Imac vs. Hackintosh

[Neodym]

You're violating the license.

Every version of OS X on sale is an "upgrade" to the full version supplied with your mac.

No mac hardware = no license.

What happens if a 2nd hand Mac does not come with any software? Is the "full version" somehow magically woven into the aluminum of the machine? Is there any license/serial number sticker for OSX on the machine (similar to the Windows license stickers)? If so, where?

And if "Every version of OS X on sale is an 'upgrade'", then why is Snow Leopard (still on sale) so expensive? And why does it not need any previously installed version of OSX to run?

And what happens if you modify the originally delivered hardware - when does it reach the "No mac hardware" status? After i change the graphic card? Or the harddrive? Or memory with modules not purchased from Apple? Or the housing itself?

Why does OSX contain drivers for hardware that is not originally delivered by Apple?

And if it's truly illegal - why doesn't Apple claim their rights in court from all the violators? Must be tens of thousands worldwide!

Questions over questions...

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

It's as illegal as it gets. Apple never licensed OS X to run on anything but Apple hardware. Anyone that tells you otherwise simply has not read their license or is justifying their theft of OS X. It's that simple.

No it is not. Depends on the law in the country you are. Here, I bought OSX, so I can do with it what I want. Apple don't feel that I should install it on my toaster? Well, though luck for them, because I never signed anything. Agreeing to a popup that says "You read this and agree" is worth nothing here, by law.

 

[knightlie]

It's as illegal as it gets. Apple never licensed OS X to run on anything but Apple hardware. Anyone that tells you otherwise simply has not read their license or is justifying their theft of OS X. It's that simple. If it were legal every Tom, Dick and Harry hardware maker would build their own Hackintoshes.

No-one is talking about starting an company to produce Mac clones, we're talking about a guy in his living room.

A company attempted it a few years ago, actually went to market and Apple sued them big time and now they're as dead as the dinosaurs.

So what?

If you care if it's legal then a Hackintosh isn't for you. If you can justify theft then go right ahead.

I have a Hackintosh laptop running a legal Snow Leopard upgraded from an original Tiger supplied with my old iMac, and I haven't "stolen" a damn thing.

Breaking a license agreement may be illegal* but it is NOT theft - get off your high horse.


* "Illegal as it gets" is a nonsense phrase - an act is either legal or illegal.

 

[rkaufmann87]

You're not stealing OS X, you're using it in a way that Apple didn't intend for you to use it, and it is "illegal" by definition, but you are not stealing OS X, so don't try to make it sound worse than it is.

It's no different than jailbreaking a device, in terms of legality and ethics

You haven't read the SLA, it's clearly theft!

----------

No it is not. Depends on the law in the country you are. Here, I bought OSX, so I can do with it what I want. Apple don't feel that I should install it on my toaster? Well, though luck for them, because I never signed anything. Agreeing to a popup that says "You read this and agree" is worth nothing here, by law.

Read the SLA, it's clearly theft. If you read it and don't understand it then find someone that does in your country, it's an international license and it clearly states:

APPLE INC.
SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR OS X MOUNTAIN LION For use on Apple-branded Systems

H. Other Use Restrictions. The grants set forth in this License do not permit you to, and you agree not to, install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so.

----------

No-one is talking about starting an company to produce Mac clones, we're talking about a guy in his living room.




Breaking a license agreement may be illegal* but it is NOT theft....


* "Illegal as it gets" is a nonsense phrase - an act is either legal or illegal.

LOL, this is a thief justifying himself. If it's illegal and it's not theft then what is is it?

 

[GermanyChris]

You haven't read the SLA, it's clearly theft!

----------



Read the SLA, it's clearly theft. If you read it and don't understand it then find someone that does in your country, it's an international license and it clearly states:

APPLE INC.
SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR OS X MOUNTAIN LION For use on Apple-branded Systems

H. Other Use Restrictions. The grants set forth in this License do not permit you to, and you agree not to, install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so.

----------



LOL, this is a thief justifying himself. If it's illegal and it's not theft then what is is it?

Breach of contract..

