Will Mac ever cave on EULA anti PC

With the Intel macs it's becoming way easier to use OS x on a "PC." How much market share would apple need before they decide it's ok for us to use OS x on PC. Even as an unsupported, you're on your own kind of thing. My hardware is way similar to a macbook pro. I am beginning to like OS x better than windows. I just will not overpay for my hardware. It's bad enough in the windows world. It just sucks that even if I pay for leopard, I'm still breaking the law.

This seemed like the best forum...since it is Unix.

 

I would bet that they are working to make it harder for people to "Hackamac" rather than open their doors. They would gain a larger market share, but controlling their customers has allowed them a greater profit share. They can pretty much control expansion to a greater degree. My 2 cents...

P.S. This might fit better in the Mac OS section

 

No he is not suicidal lol. In there all he will get is "If you dont want to pay for it dont use it then".

Plus even though the topic is general, the very idea it mentions OSX on non Mac means it will probably be deleted.

This is a very much, a on your own kind of thing.

 

I have run OSx86 and it ran almost perfect.
I have seen on ebay as well some netbooks with osx on them, going for an extra £100 or $150 than the standard netbook. The problem with apple is that they need to be a niche market. They can charge more then and avoid being targeted by viruses and the like.

I don't think apple will ever go mainstream with an OS. You will probably find it is a buggy as an early form of linux with all the extra drivers it would need.

 

People will always hack things. There is nothing hackproof. What apple OS section? I see an apple hardware...am I missing something?

I didn't say not pay for it, I said Apple make a version that is legal to use on other PC's. AKA, I want to pay for the OS, but not the hardware. The Apple section is a hardware forum. This is an OS forum, the closest thing to Apple we have.

That is all.

 

Wait, why would you run OSX on a PC?

lol, I see no benefits. Except the cute bubbles buttons-n-stuff. OS X needs Windows, not the other way around.

 

I Know but I have posted similar. Like a debate thread about why should Mac be able to run Windows but PC not be able to run OSX. It was deleted within seconds from the MODs.

I believe its blatant overcharging (there is a word for it that eludes me that means pretty much an illegal activity to charge more than something should cost) also its again in my opinion discrimination to say "this brand can do this but that brand cant" When Windows was PC exclusive and OSX was Mac exclusive all was fair. You could then say "your paying for the OS" but when the moved the hardware over and started to use windows they merged the two and then I do not think it fair to share one way and not the other. Especially when like you I know the hardware is 100% the same.

You can buy OSX on the store shelves I assume around the same price as Windows. Why should I have to pay 2x more for the same equipment just to tag a piece of fruit logo on it and be able to install an OS I want to pay for? I wont let some corporate made laws govern me. Im a computer guy I know my PC is the same as the Mac.... but its not allowed and thus a forum like this one has to comply with it for the sake of liability and what not.

 

I have hated OSX for a long time. I started on one, it crashed hard a lot. Lost data etc. I used it before it was cool. Then people started yelling "oh man this is great it never crashes blah blah I'm just making myself look like a tard" and I went from dislike to hate. OSX has been getting better though, such as getting it's CPU's out of the stone age. Windows have proven itself to be a mammoth corporation that doesn't care what it puts out. I'm suprised they even give us a GUI anymore. Windows 7 will probably amount to a hamster on a wheel. I have been trying various distros of linux and haven't found one I like. Ubuntu was pretty good to start, but it's slow and buggy. I would probably use a mac if it wasn't for their rediculous DRM.

 

Any OS is only as good as the hardware its on and the User that using it.

Virus's for instance, I have not seen a virus on any of my PC machines in like 5 years. Crashing often the work of bad drivers or corrupted files/registry knowing the proper things to install and how to uninstall them makes a difference.

I see no reason to use Mac over PC or OSX over Windows. I only see advantages on the Windows side since it has a much much larger selection of software & hardware.

But just like how people will pay $1000 for a purse that says Gucchi on it (what ever that brand is) when you can get the same thing ta Walmart for $10 people will pay $2000 for a Mac when you can get a PC with the same hardware for $1000.

