Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/30/09
All I can say is... DeCrapify them! Quick, painless bulk exorcism of dead weight trialware. #bloatware
10/31/09
10/31/09
10/29/09
10/30/09
Now, back in the Win98 days I saw some logic to it since they tightly integrated IE to the OS to make it quick to load and hard to remove, in addition to adding other functionality to the OS that the other browsers couldn't... but now it's just standard practice and a common courtesy to put a browser in any desktop OS installation. #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
However, I take issue with their ever-changing policies on shipping their computers with restore discs. Why should anyone pay to have a restore disc for a machine weighing in at, at the very least, hundreds of dollars with the legit license bundle? It would be much nicer if PC vendors actually sent solid discs with the full OS installation package with appropriate machine specific drivers, rather than the space-wasting restore volume on the hard disc. #bloatware
10/29/09
You just have to make sure you select none.
Come on what happened to jounalistic integrity?
10/29/09
Instead of trying to question the staff's journalistic integrity, it would be better to simply remind the author about this fact, because, really, that little detail is kind of easy to miss.
10/29/09
"All PC users suffer this process unless we jump through hoops like pleading with Dell or Toshiba during the ordering process, paying Sony off, or purchasing a cheap Walmart product." #bloatware
10/29/09
As for building your own PC from scratch, that's a nice idea, if it's a desktop, which is certainly not as often a case as it used to be. #bloatware
10/29/09
Step 2: Format and reinstall
Is this much of a trial? #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
Step 3: Scour the intertubes for missing drivers since they are intertwined with the crapwear on the reinstall disc. #bloatware
10/29/09
Didn't do this since, at the time, I had an XP Pro disc laying around and could just use that. #bloatware
10/29/09
Then you just get whatever computer you want and then install a new OS clean. You should always do this anyways, to keep safe from potential manufacturer viruses.
And then you just go to the MS site and download whatever drivers you need. Which isn't complicated. Although is apparently complicated for Mac fans.
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
Mac: Ah! Well I don't come preinstalled with crapware!
PC: I only do if you buy me prebuilt from certain retailers. Building me yourself doesn't result in that and you get a wide selection of customisable and upgradeable hardware. Can you upgrade yourself Mac?
Mac: Well I uh.... uh.... I don't need to be built....
PC: So no upgrade options?
Mac: Umm ummm no =(
Not to mention that because Apple are the only provider there's no competition when it comes to Mac hardware. As such because of the options you have when it comes to building a PC you can actually get hardware that's priced competitively. #bloatware
10/29/09
The majority of Apple's lineup are no less upgradeable than their PC equivalents. Laptops and all-in-one systems are inherently "closed" for the most part. #bloatware
10/29/09
I'm willing to concede laptops to Apple as they already come with the inherent lack of upgrade potential. However they still suffer from the same lack of choice. If you want a laptop running OSX you're limited to small number of Macbooks naturally manufactured and sold by Apple. If you want a laptop running Windows or Linux you have an incredibly wide range of options from many different manufacturers.
My biggest problem with Apple is they find the need to tie their OS to their hardware rather than letting each product justify itself on its own merits. It's gotten a little better now you can run Windows on Mac hardware but until they release OSX from its tether to Macs I'm still going to have issues with it.
Just to note before the flood of comments washes in about Hackintoshs. I'm refusing to acknowledge them until they become officially supported. It's not Apple doing it so they don't deserve any of the credit for it (Apple that is, the people responsible for enabling hackintoshs obviously deserve the credit for their efforts). #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
No I want Apple to try justify their hardware and their software for what they are rather than tangling them together. They've made progress in the hardware area with boot camp but their OS remains hopelessly locked off. If you're saying that trying to have OSX stand alone would destroy what's good about Apple then it can't be very good in the first place. #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
Have you ever dealt with customer support for a computer manufacturer who didn't completely know the ins and outs of the operating system that you're running?
You'd still be getting the same level of customer support if you had a Mac running OSX, that's not just going to magically disappear. Also Apple could provide support for OSX users running different hardware, they manage to support boot camp after all.
