Sorry for the question, but why is this a "dick move" on the part of Apple? Is it because it is only being used by "hobbyists", or because we think it is okay to install OS X on whatever we want to install it on? What right does Apple have to dictate the use of their software? When I steal - er, I mean make a "hobbyist copy" of a movie, is it a dick move by the studio to do what they can to stop me?
It seems like this is just another case of "piracy" to some degree, and while we all take liberties on this subject, I am not certain it is a "dick move" by the company who "owns" (ignoring the open source content) the software to protect their product.
@Monty: It's definitely up for discussion, but these are loyal Mac fans, paying (though not always full price) for software to use on a product for which Apple has no direct competitor.
I can see why Apple might want to stop this kind of thing, but I can see more clearly how it's a dick move for them to go out of their way to do it. #1062hackintosh
@Monty: For what it's worth, I completely agree. As I said here when this issue was first confirmed, Apple is a hardware company. They don't care how many copies of OSX they sell. By installing Snow Leopard on anything other than a Mac, you've completely circumvented its entire purpose for being (i.e. to sell more Macs). Sorry, but this is hardly a "dick move." #1062hackintosh
@John Herrman: They are not paying full price though. The only way to obtain a full version of the Mac OS is to purchase it with hardware. They are bypassing the upgrade path, and breaking the EULA #1062hackintosh
@thePrototype: So, why is it that, when we're comparing OSX to Windows, the $130 is the "full version" of the OS, but when we're talking Hackintoshing, it's only an upgrade license? #1062hackintosh
@John Herrman: And isn't it the fact that it is 'hobbyist' that makes it a dick move by Apple? I can completely understand their wanting to squish Psystar for trying to make money with Apple's intellectual property and someone else's inferior product. But if I , in the privacy of my own home, want to mate a consenting adult mini 10v with an up-for-it-and-legal copy of os X, who are Apple to tell me I can't? #1062hackintosh
@HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H.: If anyone does that, they have no idea how Apple licenses their OS.
That being said, the Windows 7 upgrade pricing goes from $119 to $219. Those are the prices that should be compared against Snow Leopard's upgrade pricing of $29 #1062hackintosh
@thatsmrpotatohead2U: I think it's your ending analogy that really got me! It's forbidden-relationship-macporn, baby.
Seriously, I agree, that's why it's a dick move - while I understand the argument of Apple not wanting to support Hackintoshing, I find their active attempt to squish it less than impressive. (And doomed to failure.) Apple attracts a lot of tech geeks with their shiny shiny things, and tech geeks are always going to futz around with limits once they tire of what they can do with the basic, supplied product.
But that IS Apple, really. "You can do whatever you want with our stuff, darlings!" is not exactly their tagline.
@John Herrman: I didn't pay for Snow Leopard to be installed on my Mini 9. I paid for it to be installed on my MacPro. Since I like to tinker, the mini 9 is perfect "tool". If Apple intentionally did this to neuter the Hackintosh community, then the community will figure a way around it.
Which is irony when you look back at Woz and Phreaking... #1062hackintosh
@thePrototype: Fail. So I put Win 7 on my mac via boot camp, thats illegal? what if I only EVER boot up in 7 on my mac? What are they going to do, waterboard me until I hit the option on startup? #1062hackintosh
@thatsmrpotatohead2U: No, you fail. Microsoft licenses their software individual of hardware, so you can purchase the full version from $199 to $319.
If you were to install Windows 7 upgrade without having purchased XP or Vista OEM at the same time you purchased your Mac you would be breaking the law. They may not waterboard you, but lots of corporations get handed million dollar fines for breaking software licensing agreements. #1062hackintosh
@thatsmrpotatohead2U: More like "who is the law to tell me I can't". That EULA is a binding legal document son. You break it and you are breaking a contract. The law is clear on this point. #1062hackintosh
@thePrototype: @The Lab: You guys are all assuming I wouldn't pay for the software. The kind of work I do I couldn't afford to take a chance like that.