I almost think Apple/Mac is sold based on the fashion sense more than the computer sense these days. As many of the Mac owners I have met are snobs and strut there machine around like it makes them superior.

 

This man speaks the truth. Macs are a fad that will die off. The recession may be the thing to kill them off.

 

[rant]
They will never open up the OS to outsiders, know why? It's because as soon as they do, people will complain about it not working with absolutely every peripheral in some form or another (guess what they've then turned into, that's right, they've become an overpriced MS without the hardware support), and along with that come the crashes. Guess what happens next, people realize that the Mac OS is no better than Windows, in fact, it'll rank lower because of the lack of hardware and software support.

PS. As you may have guessed, I am also a Mac hater. Before you crucify me for having "never given it a chance": I attempted to change my POV by going to the Apple store and trying one out (I have never seen so many computer illiterate people in one place), I could not get over the fact that it's too dumbed down and the "extras" can easily be gotten for Windows (or Linux, for free) from the internet, and last for the OS, I like the ability to right click things the way it's meant to be done, that is, with a mouse, no keyboard interaction needed. (almost done) I don't feel a need to pay for overpriced hardware. Viruses? Don't get me started, only idiots get viruses (too much pr0n I guess), all you need are safe surfing habits. Lastly, crashing, it's almost always either a stupid user (installing a broken program/malware) or a hardware problem.
[/rant]

 

Quoted For Truth

 

Bungalo Bill: There are two links to the same section for all Mac related topics, ranging from hardware to software...and yes, OS X.

Link: http://forum.notebookreview.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6

 

Quite frankly, Apple has no good reason to open up OS X to the PC market; by locking an OS into using specific hardware, you are essentially forcing users to buy both your hardware and your software, as opposed to buying only the operating system (Microsoft Windows, for example). OS X is Apple's cash cow for simply that reason, and opening OS X to the jungle of hardware out there has several disadvantages:

1) Mac OS must now adapt to that new hardware (how would Apple go about making this a smooth transition?)
2) Mac OS must directly compete with Windows
3) Mac OS loses the advantage of tight software/hardware integration

 

There are some truths in this comment, but some are unfair and out of line. First off, I was a heavy PC enthusiast and used the same ASUS notebooks that you had (the C90S) and was a heavy tweaker (maybe not quite as much as you) however, I have recently switched to Apple with their new line of unibody notebooks. The build quality is almost space-age in comparison to any PC-Notebook manufacturer, I can't tell you how sturdy and stiff this notebook is. There is absolutely no give or creaking on any of the housing. Unlike your analogy of Gucci purses vs Walmart counterpart, you get what you pay for.

Albeit there is a bit of cosmetic fad with Apple computers, but there is very little cosmetic over functionality sacrifice in the design. No notebook is perfect, but I can say that this MBP is pretty darn close. It's no powerhouse of a system compared to gaming systems ie; 9800 GT or anything, but I wasn't looking for those features in the first place. Apple's Mac OSX Leopard is a lot faster and easier to maintain compared to Windows Vista; installing applications, transfering files, stability, and new innovation (touch pad gestures/multi finger swiping). This was my first time using a Mac this extensively from switching from a PC based system and I'd say it was the easiest and most thrilling experience as a computer user and you realize how much hassle we've been putting up with Microsoft's products.

Your generalization of "Mac owners" is stereotypical and ignorant. Before you generalize, use OSX and their newest Macbooks before you start spewing biased opinions.

 

This thread belongs on the Mac and OSX forums, not in Linux

 

It's will never happen it would just turn into windows, needing drivers and support for thousands of different components. Apple is more of a hardware company and they need OS X to sell it.

 

I concur, and hear hear! Well said indeed.

 

Here is why you keep it on only your systems...it's just like Xbox/PS3...you are only writing/testing your software on one platform. You can pretty much bet that any Apple software will work on any Apple computer (of the same generation). Not true of Windows...there is such a wide variety of Windows computers (Intel/AMD, NVidia/ATI, terribly slow processors/terribly fast processors), that there is absolutely no guarantee that any Windows software is going to run on two different Windows based computers, unless their hardware is basically the same...which is what Apple controls.

