Apple vs. Mac OS X Hackers

[BenRoethig]

Why? You've still failed to explain why OS X should only be used on Macs. You make it sound like that's your religion, which is fine with me, but if other people don't adhere to your religion, than don't bother them.

That's pretty much the problem. Message boards tend to have a lot of zealots. They see only Apple as good and anything or anyone that is not with them is the enemy in their eyes. You can't have a difference of opinion with them, because in their eyes there is only one valid opinion.

 

[janstett]

That's where WINE will come into its own and if the developers could make a cheap, stable, easy to use and a version that supports DirectX 9. Windows people would come to the "Dark Side" in droves.

If they bring out an Intel Mac port of Cedega many Windows people will be tempted, check it out.

http://www.transgaming.com/

I would be no more tempted for that than if someone came out with a translation layer that let me run OSX apps on Windows. I want dual-boot, that's the only way to get what you need without compromise.

 

[janstett]

i cant create my own threads yet, but i encourage everyone to post on this morons site about his

"Its official!! Apple is switching to Windows!" article.

Actually, John C. Dvorak (the computer world's Bill O Reilly) floated that idea a few weeks ago on TWiT. It costs a lot of money to create a proprietary operating system, support it, create developer tools, woo 3rd parties to develop for it, etc. It might not happen tomorrow, but it may happen.

Throw in the Yellow Box rumors (apps built for OSX that run on Windows) and it gets interesting.

 

[duffman9000]

Still what is the point of putting Mac OSX on a non Apple computer?

Apple aims at the entire package hardware and software not one or the other, I still can't really see the point of running any Mac OS on non Apple hardware.

Options, that's why. Maybe you don't understand because, as a Mac user, you are content with what Jobs decrees. As stated many times, Apple will consistently put the CHEAPEST components into their systems.
What will happen with the next PowerMac is anyones guess. Will they be upgradeable? Unless they physically solder the cpu to the mobo they should be ala the new iMacs.

 

[duffman9000]

I guess I and every other switcher were crazy... I even made sure I could cross-grade the software that I needed to use... I even put up with VPC w/ Outlook until our exchange server was upgraded to work with Entourage.

I must have been out of my mind.

See 'ya

And in all likely hood you switched to a slower machine? And you personally repurchased your software? Easy when you don't have much software to repurchase.

 

[windmaomao]

Ok guys, I'm not following this thread, but I was just thinking: if Microsoft were as creative as Apple, wouldn't the entire Windows OS be one long epic poem?

"I sing of arms and the man..."

if Microsoft was not creative, you won't see apple.

 

[windmaomao]

That most definatly is stealing!!!! No doubt about it. The only way you could conceivably install that version of OSX on another computer is if:
A- You buy another apple-made Mac
B- Destroy your previous iMac

All this because the licence allows you to install it on ONLY 1 mac... Not 2, 1. Add to that that your PC is not an "Apple labeled computer", that's would be a double no-no!

yeah, so why not destroy your whole place, and move to another city and start another life.

Apple labeled, come on. Next time, they'll sell some sticker for your mouth

 

[windmaomao]

My religion? Macs? wow you need guidance. don't you notice that you are the only one left quoting me? You, on the other hand, have a 3 more people quoting you because you don't sound clear. the Mac OS is intellectual property which Apple owns. They tell you what NOT to do. They give rules that are reasonable. Forcing it to install on another machine will violate one of their rules, which comes with every Mac OS.

RIAA and Apple are in semi-different conditions. Though they both are doing their job to protect their/other's investment (RIAA=artists,studios,media companies / Apple=OS X, Macs) but they differ in their targets because RIAA=file sharers, Apple=hackers.

no, there's more ppl here quoting you. Why? Why? Why? They only give rules which reasonable to you, not me. You're just keeping saying it's illegal, that's pointless.

 

[windmaomao]

rjgjonker,
LOL... i thought about chiming in but any time anyone mentions religion in any discussion, it never ends good. Frankly, Apple IS a religion to some people. Some lose all sense of reality when Jobs speaks or when discussing Apple hardware.

Also, i don't know if the legality of EULA's or shrink wrapped licenses have ever been brought before a court. Personally, i hate them.

quite agree. I think most of ppl here loves apple, but this illegal thing really piss me off. I think the other poem says it all.

 

[Peace]

Do you realize that the majority of the home computing world uses windows? Who in their right mind would switch if it meant having to repurchase all of their software. For some, its easy. Add in Office, Macromedia Studio, Adobe products... who can afford to repurchase those? Running XP through VMWare would also be great, since it would run close to full speed also negating having to repurchase your software.
I know some people who don't like OS X but like Apple hardware. I also have pet peeves with OS X and don't want to repurchase the software i use. I would use XP for work and games and OS X for more leisurely activities.

