Discussion of OS X on non-Apple hardware is allowed on Neowin. The amendment to the rules was conclusively made after much discussion among our staff. The primary reasoning behind this is a 1984 Federal Court ruling specifically makes it illegal for a company to force their users to install the OS on specific hardware. Which is ultimately the reason we're now allowing this discussion.

Note: Be aware though that Apple has a right to deny you support and service for OS X with a breach of the EULA. Neowin will not be held responsible in the event you void your warranty or support contracts.

Also please be mindful that Neowin still has a strong policy against warez of any kind and thus any discussion on illegally obtained copies of Mac OS X and such will be dealt with accordingly.

In order to differentiate new support threads in the forums, tagging your thread title with [OSx86] is now necessary.

Example: [OSx86] Can't get wireless card to be recognized

We do not intend to remove or amend warnings or other restrictions on accounts for previous violations of this rule because at the time the warning was placed on the account, these were the rules of Neowin.

Thank you for your understanding and patience.

Cool.

Yay!!

However, this would have been more useful 7 months ago before I got a mac

-Rich-

the change... why?

hmm - not sure I agree with this. The EULA is contract and hence a binding agreement, so it is against the law to do this, to install it is circumvention. Just my opinion.

I think the big question would be, how do you discuss OSX on non-Apple hardware without it being warez? Aren't the OSX install discs setup with a mechanism to identify if the system is an Apple one? Bypassing this would violate the EULA, wouldn't it?

Call me crazy, but it seems that any method of getting OSX on non-Apple hardware would be illegal. I'm no expert on legal matters, so I admit I may not be considering something, but it seems that OSX running on non-Apple hardware and it being illegal are mutually inclusive.

Great news! I think alot more people are going to the Mac section.

Everyone please stop complaining; Why wouldn't you want OSX on PCs? Stop being selfish

That being said, why doesnt OSx86 get its own section?

Ive been running OSX on my Dell laptop ... thanks to this I've decided to get a macbook pro soon... very soon

Same here, But on my ThinkPad. Im going to get a Mac mini soon.

Wow ... it's getting chilly in hell I guess

Simply put, "a 1984 U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision held that a software publisher can't require consumers to run an operating system on a specific type of hardware." The US Supreme Court has refused to hear the case, so at this point it is legal for anyone who owns a copy of OS X (Leopard) to install it on any other hardware. The only thing Apple can do is refuse you support. That's where we come in.


The install, as far as I've read, requires some films to be altered, but that isn't illegal, only against the EULA with Apple.

1. The Mac OS X EULA is an agreement between the end-user and Apple.
2. A violation of the EULA is not illegal, as it's not breaking any US laws.

Apple has a right to deny you support for running OS X not on one of their machines, but they can't literally "sue" you for it. There are no chips or anything to identify a computer as a Mac or non-Mac on the OS X disc--supposedly people have done vanilla installs through EFI emulation.

Again: Please be mindful that Neowin still has a strong policy against warez of any kind and thus any discussion on illegally obtained copies of Mac OS X and such will be dealt with accordingly.

That means any references or discussions on illegal ways of obtaining OS X will cost you. This is the same for any other commercial software such as Windows.


We're trying to simplify the forum. That's why we're asking everyone to use tags for osx86 threads.

I seriously agree with you on this, big time!

The reasons given for allowing EULA-violating discussion can also be equally applied to warezing Vista. After all, that agreement is between Microsoft and the end user.

Why is OSX86 "ok", and Vista copying "forbidden"?

Hmm whatever.
I just won't help anyone asking questions about this specifically. So it doesn't matter much to me.

Gotcha, I'm not against this, I just didn't fully see how this could coincide without warez activity occurring, but obviously I was wrong.

Vista copying? OSX86 is "ok" as long as the user has a valid copy of OS X. If s/he doesn't, then it is warez. The same goes for Vista, as long as someone has a valid copy of Vista, then we support here.

The EULA is not a binding contract. The EULA is a contract only between you and the company, the worst they can do is sue the user and considering the 1984 case, Apple will lose.

I'm going to cry :'(

Forgive the dense question but, can you go out and buy the Apple OS and install it without any issues in terms of compatibility? How would that work. I understand Apple may not grant me support but, I would be willing to give it a try if I know it will work.

Why? Think positive--people will be a lot more open to OS X now and there are even examples above where they're now buying a mac because of their experience with it.


There are and always will be issues with compatibility on non-supported hardware. I'm not sure myself what works and doesn't since I don't run osx86.

But owning a valid copy of OS X and installing a hacked version of it on a pc are 2 totally different things.
How is it still valid if you change core files within the OS to get it installed?

Interesting turn of events... I always assumed it was a taboo topic due to fears Apple might take Neowin down.

I'm pretty sure Apple's lawyers still see it as ilegal. But good to see Neowin being less up tight.

Again a section for us OSX on x86 users would be nice

I have to say I disagree with this. I'm willing to say whoever has a Hackintosh has not obtained OS X legally, therefor any discussion of it would fall under the warez category. Like .fahim said, the EULA is a contract that you agree to, and breaking it would be against the law. Personally, I think this is a big step backwards. I'm curious as to what Cara has to say.

Oh and I'm with StevoFC on this. Thanks for telling people they need to put the [OSx86] tag on their post - it's going to be a big help in letting me know which threads to ignore.

Jesus guys:

Also please be mindful that Neowin still has a strong policy against warez of any kind and thus any discussion on illegally obtained copies of Mac OS X and such will be dealt with accordingly.


We don't publicly discuss bans anyhow.

So, a user can violate the Apple EULA, as long as they bought one install media.

