It's Apple's right, but taking the hardline is going to come back to bite them in the rear when this is all said and done. The iPod boom isn't going to last forever.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple vs. Mac OS X Hackers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My opinion is that Apple can lock down the OS to Apple specific hardware if they try hard enough. Maybe OS X 10.5 will really institute some tough anti-piracy measures, such as activation or "phoning home."
I mean, look at it this way, Windows XP has been out for years (since 2001) with its WPA (Windows Product Activation, a form of copy protection). While there have been hundreds of ways to temporarily circumvent it, no one has ever truely *cracked* WPA.
I mean, look at it this way, Windows XP has been out for years (since 2001) with its WPA (Windows Product Activation, a form of copy protection). While there have been hundreds of ways to temporarily circumvent it, no one has ever truely *cracked* WPA.
How about buying Apple products and supporting them so they can give us an even better operating system, instead of being a retard and blurring lines and such. Last I checked, you couldn't obtain official Apple parts without buying a computer from them. So if you wanna buy an iMac than somehow get an Athlon in it, be my guest.
Whoever said the iPod boom isn't going to last is right, so why are you against Apple's 'real' source of income?
Whoever said the iPod boom isn't going to last is right, so why are you against Apple's 'real' source of income?
jhu said:
by doing that im pretty sure you void your warranty...
you are splitting hairs. by apple branded, they mean something you purchase from APPLE meant to run APPLE mac osx. not from dell, not lenovo...
Using Sudo
It's a bit like using sudo in the Terminal and getting that wonderful third message about how your actions effect others. Apple has always done this. Good to see the litany continuing.
~The Red Wolf~
It's a bit like using sudo in the Terminal and getting that wonderful third message about how your actions effect others. Apple has always done this. Good to see the litany continuing.
~The Red Wolf~
freeorangeshoes said:
it's apple-labeled, not apple branded. if their intent is "machine purchased from apple or machine originally sold by apple" then they need to reflect this in the license agreement. as it stands, "apple-labeled" doesn't mean much.
indeed if you take the motherboard out of your g5 powermac, you are voiding your warranty. if you then put the motherboard back in to the original case or another apple case, it's still an apple-labeled computer.
timswim78 said:
that may be the road that apple has to take if this becomes more rampant: on-line or phone activation. and then there will be people who will be hacking the system so it won't have to be officially "activated."
DrNeroCF said:
You can build your own Mac using used parts. Though it would cost way way too much since most Mac users think that hardware retains its value for YEARS.
Regarding "official" Apple hardware, who in the hell buys official Apple memory? I'd hate to see the price for official Apple hard drives and DVD-RW's.
jhu said:
labelled, branded. its semantics. which is exactly why your argument is a little ridiculous.
ANYWAY, if you want to replace motherboards and whatever so you can run XP in an apple "case", be my guest. although, id imagine that you wont get it to fit quite right.
freeorangeshoes said:
It is not semantics when it is written into a EULA. It's "supposed" to be a contract. Contracts are supposed to be unambigous.
Choppaface said:
No, that is not econmically feasible. For one, Apple uses hardware profits to subsidize MacOS X development. The real cost to sell MacOS would be much much higher. They don't exactly match Windows in OS sales.
Also, you can't sell an OS without some support. They would get lynched in the media.
All you Clintonions here that keep nitpicking on what constitutes an Apple Labeled computer you know fully well that only Apple Computer makes Apple computers..This isnt the Gil days when crappy clones were out there..
A Mac is a Mac is a Mac.Period.End of story..
So with that in mind when you purchase OS X on a DVD legally it is implied that you would be installing it on an Apple computer..It is currently impossible to legally purchase OS X for the Intel Mac..So if you have OS X for the Intel Mac on a PC you are breaking the EULA..There is no gray area and you know it..
Don't get me wrong though.I think it would be great if we could install OS X on a PC.Or dual-boot Windows and OS X on a Mac.
Until Steve Jobs decides differently we will just have to accept it.Like it or not.
A Mac is a Mac is a Mac.Period.End of story..
So with that in mind when you purchase OS X on a DVD legally it is implied that you would be installing it on an Apple computer..It is currently impossible to legally purchase OS X for the Intel Mac..So if you have OS X for the Intel Mac on a PC you are breaking the EULA..There is no gray area and you know it..
Don't get me wrong though.I think it would be great if we could install OS X on a PC.Or dual-boot Windows and OS X on a Mac.
Until Steve Jobs decides differently we will just have to accept it.Like it or not.
Darwin is not part of linux. Portions of Darwin are actually based on BSD, NextStep, OpenStep, and FreeBSD. Non of which are linux. Your comments an opinions can not be taken seriously when you support them with false statement such as "os x is based on darwin which is part of linux".windmaomao said:
Why would they want to do that? They spend all that time trying to get OSx86 working. Why would they destroy it and all their work?
win2osx.net, the other site where all the discussion of hacking goes on (the OSx86 project doesn't discuss the hacking so much), is also down.
Maxxuss' site is up which comes as no surprise as it is .ru
jhu said:
I believe that in this case Apple-labeled does not read as "a computer with an Apple label on it" but as "a computer labelled by Apple". So sticking an Apple sticker on it yourself does not help.