I really don't see that as controlling the customers, I see it as ensuring that when your customers buy something, they know it is going to work on their machine.

And before you anti-Mac folks digress, I use Windows PCs as well...I just have to be a LOT more careful about reading the "recommended requirements" on the software boxes...

 

Just like some have already stated, Apple is a HARDWARE company, that uses its SOFTWARE to sell hardware.

Apple does not want to open up OSX for use on other hardware because it would remove the main reason to buy their hardware.

OSX is the main reason that Apple can charge more for their hardware.
I looked at buying a mac around a year ago when I bought my Sony SZ, but the macbook was less powerfull (processor and GPU), heavier, lesser battery life, and was more expensive. I just could not justify the difference in price for the OS.

 

That's a common misconception. You can look directly at the hardware specifics and buy accordingly. But what you're doing is comparing apples(no pun intended) to oranges. The software will dictate and utilize the hardware and it depends on the efficiency of the software itself. This is commonly seen in Windows based games where different game engines perform faster or better than others while doing "similar" things, for example the crysis engine vs unreal engine vs source engine. Of course the technology and capabilities are very different, and we can talk forever about it however the basics is that the hardware will react differently according to how well the actual software was written. If the software was a bloated pile of code, then the hardware no matter how fast will run it sluggishly, and vice versa.

It's a well known fact that Apple systems stay quite efficient for a longer period of time in comparison to the life of a PC(which is why they retain more resale value). It may be a number of different factors all together, but the bulk of the reason is actually because of the efficiency of the OSX operating system.

What I'm saying is that even though you may sacrifice a bit of the processor power when switching over to Mac, the efficiency of the software/operating itself would balance off some of that hardware trade off. Hope that makes sense.

 

My Gosh, your post screams of Windows FANBOYSIM! Pathetic.

 

LOL I thought it was sarcasm!

 

Haha and your avatar/sig is soooo understanding of Windows .

 

wow, some people really have a genuine hatred for apple/osx. atleast thats the way it seems.

maybe now that this thread is in the apple forums itll get a bit more from both sides.

 

Oh c'mon, you say it like people who use OS X are so lovey-dovery about Windows. They rip it to shreds, as well. Hell, I'd do the same if I knew how to use OS X, probably.

 

Oh I understand Windows very well which is why I have that avatar, it speaks the truth , however at least my avatar is appropriate for the forum I am visiting as opposed to the Windows-loving fanboys such as you that are trying to troll the Mac forum, namely this forum topic. If you guys hate Macs then don't visit the forum, some of you seem jealous or threatened that people are switching to Macs and prefer OS X.

 

Windows works fine for me, so apparantly the "truth" doesn't apply for everyone. Learned it as a 5 or 6 year old, without "frustration". And ouch, a defense on the Windows side and I'm a troller, who hates Macs. Lol, predictable fanboy. MBP is build so much better than my computer, I'm just not afraid to admit it and be 2-sided.

 

Get over it boys, I don't think this thread was intended to be a osx vs windows, apple vs PC thread. I know I made some comments above that seemed like senseless bashing, but my point was to disagree with Vicious's statement which was slightly biased. Anyway, keep this childish banter to a minimum and talk about something relevant to the topic.

 

Whatever way it states/shapes, this (OP) thread is just another angle to pry on the taboo of installing OS X on a non-apple hardware. Mac users accept the fact, like it or not, and it is so.

Try discussing about it is simply going against Apple EULA, and NBR forum rules.

cheers ...

 

I have a Mac so not being biased. Using 10.5.5 Leopard, it works well but there is nothing I have done with it that I can not do with my Windows machines.

"It just works" thats the only thing Apple has on there side as they pick there hardware to go with the software, But every prebuilt windows machine from Dell, Gateway, ect they "All just work" too with drivers disks for everything in the machine. Anyways if they ever allowed the OS to be on other systems people would quickly start to produce OSX Certified machines with the same plug & play hardware at a fraction of the cost of a genuine Mac. Apple would still get money for the bundled OS.