That EULA is only valid in the USA to top it.

https://www.pearc.de/

 

[Mike in Kansas]

Apple didn't intend for people to jailbreak iOS

But it's not illegal.

 

[rkaufmann87]

Breach of contract..

That EULA is only valid in the USA to top it.

https://www.pearc.de/

Wrong it's a WW contract!

----------

But it's not illegal.

I don't recall bringing up IOS, we're talking about OS X. Stay on the topic!

 

[cooky560]

It's as illegal as it gets. Apple never licensed OS X to run on anything but Apple hardware. Anyone that tells you otherwise simply has not read their license or is justifying their theft of OS X. It's that simple. If it were legal every Tom, Dick and Harry hardware maker would build their own Hackintoshes. A company attempted it a few years ago, actually went to market and Apple sued them big time and now they're as dead as the dinosaurs. If you care if it's legal then a Hackintosh isn't for you. If you can justify theft then go right ahead.

This is untrue, a EULA is a contract and nothing more, there is no penalty for violating a EULA if you obtained the material legally. (Ie you bought a CD in an Apple Store). The ONLY power Apple have in this scenario is prevention of resale, and refusal to provide support, which are exactly the same powers they have (if they choose to use them) against people who follow the EULA. Don't confuse the idea with that of a driving license, which gives you permission to do something that is illegal without said permission. This is identical to installing an activation crack on a legal version of Windows, it's unnecessary, but perfectly legal.

 

[Mike in Kansas]

Wrong it's a WW contract!

----------



I don't recall bringing up IOS, we're talking about OS X. Stay on the topic!

dba415 did when he referenced jailbreaking, so it is on topic. Read the whole thread.

 

[Winni]

You may as well compare an apple to a bag of orange seeds. You may or may not enjoy or be successful at planting and growing trees from which to pick fruit, but you're still not going to have an apple when you're done.

Apple uses standard, off-the-shelf PC components in its computers. The only real difference between a Hackintosh and a Mac is the design. As long as the components in your "Hackintosh" are compatible with what Apple uses, turning a PC into a Hackintosh is rather straight-forward.

And please, don't tell me the fairy tale about how great Apple's support is - I had to use Apple Care a couple of time and their support is not nearly as good as Dell's business support (and Dell's business support plans even cost less).

However, except for the fun, the question is WHY would you want to buy a PC and turn it into a Walled Garden system? If you want a Unix-like operating system, install Ubuntu Linux.

 

[forty2j]

Apple uses standard, off-the-shelf PC components in its computers. The only real difference between a Hackintosh and a Mac is the design. As long as the components in your "Hackintosh" are compatible with what Apple uses, turning a PC into a Hackintosh is rather straight-forward.

Primarily what I'm referring to is that much stuff that you would expect to "just work", doesn't. Already mentioned in this thread is HDMI ports & OS X software updates... it can be a fun project for some, but really it's a project for people who enjoy constant tinkering and like having obstacles put in their way to make the tinkering more difficult.

 

[GermanyChris]

Wrong it's a WW contract!

----------



I don't recall bringing up IOS, we're talking about OS X. Stay on the topic!

Except the website I linked sell hackintosh's and has for years.

Software patenting and licensing is different here.

 

[Axcelcius]

Here is my take on the issue. Last year I custom built a Hackintosh. I used tonymac to prepare built and installed. It was awesome but for every update, there was some additional fixing, reinstalling of kexts, etc. and I quickly realized that one of the enjoyable things about purchasing a Mac is that there were way less major issues, like inability to boot properly or crashing. I was spending quite a bit of time just trying to make it run properly rather than using the system. Eventually, I found myself on my Windows partition more than my Mac. I have since made it a Window only system and given it to my wife while I use my late 2008 MBP.

 

[throAU]

What happens if a 2nd hand Mac does not come with any software?

It shipped with a full version LICENSE for OS X.


You are purchasing the LICENSE, not the install media.

As a result, and as per the EULA - you are licensed to upgrade it with a retail copy.