Would your comments be any different in light of this? #1062hackintosh
@thatsmrpotatohead2U: I think the argument here is that most of the cost of the OS X software is in the cost of the hardware. I suppose I could understand the logic of someone who owns a MacBook creating a Hackintosh since they already "paid" for OS X (though, they only paid for a single copy). However, if you merely purchased an upgrade license and do not own a Mac, you did not really pay for OS X. #1062hackintosh
@Monty: I'm not saying that Apple should start writing frickin drivers for non-Apple machines - but what the hell is the point in killing support for shit like this? Is support for the Atom REALLY taking up space in the kernel that they need to use for something else? No.
I own a Macbook Pro, a copy of Leopard and a copy of Snow Leopard. Who in the hell are they to try to PREVENT me from doing what I want with my own (LEGAL) software? They don't have to condone, support, or even have an opinion on it, but they certainly don't have to take steps to kill it. It's ridiculous.
And for the record - my Hackintosh woops my MBP's ass. #1062hackintosh
@The Lab: Clear as a foggy window. You're talking about
a non-negotiable contract between unequal parties. US courts have both upheld and shot down individual contracts of this sort in differing cases, but have not ruled on EULAs themselves. US courts tend to favor commercial organizations over individuals, though, so your appeal to authority may be right. #1062hackintosh
@The Lab: Yes it is. But if you break it agents are not going to come knock down your door and arrest you. People keep making it seem if you break the EULA you are going to get assraped. I don't read the EULA at all and I don't care. I won't get caught. #1062hackintosh
@zeroprime: While I'm all for hackintoshing, the EULA argument is a tough one. Most companies have their EULAs readily available online for the end user to see, so when you purchase software to install, you cannot argue that you were unaware of what the EULA entailed as ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Since the EULA is freely available before purchase, it can be assumed that by purchasing software, you are implicitly agreeing to the EULA and then by installing it you are explicitly agreeing. It doesn't matter that there is no contractual negotiation so long as the EULA does not violate any federal or state laws. #1062hackintosh
@not_a_virus.exe.vbs: My company just got fined millions of dollars for breaking EULAs, why don't you try and explain that to our legal department? #1062hackintosh
@HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H.: You're just being inflammatory I guess but there is a bit of interesting information underneath the jab. Anytime you buy just the OS from Apple it is technically an upgrade. Original licenses only come via an installed version on one of their machines. That's why it's hard to explain why there's a $130 upgrade and a $30 upgrade for 10.6. #1062hackintosh
@thePrototype: I am speaking about individuals, obviously. Someone who is an individual isn't going to get in trouble for breaking an EULA unless he is in idiot and broadcasts what he is doing out on the internet. #1062hackintosh
@not_a_virus.exe.vbs: that may be the case, but that is the same is saying 'oh I'll only steal a hundred dollars, because they only really care if I steal a thousand'. #1062hackintosh
@thePrototype: Maybe so. Like I said in my original post, I am not going to get in trouble fro breaking an EULA unless I am an idiot and go off and do something stupid. People should not be scared of getting in trouble for hackintoshing. #1062hackintosh
@thePrototype: No. Being drunk and driving on your property won't get you a DUI. Breaking the EULA and doing it in your own home won't get you in trouble. Drinking and driving in the streets WILL get you in trouble, same way as breaking the EULA and letting every Tom, Dick and Jamal know what you are doing.
@thePrototype: And i do know that not getting in trouble /= breaking the law. Yes it is wrong. But you won't get in trouble. it is a victim less crime like necrophilia. Or so I have been told. #1062hackintosh
@not_a_virus.exe.vbs: it was Washington State... I also heard an old wives tale about someone passing out drunk in a vehicle that was on blocks and getting a ticket, not sure about that one though. #1062hackintosh
My hope is that maybe, somewhere, deep inside the bowels of Apple, a team of rogue developers are creating a super-secret Snow Leopard install disc that you can use to dual-boot your PC legally, and for that reason they're trying to close the Atom support so they can sell it in a sanctioned version. #apple
Speaking of merciless gods, what does it take for Giz to bequeath unto me a star? I'm unemployed and will remain so unless I have such an honor to put on my resume.
