Become Microsoft? I think some people here give Apple a lot more credit than they deserve. Sure, they make what I find to be a more pleasing OS in terms of function and aesthetics, but I don't hold any beliefs about how Apple the corporation is somehow wonderful and magical. Both Microsoft and Apple are large large corporations, and as such, they share a primary goal: profit. Why does Apple keep its OS tied to its machines? Large profit. The hardware is relatively expensive, but if we were able to buy the OS and put it on any machine we wanted, I think you would see a lot of people ditching the hardware side of Apple.
That's likely anti-Apple propaganda (the Apple profit theory in context to MS). However, on the other hand, the EULA is not on the outside of the Box, in most cases like the
US Supreme Court prefers as a suggestion but not yet a ruling.
Apple, Microsoft, or any software company can say their EULA, behind a shinkwrapped box, is a contract.
US law currently states that there are six provisions that make a contract void, as they are
1) Fraudulent contract lacking consideration
2) A contract that is asking, among other things, for illegal activity
3) A contract where one or both parties are not mentally sound - ie -down's syndrome
4) A contract where one or both parties are under age
5) An unconscionable contract, where one or both sides have hidden terms or unfair advantage
6) A contract that flies into the face of the Uniform Commercial Code
Apple can claim that it's OS is a license, which it isn't. The majority of district courts have ruled that it's a product, thus "product ID code" and "product launch" when any OS comes out.
Asking a buyer to use Mac OS on just Apple hardware is a gray area which most legal scholars consider
unconscionable. It would be akin to buying a Gibson guitar and for Gibson to say that when you replace old strings on your guitar, you
must use only Gibson strings. BTW, Gibson strings are not all that bad but Ernie Ball Strings are cheaper and better.
