Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
this doesnt say exatcly what i want it to say but i have more proof...
attachment.php

That's probably because you've decided to do an "Upgrade" install to Leopard, you can do a Archive and Install (recommended) or Erase and Install, and I'm sure that message wouldn't be displayed, especially with the latter.
 
Sorry, but there's no way this can go through. It's not even a good idea, IMO. I mean, cr@ppy hardware with poor support --you get what you pay for, as we all know-- would lead to potential bad experiences for users with machines that overheat, lock up unexpectedly, and so on. This is probably in part the reason Apple doesn't want clones any more, anyway. Jobs was right to kill them off and retain a good brand experience from start to end. Just my opinion.

Amen, I agree, but isn't it time Apple woke up and gave us a real MINI, with upgradeable parts. Time to give us what we want, not just what Apple wants us to want.$599 for yesterdays parts bin hardware doesn't work in this day and age:rolleyes:
 
It's a flawed analogy, a kia isn't built nearly as well as a BMW, but a lot of us are actually running heavier duty hardware than is available in any Mac bar the Mac Pro (and that is made by the same manufacturers, my PC is all Intel and Nvidia hardware on an Intel EFI motherboard).

This machine will actually run vanilla OS X using the PC EFI hack (effectively Boot Camp in reverse) and the only thing that isn't natively supported is the on board sound - logically you could replace the BIOS emulation on this machine with Apple compatible EFI and the thing would install and run leopard straight from a regular retail disk.

Effectively we're talking about taking a BMW Engine, transmission and electronics and installing it in a custom chassis that's built just as well, if not better, and for half the price, the only difference is literally the badge on the hood.

Some of us don't see the point in dropping 3 grand on a machine that will be obsolete in 6 months (admittedly the Mac Pro isn't bad value at this time, because it only just came out, 6 months from now the same hardware will cost substantially less but the Mac Pro's price point won't drop - the old one certainly didn't), or dropping 2 grand on a machine that can't be upgraded and where a substantial part of the cost is in the display which you have to throw out when you buy a replacement.

I would like to see a system of Apple trusted partners, a handful of high quality manufacturers like Intel and NVidia who sell certified hardware with certified drivers (admittedly its hard to keep a straight face saying that, given NVidia's issues with Vista).

Apple don't have to support every hardware mfr out there, but if they would release OS X on specifically built generic systems, they'd take a HUGE chunk out Microsoft's market segment overnight, hell, they could release a $500 version of OS X for x86 and I'd buy it, it wouldn't be the first time they jacked up the price of software on non Apple hardware.

It's an analogy, what can you say. But keeping with that for fun.

Reading their warnings, things that won't work and the history of the hacks that need to be done to make it work.

You wouldn't be able to fill gas up on the right side of the car anymore, you'd need to take the engine out to check the oil level and you can't run it down to the BMW shop to have the check engine light turned off.

But other than that, it's just the same.

Sorry... this was bad.
 
I can't even imagine why someone would want all of the crap from the PC world swirling around inside of a well made fine piece of machinery. Good luck with that.
SPOILER ALERT: Apple hardware IS PC hardware. The only difference is EFI.

The mac mini is quieter, has a years warranty, more reliable, has a remote included and looks great (that thing looks like a fridge imo)
And can't be upgraded. No discrete graphics. Ever.

Who is going to help you when this stops working or is unreliable?
This is not for people who worry about that. And in all reality, why would it stop working? The answer is "don't install updates until you know they will work." It's very simple.

This "OpenMac" is for computer users who can read instructions.
 
I wonder if the EULA is a thing that applies to the end users of openmac and not the openmac vendor?

If that was the case the vendor would not be in violation to sell openmac boxes

They would not be in violation of the EULA (if they direct people to buy Leopard at an Apple store and install it), but they would be in violation of quite a few other laws. Starting with trademark infringement - using Apple's name to sell their wares. And selling computers by inducing people to breach Apple's EULA. Even if breach of that EULA is not illegal, you can't base your business on telling people to breach it.
 