Untethering it would (or should) change nothing about the current level of customer service (at least for Mac OSX users) so I don't see how it could suffer. There might be a lower level of customer support for people using OSX on PC's but again no one is forcing you not to use a Mac.
What I really want is the option to install OSX on hardware of my choice, preferably as a dualboot so I'm not stuck using it when I don't want to. Apple hardware now offers a choice of OS so why shouldn't it work the other way around?
The way I see it is Apple are simply too afraid to try and sell either Macs or OSX as standalone products. It just makes it seem like Apple don't have the confidence to decouple their products for fear that one or both will sink. #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
Are you suggesting that supporting Boot Camp on their own, known hardware is pretty much the same as supporting OS X on any hardware configuration imaginable? And that this would require almost no additional resources in support staff or engineering? And the quality of the OS X experience would remain the same? AND that Apple would do this so you'd stop buying their hardware which is their primary source of Mac related income? Great plan! #bloatware
10/29/09
That's a typo, it should read "try to justify their hardware and their software for what they are". The meaning should be obvious but I'll explain that I meant they should justify their OS and their hardware as distinct products rather than as a single package.
Boot Camp, of course, is software
Way to miss the point. What I meant was that Apple hardware had progressed to a more open state where you can have a choice of what OS you run on the hardware. Boot camp was merely the enabler, it was the move to Intel processors that made it possible. Perhaps I should have mentioned that but I thought it was sufficiently obvious.
"Their OS is hopelessly locked off" from what? Running on every cobbled together system on the planet? How would you suggest they do this without getting mired in the driver situation that makes Windows such a nightmare?
Hackintoshs manage it to a degree and they're not even officially supported by Apple. Also you cite cobbled together systems as if having hardware options and a less strict access to that hardware (in terms of tinkering) is universally bad. It's more about having the option, no one is saying there should no longer be your supposedly perfect airy fairy Mac/OSX love story that works like a dream and is oh so fluffy but if I want to put OSX on a PC and endure the "nightmarish driver situation" (ooooh drivers, so frightening!) why shouldn't I?
I wish I could end this with some snappy comment about your reply but sadly I can't think of anything. It just didn't really have any point to it. #bloatware
10/29/09
I realize that I'm too dumb to understand your obvious answers but please bear with me. #bloatware
10/29/09
AND that Apple would do this so you'd stop buying their hardware which is their primary source of Mac related income? Great plan!
See that's my point right there. Apple are too damn scared to put forward OSX or Macs as products worthwhile for their individual merits. That if they open up OSX for systems outside of Macs then the Mac platform will suffer. If the Mac hardware is really that weak that it needs something to boost it then they should improve it. But really they should let them stand apart and sell themselves on their own damn benefits rather than trying to depend on each other.
Are you suggesting that supporting Boot Camp on their own, known hardware is pretty much the same as supporting OS X on any hardware configuration imaginable?
Modern Mac architecture isn't incredibly different from a PC's hardware architecture. It's why things like hackintoshs work. Also it's not "any hardware configuration imaginable", it's always going to fall into a certain range.
And that this would require almost no additional resources in support staff or engineering?
I don't remember suggesting that nothing from Apple in terms of resources would be required so I'm just gonna write that off as rambling.
And the quality of the OS X experience would remain the same?
I'm not saying it may not differ, but as I said in my other reply no one is forcing you to give up your supreme OSX+Mac marriage made in heaven. It can be run successfully on other hardware platforms though, if Apple put their weight behind it I'm sure they could do it without harming the OSX "experience" that much. #bloatware
10/29/09
Well the "infinite number of unknowns" isn't quite as you put it. Computer hardware is more similar than you think, especially between Macs and PC's lately. You've got a CPU, memory, GPU's etc. These components do roughly the same job whether in a Mac or a PC.
You may not know but the "driver" problem as you put it is becoming less and less of an issue. Sure you still need drivers to support certain types of hardware, that's never going to change. Even with Apple products you have device drivers. The problems normally associated with drivers are issues of system instability.
