OSX on sub notebook (MSI wind) - Page 3

Flibb · 06-08-2008, 09:05 AM

Originally Posted by peterb

Except that marking a computer not made by Apple as if it was would be counterfeiting.

I wa thinking more of brambley apple, on a more serious note quie ta few pople are putting apple wifi cards in these to get wifi working in OSX. Anybody do apple inside stickers?

TheAnimus · 06-08-2008, 11:00 AM

95% Apple Compatable?

Gunbuster · 06-08-2008, 11:38 AM

I don't know if you guys have been following the whole PsyStar Mac Clone stories in the US. Apple rightly has been careful in how they go after PsyStar incase it ends up invalidating their own EULA. That is to say, if I agree to legal license inside the box by opening box how is that legal. It's like saying I must agree to a legal contract to read what it is I am agreeing to.

I don't doubt that Apple will get it's way, but if by some fluke it call's in to question the whole legality of EULAs it may mean exciting times a head for the more restrictly EULA'd software.

alsenior · 06-08-2008, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by Flibb

Anybody do apple inside stickers?

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

95% Apple Compatable?

Something like this maybe?

b0redom · 06-08-2008, 12:15 PM

I briefly considered building a Hackintosh before I got my iMac. IMHO one of the things which OSX brings to the table is rock solid stability. Apple know exactly what very small subset of hardware they need to support. If you start adding to that, and hacking the OS, you potentially make it far less stable.

keef247 · 06-08-2008, 01:49 PM

exactly.

and pfft i highly doubt the thread starter will purchase osx if he's mentioning things like custom disc which anyone who knows about this sort of thing knows it means a hacked iso from a torrent... should look on the forums for doing this sort of thing and you'll see what i mean. all the terms used are always "custom iso" or disc etc etc. because it's a custom version of the proper disc.
also modifying a legal copy is also illegal. its not open source like linux and its rights are is it...

flibb sounds like you haven't red up properly.i've seen a hacked one being installed and even the hackers that make the osx distros for x86 state clearly how you should buy one because its illegal to do this etc. zdnet and erm i think cnet even tested this in a video and stated how it was illegal and was only proof of concept etc... have a proper look

aidanjt · 06-08-2008, 04:53 PM

zdnet = USian, CNet = USian. Again, US law isn't British law. And even in the US the legality is only *questionable*.

TheAnimus · 07-08-2008, 12:14 AM

keef247 can't help but feel your not getting this.

This is in the UK a 'grey' area. Even if it was somehow a law (i won't get into licensing vrs criminal law) it would be very anti-competitive.

Someone, its only a matter of time will test this, and it will be intresting to see the outcome, and how it effects the anti-competative/meglomaniac nature of apple.

keef247 · 07-08-2008, 12:24 AM

right lets put this crap to bed...

First of all I don't CARE if its not america etc... it still IS illegal over there that was the POINT.

as for a UK loophole... prove it?

where's the facts to back this up.

you've given me no evidence.

the fact your condoning things that are illegal elsewhere (still illegal after all... murder is murder you wouldn't say its ok if it wasn't a crime elsewhere would you... I know thats abit strong but still the point is there.)

straight from a guide of how to do it...

ISO Copyright Notes

Various hackers have released hacked ISO torrents that can be installed on PCs. However, this violates the Apple EULA agreement and there are legal issues with using the ISOs. The legal ways to obtain a copy would be:

1) Become an Apple Developer ($500 membership)

2) Buy a real mac, deactivate the copy of OS X and install it on a PC (this way would be pointless because the whole point is to run OS X without getting a mac). This way also somewhat violates the EULA because the agreement says that you can't run OS X on non-Apple hardware.

Its best to get a legal copy of the ISO because then you can install the software without worry about malicious software or about the software phoning home.

and if anyone knows enough about the EULA along with the ways and means of the law and using it it'd be the people (the hackers) who put time and effort into making it possible...

as after all they didn't set out to do it illegally most of the people that did this did it with retail copys... and as their interested it really making it work and not a jerk off to apple to get one over on buying a legit copy... instead they just want a cheaper alternative (had it been legal) hence finding out all the facts of it.

sure there are tons of people that do just want a free ride but not all hackers/developers/modders of code have bad intension's.

so yeah fair enough if he really really was innocent but the point is "custom install discs" or whatever you want to call them are purely illegal iso's put out on the net.

I really fail to believe anyone would pay a $500 dev license and then have a real mac aswell and yada yada yada only to still be breaking the EULA.

show me some proof about UK licenses etc and I'll listen.

I still believe if somethings illegal somewhere it's still illegal...

