and totally at odd with the tremendous success of Pike Alpha's XCPM approach over many many years!
Just tell me one reason why to use SMBIOS mac Pro6,1 instead of iMac17,1! The only transparent reason I would see would be the desperate intent of maintaining the USBInjectAll.kext approach or derivatives (e.g. X99_Injector USB 3.kext or, XHCI-200-series-injector.kext, etc.), which however apparently cannot be entirely and fully successfully implemented on X299 boards either, even despite the use of a SMBIOS macPro6,1 System Definition. In any case, please don't tell me seriously that USBInjectAll.kext and derivatives as well as related DSDT or Kext and Kernel patching distributed in the respective forums is not a USB patching! And please also do not tell me that SMBIOS iMac17,1 needs additional graphics patching when compared with SMBIOS macPro6,1 (just think on the black screen issue with Nvidia graphics cards). That's simply ridiculous, sorry!
It is true, that the SMBIOS iMac17,1 imposes the sudden dead of USBInjectAll.kext or any derivatives (e.g. X99_Injector USB 3.kext or, XHCI-200-series-injector.kext, etc.), as there is no iMac 17,1 identity neither in Apple's IOUSBHostFamily.kext nor in Apple's AppleUSBXHCIPCI.kext. However, the absolutely novel and innovative XHC USB Kext approach originally developed by Brumbaer and actually employed and further iterated in all detail in my guide, makes USBInjectAll.kext totally obsolete! Moreover, I am indeed totally happy about this latter fact, as I am honestly also very happy to finally get rid of the entire problematics and sometimes quite diffuse application strategies related to USBInjectAll.kext, spread over the years.
Thus in my opinion, the only excuse to stay with SMBIOS mac Pro6,1 is the personal laziness of creating board-specific XHC USB Kexts for mainboards not yet directly support by my guide. However, I implemented an explicit and very detailed XHC USB Kext Creation Guideline for all available X299 mainboards and by the way also for all other mainboards available on the market. The Guideline just needs to be applied once for each particular mainboard. The related effort does not extent more than a couple of hours of your time. Once a XHC USB Kext is available for a specific mainboard, all users of the same mainboard can directly employ the latter XHC USB Kext on their mainboard without any further personal efforts, like it is already the case for the ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe! Finally, the XHC USB Kext approach absolutely grants the full implementation of all available internal and external USB2.0 and USB3.0 ports, which furthermore deliver without any exception also all expected data rates! There is absolutely no need for additional DSDT, Kext or Kernel patching, like it is frequently the case when employing USBInjectAll.kext or derivatives, despite the OS X USB Port Limit Patch, which is anyway required in case of both USB approaches.
You asked me about my personal opinion. Saying the above, I hopefully satisfactorilly fulfilled your request and answered your question in the best possible way.
I don't want to launch once more an extended and never ending theoretical discussion with god and the world, which already totally messed up once this thread at the very beginning!
If you are content with the SMBIOS mac Pro6,1 System Definition, live in peace and be happy with this in my opinion however largely misleading approach. I will continue promoting and distributing the SMBIOS iMac17,1 approach, which in my opinion and given the excellent results, appears to be definitely the more transparent and intuitively correct approach for Skylake-X/X299.
Everybody is free to decide the direction of his Skylake-X/X299 journey. Nobody is obliged to follow my guide. The intention of my guide is to show and demonstrate to people how to derive a fully functional, excellently performing and absolutely stable Skylake-X/X299 System. All Users following guides different from mine have my blessing in their endevours!
Hurray to the diversity of nature!
Cheers,
KGP
!