Drivers used to primarily (if not exclusively) run in kernel mode. If they then went batshit due to some problem or whatever the system would just break (due to the kernel being the important bit). Apple decided to just sweep the problem under the rug and forget about it by not supporting anything they didn't make.
Drivers now though have a lot more abstraction between them and the kernel meaning that issues don't reach the system level. It's why modern PC's are incredibly more stable than they used to be.
As for their motivation. By letting OSX loose they'd be able to target a much wider market. Considering the hackintosh community there are plenty of people out there who'd want to use OSX but won't buy a Mac to do so. So why not sell them OSX?
If they focus on providing quality hardware in their Mac division as well as the smoother "OSX experience" that'd come with running OSX on a Mac it shouldn't decimate their hardware sales. If it does then it'll just show it was never worth buying in the first place.
Plus by untethering OSX they might even be able to fish people who use it into buying a Mac or other Apple products. One of the main reasons I'm on the fence about buying an iPhone or iPod Touch is that I'm cut off from developing on it because the SDK is locked to OSX. I'd be quite happy to buy OSX to run on a dual boot, but there's no way I'd buy a Mac just for that. #bloatware
10/29/09
That aside, look at their profit breakdown: [www.betanews.com]
They made $3.4 billion on computer sales in the last quarter and $647 million on "Software, Service and Other Sales" and that's including an operating system launch. You're saying they should risk cannibalizing the $3.4 billion to try to expand that $647 million. They might be be missing out on some boxed OS sales but if you look at those numbers, it's hard to imagine they care. Further, I remember Mac clones--I bought one. It was a great cheap machine but the cloning experiment wasn't good for Apple. If you look at their stock value and profits from the last 10 years, it's hard to argue that they're on the wrong path. #bloatware
10/29/09
Customer support issues disappear when I can walk into a physical store, talk to a real person, and I can know that he is an expert in precisely the make and model of both the computer and operating system that I give him. I had a faulty battery last summer, so I walked into a store, and within ten minutes walked out with another battery in hand, free of charge. How would you do that with your windows machine?
I guess my big issue is why you're so intent on harming the status quo. As you pointed out to Modano, hackintoshes prove that Mac software can run on other systems. Yes. You already can do exactly what you want to do. You say that you've built a computer before, so what's the issue for you? If some hardware fails, just replace it. If they don't want to offer customer support for you, you should be okay. Me, on the other hand, I can't offer myself that type of support, and if they only want to offer it for certain machines, that's their choice. They are a business just like any other. You shouldn't expect to be able to walk into a Burger King with a McDonald's coupon and expect them to honor it, can you? It's their software, it's proprietary. If you don't like that, get something else. #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
Since MS are still considered a monopoly and have problems with the EU and such, they will not risk it. #bloatware
10/29/09
Microsoft faced the US because they "forced" IE to the users, not because it was removed from the OS (even so, removing a important application is diferent from removing crapware). #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
"how about they make an OS that has the shit anyone, your grandma to your hacker friend, would ever need, one version, and keep it as consistent as possible across all machines"
Windows 7 Ultimate, Windows 7 Professional, Windows 7 Home Premium, Windows 7 Starter.
Really? Really? #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
Annnnd that makes what I said about putting everything in one version void how? #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
Your grandma isn't going to need much more than what's already in the box and your "hacker" friend knows where to find and how to get everything he needs and probably for free too. #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
Bye bye Flash HD decoding at a proper framerate
Bye bye decent audio stack
Bye bye working video drivers #bloatware
10/29/09
Bye bye girlfriend. #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
1. I primarily use a mac
2. I don't have to put up with the shortcomings of linux on a daily basis
3. That the linux soundstack isn't an unmitigated clusterfuck
4. That ATI drivers aren't a complete trainwreck
5. That nvidia drivers aren't much better
Linux on the desktop is a laughable proposition for many reasons and these are only a few. #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
Some of that bloat was fun. #bloatware
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
1. Microsoft's classification for "netbook" exists for the sale of their operating systems at a discounted price, not just because they said so.
2. They can not tell HP to "suck it" because that would be a direct violation of any number of antitrust regulations. #bloatware