Comments on: Is Apple losing control of OS X?

By: JMZ

JMZ — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 21:12:32 +0000

I just read that Apple may be rolling out a defense against Hackintosh users running Snow Leopard on their Atom-based netbooks. The rumor has it that 10.6.2 will “disable” itself on Atom-based systems. I guess I’m glad that I never bothered to install OS X on my netbook.

By: anthonie

anthonie — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:11:34 +0000

You people sticking up for apple are a bunch of do-gooder babies! I can’t believe the crap I’m reading! So apple doesn’t get to charge the few people willing to jump the hurdles too much damn money for so-so hardware, boo hoo. Maybe for the people who are making 60k a year spending 1500 dollars on a computer that is half of what I could build for the money seems reasonable, but to us ”poor” people, it’s a load of crap. Windows sucks. It is raped and pillaged by viruses. OSX on the other hand pretty much is immune in comparison. Hmmm…so I should drop 3000 dollars on an apple computer that I want because apple has a big problem with me running their software on my 1500 dollar computer that is better…yeah that makes sense to my wallet. OR I can run windows, and be frustrated and pissed off pretty much the whole time. I think I’ll do the hackintosh method.

By: nik heger

nik heger — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:35:52 +0000

It seems like nobody wants to answer, so I’ll do it: No, Apple is not doomed. Apple can, at their own digression, any time they want, add a zillion little hardships to running OS X on non-supported hardware.

I don’t think they can really enforce their EULA, whatever others may think, in my mind, if you buy something then you can do whatever you want with it. That’s the answer that a good justice system will find. We’ll see how it plays out in the real world but that’s what I would bet on.

It doesn’t matter though. Remember how Microsoft brought down DR-DOS and everyone else who got in their way? By technical means, by making the other people’s stuff break. Apple can do that too. For example, every update to OS X could break all hackintoshes. Don’t think they could do that? Yes, they could. If that wasn’t enough, they could make their apps only work on the real thing – strange problems would occur on the hackintoshes only. And… ooops, no support for that. There is a million ways…

So no Apple is not doomed, they are just sitting back in the knowledge that while they can’t win by making OS X un-hackable, they can make it so that any normal and sane person would much rather buy the real thing. As it is, they probably figure every hackintosh user is a potential future customer and as such they are going to try to not piss them off. They’d want to gradually nudge these people into buying a real Mac.

By: Guy

Guy — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:18:09 +0000

I find the use of the term “stealing from Apple” interesting when he has a 5-user license. He’s installing one of those licenses on non-Apple hardware. Assuming Joe is smart enough to know he will never get support for any non-Apple hardware that OS X is installed on, how exactly is it stealing? He bought the 5-user pack because he has two Macs and it’s cheaper to buy it than to buy two seperate licenses. At least he’s not just buying the single license and installing it on multiple machines (which WOULD be stealing).

As far as non-Apple Macs go, Apple is going after Psystar because they are infringing on Apple patents by including OS X in the machines they sell. So far they haven’t gone after EFI-X (which in most ways is a superior solution) because while they sell an OS X compatible computer (if the EFI-X USB chip is also purchased), they don’t sell it WITH OS X.

Joe has bought and is in need of a netbook. Apple (so far anyway) does not sell anything in this line. The MacBook Air, while quite a neat little machine, is more than 3x the price and at least 2x in size. NOT the same thing. As long as he doesn’t expect Apple to support him, whaere’s the harm in putting OS X on whatever he likes as long as he doesn’t exceed the number of licenses he has AND doesn’t attempt to resell it as a Mac?

Because I want more storage (and the ability to add to that storage internally), I’m giving serious consideration to an EFI-X computer once Snow Leopard is released. I hate having multiple USB2 and FireWire enclosures all over my desk. I’m just waiting to see what happens to all the hackintoshes and current EFI-X Macs first. A tower Mac with better performance, more storage options, and better graphics than iMacs for a much lower price. Yes, it will have a legally purchased version on it as well and no I don’t expect Apple to support me.

For the record I’ve been a Mac user since 1987 (System 6.04 on a Mac Plus) and would pay more for an Apple Mac if it could be figured the way I need it to (storage).

By: Tom Benson

Tom Benson — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 06:35:26 +0000

I don’t think you have anything to worry about personally. If you own an extra license (most people don’t) and are tech savvy enough to install this on a non Apple machine for your own personal use, then good for you. It’s when you decide to provide this as a professional (ie paid) service that you are going to get into trouble.

Yes you are breaking the EULA, but there being no financial gain in the process mean that Apple Legal has no leg to stand on if they decided to take you on.

By: Neil Anderson

Neil Anderson — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:58:28 +0000

In a certain small sense Apple has lost control. At this point it’s not a concern for them unless you’re a company selling computers with their operating system on it.

By: Snafu

Snafu — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:38:37 +0000

“…f you are going to steal from Apple…”

If anything, JMZ could be misusing Apple’s software, not stealing it. Also, EULAs aren’t the most enforceable of rules, and Apple could be accused of bundling (after all, a Mac can run Windows, and OS X can be run on a PC).

Myself, I intend to go “MacBook Mini” as soon as the Ion platform gets released and pricing and capabilities of all netbook ranges get clarified.

By: greg stasko

greg stasko — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 22:28:26 +0000

I wonder if this whole phenomenon gets out of hand (Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware), Apple will end up resorting to some sort of dreadful copy protection or network activation, similar to what happens on WIndows?

That would be a very unfortunate side effect to all of this.

By: Steve A

Steve A — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 20:40:17 +0000

Edna said: “And now that you are breaking the EULA, please don’t expect any kind of support from Apple should you need it. ” LOL. People who install Mac OS X on other hardware aren’t the type to ever call Apple for software support. I’ve been using macs since 1985 and I have yet to call Apple for OS support.

By: Jim G.

Jim G. — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 17:25:19 +0000

Artificially tie OS X to Apple hardware?

If you ask me, as a programmer, there is more effort and code written to make OS X work well and – more importantly – be supported on non-Apple hardware.

If Apple chooses to not waste resources doing this, that is there choice.

If you want to extend this argument, why are Sony and XBox games only allowed to run on their respective hardware, when they use the same processor? Artificial tie? Hardly. Optimizing code is the more likely answer.