----------

And what happens if you modify the originally delivered hardware - when does it reach the "No mac hardware" status? After i change the graphic card? Or the harddrive? Or memory with modules not purchased from Apple? Or the housing itself?

You're being obtuse. The OS has checks for mac EFI (which is only legally obtainable from Apple by purchasing a machine that ships with it) and if you still have that it is still a mac.

Why does OSX contain drivers for hardware that is not originally delivered by Apple?

Mac Pros that can take cards? Apple internal testing for hardware they have or had in development that they may or may not release? That is apple's business and has no bearing on legality of hackintoshes

And if it's truly illegal - why doesn't Apple claim their rights in court from all the violators? Must be tens of thousands worldwide!

Questions over questions...

It's not worth their time to sue each and every hobbyist. But they COULD, legally. And as per the above, letting the hobbyist crowd slide may encourage people to get their feet wet and then buy a real mac. But just because they don't prosecute EVERYBODY over it, it doesn't mean it is LEGAL.

That isn't how the law works. Trademarks? Perhaps. But not breach of copyright. Just because the MPAA hasn't sued everybody who has downloaded episodes of the simpsons on their PC, it doesn't mean that it is legal.

Psystar tried making money off the hackintosh scene and see where they ended up?



I'm not saying don't build a hackintosh, but by the same token, don't claim there's nothing legally wrong with it, because that's a crock.



edit:
as far as the legality of the EULA goes, well, if your country signed a "free trade" agreement with the US, then they also inherited a heap of IP law along with it.

----------

This is identical to installing an activation crack on a legal version of Windows, it's unnecessary, but perfectly legal.

It is NOT legal.

http://www.chillingeffects.org/anticircumvention/faq.cgi

Question: What are the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions?

Answer: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is the latest amendment to copyright law, which introduced a new category of copyright violations that prohibit the "circumvention" of technical locks and controls on the use of digital content and products. These anti-circumvention provisions put the force of law behind any technological systems used by copyright owners to control access to and copying of their digital works.

The DMCA contains four main provisions:

a prohibition on circumventing access controls [1201(a)(1)(A)];
an access control circumvention device ban (sometimes called the "trafficking" ban) [1201(a)(2)];
a copyright protection circumvention device ban [1201(b)]; and,
a prohibition on the removal of copyright management information (CMI) [1202(b)].
The first provision prohibits the act of circumventing technological protection systems, the second and third ban technological devices that facilitate the circumvention of access control or copy controls, and the fourth prohibits individuals from removing information about access and use devices and rules. The first three provisions are also distinguishable in that the first two provisions focus on technological protection systems that provide access control to the copyright owner, while the third provision prohibits circumvention of technological protections against unauthorized duplication and other potentially copyright infringing activities.

 

[Mike in Kansas]

Here is my take on the issue. Last year I custom built a Hackintosh. I used tonymac to prepare built and installed. It was awesome but for every update, there was some additional fixing, reinstalling of kexts, etc. and I quickly realized that one of the enjoyable things about purchasing a Mac is that there were way less major issues, like inability to boot properly or crashing. I was spending quite a bit of time just trying to make it run properly rather than using the system. Eventually, I found myself on my Windows partition more than my Mac. I have since made it a Window only system and given it to my wife while I use my late 2008 MBP.

After 28 years I am tired of "tinkering". It's no longer fun the way it used to be. I get more enjoyment out of using my computer than maintaining my computer. My 15 year old son tinkers. He likes to overclock, jailbreak, hack, cobble together and create as many different things out of the pieces he has as possible. He is also constantly reinstalling his OS, rolling back his changes, searching for drivers, etc etc etc. It's not that I CAN'T do this stuff - I just don't WANT to.

 

[cooky560]

it's perfectly legal in places where the DMCA doesn't apply, like here , I've even asked people in my local Apple Store if it was legal to buy a Snow Leopard DVD and use it on non-APple hardware, they said that here at least they had no legal recourse to my doing so unless I tried to sell the device, but they'd rather I didn't.

For the record I have a proper iMac, I just wanted to put this EULA crap to bed.