I mean we have enough reps and stores in the UK the same with windows so I fail to see why there wouldn't be proper solid rules as the US or with windoze

**Agent** · 07-08-2008, 12:33 AM

Keef, you're missing what the TheAnimus is saying. He has it spot on.

If Apple said they own your first born by installing OSX, would it be legal?

aidanjt · 07-08-2008, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by keef247

I still believe if somethings illegal somewhere it's still illegal...

Wow, that's such a bad argument that I'm almost lost for words. We should start cutting off peoples fingers for theft. Since that's the law in other countries.

Steve B · 07-08-2008, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

keef247 can't help but feel your not getting this.

This is in the UK a 'grey' area. Even if it was somehow a law (i won't get into licensing vrs criminal law) it would be very anti-competitive.

Someone, its only a matter of time will test this, and it will be intresting to see the outcome, and how it effects the anti-competative/meglomaniac nature of apple.

How can you call a company which accounts for a very small segment of the PC market megalomaniacal?

I also fail to see how it is anti-competitive. Microsoft opened up their licensing a long time ago, Apple didn't. I get the impression that you think it's only anti-competitive because they don't operate like Microsoft.

Apple don't make their money from software, they make it on hardware. If the EULA was tried in court and Apple couldn't defend not allowing other people the right to install the software on non-apple machines, they would be up the creek.

dangel · 07-08-2008, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Steve B

Apple don't make their money from software, they make it on hardware. If the EULA was tried in court and Apple couldn't defend not allowing other people the right to install the software on non-apple machines, they would be up the creek.

Probably not. The certainly wouldn't lose iPod sales, or iTunes sales or iPhone Sales etc.. Plus loads of people would still buy their (often) expensive hardware because it's pretty and has the right logo on the box. I've just had a meeting with a 'consultant' who couldn't work out how to use a PC (for his presentation) because he's a 'mac man'. Bless.

OSX will never be a mass market item so long as it's tied to Apple's hardware alone. I don't think Apple actually care though - it's not their business objective IMHO.

Steve B · 07-08-2008, 10:32 AM

Originally Posted by dangel

Probably not. The certainly wouldn't lose iPod sales, or iTunes sales or iPhone Sales etc.. Plus loads of people would still buy their (often) expensive hardware because it's pretty and has the right logo on the box. I've just had a meeting with a 'consultant' who couldn't work out how to use a PC (for his presentation) because he's a 'mac man'. Bless.

OSX will never be a mass market item so long as it's tied to Apple's hardware alone. I don't think Apple actually care though - it's not their business objective IMHO.

I agree with you to some extent dangel, but you're contradicting yourself here. On the one hand you say that they probably wont be up the creek, but on the other you say OSX will never be mass market as long as it's tied to Apple hardware. As soon as its not tied to Apple's hardware, people start building their own machines to run OSX on, and Apple loses money.

dangel · 07-08-2008, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by Steve B

I agree with you to some extent dangel, but you're contradicting yourself here. On the one hand you say that they probably wont be up the creek, but on the other you say OSX will never be mass market as long as it's tied to Apple hardware. As soon as its not tied to Apple's hardware, people start building their own machines to run OSX on, and Apple loses money.

Not a contradiction at all - if OSX went mass market then Apple (potentionally) gain a lot of software sales (MS seem to manage to survive on a software-fuelled revenue stream). People would be buying OSX, the service packs, the ipod, the itunes tracks, the iphone (and contract revenue from said) - do you really think they'd be up the creek as a result? Their margin on desktop hardware must be awfully good for that to be the case.
But as I said, it's not their business model - as someone else pointed out: Apple are all about control. They control OSX via hardware tie-in. The iPhone is neatly tied up with contractual revenue obligation and a (very) closed platform (as compared to Symbian or Winmobile).

I do think Apple would struggle to support the vast base of PC hardware than Vista does though - tieing it to limited hardware does give them a lot more control over 'quality' of drivers.

Steve B · 07-08-2008, 11:05 AM

Apple make significantly less money on software than they do on hardware though, so there's absolutely no benefit in opening up their operating system.

MS seem to manage to survive on a software-fuelled revenue stream

MS don't make the hardware though, so don't have much control over the quality of components put into people's systems.

I do think Apple would struggle to support the vast base of PC hardware than Vista does though - tieing it to limited hardware does give them a lot more control over 'quality' of drivers.

Agreed to some extent. The drivers will be higher quality, yes, but that doesn't mean they'll be better drivers. Video drivers for Windows machines are much more well developed, I suppose this could be to do with Direct X but I don't know much about that.

Do you think you prefer Apple running a very tight ship with lots of control?