I will pay whatever for this with Mac OS X 10.5.2 inside:

- MOST IMPORTANT: bedroom quiet Mac. If possible, fanless.
- FireWire 800 (two ports)
- FireWire 400 (two ports)
- USB 2 (4 ports)
- 1TB 7200 rpm drive inside. Option for a second drive (Time Machine)
- Option for up to two quad core Intel processors (octo).
- Option for 8 GB RAM (1GB/core)
- Audio in
- Audio out
- No need for PCI slots.
- No need of graphic card.
- No need for expandbility.

Size: less important.
 
Show me any case law of any court upholding any EULA.

Show me any case law backing that EULA's are legal.
 
I'm writing this on a 2.4@3.2 GHz Quad-core, 2 GB RAM, 8800 GT, 500 GB HD hackintosh. I'm guessing the components costs in the neighbourhood of $1200 in the US and, according to geekbench and xbench, it performs slightly better than the mac pro (1x2.6 GHz quad core extreme + 8800 GT) model at $2600.

It's fully updated and seems pretty stable, but Safari and Mail occasionally quits unexpectedly (like once every couple of days). However, updates are not always trivial to install. Updating to 10.5.3 will likely need some additional patching, or a bit of terminal magic.

I didn't buy this computer specifically to run OS X, but I wanted to install it to see what all the fuss was about and as it turned out, OS X has become my primary operating system, except for games (I was using Linux+Vista before).

The copyright laws in my country afford me the right to patch away at any legally bought software, if it doesn't work on my hardware, so it would seem I'm in the clear, but US law is very different. At least one of the patches circumvents encryption, which I'm guessing would get you in trouble with the digital milleneum act.

Morally, I think there is a slight difference between modifying a legally bought copy of OS X privately, and doing it commercially. If you want a hackintosh, take the time to research and build it yourself. If you don't have the time, knowledge and inclination, your best bet is still to buy from Apple.

So is Apple losing money on this? Well, I bought an Apple keyboard and Leopard and am currently thinking about buying a MacBook. That would have never happened if I did not have the option of trying out OS X relatively cheaply.
 
Amen, I agree, but isn't it time Apple woke up and gave us a real MINI, with upgradeable parts. Time to give us what we want, not just what Apple wants us to want.$599 for yesterdays parts bin hardware doesn't work in this day and age

Hmm, I just want to tell if Apple do what you said and Mac OS X become less stable then last time when Apple restrict the hardwares on their product, dont come in the forum and start bashing Apple.

You know why Vista sucks? Partly because most people hope their 3 years old PC can run Vista flawlessly. If MSoft did like what Apple doing now, Vista wont be that sucky.
 
This is not for people who worry about that. And in all reality, why would it stop working? The answer is "don't install updates until you know they will work." It's very simple.

hahahaha

Why on earth would you take something that works so well and turn it into a pile of crap? To save a few bucks?
 
And can't be upgraded. No discrete graphics. Ever.

This is not for people who worry about that. And in all reality, why would it stop working? The answer is "don't install updates until you know they will work." It's very simple.

This "OpenMac" is for computer users who can read instructions.

On Macrumors we represent a small majority of both apple users and computer users in general.
Most people would never need such things as gaming quality graphics and upgradability - therefore the mac mini appeals to lots of people who just want a cheap mac for day to day tasks.
 
hahahaha

Why on earth would you take something that works so well and turn it into a pile of crap? To save a few bucks?
What is the magical quality about Apple-branded hardware that makes it "work so well?"

PROTIP: THERE ISN'T ONE.

This box uses the same kind of hardware Apple uses. Same chipsets. Same processors. Probably everything is the same down to the drives. There's no reason not to. If you are building a hackintosh from scratch you can build a machine which OS X will function on just as flawlessly as it does on a Mini. Or a Pro. Or an iMac.