Copyright law stops me from copying copyrighted material for the purpose of distribution in whole or in part (either for sale or otherwise)reverse engineering the product, and little else. I have every right to do what i wish with the material after obtaining a license for it with the exception of the specific limitations above (this right is even protected in law). A EULA is a non-legally binding contract, this may be different in the US.

 

[snberk103]

....
And if it's truly illegal - why doesn't Apple claim their rights in court from all the violators? Must be tens of thousands worldwide!

...

Others have answered the other questions. I can do this one.

Because in the case of a hobbyist, Apple can only sue for the damages it has suffered. Which are hard to quantify because you would need to figure out what kind of Mac the hackintosh most closely resembled, then Apple would need to disclose the net profit it makes on that Mac, the actual damages Apple has suffered.

To collect that they need to go to court and prove that you have installed OS X on non-Apple hardware - for each and every person who they wish to collect from. And they would have to disclose a bunch of corporate data that they have managed to keep secret. Hardly worth the effort, imho.

Plus - in the USA - if they get one judge who wants to make an activist name for themselves and overturns the EULA, Apple will need to appeal that decision up to a level of the court with professional judges instead of former dogcatchers who thought running for a judgeship was easier than running for mayor.

In the case of Pystar, Apple could sue for punitive damages as well as actual damages because they could show that Pystar would likely continue damaging Apple (with lost sales) if Pystar continued their activities, and that Pystar might consider the payment of actual damages just the cost of doing business.

----

I am not going to speculate whether the EULA is legal everywhere or not - though, for the record I behave as if it is. However, I can say that the fact that Apple does not sue hobbyists has no bearing on whether the EULA is legal or not.

 

[Neodym]

It shipped with a full version LICENSE for OS X.

You are purchasing the LICENSE, not the install media.

As a result, and as per the EULA - you are licensed to upgrade it with a retail copy.

How do i then prove i have got the license, if there is neither install media nor any license sticker anywhere?

You're being obtuse.

You're being rude.

I did ask my questions for a reason! If that mysterious license you are referring to is somehow connected to the machine simply being a Mac, then when does it stop to do so? What if i re-use parts of it in another machine or replace parts with non-Apple parts? You have not been able to answer that and instead been backing out by insulting me.

The OS has checks for mac EFI (which is only legally obtainable from Apple by purchasing a machine that ships with it) and if you still have that it is still a mac.

Good. Now tell me - if Apple has ways to identify whether OSX runs on a genuine Mac, then why don't they simply block those machines from software updates with reference to the EULA?

Apple internal testing for hardware they have or had in development that they may or may not release?

Right - having internal testing routines in an official OS release is quite usual for a two-man garage startup. Oh wait...

It's not worth their time to sue each and every hobbyist. But they COULD, legally. And as per the above, letting the hobbyist crowd slide may encourage people to get their feet wet and then buy a real mac. But just because they don't prosecute EVERYBODY over it, it doesn't mean it is LEGAL.

As i wrote above - they would have other means of blocking hackintosh users without having to disclose any internal numbers.

I'm not saying don't build a hackintosh, but by the same token, don't claim there's nothing legally wrong with it, because that's a crock.

I don't say it's completely legal, but for sure it's not completely illegal as well. It's probably a juristic grey zone - even more so, as the DMCA does not apply to countries other than the USA.

 

[stayupforever99]

Ok now I hardly ever post but I do like the whole Hackintosh debate.

I have only ever owned PPC mac's as soon as apple went INTEL I went Hackintosh. I have bought every copy of OSX I ever used Tiger, Leopard, Snow Leopard, Lion and Mountain Lion.

Yes breaking the EULA as wrong and I am sure apple could stop people building Hackintoshes any time they wanted, to but why dont they?

The main reason I believe is

There is nothing like having a whole community of unpaid developers working on your system/application writing patches testing new hardware pushing it forward. There are some very talented people in the Hackintosh community there are many who come to mind. But there is one who really stands out and that is netkas (http://netkas.org/) who ever that may be.

There are reasons not to Hackintosh but there are many reasons to Hackintosh.