At that point everybody could see that your paying more for the hardware than your should because 100% identical machines from other companies will sell for less and work exactly the same. Just they are not allowed because some legal mumbo jumbo.

I can only imagine back in the days before laws, when man could do what man wants and some words or signed documents out there in nowhere tell you what to do and how to live.

I guess that sounds like I am against laws, thats not true I was in the Military and looking to become a Highway Patrol Officer so I know you need laws and to keep the peace. However some UELA that says you cant install this software on your computer unless you buy the computer from us... Thats not a law, thats BS

 

So, honestly, why are using a Mac? You don't seem to be practicing what you are preaching.

 

The thing that still gets me, is that manufacturers are shipping out pcs that can barely run vista. Like whats the point in selling a computer, with vista, if it can barely run it decently, and give no option for xp. The average user is gonna get stuck with a slow pc, when if they had the option for xp, theyd atleast have a decent computing experience. How come I never really see anyone bashing dell,hp, etc, for not giving everyone the option to install xp on their pc out of the box. Sure it can be done, just hunt down the drivers, but for the average person, theyre not gonna do that. And it can be done legally. They're left with a sluggish pc with vista, that i guess has the drivers, and "just works" barely.

Also, its not like apple ships an OSX dvd, that when you pop it in a pc it says "dont install me on a pc, only osx hardware" People had to reverse engineer the install in order to get it to work on pcs. If you could just pop it in and install, and apple just said no dont do it, then itd somewhat be a valid argument. Its the companies decision not to do that, as they make their money not from selling osx, but from selling computers, that just happen to run a different operating system.

And yea, I know ive gone offtopic, and some examples arent ontopic, but it just gets the point where you get sick and tired of windows users coming and bashing apple/osx for no good reason. I usually keep my mouth shut, cause i dont want to get involved with the stupid arguments, but i guess if the thread stays civil, and not boiling down to the one line typical responses, their can be a valid discussion.

But my main point. Apple doesnt ship its OSX dvds with the ability to install on pc hardware. If it did, then this discussion about the eula would kind of have a point.

 

It can install directly on a PC they have a forced hardware block that can be bypassed with an extra piece of hardware. Its not that it wont work on PC, they purposely blocked it so that it wont work.

As for my Mac, I just have one for the very reasons of what was said. So that I can honestly say I have an unbiased opinion and "tried it before I knocked it"

Many times people speak out of what they "think" is true and if the actually see something for themselves they find out there are wrong. So I had to make sure to take OSX for a test ride before I said... "Meh Windows can do that"

 

Anology Time!

Wrong.

Apple is a hardware & software company. They just try to force it as a package deal so they can price gauge.

Tell me if we change the terms up here and make an analogy that this makes sense.



Picture an old time market that you walk to, this is back in the old days before cars and things.

At the market Farmer Mack Apple Sells Baskets of Oranges. The Basket is the hardware, the platform that supports the Oranges (Software) and Farmer Mike
Rosoft sells Oranges directly so you have to get your own basket. However many people sell Mike's oranges in a basket of there own for you. You have to have a basket to carry the oranges home just like how you need a computer to run software.

So you think its ok for Mack to sell his baskets for twice as much as the other ones cost just so you can get his oranges? Keep in mind he does not
want you to buy his oranges separately and use your own basket he insist that you must buy his basket. However if you go to the store you can find his
oranges on sale without the basket.

To make sure you do not just buy them separately he drafted a EULA that says "You cant eat my oranges unless you buy my basket to put them in".
There is nothing stopping you except following his man made agreement that you never wanted to agree with in the first place. (This the irony of the
word agreement)

What do you do? Pay 2x more for no reason?, It's just plain stupid to pay more for the basket he wants to sell when its the same as the basket you already have or can buy for much less.

Point being Mack sells a different kind of orange that you would like to eat (OSX) but under no common sense terms of humanity can you see why you have
to buy his basket to get them, when everybody else sells there oranges separately and does not mind what kind of basket you put them in.

