Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

EFiX Allows Mac OS X to Boot on a PC

teh_pwnerer said:
Totally disagree. It's like Toyota telling me what I can or cannot do with my car. Once I own they car they can't do anything about it. I can even put a Honda symbol on it and sell it to my neighbor. Somehow we've entered into this digital age where people think just because someone sells something with a EULA glued to the package they have a right to control every aspect of what goes on with the product after the sale. It's sold, it's gone.
Click to expand...

It's not like buying a car. If you must use that analogy, then it would be more like buying a car at a reduced price with the condition that you only use it as specified in a contract.

How would a software company make money if they could not limit your use of the software?
 
If you can't afford a Lamborghini you just scrap together a kit car as a substitute.

And that is what it will always boil down to! I'll continue to go for Lamborghinis!
Click to expand...

I love the way a Lamborghini looks. That's why i go with Macs.

I love my Lamborghini with a Ford engine inside of it. It cost 10 times more than an actual Lamborghini because they custom fit a Ford engine inside.

That's why I buy Macs. It's like a Lamborghini that costs more than a Lamborghini.

Macs cost a lot of money because they are custom-fit with Dell engines. (i.e., Intel processors and NVIDIA graphic cards)

If you don't like special, high-grade, custom finishes, like Lamborghinis with Ford engines... then don't buy MACS and GET OFF THIS FORUM. it's that simple.
 
teh_pwnerer said:
Terrible precedent. We don't need any more locked down things.



Totally disagree. It's like Toyota telling me what I can or cannot do with my car. Once I own they car they can't do anything about it. I can even put a Honda symbol on it and sell it to my neighbor. Somehow we've entered into this digital age where people think just because someone sells something with a EULA glued to the package they have a right to control every aspect of what goes on with the product after the sale. It's sold, it's gone.
Click to expand...

You are probably the smartest person in this thread, and a shining beacon of light in the darkness that is the group think of the clueless fanbois.

You are correct on all counts. I can't believe how many people here don't get it.
 
daveporter said:
Time for Apple to place a dedicated hard-wired security chip on its motherboards with proprietary, copy protected, legally protectable code that the OS must check for before Leopard will boot.

This will slow down this type of thing and give Apple the legal ammunition needed to take out any company that tries to defeat the security chip.

I am appalled by those that believe that companies have no right to dictate how and under what terms their products will be used. You have a choice, if you don't like the companies terms and policies, don't buy their products.
Click to expand...

lexmark tried that and lost in court also apple can't do that as that will lockout all of mac out today as well there older ones.
 
teh_pwnerer said:
Terrible precedent. We don't need any more locked down things.
Click to expand...

Terrible why?

If you buy a mac and run the OS, you don't see anything different from the way it is right now. In fact, how would you even know if they are doing this right now?

What would be the downside to that other than it would make it harder to run OSX on generic hardware?
 
BaldiMac said:
It's not like buying a car. If you must use that analogy, then it would be more like buying a car at a reduced price with the condition that you only use it as specified in a contract.

How would a software company make money if they could not limit your use of the software?
Click to expand...

Red Hat seems to do pretty well. I'm fine with them limiting the software like this:

One copy for one computer.

That's really all that needs to be said in a EULA. I will buy one copy for each computer I install it on.
 
milo said:
Terrible why?

If you buy a mac and run the OS, you don't see anything different from the way it is right now. In fact, how would you even know if they are doing this right now?

What would be the downside to that other than it would make it harder to run OSX on generic hardware?
Click to expand...

Well, let's see:

1) It's another thing to go wrong. Being aggravated by a computer bug is one thing, being aggravated by a computer bug caused by DRM is ten times worse.

2) It won't work. It will be hacked and worked around by people who don't like it, just like every piece of DRM in history.

3) That's kind of what the EFI bios already is, and guess what - there is now a work around.

4) What are you going to do about all the legacy macs out there? Just shut them off?

5) Keep your hands off my computer, my software, and everything else I own!

kthxbai
 
How would a software company make money if they could not limit your use of the software?
Click to expand...

the more people that use OS X, the more it becomes popular. The more people learn to use it. The more people learn to use the software installed on it. The more developers start to create software for it. The more people leave windows. The more people start buying it legally for their businesses. The more people HAVE to use it, because they don't know anything else.

That is why Linux is becoming better and better every year. It's free. People love developing for it. Eventually when a lot of people are steadily moving to linux, it will become the dominant OS in the world, and Mac OS and Windows will eventually open source their operating systems in order to compete with Linux.
 
oban14 said:
Red Hat seems to do pretty well.
Click to expand...

Red Hat has a EULA.
http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_rha_eula.html

They make money by providing support for an operating system that they have not developed for the most part. A company that uses its own resources to develop a normal program that works well would not have this option. Not to mention that you could go to any company for support, not just the developer.

