OpenMac

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by photon

......

If I purchased a full version of OXS for $399, installed it on a clone, and then needed support I'd be SOL. ...........

But most aren't as levelheaded as you.

[photon]

They just have to put the Microsoft stuff at the beginning of their support calls..

"You have chosen technical support, please have your credit card number or mortgage title ready."

Clone users are used to no support from Microsoft, and Apple users won't notice having to pay more, they do it anyway, so everyone wins!!!

[greerb]

There is nothing different between this and http://www.osx86project.org/. It is not illegal to put OS X on another machine. Apple will just NOT support it.

Look at your PC or Laptop that you have in front of you, most probably bought the machine with Windows, unless you bought the machine with NO operating system. Load a Linux partion on it and your computer won't boot anymore, see how far your warrenty, with the company you bought it from, gets you. I'm sure that HP, Sony, Toshiba ect. only supports Windows or the operating system that came with the machine.

[photon]

Is that 100% legal though? I know they dodged a DMCA takedown by Apple by not having or promoting any info that violates the DMCA, but doesn't the act of running it still do so?

Thanks for that though, a quick browse of the forums has some VM solutions for running OSX, I'll have to check those out.

[psicodude]

Originally Posted by greerb

There is nothing different between this and http://www.osx86project.org/. It is not illegal to put OS X on another machine. Apple will just NOT support it.

Look at your PC or Laptop that you have in front of you, most probably bought the machine with Windows, unless you bought the machine with NO operating system. Load a Linux partion on it and your computer won't boot anymore, see how far your warrenty, with the company you bought it from, gets you. I'm sure that HP, Sony, Toshiba ect. only supports Windows or the operating system that came with the machine.

Someone doesn't have their facts straight.

Psystar is now in clear violation of Apple's EULA, which prohibits running the operating system on any piece of hardware without that little Apple logo.

This is according to PcWorld magazine. http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/006799.html

And your argument about HP, Sony, Toshiba, etc. not supporting a machine that does not have the preinstalled OS is crap. All of those companies are hardware manufacturers, and couldn't care less which OS is installed. If your video card dies on a Toshiba laptop, they replace it. Period. Of course they don't support the OS, because they didn't make it. If you have a software issue with one of those machines, they almost always just get you to restore the machine to factory default and call it a day.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by photon

Is that 100% legal though? I know they dodged a DMCA takedown by Apple by not having or promoting any info that violates the DMCA, but doesn't the act of running it still do so?

Thanks for that though, a quick browse of the forums has some VM solutions for running OSX, I'll have to check those out.

No, it is not legal because some code would have to be altered in order for it to run. OS X runs a check to make sure that it is being installed on Apple hardware. Since they are 99% generic pc parts, it's not to hard to foul up that 1% with a patch that will get it to install.

[photon]

Which gets back to my original point; if I buy software I should be able to do with as I want, I don't agree with the licenses that basically mean you're borrowing software on the good will of the author and hope they don't change their minds about what you can and can't do with it even more.

If they have to mess with the OSX that talks to the TMP, how did they end up dodging Apple's DMCA takedown? I didn't follow this very closely when it happened a few years back.

[Bobblehead]

I'm also starting to read there are some who are questioning the validity of "shrink wrap" EULAs. The question is: once a transaction has been completed, does a EULA violate the "right of first sale". Is it legal to put conditions on the sale of an asset after you have already been paid for it?

Personally, I think if they wish to put conditions on the sale, they need to be spelled out and agreed to before the transaction is completed.

Does Toyota legally have the right to tell you how you can use your new Camry after you have purchased it? You have the keys in hand, but if you start the car you agree to only drive on paved roads. And if you do not agree, you have opened the door so you cannot get a refund, only Toyota in-store credit.

[photon]

And even if those conditions are spelled out, are those conditions legal. Not all conditions and clauses are legal.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by photon

And even if those conditions are spelled out, are those conditions legal. Not all conditions and clauses are legal.

I'd love for this to be challenged.

I've always noticed that the problems that make my computer BSOD (on occasion) or cause freezes and such are hardware/driver related. That doesn't mean that Microsoft did a great job with helping hardware manufacturers in writing good drivers, but Apple doesn't have to worry about that with OS X. They have generally one driver platform to deal with, they can make things work together flawlessly because they control all aspects of it.

Something just doesn't seem quite right about restricting something like an operating system to a specific hardware profile.

[arsenal]

Update from gizmodo:
http://gizmodo.com/380488/psystar-ex...ks-like-a-hoax

[onetwo_threefour]

I agree largely with Photon on this one. I think eceryone has missed the best analogy though. What Apple is doing is comparable to buying a Sony music CD and having a little notice in the case that says it's illegal to play it on anything other than a Sony CD player. The content is accessible through other hardware platforms to be used for it's legally intended purpose and yet they are tryiing to tell you not to use said legally available hardware. If that's not anti-competitive I don't know what is.