A Hackintosh is not for everyone, but is it not at the heart of all computing enthusiasts to play to tinker

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homebrew_Computer_Club)

 

[paduck]

It's illegal in the same way that stripping the tags off a mattress is illegal. Yeah, it's technically against the law, frowned upon by Apple, and definitely against the EULA packed in with OSX...

...but you're not going to go to jail for doing it. Apple won't even attempt to bother you with a C&D so long as you don't start mass producing hackintoshes and sell them out of your garage. Unless you're a huge stickler about following the law to the very letter, there's no reason not go for it. Just buy a copy of OSX instead of downloading it off a torrent so we won't call you a dirty filthy pirate.

Stripping the tags off a mattress isn't illegal. It is illegal for anyone but the end consumer to remove it.

The end consumer explicitly can remove the tag. As for the Hackintosh, it is a violation of the End User License Agreement. Which is a civil, not criminal act, although still illegal. Practically speaking, if you aren't selling the Hackintosh and it is only for your personal use, you aren't at risk of Apple coming after you.

The Hackintosh does give you a lot of configuration flexibility not offered by Apple, but it also gives you installation and upgrade problems whenever you do anything with the OS. I have built a handful of Hackintoshes over the last five years for specific purposes. When the new iMac line comes out, I'll probably upgrade to that for my main computer. It's not worth the hassle to maintain the main computer as a Hackintosh. I'll just have to manage on fewer hard drives...

 

[throAU]

How do i then prove i have got the license, if there is neither install media nor any license sticker anywhere?


You're being rude.

Really?

This is a discussion, and i am presenting the facts as far as I've been able to determine them.

I haven't insulted you at all, I just called you on being obtuse (because you were) and trying to make this more complicated than it is.

If I wanted to insult you, I'd say something like "you're a moron" or "you're an idiot" but I haven't, and don't plan to.


The fact that you have in your possession a Macintosh machine with the EFI embedded into the device is your proof of license ownership. Unless someone reports the machine as stolen (and the cops/court/etc. determine that yes, your machine is stolen), then you're good.

The device with the EFI in it is licensed for OS X. Duplicating the EFI is illegal. If the machine containing the EFI is upgraded, fine. It is still a mac. It really isn't that complicated.

If you want further clarification, I'm sure someone at Apple can run your through what constitutes a machine that is legally allowed to run OS X.

----------

I don't say it's completely legal, but for sure it's not completely illegal as well. It's probably a juristic grey zone - even more so, as the DMCA does not apply to countries other than the USA.

There's no "sort of" legal about it.

Either the law applies in your country, or it doesn't.

Whether or not you have apple serving you with a cease and desist order or taking you to court over it is entirely irrelevant to the legality of it.

People smoke weed in plenty of places where it is illegal. People drink alcohol in the US at 16. not everyone gets prosecuted for it. That doesn't suddenly make it legal.

It makes it less risky, sure. But it still isn't LEGAL.


And apple DO prevent OS X from running on non-apple hardware out of the box. The fact that you need an EFI bootloader hack to get it to boot on a PC is entirely due to this. Could they do more to prevent it? Sure - but they only need to stop the 90% of people who are too clueless or don't care enough, or don't want to give up the "just works" to get it running.

Your car can likely do more than 100mph, but that isn't legal on the road (in most places) either.

If you don't want to take my word for it:

- go read the OS X EULA
- ask your lawyer whether or not this EULA is legally enforceable in your country

The DMCA is only one way that the law could be used against you if Apple wanted to sue you over a hackintosh. Yes I'm sure there are countries where it wouldn't be possible for apple to sue, but I think you'll find that the majority places where apple actually sell hardware are not included in that list.

 

[chillco]

Could you people please start a legal vs illegal topic and go on arguing over there? A lot of people (myself included) want to know if it's REALLY that hard to maintain a stable system. If the new iMac doesn't come out this month i'm seriously considering building myself a killer system following tonymacx86 buyer's guide and i'm wondering if it's worth the extra tinkering.