@TJ: First rule of star club is don't beg for stardom. When it happens, it happens, until then, enjoy Giz and try not to be a douche or troll (not saying you are, just that that helps in the path to stardom). That or steal OMG Ponies! account. #apple
Apple will eventually lock out Atom, or any other processor they don't currently use in a product, just like they're locking out Palm from using iTunes.
Apple is a hardware business and if something might reduce sales of that hardware, they're gonna have to put the hurt on. *SMACK* #apple
@zer0zen: Palm is nowhere near the same as the Atom processor. Palm tries to break into Apple's proprietary software, whereas Intel simply makes the procs for other computers. Hackintosh systems have been around for a long time, and many of them use the same exact processors that Apple uses. #apple
@Kaiser-Machead: The essence of a Hackintosh is taking Apple's OS and running it on non-Apple hardware, which Apple specifically does not want because it cuts them out of a potential hardware sale. Palm bustin' into iTunes is the same deal because a Pre getting into the iTunes world means non-Apple hardware gets into the ecosystem which can reduce iPod/iPhone sales. Apple wants to protect their walled garden at all costs.
Basically, don't mess with Apple's hardware sales or they'll come a knockin'!#apple
The video reminds me of all the times I tried to put Linux partitions on my Mac drives and use a boot loader. Works for a while, only a little while. Eventually you'll do something to kill it.
I've recently become a fan of VM's for alternative OS's. So much easier to experiment with. Doesn't help with the Mac OS though, sorry. #apple
This would be about the only way many Windows users would buy into the MacOS ecosystem. $1000 (minimum) is too much of an investment to try a new OS. #apple
@DaveExile (Starfree since 2006!): I've worked in both ecosystems (Apple at a former job) and I have to wholeheartedly agree. Both are great, but it sucks to jump to a whole new one without any knowledge of how it works. I worked on Macs for 3 years and was still confused sometimes with how they worked because I literally grew up on Windows and, as such, feel comfortable in it.
I'm hackintoshing my Mini 10v as soon as I find a willing friend with a Mac, but making the full leap would be tough for me, especially since I would have to not only pay the high price for a new Mac, but also rebuy several thousand dollars worth of software. #apple
@Nathan Obbards: Though I would be happy to lend out my mac so you can hack your mini 10v like I did, I can only assume we live nowhere close one another and would recommend going to a public library. Many are carrying Macs now and you could do lots of fun illegal stuff in public ;). Or even a University library, since they're open to public (it would be more likely to have some Macs.) #apple
This is why I don't use proprietary software or hardware.
Don't tell me what to do with hardware I've purchased. Don't charge me money for something that doesn't exist, then tell me what I can and can't run it on. #apple
@TheGZeus: Except they aren't doing that. They are trying to streamline their OS for their hardware that they use (in theory). They aren't charging you for anything or telling you what to do. That's like complaining that you can't load Android on your iPhone or drop a Chevy transmission into your Ford truck without heavy modification. You are doing something that is outside of the scope of the product and, as such, can expect to see problems.
I, as much as the next person, wish that Apple would open up their software more, bring down prices, etc. but they have a right as a company to streamline their OS for their hardware, even if that means crippling unsupported hardware in violation of their EULA. I say this as a proponent of hackintoshing. #apple
@Nathan Obbards: They're charging me for the hardware _and_ the software, then they tell you what you can and can't do with it.
Sell your computer? The EULA says the next user has to buy it. Own 5 macs with Leopard on them? You have to buy 5 licenses. Want the interface to be different, they don't want you to...
The list goes on.
I don't use proprietary software.
I don't want to use proprietary software.
I don't like using proprietary software.
Want to port Linux/BSD/other weirder free operating system? Do it. Want to give it to someone else when you're done? Do it.
I don't like the idea that these companies charge you for work that's already been done, but keep charging whether they've recieved payment in proportion to the work done or not.