I'm fine with them limiting the software like this:

One copy for one computer.

That's really all that needs to be said in a EULA. I will buy one copy for each computer I install it on.
Click to expand...

So you are fine with a EULA as long as you agree with it. Oh. Wait. That's how it works now! If you don't agree with the EULA you can return the software for a full refund.
 
johnasmith1914 said:
the more people that use OS X, the more it becomes popular. The more people learn to use it. The more people learn to use the software installed on it. The more developers start to create software for it. The more people leave windows. The more people start buying it legally for their businesses. The more people HAVE to use it, because they don't know anything else.

That is why Linux is becoming better and better every year. It's free. People love developing for it. Eventually when a lot of people are steadily moving to linux, it will become the dominant OS in the world, and Mac OS and Windows will eventually open source their operating systems in order to compete with Linux.
Click to expand...

Ok, I usually stay quiet on this topic but you people have you ever read these forums? The above argument is wrong. wrong wrong wrong. What is the number one problem with windows??? compatibility of a bajillion different types of setups. This is why windows is huge ( size wise). To create a better experience, that is why mac's are locked, plain and simple. Prices would go up for OSX to create the R&D and support for having such a huge market with all these choices.

Two: NO CAR ANALOGIES! NEVER EVER EVER!!!! These analogies definitely get caps because they are always the worst and stupidest arguments. They never work, someone always finds a loophole, so just NO.

Three: The next time I would buy windows, which I never have will be when they offer a stripped down version of the OS, and I get to install the drivers I need. I don't need them telling me what I do and dont need. I don't understand why they wouldn't just offer a stripped down barebones version of the OS. Oh wait, yes I do. Because they so fricken greedy out they "a" holes that they want to sell you the biggest load of crap they've got. If OSX ever goes open to all, I will probably never buy OSX either just because it'll be bloated. This is what is driving me to Linux. Free=best.
 
johnasmith1914 said:
the more people that use OS X, the more it becomes popular. The more people learn to use it. The more people learn to use the software installed on it. The more developers start to create software for it. The more people leave windows. The more people start buying it legally for their businesses. The more people HAVE to use it, because they don't know anything else.

That is why Linux is becoming better and better every year. It's free. People love developing for it. Eventually when a lot of people are steadily moving to linux, it will become the dominant OS in the world, and Mac OS and Windows will eventually open source their operating systems in order to compete with Linux.
Click to expand...

And Linux comes with a license that limits what you can do with the software.
 
This is what is driving me to Linux. Free=best
Click to expand...

I usually don't post here. But I have to say that this above statement is absolutely WRONG WRONG WRONG.

I was once offered a free hotdog in NYC one day buy a guy who was playing a guitar out on the street. I asked him what brand it was, and he said he didn't know, that he got it off some other guy for a dollar but wasn't hungry.

in that case free did NOT equal BEST. The hotdog was a 7.33 on a 10 point scale.

That same day I had a Nathan's hotdog, that wasn't the best, but it was decent, i had it rated, and the man who was grading it said it was a 8.25 on the same rating scale as the other one. Sorry dude, you are wrong.

OS X RULES. LINUX DRoOLS

In another case, I was offered free Trombone lessons from a guy that said he was pretty good at it. Unfortunately, it didn't go down so well.

Then another time, I paid $250 an hour for a professional to teach me. I believe that those lessons were better than the other ones.

I just corrupted your statement about Linux being the best.

Linux absolutely sucks and will never become the dominant OS.
 
Another illegal threat. With this you are modifying the boot process. Part of OS X that helps with startup is being modified and with that you are breaking the terms of use.
 
teh_pwnerer said:
Terrible precedent. We don't need any more locked down things.



Totally disagree. It's like Toyota telling me what I can or cannot do with my car. Once I own they car they can't do anything about it. I can even put a Honda symbol on it and sell it to my neighbor. Somehow we've entered into this digital age where people think just because someone sells something with a EULA glued to the package they have a right to control every aspect of what goes on with the product after the sale. It's sold, it's gone.
Click to expand...

ZONK! Sorry, but the truck analogy just doesn't work. You're talking about a physical item. The issue of the OS comes down to intellectual property restraints. You don't actually OWN the OS when you purchase a Macintosh you own a license to use the OS. There's no intellectual copyright infringement if you slap a Pwnerer Made This sticker on a Dodge then pawn it off on your neighbor. You're receiving reimbursement for the resale of your own property.

Big Difference.
 
For those that think that this type of thing is a great idea I will try one more time to make a point that you hopefully will understand.

First, try to understand that OS X is sold at a price that is most likely break-even at best. Why? Because that is not where Apple makes its profit; they are not in the business of selling only operating system software.

With Apple's current pricing plan, they are sure that each person that purchases a copy of OS X also purchased a MAC computer. They reap income from the hardware sale.