Not so fast there!
From Microsoft's EULA :
Generally, you may upgrade or replace all of the hardware components on your computer and maintain the license for the original Microsoft OEM operating system software, with the exception of an upgrade or replacement of the motherboard. An upgrade of the motherboard is considered to result in a "new personal computer." Microsoft OEM operating system software cannot be transferred from one computer to another. Therefore, if the motherboard is upgraded or replaced for reasons other than a defect then a new computer has been created, the original license expires, and a new full operating system license (not upgrade) is required. This is true even if the computer is covered under Software Assurance or other Volume License
programs.


So if you decide to put Windows on an Apple you have to buy a NEW Windows license.Not an upgrade either..

 

[mwpeters8182]

Don't know if it's been mentioned, but the forums are back up at the site - it looks like Apple really wasn't in it to shut down the site, but just wanted them to remove a few links.

 

[duffman9000]

Not so fast there!
From Microsoft's EULA :
Generally, you may upgrade or replace all of the hardware components on your computer and maintain the license for the original Microsoft OEM operating system software, with the exception of an upgrade or replacement of the motherboard. An upgrade of the motherboard is considered to result in a "new personal computer." Microsoft OEM operating system software cannot be transferred from one computer to another. Therefore, if the motherboard is upgraded or replaced for reasons other than a defect then a new computer has been created, the original license expires, and a new full operating system license (not upgrade) is required. This is true even if the computer is covered under Software Assurance or other Volume License
programs.


So if you decide to put Windows on an Apple you have to buy a NEW Windows license.Not an upgrade either..

NO KIDDING?!?

And for the people that have retail copies, like me, i've reused my copy of XP on 3 systems now. Upon reactivation, i called MS, told them i built a new computer and had wiped the OS off the old system. They asked me some questions, like new mobo, gpu and hard drive setup, and i was done in less than 10 minutes.

 

[mwpeters8182]

They most definatly do sell ONLY upgrades!!! Sure, the box contains the whole thing (ie: WinXP upgrade boxes contained everything too, but it was still an upgrade!). Ready the requirements & EULA for the retail box correctly before you unload a false statement like that. There is no, and probably will never be a full retail version of OSX.

This is untrue. All versions of OS X sold are either upgrades or full versions. You could install 10.4 on a system that was running only System 9, and there'd be no problem there. The 139 is the same price for the upgrade or full install.

Windows XP upgrade installs must be run from the OS, rather than booted into (at least earlier upgrade versions, I'm not sure if they changed that).

 

[jumpinjohn]

And in all likely hood you switched to a slower machine? And you personally repurchased your software? Easy when you don't have much software to repurchase.

Alas, I am totally exposed now. I switched to a way way slower machine... A lowly PB 1.25 Ghz G4. I nearly puked. I gave up my ThinkPad for this? But I didn't tell anyone, because as you know, it would make me look really stupid. And because everything is not free, I want to look smart, not stupid. But you have exposed me. And, yes I was a double idiot because I personally repurchased my software. I am ashamed to say it. My children did without food. Fortunately, it was not much software, since I am only a lowly user. Just MS Office, Adobe Creative Suite, Quark, AccountEdge (MYOB), and then shame of all shame I purchased Final Cut Express. And did the upgrade to Tiger. So you are completely accurate in your appraisal of me. And the worst thing is this. My stupidity has spread. Now there are several Mac users at work, and I even have another one at home.

I am exposed for all the world now. I hope you are happy.

See 'ya

 

[duffman9000]

jumpinjohn,
I'm not calling you stupid, but I hope you switched to OS X only because of OS X, and not for Apple hardware. I own a Thinkpad now and yes (when i had OS X installed), it smoked my friends powerbook in overall "snappiness", even without proper driver support. I've always suspected that that would be the case.
People who bought PowerbookG4's that argued that the hardware was better or even equivalent to a top of the line pc laptop are just crazy. If we were to install OS X on hardware from the same time period, the powerbook would get humiliated.
I, for one, am glad that those days are over. Now we can use some of the best pc hardware available.

 

[cyberddot]

Options, that's why. Maybe you don't understand because, as a Mac user, you are content with what Jobs decrees. As stated many times, Apple will consistently put the CHEAPEST components into their systems.
What will happen with the next PowerMac is anyones guess. Will they be upgradeable? Unless they physically solder the cpu to the mobo they should be ala the new iMacs.