Software doesn't exist. It's math. It's not even a creative pursuit, and I release all my music/videos under Creative Commons licenses, (unless they're parodies, where things get weird).
My head's splitting from too much caffiene today, so I might not be being too clear.
I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to charge for licenses on copyrighted works. That's legal and ethical. The concern is moral.
It is my opinion that it's immoral, but it's just an opinion.
I refuse to be told how to use my computer. Windows, Mac, even the original BeOS and DOS. They all restrict what you do with your computer.
DRM alone is reprehensible, and that's just the most obvious.
I could go on for hours, but I doubt you care, and again, it's just my opinion. #apple
here's one vote for killing it. i think the hackintosh concept is kind of a mess. apple's whole philosophy is about mating the hardware with the software in a specific way; if you don't like it, don't buy a mac. this is one area where i don't really think the status quo need always be challenged; it's ok to follow a company's rules sometimes. #apple
@back_at_it: I agree with your comment. But there is also the whole Darwin experiment where Apple open sourced the OS to a degree. Did they not know it would be used to run on other hardware?
@PotteryBarnClearanceSale: you've got a point there. while i can't really speak for apple, and your question is of course rhetorical, i would venture to say that making parts of the os open source (ex: grand central) only allows for portions of the code to be used/modified. it doesn't allow for the whole os to be 'borrowed' am implemented. i do however think the case can be made that you cannot embrace open source without actually showing some semblance of support for that very movement (it's a bit oxymoronic on apple's part). #apple
@back_at_it:
Yeah, I didn't really hit my point on that. What I was really getting at is that Apple opened the door, but there is absolutely no reason the golden master designers should support hardware outside hardware on their table. Namely, Apple hardware.
It's almost like Apple is not providing full support for the hardware you didn't buy from them and the software you pirated from them. How dare they! #apple
@glitch44: The software isn't necessarily pirated. I, and a lot of others, bought the copies we used. I don't think most of us feel we are owed support. We're hoping it will keep working and it would be annoying it they did it for some strategy alone.
@AkkiRonin:
1. It doesn't matter if you bought it or not. It still violates the EULA.
2. Your hardware is not supported and you had to perform other EULA violating operations to get it to function on said non-supported hardware.
3. Just because you bought it does not mean your actions are supported or condoned by Apple. #apple
The OS developers at Apple don't give a ragged ass about unsupported setups, if you're using any system off book you're lucky anything works the way you want it to when it is in test mode. The final release will meet broader standards but that still doesn't mean they are debugging for Hackintosh systems. #apple
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/11/09
It seems like this is just another case of "piracy" to some degree, and while we all take liberties on this subject, I am not certain it is a "dick move" by the company who "owns" (ignoring the open source content) the software to protect their product.
I will shut up now. My apologies, again. #1062hackintosh
11/11/09
I can see why Apple might want to stop this kind of thing, but I can see more clearly how it's a dick move for them to go out of their way to do it. #1062hackintosh
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
That being said, the Windows 7 upgrade pricing goes from $119 to $219. Those are the prices that should be compared against Snow Leopard's upgrade pricing of $29 #1062hackintosh
11/11/09
Seriously, I agree, that's why it's a dick move - while I understand the argument of Apple not wanting to support Hackintoshing, I find their active attempt to squish it less than impressive. (And doomed to failure.) Apple attracts a lot of tech geeks with their shiny shiny things, and tech geeks are always going to futz around with limits once they tire of what they can do with the basic, supplied product.
But that IS Apple, really. "You can do whatever you want with our stuff, darlings!" is not exactly their tagline.