Peace said:
i don't think so. Whoever invent pc can do whatever he want to a pc then? where is this guy
fahlman said:
they can with xpostfacto. so a corollary question: is xpostfacto illegal? possibly. here's section 2 of the mac os 9 eula:
so running mac os x on a clone is not permitted by the eula
robbieduncan said:
then it should be stated expicitly in the license agreement.
Mr job is playing with fire
sorry for the english thx you
you dont go and piss off hacker/cracker/hobbist by crashing there little game .... period now the only thing he did its gave them a ennemi to fight ....
they will go off shore like other pirate site where there no laws [site names removed] and so many more ....
Piracy cannot be stop nor curtain dont forget the same person that hack/crack os are the same that do trojan and virus ...... Window is now living with there choices they made a few years ago not its the most crack up OS ...
Apple is the next ,they shot first hacker will shot last ... there no laws no justice no legal team on the net ......
for each one they will caught 100 will reply more viciously ....
its a already lost battle ....... Last time i check maxxuss is not in jail .
But there a easy way out of this Apple must do a PC version WITHOUT support period they should call it (Open OSX86) project build with out aqua sell its a 100$ Or face hack and cracker for the rest of time and end up like window
The day Apple choose to go intel its the day they choose to step into the slugfest and nothing can win a slugfest 100000 hacker to one
so apple should get the message fast or it will end up badly
sorry for the english thx you
you dont go and piss off hacker/cracker/hobbist by crashing there little game .... period now the only thing he did its gave them a ennemi to fight ....
they will go off shore like other pirate site where there no laws [site names removed] and so many more ....
Piracy cannot be stop nor curtain dont forget the same person that hack/crack os are the same that do trojan and virus ...... Window is now living with there choices they made a few years ago not its the most crack up OS ...
Apple is the next ,they shot first hacker will shot last ... there no laws no justice no legal team on the net ......
for each one they will caught 100 will reply more viciously ....
its a already lost battle ....... Last time i check maxxuss is not in jail .
But there a easy way out of this Apple must do a PC version WITHOUT support period they should call it (Open OSX86) project build with out aqua sell its a 100$ Or face hack and cracker for the rest of time and end up like window
The day Apple choose to go intel its the day they choose to step into the slugfest and nothing can win a slugfest 100000 hacker to one
so apple should get the message fast or it will end up badly
ok, i take it back. os x is based on darwin which is based on BSD, NextStep, OpenStep. My point still holds.fahlman said:
funny
who is afraid of virus seriously?
it's real life, deal with it. As I can understand, it does create a whole new field of job oppertunity.
I don't know how many ppl wining about virus here are really hit by virus badly and can't recover from the tragedy afterwards.
Just set apple free, man, grow up.
who is afraid of virus seriously?
it's real life, deal with it. As I can understand, it does create a whole new field of job oppertunity.
I don't know how many ppl wining about virus here are really hit by virus badly and can't recover from the tragedy afterwards.
Just set apple free, man, grow up.
toxicfreak said:
This statement is an example of why I have a gut feeling where the "trojan" came from.
I really don't get some of you. It's not YOUR choice as to if you should be allowed to run os x on a generic pc, its APPLES choice. They choose not to. I can see why, so no matter what your opinion is no one should be doing it. If you want to use os x, buy a mac. And even if you do buy a mac, that still doesn't mean you should be allowed to use that operating system on another machine.
From the get-go, putting x86 os x on a pc was illegal. Yet they did it and countinue to do it even now that the offical version has been realsed. I hope apples legal team does whatever they can to stop it....once again, it's their choice not yours. You think otherwise, go ahead and spead a decade coding your own operating system.
And all these "hackers" who think they have rights now....what is the internet coming to?
From the get-go, putting x86 os x on a pc was illegal. Yet they did it and countinue to do it even now that the offical version has been realsed. I hope apples legal team does whatever they can to stop it....once again, it's their choice not yours. You think otherwise, go ahead and spead a decade coding your own operating system.
And all these "hackers" who think they have rights now....what is the internet coming to?
Here's the thing. Apple's hardware looks nice/is solidly built, but the innards of their systems are now no different than those "crappy peecees" that people here seem to keep harping about. I store my computer under the desk - I really could care less if it's made of aluminum or not, or looks good. If I could buy a standard tower mac without the ridiculously overpriced case, I'd be happy. For me, a computer is a tool, not a decoration.
I understand that Apple uses the hardware sales to subsidize the software development, but I'd bet that their software sales would boom if they opened up OS X to run on PCs. And I still think you'd see a lot of folks buying Mac branded hardware too, assuming it was priced competitively. People like things to just work, and Apple can still provide that. I think they'd make more money in the long run, as many of my friends really like OS X, but prefer to build their own systems.
I understand that Apple uses the hardware sales to subsidize the software development, but I'd bet that their software sales would boom if they opened up OS X to run on PCs. And I still think you'd see a lot of folks buying Mac branded hardware too, assuming it was priced competitively. People like things to just work, and Apple can still provide that. I think they'd make more money in the long run, as many of my friends really like OS X, but prefer to build their own systems.