But given that that's not even remotely the scenario that's happening here with "OpenCore Computer", it makes perfect sense the cmaier only told part of the history.
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.
'OpenCore Computer' Launches Commercial Hackintosh in Violation of Apple's macOS Licensing Agreement [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But given that that's not even remotely the scenario that's happening here with "OpenCore Computer", it makes perfect sense the cmaier only told part of the history.
given they know it’s illegal and who they are going up against this should immediately raise red flags. The obvious scam of take your bit coin deposit for a pre order, get shut down, then never return the money seems all to likely
This ^^^^^^
Back in the day macOS was solid (not without bugs, but solid anyway). Now no-so-much and it is getting worse.
Job's dividing Apple's product line into 4 quadrants helped save Apple by focusing on a few things they could do real well. Until then, resources were spread way too thin and Sculley, with his soft drink background, thought the computer industry could work like the soft drink - spin off a lot of products with different features to reach as many consumers as possible. Unfortunately it's a lot easier to tweak a formula, put a different coat of paint on a standard can, and sell a new product.
The Newton was really ahead of it's time. I had an OMP, and later reviewed the 2K and the 2K had a lot of potential. Graffiti gave it stylus input to make up for its generally bad HWR, and the keypad made it a nice portable for basic writing etc. to be later transfered to a PC.
Yo, the iPhone is the minivan of mobile phones. Now get off my lawn...
Last edited:
Yes and it is a shame IMO. Their OS MacOS is great. way better than windows. I know many windows users wanting to use macOS. they just find the computers to expensive or they don't have the specs.
edit:typo
Last edited:
Yep, monitors don't change in any essential way for 10+ years, computers 4 or 5 years. But the problem is that Apple today is changing for changes sake, not to really improve. They want people to buy new computers needed or not because that is their DNA and it is required to support current macOS releases.
Computers today are a commodity, not new fast changing technology. Apple is still caught up in the 90s where computers improved so much in 2 years that new ones were wanted. Today, I don't want a new computer every 2 or 3 years just in order to run a current Apple macOS. This is the problem that Apple does not understand and why the 90s strategy worked during the 90s and does not now. It is Apple that has not adapted, not me.
nah, i‘ve been working professionally (editing videos, color grading, animating, music) on various hackintoshes since around 2007 - i’ll admit, my first install took around a day, because I didn‘t have the right hardware - my first hackintosh was just a pc with components not bought for hackintosh in mind. but since then they’ve been running without any fuss, and were no more complicated to set up than a windows-install. i‘ve had to reinstall a broken osx once, just as i had to on my macbook. and even if the hackintosh hardware ever breaks down, I could go to he next store and buy a replacement-part and be up and running in no time vs. sending in the mac and also paying for all the parts soldered to the damaged one.
granted, if i had the money, i‘d buy a macpro, and never waste a second thought on it. but I don‘t have that amout of change lying around, and so do most pros I know, even big TV-companies (most of which just buy windows machines because of that). sure, we could afford it, if we had to - it‘s a tool that also makes money - but it’s a luxury tool with the money better invested in other things. otoh, i can build a hackintosh that‘s - using applications in my field - just as fast as a 12-core macpro for less than a quarter of the price with the only real world advantage of the macpro making even less noise and being shinier.
I was just saying this the other day. I really wish Apple would for once leave well enough alone and focus on stability instead of change. They can't though. That is simply not Apple. They have to continually stir the pot, breaking many things along the way. They do not care who gets rolled over in their path. I understand there might be great potential with ARM, but do we really need ARM Macs? I mean, do we not hit a threshold of performance which in the real world the gains are no longer relevant? I feel sorry for a lot of these smaller 3rd party devs that simply can't keep up. I wish Apple would have just teamed up with AMD and called it a day. At least then they wouldn't have the excuse that Intel is holding them back.
Just wondering if any of these Hackintosh companies can beat the system by just building the computer to spec, then just not selling it with the Mac OS but with online instructions from a “third party” website on how to install the OS?
then they’d just be hardware to spec dealers. Maybe at worst, with modified BIOS etc.
then they’d just be hardware to spec dealers. Maybe at worst, with modified BIOS etc.
Well, it's a big issue apparently only for a handful of critics and shorts. The company is approaching $1.5 trillion market cap, so it's not an issue for Apple, their target market, or their long shareholders. Could you help us understand what you mean by "a proper desktop"? I suspect it's an area of computing that has a slim margin.
My point was that the licensing program was probably not the main thing that nearly bankrupted Apple in the 90s.