It may be good business for Mack because he can use you as a cash cow and force you to buy a basket you do not need just to get something you want.
However major flaw here is you can buy/get only what you want (The Oranges) without his basket purchase he just insist that you must because he wants
your money, thus he took advantage of the legal system and forces you to by UELA, but not physically or morally can he twist your arm.
Its pretty easy to look on the store shelf and see Macks Basket next to Mikes Basket.... Huge price difference same exact same thing. Is a UELA
justification enough to tell you not to just buy the oranges and get the cheaper basket. If you say yes... Well too bad for you but its your money.

When Man was created all were created equal, when mother nature gave us tree's and fruit all were created equal. You could get any fruit from any tree
you wanted. It was Man that intervened and said, you must pay me for that fruit.
It started our way of life, and so be it. Only fair and to create a circle of trade called the economy. It is when man started to say. No now you
must pay me more for this fruit and buy this basket to go with it that greed and corruption started to fill his eyes and the downward spiral begins. To
aid in this quest, bad laws, bad governments and things came about to enforce it upon you. I refuse to aid in humanities greed and evil nature of
extortion. I'll continue to be neutral and free as nature had intended it.

Do unto others as you would have done onto yourself, Always do the right thing even when nobody is looking, things like that are what I follow. These
morals are becoming nie extinct and instead man made laws are taking over. Many times the laws not being just or created by people with bad intentions
in mind.

Anybody with a good head on there shoulders and a good upbringing knows the difference between right and wrong. Stealing is wrong, Killing except for
survival is wrong, Cheating, Lying

But the twist is when the tides are turned. If you live a 3rd world country where they just tripped the price of bread for no reason and thats the
only thing you can eat and were only able to afford 1 loaf a week. The government is the one stealing from you. At that point taking a loaf of bread is
just. It has reason behind it just like Robin Hood. By law Robin Hood was a bad guy, by nature he was good.

In this case I feel Mack is the one stealing, you would only be standing up for yourself to refuse to pay for his basket and he should be forced to allow us
to have his oranges with no strings attached.

So follow the new way, or follow the old way. To each is own path.

Of course this is just an analogy and discussing the idea of things, not the action of doing so don't take it literally.

Edit: Oh and case in point you cant tell me just because Mack sells Baskets & Oranges that he is not a Fruit Farmer but instead a Basket Weaver. If he has fruit (software) you can buy/use then he is a fruit seller too.

 

I hate windows!


Click for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

 

I think Apple should stay proprietary as that's what make Macs great. Apple can finetune their software for their hardware because they know what it should be. When I run a Macbook and virtually any PC on the same network, the mac tends to always perform better...less lag, less drops. That's what we pay for.

If Apple chooses to make OSX available to PCs, they open themselves up to the same lawsuites that Microsoft has been fighting for years. Microsoft upgrades tend not to drop a lot of software support and this was declared an attempt to monopolize, OSX does the same thing but the software is Apple's.

To put it shortly, it's like someone wants snow blower engines to be used on lawn mowers...it would involve a redesign and would be frivolous.

 

I have to agree with Trebuin,

Vicious your analogy of the orange and baskets is great, however, it's missing some crucial elements as to why Mack Apple wants to sell them together. Using your analogy:

For example, Mike Rosoft has a much larger farm and he sells all kinds of citrus species; tandarines, mandarins, grapefruits etc for different markets and different consumers. Because of that, each orange needs special requirements to "cater" to that would be right for different types of basket types. Because of that, Mike Rosoft has expended a lot of money and time to develop a farm capable of creating vast number of different oranges. Mack Apple on the other hand, stuck to only a very small niche species of oranges, they are highly polished oranges that have demand only packaged with the highly quality detailed baskets. If Mack Apple would want to sell these to all the other baskets, he would have to spend a lot their own resources to get it to match other baskets. He would be sacrificing their typical "niche" market and "high quality" to conform with other basket weaving manufacturers.