HA! Oh wait...so this thread is actually meant to stroke the ego of those that choose to do anything but PAY for Apple's current and quite viable option to get a stable version of OS X -- by surrendering your hard earned cash (those of you that work, that is)!??! I don't make choices by decree, but thanks for the insult. I think I know where you're coming from now.

So Apple provides an upgrade path in a high-end, bleeding-edge Pro' line and you're going to buy it? How much would you pay now for the best components and a chance to run wXP or a Linux-distro?

How many of you would pay to keep a company you like open and in-business as long as they made products you found inovative and useful? If you were employed by Apple you'd be glad that your crazy bosses were doing whatever they could to keep their little 3-5% raft afloat on the ocean of choices consumers have.

Apple didn't go from $15/share to $70/share in last 6 years with the help of nearly as many sheep as M$ has had following them to their $26/share.

 

[jumpinjohn]

jumpinjohn,
I'm not calling you stupid, but I hope you switched to OS X only because of OS X, and not for Apple hardware. I own a Thinkpad now and yes (when i had OS X installed), it smoked my friends powerbook in overall "snappiness", even without proper driver support. I've always suspected that that would be the case.
People who bought PowerbookG4's that argued that the hardware was better or even equivalent to a top of the line pc laptop are just crazy. If we were to install OS X on hardware from the same time period, the powerbook would get humiliated.
I, for one, am glad that those days are over. Now we can use some of the best pc hardware available.

When I switched, it was a switch for the whole enchilada so to speak. I have always loved the IBM ThinkPads, but had grown dis-satisfied with the continual problems that the Windows OS had been creating. I am truly not a big technical guy. The folks that want to crucify Bill or Steve make me roll my eyes and think, "gee they need to get a life". The Apple hardware is difficult for me to evaluate on an orange to orange basis, because I cannot run windows on it. Perhaps it is only Dell quality. People have suggested that. But having owned three TP's and watched several Dells, my experience is that the Apple Hardware is very reliable, and at least as high in quality as the old IBM TP, and way ahead of Dell.

Maybe you are right that the hardware is really behind. I think it will make it so that Apple can make their hardware better, since they moved to intel. But I don't necessarily think Apple must put up with their OS being hacked and made to run on every walmart PC in the world. I would be afraid that it would spell the end of apple and OS/X. That would make me sad, because for two years I have had no worries about configurations, viruses, or anything else. It has just worked. I can forget about the computer and just do the work. The way it should be.

I guess Apple's Team (Steve and the others) know pretty well how to turn a company around and have done a good job. And I am glad to enjoy the fruits of what they have done as a company. I won't mind paying a premium for Apple Hardware if it means that I can continue to have trouble free computing. Most of us just want the stuff to work.

I think I just did not appreciate the implication that people who switch from windows to mac are not average users, or if we are, that we only did it because we didn't have to shell out the bucks ourselves. I considered the move for several months and asked alot of questions. Because as you say, it was a substantial investment.

See 'ya

 

[duffman9000]

HA! Oh wait...so this thread is actually meant to stroke the ego of those that choose to do anything but PAY for Apple's current and quite viable option to get a stable version of OS X -- by surrendering your hard earned cash (those of you that work, that is)!??! I don't make choices by decree, but thanks for the insult. I think I know where you're coming from now.

So Apple provides an upgrade path in a high-end, bleeding-edge Pro' line and you're going to buy it? How much would you pay now for the best components and a chance to run wXP or a Linux-distro?

How many of you would pay to keep a company you like open and in-business as long as they made products you found inovative and useful? If you were employed by Apple you'd be glad that your crazy bosses were doing whatever they could to keep their little 3-5% raft afloat on the ocean of choices consumers have.

Apple didn't go from $15/share to $70/share in last 6 years with the help of nearly as many sheep as M$ has had following them to their $26/share.

IF Apple provides a clear upgrade path. Big IF. When was the last time they allowed that to happen?
My next Mac will be a MacBook Pro IFF they can dual boot, else nothing. It's like buying a pc but also being able to use OS X.

And how much would I pay for the best components? I think you didn't read my sig. Clearly, not the "best" but surely faster than most PowerMacs. I know i'm not alone in wanting to pay for OS X. Pre-Intel i couldn't justify paying top dollar for old tech.

Sure, i bet you know where i'm coming from. The RDF allows Apple to stay afloat on such a small market share.

This reminds me of a friend of mine that used to work for Dell, as a sales person. He eventually quit because he couldn't take having to constantly lie...lol. This is no different than what Apple has done for years. Would you work for a company like that?

 

[duffman9000]

jumpinjohn,
Then i'm very happy for you. You made the switch for the right reasons. Too many people get sucked into believing that Apple hardware is "better" and trying to convince people otherwise is like trying to convert someone from Christianity to Atheism. Aint gonna happen.

