Policy regarding OS X on non-Apple Hardware

By Marshalus
in Site Announcements

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Marshalus Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted (edited)

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.

Edited by Hurmoth
Grand Master

+Fahim S. MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

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.

Grand Master

Mathachew Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

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.

Grand Master

Hurmoth

Posted
Posted
the change... why?

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.

I think the big question would be, how do you discuss OSX on non-Apple hardware without it being warez?

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.

Grand Master

giga Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

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.

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

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

Grand Master

markwolfe Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
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 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"?

Grand Master

Mathachew Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
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.

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.

Grand Master

Hurmoth

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

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.

Mentor

+Steve B Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted

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.

Grand Master

giga Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
I'm going to cry :'(

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.

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.

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.

Grand Master

+StevoFC MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted
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.

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?

Grand Master

MasterC

Posted
Posted

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. ;)

Grand Master

giga Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Didn't William get banned for linking to a screen with an icon of OSX on it? And now this? Seems a bit two faced.. Would like to know more..

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.

Grand Master

markwolfe Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
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.

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 topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • I restored the default settings to Secure Boot. Big mistake

      By dorf · Posted

      This might work, but the boot menu F12 only shows hdd and dvd+/- and Niks In the bios all usb are enabled. the usb stick is in place and in the boot menu it does not show up in the bios boot order.
    • EA Sports UFC 6 review: Brutal, satisfying, and surprisingly accessible to newcomers

      By Steven P. · Posted

      Because we were never offered a UFC game to review it in the past. Sometimes it's not a conspiracy, the reviewer does not even live in the U.S. and didn't ask for it.
    • Politically funny images of the World

      By Xenon · Posted

    • Apple releases iOS 27 Beta 2 for developers and power users

      By Aditya Tiwari · Posted

      Apple releases iOS 27 Beta 2 for developers and power users by Aditya Tiwari It's been a couple of weeks since Apple previewed the iOS 27 update during the WWDC official keynote. The upcoming iOS version will bring even more refinements to the Liquid Glass design language, an upgraded Siri AI assistant, and several new Apple Intelligence features. Interestingly, the latest WWDC keynote was different than previous years. Apple has released the iOS 27 beta 2 (build 24A5370h) for developers who want to test the new features being baked for the iPhone and optimize their apps. If you're interested in downloading the latest beta, go to Settings > General > Software Update > beta Updates, then choose iOS 27 Developer Beta. You can download the latest iOS 27 beta on more than 30 supported iPhones. Make sure you know what you are doing since developer betas can be unstable and unexpected at times. If you want to be on the safer side, you can wait for the public beta, which will arrive next month. It's been a while since Apple discontinued its AirPort router lineup. Now, the company said in the iOS 27 beta 2 release notes that the AirPort Utility is deprecated and won't be available for new downloads from the App Store. Apple added that if you previously downloaded the app, you can re-download it. However, the functionality isn't guaranteed when using the AirPort Utility on iOS 27 or later. Speaking of known issues, Apple said that the Portrait mode blur effect might render incorrectly for photos; you may be unable to stop an alarm from the lock screen without unlocking your iPhone; the "Add a Control" button in Control Center edit mode might appear small or clipped. There are several new features in iOS 27 beta 2 as well. It comes with Neural Engine improvements for Apple Intelligence, including better performance when loading large models over 1GB. HomeKit Secure Video recordings are processed on-device and through Private Cloud Compute for video descriptions and search, when Apple Intelligence is enabled in the Home app. That said, you can also download the second betas of macOS 27 Golden Gate, iPadOS 27, watchOS 27, and other Apple operating systems.
    • AMD 26.6.2 driver brings FSR 4.1 support to RDNA 3 RX 7000 series graphics cards

      By RejZoR · Posted

      FSR 4.1 is insanely superior to FSR 3. Like, FSR 4.1 Performance looks better than FSR 3.1 Quality. It's great they are finally enabling it for RX 7000 users. A bit late, but I guess better late than never.

  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
    • First Post
      mike_rumble earned a badge
      First Post
    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      203
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      98
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      80
    5. 5
      neufuse
      67
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!