The combination of the price paid for OS X and the price paid for the hardware COMBINED is sufficient to allow Apple to pay for R&D, general overhead and make a profit for its shareholders.

If you take away a major portion of the income that they derive from each copy of OS X sold, that of the hardware, Apple will not generate sufficient funds to pay for R&D, general overhead and profit for its shareholders.

If this were to happen, something would have to give. Either the price of a copy of OS X would have to be increased by the amount of income that was derived by the hardware sale that did not occur (drastically raising the cost of a copy of OS X), R&D costs would have to be reduced (no more innovative products we all love), general overhead would have to be reduced (quality engineers and programmers would be let go, again no more innovative products) or shareholder profits would have to be reduced (no more Apple) or more likely, some combination of all of these.

Does this remind you of any other company (think M$)? Do you really want another M$ instead of an Apple? That is what widespread adoption of the use of Hacintoshes would cause. Not a pleasant thought.

Dave
 
Firmware lawsuit possible ...And Apple gets screwed supporting this Hackintosh

Forgive me for not reading the hundreds of posts since yesterday, potentially resulting in redundancy:

The glaring way in which EFiX could result in a lawsuit is if the included EFI firmware has anything to do with that which Apple use on Macs. If it does, this company is D E A D, so long.

The tangly way this could result in a lawsuit would be by strictly enforcing the EULA (I'm too bizzy at the moment to provide the name Apple actually uses for their licenses or to go find a copy). Apple clearly state, if memory serves, that Mac OS X is to only be run on Apple provided hardware. The end.

Next issue: Apple being stuck doing tech support for unsupported hardware.

We all know perfectly well that if you buy into the EFiX game then you are going to be suck in the Infinite Loop of The Blame Game. No way is EFiX going to support your Mac OS X problems! "It's not our software man! We only support the hardware add-on! Call Apple!". Then you call Apple and they ask for your hardware SERIAL NUMBER (Yes they do!) and you have to come up with some fraudulent number you grabbed off the net. If you fail to deliver, Apple grab your phone number for the purpose of identifying your ass so they can add you to their lawsuit, then tell you go to talk to the EFiX folks, it's their problem, it's not Apple hardware. If by chance you make it through Apple's grilling, you have just made yourself a PARASITE on Apple, having them pay for tech support you in no way whatsoever deserve because you broke the law and tossed MOSX on IBM derived PC hardware, you little scumbag.

So, I'm just saying, you know, like, save your ass and be assiduous dude! 😀
 
BaldiMac said:
Red Hat has a EULA.
http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_rha_eula.html

They make money by providing support for an operating system that they have not developed for the most part. A company that uses its own resources to develop a normal program that works well would not have this option. Not to mention that you could go to any company for support, not just the developer.



So you are fine with a EULA as long as you agree with it. Oh. Wait. That's how it works now! If you don't agree with the EULA you can return the software for a full refund.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with a reasonable EULA. If a EULA is unreasonable, it is probably illegal and there is no reason to obey it.

drewyboy said:
Ok, I usually stay quiet on this topic but you people have you ever read these forums? The above argument is wrong. wrong wrong wrong. What is the number one problem with windows??? compatibility of a bajillion different types of setups. This is why windows is huge ( size wise). To create a better experience, that is why mac's are locked, plain and simple. Prices would go up for OSX to create the R&D and support for having such a huge market with all these choices.
Click to expand...

Since you can't seem to figure out a business solution for this, I'll provide you with one. Apple could simply state that they only guarantee it to work on Apple branded hardware. They could also provide a list of supported hardware. Or, just like the hackintosh community, people could keep a list of what hardware works and what hardware doesn't.

There is nothing special about Apple hardware besides the design and the logo. It's all consumer grade Intel/PC parts.

Two: NO CAR ANALOGIES! NEVER EVER EVER!!!! These analogies definitely get caps because they are always the worst and stupidest arguments. They never work, someone always finds a loophole, so just NO.
Click to expand...

So because there is an analogy that disproves your point, it should be disregarded and removed from the debate? OK. 🙄

Three: The next time I would buy windows, which I never have will be when they offer a stripped down version of the OS, and I get to install the drivers I need. I don't need them telling me what I do and dont need. I don't understand why they wouldn't just offer a stripped down barebones version of the OS. Oh wait, yes I do. Because they so fricken greedy out they "a" holes that they want to sell you the biggest load of crap they've got. If OSX ever goes open to all, I will probably never buy OSX either just because it'll be bloated. This is what is driving me to Linux. Free=best.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of ISOs floating around torrent sites and elsewhere that offer a stripped down version of the OS with all unnecessary drivers removed. Of course, you'll be violating a EULA, but if you bought a legal copy I wouldn't hold it against you.

Where can I get a stripped down version of OSX, by the way? 😱
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back