In my eyes Apple is forcing me to consider these options. My Macbook Pro died and i NEED a new machine as soon as possible. Since my Macbook never left it's desk anyway i want a desktop machine because you get more bang for your buck. But i refuse to buy the old iMac because i will not pay 500 euro's extra for a 256gb SSD. I consider myself quite the tinkerer, but I'm not going to remove a 27 inch display off of a brand new iMac.

Long story short: I'm considering a hackintosh and i don't care if it's illegal or not.

 

[Nandifix]

Could you people please start a legal vs illegal topic and go on arguing over there? A lot of people (myself included) want to know if it's REALLY that hard to maintain a stable system. If the new iMac doesn't come out this month i'm seriously considering building myself a killer system following tonymacx86 buyer's guide and i'm wondering if it's worth the extra tinkering.

In my eyes Apple is forcing me to consider these options. My Macbook Pro died and i NEED a new machine as soon as possible. Since my Macbook never left it's desk anyway i want a desktop machine because you get more bang for your buck. But i refuse to buy the old iMac because i will not pay 500 euro's extra for a 256gb SSD. I consider myself quite the tinkerer, but I'm not going to remove a 27 inch display off of a brand new iMac.

Long story short: I'm considering a hackintosh and i don't care if it's illegal or not.

I would also like to know this. In the exact same situation!

 

[Neodym]

A lot of people (myself included) want to know if it's REALLY that hard to maintain a stable system.

Well - that depends on your experience. With picking the right components (namely Gigabyte H77/Z77 motherboards) it's very straightforward to set up with very little fiddling. Once its running, it behaves just like a normal Mac.

Here and there may be some smaller quirks (like non-USB audio or HD4000 graphics not working properly), but usually that applies to new software (like Mountain Lion) or hardware (like the HD4000). Normally it does not take long until that is ironed out and within a couple of weeks you have the necessary patches available.

Biggest (if not the only) problem are the OSX updates. Updating from 10.8.0 to 10.8.1 was going as smoothly as possible for most people (even via the automatic update mechanism inside OSX), while the step to 10.8.2 broke the system for many people.

So as long as you follow the golden rules, a hackintosh nowadays is basically (nearly, albeit not completely) as easy and solid as an iMac.

Golden rules:

- Pick compatible /verified components or accept asking for trouble when going for rarely used / poorly supported components for one reason or the other.

- Same goes for living on the bleeding edge in terms of hardware (though the evaluations of upcoming hardware on various sites usually give a good guidance). Accept to run into problems if you buy directly after release.

- Mistrust any OSX update in the first place! Make a backup (ideally onto a bootable medium) before you update, so you can easily roll back if anything goes wrong. Perhaps you'd want to have a spare system drive to try an update before you use it on your productive system.

- Be prepared that the very software you are using may have a problem yet unknown as testers usually go for "standard" software. This especially applies to expensive / professional software.

- Accept that the software tools to help you with your hackintosh are far from being as refined as you may have grown used to from Apple itself.

- Would be a bonus if you are not scared of using the Terminal in case of problems, though it's not mandatory.

 

[snberk103]

...
Golden rules:

- Pick compatible /verified components or accept asking for trouble when going for rarely used / poorly supported components for one reason or the other.

- Same goes for living on the bleeding edge in terms of hardware (though the evaluations of upcoming hardware on various sites usually give a good guidance). Accept to run into problems if you buy directly after release.

- Mistrust any OSX update in the first place! Make a backup (ideally onto a bootable medium) before you update, so you can easily roll back if anything goes wrong. Perhaps you'd want to have a spare system drive to try an update before you use it on your productive system.

- Be prepared that the very software you are using may have a problem yet unknown as testers usually go for "standard" software. This especially applies to expensive / professional software.

- Accept that the software tools to help you with your hackintosh are far from being as refined as you may have grown used to from Apple itself.

- Would be a bonus if you are not scared of using the Terminal in case of problems, though it's not mandatory.

It's a good list. I will add one more, if I may.
- In case of any problem, you are own tech support. You will need to troubleshoot the issue, and arrange for the resolution of the problem.