I like using OS X. When the Intels were announced, I and many of my friends, were chomping at the bit to get one. But Steve being Steve, no dual boot. If its possible it aint going to be easy. For people that want to defend this: He knew. We know that he knew that people would want to dual boot. Steve isn't stupid, if anything he's a hell of a salesman. I've met too many tonic salesmen to let Steve get the better of me though.

I hope people will drop the "every pc user wants to pirate OS X" jokes. The coolness of doing it wears off fast when you can't use Quartz or Core Image. Without the eye candy we might as well run a linux distro. I did it mainly to see the speed difference, and rest assured, there was a big difference.

 

[janstett]

Still what is the point of putting Mac OSX on a non Apple computer?

For starters, let's say you want a laptop that weighs less than 5 pounds.

Apple's hardware isn't cutting edge. Nifty, yes (slot loaded drive, etc). Cutting edge, no.

 

[cyberddot]

IF Apple provides a clear upgrade path. Big IF. When was the last time they allowed that to happen?
My next Mac will be a MacBook Pro IFF they can dual boot, else nothing. It's like buying a pc but also being able to use OS X.

And how much would I pay for the best components? I think you didn't read my sig. Clearly, not the "best" but surely faster than most PowerMacs. I know i'm not alone in wanting to pay for OS X. Pre-Intel i couldn't justify paying top dollar for old tech.

Sure, i bet you know where i'm coming from. The RDF allows Apple to stay afloat on such a small market share.

This reminds me of a friend of mine that used to work for Dell, as a sales person. He eventually quit because he couldn't take having to constantly lie...lol. This is no different than what Apple has done for years. Would you work for a company like that?

Sorry...I see that you might actually be aware that painting with too broad a brush may include LOTS of folks that actually decided to go with Apple, but without Steve's filtered version of reality.

I would love to have a dual booting MacBook, and I hope it happens. IF it happens (the IF in my previous post was a rhetorical) it will be due in part to a plan to make a profit by inviting folks like you and me in to the fold with a product we've been waiting to see. Apple is a business after all, not a club of enthusiasts.

The only dishonest salesman you know worked for Dell? Wait...Dell and Apple are the only examples of dishonest businesses that come to mind? Honestly, the idea that we all get nothing but the truth from those selling us anything is...well, silly...but then you know that already. For those of us living in N.A., RDF's are all too common in business AND the public sector. (Dare I say the planet?) Hardly exclusive to Apple or Steve Jobs.

So...I agree, I hope Apple decides to provide competitive hardware along with their obviously competitive OS and an opportunity to dual boot in a smoove and well orchestrated fashion...and that Apple makes a profit so they can keep driving that train.

 

[nataku]

For starters, let's say you want a laptop that weighs less than 5 pounds.

Apple's hardware isn't cutting edge. Nifty, yes (slot loaded drive, etc). Cutting edge, no.

Agreed, however, putting it in a non-Apple computer is not right.

 

[rjgjonker]

Agreed, however, putting it in a non-Apple computer is not right.

Putting what in a non-Apple computer is not right? And why is that so?

 

[cloud 9]

Putting what in a non-Apple computer is not right? And why is that so?

the creators of Apple are allowed to set up the rules. if they want to sell both hardware and software together for a better experience, well that's their choice.

if you don't agree, steal it or don't use it as it is intended...fine..whatever
but
1. you lose your integrity and respect from others (excluding from socially disabled people)
2. people start wondering why your spent you free time doing stuff like that...wich leads back to number 1
3. it's illegal. (if you create something and people abuse it because they have a different 'opinion'...well you're not motivated to improve or create again) and it's not even an opinion, just a bad education lol

 

[ezekielrage_99]

Options, that's why. Maybe you don't understand because, as a Mac user, you are content with what Jobs decrees. As stated many times, Apple will consistently put the CHEAPEST components into their systems.
What will happen with the next PowerMac is anyones guess. Will they be upgradeable? Unless they physically solder the cpu to the mobo they should be ala the new iMacs.

I'm not fussy of the hardware but what I do expect when I buy a computer is it to work properly the moment I get it out to of the box. So far I haven't gone wrong with Apple, I have Dells, Compaqs, Osbournes and HPs which all had a plethera of problems from software to hardware.

Cheap components or not the Apples that I have had over the last few years have just simply worked, and the only time I have replaced them was when it wasn't worth upgrading them (cheaper to buy a new computer).

Even from a PC POV Intel has never really been upgrade friendly because they change the chipsets, sockets/slots on a very regualar basis more so than AMD.