Likewise for Vista? If I purchase a boxed copy, I can freely violate the EULA on Neowin and install it on numerous PCs and get support?

Sounds crazy, if true!

This was something that we actually discussed, the staff I mean. This is essentially what we agreed, "'Cracking' is circumventing a copy protection of some sort. There is no copy protection with OS X. There isn't even a CD key at all. What's being done by people is they are modifying the software in a way that violates their EULA. But a EULA is just an agreement between the user and Apple. It's nothing illegal to violate it, since it's not a law that you're breaking. The most Apple can do for violating it is to deny you support."

Why does everyone bitch so much about this topic? The mods have allowed it. Period. Windows on Macs. OSX on x86. Everyone gets everything and everything is avaliable to everyone.

Stop bitching.

How would you? Circumventing activation/copy protection? (which doesn't apply to OS X)

I'm not bitching. I'm trying to see if the same freedom to violate Microsoft or Adobe Photoshop EULAs will be given.

No, because you only have one license for that copy of Vista. Purchasing a copy of Vista only grants you the rights to install it on one PC, the same with OS X. That would be the law, not just the EULA.

But it seems that no one is going to help [osx86] posts now anyway...

You are bitching about something that is legal (installing OSX on x86) and something illegal (installing Vista on more than one PC with the same license)

See the difference? If you still dont, please forget about it. If you are not intrested in this world, ignore that and done. Don't ruin it for the rest of us.

oo, cool... Glad we can talk about OSx86 now

No need to be rude, he's just looking for our reasoning behind us changing our policy. No harm in asking for clarification.

I have mixed feelings about - Part of me is pleased that this discussion is now allowed as it's interesting, but the other hopes that this doesn't give people a license to constantly complain and demand help on how their copy doesn't work, or that it needs sorting out; or asking others on how to obtain it.

Let me be clear on this, if a person requests information on how to obtain a copy of OS X, if someone posts warez, that person will be punished. Our rules are clear that warez is NOT welcomed here and that rule will continue.

Outside of that, as long as users have a legal copy of OS X, we will gladly allow discussion on how to modify the files so that they can install and run it on any AMD/Intel processor.

We allow discussion of ways to modify the operating system files of Vista, XP, etc to allow stuff like unsigned drivers or themes... in my view its a similar situation.

I think they've just opened up a big can of worms that they really should have kept covered up.
Its a very slippery slope they have just started down.

We all know that the OSX used on whitebox PCs is going to be a pirated version just as we know that a the majority of people have pirated software on their machines, dodgy decisions to open up with no visible sign on what exactly they stand to gain by the decision.

So, what exactly is allowed and what isn't? Am I allowed to make a topic asking what version of OSX86 would be best for my hardware? No links to the software, obviously, but just names.

Very nice comparison. I completely agree.

We've been allowing discussion of violating the Windows EULA ever since we've supported people installing uxtheme hacks.

What we're saying here is it's OK to talk about going down to the Apple Store, buying a copy of OS X, coming back home and modding the files on the disk so you can run it on your PC. There's no US law violated by that, just an agreement between you and Apple.

What we are not saying is its OK to go download a copy of OS X and mod it to work on your computer. That's a violation of copyright laws.

Copying bad. Modding OK.

Yeah - sorry Hurmoth. I realize that - in fact I just edited my post to get rid of most of what I'd said... but I edited it back so it doesn't look all odd, now I've been quoted.
As this doesn't violate US laws then I'm pleased that this discussion is allowed. But yeah, I know Neowin will punish those who discuss how to to obtain it. Neowin of course has proved to be very good at dealing with topics that involve warez.

No, because that would be warez. What is allowed is you going and purchasing a legitimate copy from Apple, Best Buy, etc. and manipulating the files yourself to be able to install it on any Intel-based computer.

No, we don't. It's quite easy to go down to your local Apple Store or Best Buy and pick up a copy of Leopard. It's entirely possible to get OS X on your PC in that manner in legal ways.

We can't be absolutely sure that every person receiving Windows support on these forums has got a legit copy. Should we stop providing help for everyone out of risk that they might be running an illegal copy?

hmmm, the scenario you keep describing thou Hurmoth, I sell you a stolen laptop in a Pub, as-long as I don't tell you its stolen, its OK

So if the mods allowed discussion and distribution of warez or bomb manufacturing we shouldn't have the right to discuss whether they may have made a terrible mistake? I'm not saying it's anything on the same level but we should be allowed to discuss whether it makes sense for Neowin.

First of all, imagine the number of people that have pirated software here already, such as Windows itself. We DO NOT support that, but as long as we don't know, what can we do about it?

The fact of the matter is, there are people who are running a legit copy of OS X on their PC. I am one of them. I'm doing it more for testing purposes, but I own a legit copy of OS X and I manipulated the files myself, so everything I've done is 100% within the law. Other's might be trying to do the same, but could be running into minor issues. What we gain is a new market, if you will. We are opening ourselves up for a larger community, but this time in the Mac world.

And we also know that the majority of users here are running pirated versions of Vista, XP, Photoshop, etc.


No, you're not. That would be like asking "which version of Vista on thepiratebay should I download"

What you are allowed is to discuss how to run a legally license/bought Leopard DVD on your PC. This usually means emulating EFI or modding the Leopard license you bought to make it run on your PC.

There's a difference there though. Neowin is not legally libel for what a user does as long as Neowin doesn't know about it. A person is not protected the same way however.

Neowin is not promoting the use of illegally obtained software, in fact we're punishing those who talk about illegally obtaining software.

Gotcha. I already own a copy of Leopard anyway, so I'm in the clear.

Thanks!