11/11/09
11/11/09
Which is irony when you look back at Woz and Phreaking... #1062hackintosh
11/11/09
11/11/09
If you were to install Windows 7 upgrade without having purchased XP or Vista OEM at the same time you purchased your Mac you would be breaking the law. They may not waterboard you, but lots of corporations get handed million dollar fines for breaking software licensing agreements. #1062hackintosh
11/11/09
11/11/09
Would your comments be any different in light of this? #1062hackintosh
11/11/09
11/11/09
I own a Macbook Pro, a copy of Leopard and a copy of Snow Leopard. Who in the hell are they to try to PREVENT me from doing what I want with my own (LEGAL) software? They don't have to condone, support, or even have an opinion on it, but they certainly don't have to take steps to kill it. It's ridiculous.
And for the record - my Hackintosh woops my MBP's ass. #1062hackintosh
11/11/09
a non-negotiable contract between unequal parties. US courts have both upheld and shot down individual contracts of this sort in differing cases, but have not ruled on EULAs themselves. US courts tend to favor commercial organizations over individuals, though, so your appeal to authority may be right. #1062hackintosh
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
That analogy makes sense. #1062hackintosh
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/08/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
Pwitty pweeze??? :-( #apple
11/07/09
11/07/09
Ahh well, I love Giz too much to be bitter. I'll just go drink a bottle of Morgan and cry myself to sleep.
...and to think I was willing to shamefully prostitute myself for that star. #apple
11/07/09
edit for later: and then the chap went to bed. Sleep tight.
11/09/09
11/07/09
Apple is a hardware business and if something might reduce sales of that hardware, they're gonna have to put the hurt on. *SMACK* #apple
11/07/09
11/07/09
Basically, don't mess with Apple's hardware sales or they'll come a knockin'!#apple
11/07/09
I've recently become a fan of VM's for alternative OS's. So much easier to experiment with. Doesn't help with the Mac OS though, sorry. #apple
11/07/09
This would be about the only way many Windows users would buy into the MacOS ecosystem. $1000 (minimum) is too much of an investment to try a new OS. #apple
11/07/09
I'm hackintoshing my Mini 10v as soon as I find a willing friend with a Mac, but making the full leap would be tough for me, especially since I would have to not only pay the high price for a new Mac, but also rebuy several thousand dollars worth of software. #apple
11/08/09
11/08/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/07/09
Don't tell me what to do with hardware I've purchased. Don't charge me money for something that doesn't exist, then tell me what I can and can't run it on. #apple
11/07/09
I, as much as the next person, wish that Apple would open up their software more, bring down prices, etc. but they have a right as a company to streamline their OS for their hardware, even if that means crippling unsupported hardware in violation of their EULA. I say this as a proponent of hackintoshing. #apple
11/07/09
Sell your computer? The EULA says the next user has to buy it. Own 5 macs with Leopard on them? You have to buy 5 licenses. Want the interface to be different, they don't want you to...
The list goes on.
I don't use proprietary software.
I don't want to use proprietary software.
I don't like using proprietary software.
Want to port Linux/BSD/other weirder free operating system? Do it. Want to give it to someone else when you're done? Do it.
I don't like the idea that these companies charge you for work that's already been done, but keep charging whether they've recieved payment in proportion to the work done or not.
Software doesn't exist. It's math. It's not even a creative pursuit, and I release all my music/videos under Creative Commons licenses, (unless they're parodies, where things get weird).
My head's splitting from too much caffiene today, so I might not be being too clear.
I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to charge for licenses on copyrighted works. That's legal and ethical. The concern is moral.
It is my opinion that it's immoral, but it's just an opinion.
I refuse to be told how to use my computer. Windows, Mac, even the original BeOS and DOS. They all restrict what you do with your computer.
DRM alone is reprehensible, and that's just the most obvious.
I could go on for hours, but I doubt you care, and again, it's just my opinion. #apple
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
Yeah, I didn't really hit my point on that. What I was really getting at is that Apple opened the door, but there is absolutely no reason the golden master designers should support hardware outside hardware on their table. Namely, Apple hardware.
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
1. It doesn't matter if you bought it or not. It still violates the EULA.
2. Your hardware is not supported and you had to perform other EULA violating operations to get it to function on said non-supported hardware.
3. Just because you bought it does not mean your actions are supported or condoned by Apple. #apple
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09
11/07/09