The flaw of this analogy is that, oranges and baskets is really not a good example though, simply because anyone can eat them and anyone can use them and baskets are just baskets.. Software isn't as simple as human consumption, and drivers and application code must be specially developed for it to work. What complicates things is the driver development, for OSX, they have only a small number of manufacturers and their driver development is tight knit.

More on this later when I have some more time ... to be continued.

 

There is something that I hate about each of the three major operating systems; Windows, OS X, and Linux. They all have aggravating shortcomings that make me use a combination of them to recompense for their individual weaknesses. For me, 64-bit Vista and Ubuntu Linux (with ReiserFS) hit the sweet spot.

 

The flaw in that is again the baskets *computers* are the same! Its not a highly polished basket that cost more to make. It has a different body and an apple logo on it. The ram, cpu, video card, wireless card, ect are all the same! You can find many 3rd party OSX drivers for stuff. For instance my Ralink wireless card has OSX software.

The only reason its so limited as is, is because its a small market. When the flood gates open more software, support, and drivers will appear instantly. Also you can duplicate a Mac internals 100% with a PC so that OSX will have every driver plug & play for much less than the Mac.

No you cant run OSX on any PC hardware, Yes you can make a PC or notebook that runs OSX nativly with no issues because macs use the same parts. Its just a matching game. Thing is the cash count doesnt match!

 

I ran OS X Leopard on my old ThinkPad T61... Nothing special. It runs just as a fast as Vista and I even showed some people at my school who own Macs. They were really p*ssed and said it was a Shell Pack for Windows .

 

Yes, and I'm sure there's a non Apple laptop out there that multi-touch trackpad, right?

 

Yes, and I'm sure there's a non Apple laptop out there that multi-touch trackpad, right?

 

I dunno, all the specs are out there when youre buying a computer. You should know if youll need a better video card, and a dvd writer. All that stuff is easily found out through research.

I know I wouldnt have bought my MBP if it didnt have the 8600 at the time, and I can do everything else I need it to.

The macbook fits some peoples needs, and it doesnt fit others. Pretty simple.

 

Whats your point? It's stupid to hate an OS because of fail screens, which are most of the time based on 3rd party software. There's so much more software available for Windows, that, when installed by the wrong person or time, can cause errors. Just because you -can- hate it, doesn't mean you have to .

 

Discussion of running Mac OS X on a PC is strictly prohibited on these boards - stay off that topic. I deleted several posts.

 

You (the moderators of this site) don't seem to get it. Running OS X on a PC is based on open source work which is under Apple Source Public License.
Here is the source code of the bootloader that Apple uses:
http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/10.4.8.x86/
Here is the modified source code of the bootloader that allows to boot from a retail OS X disk: http://tgwbd.org/darwin/boot.html
both licensed under Apple Source Public License (APSL): http://www.opensource.apple.com/apsl/
This is just one of many open source examples that allows a PC to run OS X. They can not deny the use of open source based on the license.

For years Apple leeched off open source work without contributing anything substantial. Now that they can't restrict it with their closed hardware anymore, and it is biting them in the back, because the foundations of OS X is based off of open source software.

 

"Apple asks its customers to purchase Mac OS knowing that it is to be used only with Apple computers," he wrote. "It is certainly entitled to do so."

That is the official judge's notes on the recent Psystar case. Running Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware is a violation of the Mac OS X EULA, and the court decided that Apple has every right to continue to enforce that. NBR has chosen to also enforce that decision.

 

First, there is no case decision yet, the case is not finished. Second, the case is about Psystar's commercialization of Apple's intellectual property, not legal use of open source software.
Apple can not deny anyone from using the open source software licensed with APSL. Anyone can view, download and modify the source code as long as they provide the modified code.

Since you are determined to follow court rulings, here is a relevant one that actually passed and says it is illegal to tie a "unique and desirable" operating system to specific hardware.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=473&invol=908&friend=nytimes

It might be against the EULA of Apple to run their OS on non-Apple hardware, but that only allows Apple to deny support if used on a non-Apple hardware (similar to modified OS on iPhone/iPods).

 

This topic has been beat to death. If you don't like the EULA, don't use OS X, plain and simple. There's always linux.