This is why people who complain that their Macs will break if Apple releases an upgradeable non-ridiculous tower, because they will have to support new hardware, are full of it. All Apple has to do is support one card, and sell that card. Period. If other cards work, that's great, but it's not Apple's problem. Simple. Easy. End of story.
 
Morally, I think there is a slight difference between modifying a legally bought copy of OS X privately, and doing it commercially. If you want a hackintosh, take the time to research and build it yourself. If you don't have the time, knowledge and inclination, your best bet is still to buy from Apple.

I'm tempted to agree with this. The IBM clones from before the PC didn't really hurt IBM, and though the IBM PC clones did drive IBM out of the PC business it made the PC one of the most successful products ever.
 
On Macrumors we represent a small majority of both apple users and computer users in general.
Most people would never need such things as gaming quality graphics and upgradability - therefore the mac mini appeals to lots of people who just want a cheap mac for day to day tasks.
I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make.

The reason Apple doesn't want to build this kind of machine themselves is precisely because people would buy it.
a) Steve hates expandability
b) Steve is in love with AIO and wants people to buy it even when they need something else
c) producing this machine means that the Mac is no longer "special" in its form-factors. apparently Apple does not have enough faith in its choice of hardware (i.e. the parts) and fantastic OS to believe that people will continue to see the Mac as a premium product if this existed. I think they're wrong, but they don't listen to me.

I'm glad I bought my Macbook Pro before Apple turns all of their machines into sealed-box accessories that only run Apple-approved software.

skunk: s/factoid/stereotype/ :p

Yes, I realize you're being silly, but people really do read directions. Especially us engineers.
 
Nearly 50% negative votes? wow

It gets a thumbs up from me, if only to spur Apple on to create a mac that so so many of it's users want. And affordable, upgradable, headless mac.
 
I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make.

The reason Apple doesn't want to build this kind of machine themselves is precisely because people would buy it.
a) Steve hates expandability
b) Steve is in love with AIO and wants people to buy it even when they need something else
c) producing this machine means that the Mac is no longer "special" in its form-factors. apparently Apple does not have enough faith in its choice of hardware (i.e. the parts) and fantastic OS to believe that people will continue to see the Mac as a premium product if this existed. I think they're wrong, but they don't listen to me.

I agree, i thought that you were trying to say that the OpenMac would suit most users needs better than a Mac Mini.
Seems i was a bit confused!
 
I agree, i thought that you were trying to say that the OpenMac would suit most users needs better than a Mac Mini.
Seems i was a bit confused!
Nah, most people don't need the expandability and extra options of a minitower. If I were Apple I would market this "missing Mac" as a Pro machine and kick up the Mac Pro's specs even higher; maybe include some server components like motherboard-integrated hardware RAID. The people who really need Pros end up getting that stuff anyway.

Call it the Mac... I don't know, something. They made up a name for the Air and everyone thought that was going to be Macbook Flash or Macbook Thin or something.
 
a EULA is that - and end-user agreement. The only weird thing is that this company will preinstall Leopard for you. So I could see Apple trying to get them in trouble for that. That being said, EULA's are of debatable enforcement. But I'd guess Apple would try against a company like this.

If they don't sell it with Leopard, I don't see how Apple can block it. They'd have to go after the end users buying/installing Leopard and it seems unlikely that would happen.
I see this situation as a test case for all computer related EULA agreements/licenses. Like you said, I don't see Apple going after the end user. The only way that Apple can block this is blocking the company.

The path this will take will be very interesting to say the least.

Part of me wants it to work so we can have alternatives to run the Mac OS. Another part of me remembers the clones. This part of me remembers what it cost Apple and hopes that Apple can block this company.

Apple's legal department is among the best. We shall see.
 
Even if it's ok to sell the machine without Leopard, what's the deal with emulating Apple's EFI?

Sony likes to stamp on Playstation emulators.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.