He introduced the "4 quadrants - focus on what Apple does best" model because Apple's Mac range was a confusing shambles and needed revising with extreme prejudice... and yet the next thing he did was to introduce a personal stereo, and then a phone, which were both complete departures for Apple (try to compete with Sony, Nokia and Blackberry? Don't be silly!) However much the authors of business studies courses may want it to be true, people like Jobs don't succeed by adhering to simplistic rules that will fit on a powerpoint slide. "4 quadrants" may have saved the company from actual ruin, but it was ignoring that rule and taking a huge gamble that turned it into a massive success. Superficially, the Newton or the QuickTake made just as much sense at the time - the devil is in the details (plus a large dollop of luck).
(Slightly o/t rant
It's like the "Jobs wanted everything to be a sealed-up appliance" meme: He may have wanted the original Mac and iMac to be domestic appliances but, under Jobs, Apple also released the 'blue and white' G4 tower, the PowerMac G5 and the original Mac Pro, which set new standards for 'tool free' access to the innards. Even the new MP fails in that respect - to re-seat a wobbly PCIe card you have to unplug all the cables, roll it out from under the desk on those $700 wheels and lift up the entire cover by the full height of the system... (or there's the rack-mount version, which turns out to need the full depth of a server rack, meaning it won't fit in a lot of studio A/V racks... and where the RAM slots are underneath the case...) But, hey, the PCIe slot covers are machined from solid aluminium (even though the typical customer who's just paid thousands of pounds over the odds to get 8 PCIe slot is going to chuck most of them away) and when you're flat-out on the floor changing the RAM, the hatch closes with the thunk of a BMW door.
What Apps are you running that are not 64-bit?
MS Word Caveman Edition. There is no alternative for making stone tablets look professional.
I just don't understand their business model. They don't tell you where they are or, really, who they are. They set up a complex payment schedule using bitcoin -- BITCOIN! -- as though that's a common currency of exchange. They send you a photo of the computer as though it's an exchange of a kidnapping victim. They (claim to) have a warranty but don't tell you how to get this freaky Frankenstein serviced. They use a CPU that is widely known not to be fully compatible with Hackintoshes. Their website is wonky. All it's missing is a Nigerian prince. Who would buy this thing?
[automerge]1592144615[/automerge]
[automerge]1592144615[/automerge]
It's a creative thought but, no. It would still be illegal. It would be a case of inducement to infringe, and still violates patent and copyright laws.
********. Back then everyone wanted “choice” too. People bought the clones because they were cheaper, faster, more expandable. And if your point is that demand for clones would be even higher today, that proves my point. The reason apple’s previous foray was a disaster was NOT because nobody bought the clones. Quite the opposite. So you are proving my point.
learn from history.
[automerge]1592145618[/automerge]
They may as well throw in three doses of COVID-19 vaccine with every purchase.
Last edited:
Dunno why this is such a difficult concept for people to grasp.
There's also no imprint, no company address, nothing. No details on which 3rd parties they share your data with in the privacy policy. At least in the EU this alone is highly illegal.
Tell me more. How exactly is it a big issue?
It's not Apple's fault if developers don't believe them. Transition to 64 Bit started with OS X 10.4 Tiger in 2005, gradually increasing the amount of software being written in 64 Bit over the following releases. The writing has been on the wall for over a decade. I said it before and I will say it again: Every developer who had only the slightest intentions to keep his code up to date had plenty of time to do so.
BMW doesn’t have a proper coupe at around $25000 and it’s a big issue.
Guess I can just sneak onto a lot and take one.
It IS an area with slim margins, and apparently not one where Apple sees a lot of potential. MacBooks are their best sellers, and stand to benefit the most from the ARM transition.
More like: Far from what whiny tech nerds get frothed up about on tech forums.
Apple knows its customer base. That's why Apple is one of the most successful companies in the world. And why its customers are repeat purchasers, opening their wallets paying premium prices, year after year after year.
Last edited:
Show any studies that quantifies this. Make sure they show their work.
The point with the ARM chips is differentiation. Apple wants to avoid their products being commoditized. Switching to Intel was necessary in 2005, but I doubt even Steve Jobs thought it would be permanent. Since then, mobile devices have generated the bulk of their revenue, and they have invested so much into the ARM architecture that it has become viable for its Mac line. While others are starting to close the gap, Apple has shown for at least the last 7 years that they have the best chip designs. And since they control the OS and the chip design, they’ll be able to optimize both in a way that others won’t be, at least initially.
That's it exactly. Relying on commodity CPUs pretty much levels the playing field among computer manufacturers. Apple designing their own CPUs permits custom functions, architectures, and other secret sauce not available to competitors. And that includes being able to better trade performance/power dissipation/thermals/etc for different products.
Other benefits are cost and Apple not having its success (or downturns) driven by Intel's roadmap.
Last edited: