Policy regarding OS X on non-Apple Hardware


Recommended Posts

How would you? Circumventing activation/copy protection? (which doesn't apply to OS X)
You can run Vista for 30-days per install. Will that rule forbidding this be removed now? After all, less circumvention is being done reinstalling than there is in making OSX work on beige box hardware.
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.
That sounds like picking and choosing among what EULA provisions are honored and which are not. And that is the EULA, as there is no "law" that forbids multiple installs - outside of Copyright law. And Copyright law is based on... get this... the terms of the EULA.

I accept it is now legal to discuss OSX86. I just don't see consistency with other EULAs

Also, another thing to think about. I've already started reading member's posts where they stated they tried this on their notebook and ended up purchasing a Mac. I'm sure that there are probably thousands of people who have done the same. I'm one of those people. I fell in love with the UI after using it on my desktop and ended up buying an iMac late last year. I've never been happier.

So is this unofficial and just "modifying" of the files so it will work on x86? I thought Apple was a different architecture, like PPC? How do you get code compiled for PPC to work on x86?

You are way behind the times, Apple's new machines are entirely Intel x86 based, see http://www.apple.com/intel/

Cara had a blog post about this about a week ago, she was not supportive of Hackintosh: https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?auto...;showentry=1828

Yes. And if I had to guess I would say she won't be happy at all with this decision. And it definitely doesn't make much sense to **** off the most informed Apple/OS X user here.

Support for all things Apple will drop significantly here because of this. I for one, will not help anyone I am even suspicious of using OSX86.

So is this unofficial and just "modifying" of the files so it will work on x86? I thought Apple was a different architecture, like PPC? How do you get code compiled for PPC to work on x86?

I'm probably going to get flak for this, but that changed when Apple changed their Macs to be like PCs by going with Intel chips.

You can run Vista for 30-days per install. Will that rule forbidding this be removed now? After all, less circumvention is being done reinstalling than there is in making OSX work on beige box hardware.

I'm not familiar with the Vista side of things but as far as I'm reading it, that rule mainly deals with the aspects of downloading a copy of Vista through illegal means and thinking of it as "shareware" software. We're not condoning downloading Leopard through illegal means.

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.

In same manner, can we safely assume that all Mac owners running Vista are pirating Windows?

You can run Vista for 30-days per install. Will that rule forbidding this be removed now? After all, less circumvention is being done reinstalling than there is in making OSX work on beige box hardware.
Again, to get Vista you'd have to download a copy illegally. That is warez. Unless you obtain a copy of Vista from an authorized vendor (Microsoft, Wal-Mart, etc.) then it is warez.
That sounds like picking and choosing among what EULA provisions are honored and which are not. And that is the EULA, as there is no "law" that forbids multiple installs - outside of Copyright law. And Copyright law is based on... get this... the terms of the EULA.

I accept it is now legal to discuss OSX86. I just don't see consistency with other EULAs

Did you see Tim D.'s post? He actually addressed this. I'm researching licensing laws/EULAs right now.

Is creating a new subforum for this a good idea if Neowin is going to allow this discussion? (I know, Neowin is looking to simplify its forum structure) - but I think it's reasonable to say that it will annoy genuine Mac users in having the Apple General Discussion forum full of [OSx86] threads. I'm not a Mac user (yet!), but I can imagine having these topics in this forum would annoy those who have Macs.

Cara had a blog post about this about a week ago, she was not supportive of Hackintosh: https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?auto...;showentry=1828

Thanks for posting that link. (Y)

Yes. And if I had to guess I would say she won't be happy at all with this decision. And it definitely doesn't make much sense to **** off the most informed Apple/OS X user here.

Support for all things Apple will drop significantly here because of this. I for one, will not help anyone I am even suspicious of using OSX86.

Once again, I'm with you on this. :yes:

Again, to get Vista you'd have to download a copy illegally. That is warez. Unless you obtain a copy of Vista from an authorized vendor (Microsoft, Wal-Mart, etc.) then it is warez.
To get Vista, I can buy. Then proceed to violate the EULA by installing it on extra computers with "trial periods" then re-imaging it. I am not making copies of the media. I am not illegally downloading anything. Simply violating the spirit and terms of the EULA.
Did you see Tim D.'s post? He actually addressed this. I'm researching licensing laws/EULAs right now.
I know I must sound like a pain in the butt right now (and considering I have never bought an Apple computer - just been donated an old G3 for my kid to play with) I really have no vested interest in Apple or their EULAs. And I do appreciate the effort and hassle the staff is going through to answer these questions that everyone is pouring into the thread at breakneck pace. :p

And timdorrs post was purely on copyright aspects of downloading.

Yes. And if I had to guess I would say she won't be happy at all with this decision. And it definitely doesn't make much sense to **** off the most informed Apple/OS X user here.

Support for all things Apple will drop significantly here because of this. I for one, will not help anyone I am even suspicious of using OSX86.

She claims she's an Apple employee, I'd imagine that Apple employees probably would agree with allowing this discussion, but, with all due respect, we're not here for Apple, we're here for the community and this is a step forward in helping out the community.

i would like them to have their own section, but i do not agree with having the section at all.

i hope apple puts a stop to it as it will majority lead to extreme negativity towards osx because of people tryign to run it on stuff it was not meant to be run on ( aka forcing XP to run on a 486 )

Is creating a new subforum for this a good idea if Neowin is going to allow this discussion? (I know, Neowin is looking to simplify its forum structure) - but I think it's reasonable to say that it will annoy genuine Mac users in having the Apple General Discussion forum full of [OSx86] threads. I'm not a Mac user (yet!), but I can imagine having these topics in this forum would annoy those who have Macs.

I don't think saying "We know most users are pirating windows, photoshop etc. etc." is an excuse to say it's fine to put up with discussion of ilegal activity especially if you know it's predominantly ilegal. If anything Neowin should be encouraging users who wish to do these things to pursue the legal(er) route, not just opening pandora's box.

I hope that made sense.

She claims she's an Apple employee, I'd imagine that Apple employees probably would agree with allowing this discussion, but, with all due respect, we're not here for Apple, we're here for the community and this is a step forward in helping out the community.

I'm sorry but either your reading comprehension isn't very good or you didn't read her blog post. Because what you just said makes no sense.

And she "claims" to be an Apple employee?

What, you don't believe her?

To get Vista, I can buy. Then proceed to violate the EULA by installing it on extra computers with "trial periods" then re-imaging it. I am not making copies of the media. I am not illegally downloading anything. Simply violating the spirit and terms of the EULA.

I know I must sound like a pain in the butt right now (and considering I have never bought an Apple computer - just been donated an old G3 for my kid to play with) I really have no vested interest in Apple or their EULAs. And I do appreciate the effort and hassle the staff is going through to answer these questions that everyone is pouring into the thread at breakneck pace. :p

And timdorrs post was purely on copyright aspects of downloading.

You're absolutely right. But here's my question for you, what support would someone need from installing Vista on multiple computers that s/he'd need to disclose that information to us? While you're right it is just a violation of the EULA to install software on multiple computers, my question, I guess is why would they need to tell us that? Unless of course they're having an activation issue.

On top of that, they do not have a legal standing to back themselves up in court. Someone who installs OS X on their PC does. The 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.

Also I don't get Neowin is doing this? Sure they want more visitors but OSX86 traffic is hard to get.

There are 2 huge special x86 fora and 1 central wiki for this stuff...

By allowing it here, you not only wasting your time with legal issues (keeping up to date wether supporting this is (still) legal takes time too...), but also decentralizing the current community.

I know you guys want to help, but you aren't making it easier for yourself and the (newbie) osx86 user.

IMHO .. just allow links to the 2 special osx86 fora and central wiki.

(also .. if you're going to do this .. use a seperate subforum for this .. and not tags... supporting x86 is a mess (which nearly every macfan hates most of all; see workstation thread, 'em fakers :p))

This makes sense. Since the EULA isn't connected to any U.S. laws, as long as you obtain OS X legally in the first place, the only issue is between the user and Apple, who will refuse to give support for the product, which is fair. OSx86 is a community-driven project and I think Neowin should be a part of that community. I can see why some people may disagree with the idea but I'm personally in support of it. Good job (Y).

I'm sorry but either your reading comprehension isn't very good or you didn't read her blog post. Because what you just said makes no sense.

And she "claims" to be an Apple employee?

What, you don't believe her?

I'm not saying I believe or disbelieve her to be an Apple employee. That wasn't my point. My point was we're not here to cater to Apple, we're here to help the community.

You're absolutely right. But here's my question for you, what support would someone need from installing Vista on multiple computers that s/he'd need to disclose that information to us? While you're right it is just a violation of the EULA to install software on multiple computers, my question, I guess is why would they need to tell us that? Unless of course they're having an activation issue.
So, the policy is "don't ask, don't tell"? That a "wink" about the media origin is OK? I guess that the same assumptions are made about Vista and Photoshop in the forums. Only direct admitting to warez copies is acted on. So being evasive about the source of your OSX is the way for pirates to go.
The 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.
If this was all based on that ruling, then why did not anyone say so at the beginning announcement?

If it is of any consolation, I now accept this not only as a staff decision, but I understand the reasoning behind it. I won't be posting any more questions on this. :yes:

(I still am strongly opposed to "wink warez", though) :p

Cara had a blog post about this about a week ago, she was not supportive of Hackintosh: https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?auto...;showentry=1828

And since when Cara speak for Neowin or Apple? Never, she speaks for herself.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • So size is the ONLY selling point????? People have been plugging in PC's to TV's in living rooms for 20+ years. I would take a bigger box for more peformance. Also lot and lots of SFF/Mini ITX build guides out there.
    • My point is, if you buying this instead of a console for TV purposes, that you need to understand that you will not be able to play the most popular MP games with Steam OS. Now if you are not into those games, and into some of the perputual alpha/beta games on Steam then this is an option. I would argue a gaming PC would be the better route, more expensive but take the 1k -1.4k you are about to spend on this thing and build a better one. Because it is running Linux you can overide its 1080p settings. However The Verge complained about its 1080p cap and how you would have to get around it at the CLI, so someone buying this instead of a PS5 or Xbox might have a challege on their hands.
    • A review of Synology's BeeCamera software for the BeeStation Plus by Christopher White Synology is leaning into the BeeStation and the BeeStation Plus, and it's easy to understand why. While power users will want something more customizable, the BeeStation and its more powerful sibling, the BeeStation Plus, are great for those who want a device they can simply plug in, click a few buttons, and have it work as their own personal cloud. Until recently, the device was mostly used for the storage of files, photos, and videos, and with the Plus model, you could install and stream media through Plex. Synology recently released a new free application for the BeeStation Plus called BeeCamera, which is basically a stripped-down version of Surveillance Station. First, let's get the confusing naming out of the way. While you might initially think that BeeCamera is a physical device, perhaps a camera that Synology created specifically for the BeeStation Plus, that would be incorrect. BeeCamera is simply the name for the application that runs on the NAS and on your mobile device. I think the marketing team missed the mark here, but it does fit the other naming on the device, like BeePhotos and BeeFiles, I guess. Camera Support As of right now, only Synology-branded cameras are supported, which many will see as a callback to the drive locking the company implemented and then backtracked on. That said, while I 100% disagree on drive locking, I agree that camera locking for a device made to simply plug and play is the right decision. The whole point of the BeeStation line is simplicity. There are currently three camera model lines available, a wireless device for indoor use, and two PoE models for external use. CC400W (Wi-Fi): Plug it into power using the included power adapter, and connect it to your wireless network. This camera is rated only for indoor use and is the one I was provided to review the BeeCamera. $198.36, in line with the Unifi G6 Compact. BC510 (PoE): A bullet-style camera. Connect it to an Ethernet cable that is providing Power over Ethernet (PoE). This camera is rated for both indoor and outdoor use. $240. TC510 (PoE): A dome-style camera. Connect it to an Ethernet cable that is providing Power over Ethernet (PoE). This camera is rated for both indoor and outdoor use. $240. Although this isn't a review of the actual Synology camera, I did want to note that a positive for the Synology CC400W is that it uses a magnetic base. This means you can mount it on any magnetic surface, which is pretty handy. However, a downside to the camera is that it's powered by a built-in USB cable that's about six and a half feet (two meters) long. This means that the cable will probably be either too long or too short, but more importantly, if the cable is damaged at all, you'll likely need to buy an entirely new camera because there doesn't appear to be a way to replace it, unlike many competitors, like the Unifi G6 Instant. Hopefully, this is something Synology addresses in a future revision of the hardware. The BeeStation Plus supports up to four cameras. Setup The setup of BeeCamera is, like everything in the BeeStation family, very straightforward. Simply make sure you're on at least version 1.5 of the BeeStation OS, and BeeCamera is automatically installed on the device. BeeCamera Setup Screenshots Setting up the CC400W was just as easy. Plug it in, open up the BeeCamera app, and follow the on-screen steps to add the camera. During this process, you'll configure the camera name and how many days of retention you want to keep. The system will also automatically update the firmware for you. The whole thing took only a couple of minutes, excluding the time it took for the camera to update the firmware. Once the camera is connected to the BeeStation Plus, you can manage the various camera settings within the app, although there aren't many to choose from. You're able to configure whether the microphone will record audio (some privacy laws may preclude you from recording it), select what codec to use (H.264 or H.265), configure the color and exposure of the camera, and determine what data you want to overlay onto the video. Finally, you can set up AI detections so that BeeCamera will alert you if it sees certain things. These are all of the common detections you would expect in a camera system, such as people, pets, and vehicles. Under people and vehicles, you can also add extra monitoring for lingering and congestion detection, although pets are currently in "Lab" and therefore have no extra features yet. Recording in 4K using H.265 for 30 days will take roughly 300 GB of storage, which is very reasonable for most regular households, as the BeeStation Plus has 8TB of native storage. If you want to set up detection zones, you can. These are areas that BeeCamera will look at for the various detections, and are helpful if, for example, there's a tree in your frame and you don't want to be notified each time the wind makes the branches move around in the frame. Finally, you can also schedule when the camera should and should not be recording, which is a very useful feature. For example, you may want to record only at night when you're sleeping, but not during the day when you're up and about the house, so you can easily shut the camera off between 8 am and 10 pm. Each hour of each day can be configured to record continuously, only upon a detection event, or disabled completely. You can't fine-tune to record at a specific time, though, only hourly blocks on the hour. Daily Use The best part of BeeCamera is that it's easy and just works. If you only care about being notified when things happen, the mobile app sends those notifications and lets you click the button to bring up the video and see what's going on. For example, when I went out of town and had the camera pointed at the cat tower in our hallway, it was nice to be able to drop in and check that my furry friends were doing okay without me. Initiating the remote connection to the BeeStation Plus through the app is very responsive, but this will heavily depend on your ISP. In my case, using Xfinity, I'm able to go from starting the app to seeing live video in roughly three seconds, which is about the same amount of time it takes to connect to my Unifi UNVR system that costs much more. If you want to see footage from a specific day and time, you can do so using the calendar icon. You can also scroll through the timeline, looking for detections that are labeled in blue (vs. the normal gray when there's nothing of interest). There are buttons that let you go to the last/next detection on the timeline, which is helpful if you missed the notification on your mobile device. That's where the ease of use stops, though. While you can download clips that are flagged by detection, there's apparently no way to select generic time frames you're interested in, and the only place to download is to your phone. In addition, sharing a video shares the actual video, not just a link back to your BeeStation Plus. While that's good from a security and privacy perspective, it's a little awkward for sharing large videos. Limitations While the ease of implementation is great, there are some things that are lacking from BeeCamera. The most obvious is that there is no way to view the footage on the desktop. You can log in to the BeeStation Plus to see how much storage BeeCamera is using, but unlike BeePhotos and BeeFiles, there is no BeeCamera on the web console to manage or view footage. This means you'll be viewing all of your security footage on your mobile device, which is pretty limiting. In addition, there's no way to download the video to your PC without first using your phone as the intermediary. The one exception to this is that you can use BeeFiles to see the raw MP4 files. They're saved in 5-minute increments, and it's just raw data with no detection information or any other way to identify what any of them are. The lack of a way to interact with BeeCamera on the desktop also makes configuration of the cameras more difficult. For example, trying to set up detection zones using a tiny screen and your finger to draw boxes is more cumbersome than it needs to be. This reinforces the idea that BeeCamera is not made for power users. It's also missing some of the more advanced functionality of Surveillance Station. For example, I couldn't find a way to say, "Alert me if the thing in this zone is no longer there." Another major deficiency with BeeCamera, and a feature I suspect may come out in the future, is that while it can detect generic people, there is no specific facial recognition yet. This is an interesting omission, given the fact that other Synology tools can detect specific individuals, and competitors such as Unifi Protect also do it. This is probably a software limitation, so we will have to wait and see if this feature is added in the future. Conclusion If you need a security guard to monitor surveillance cameras to make sure your property is secure, then BeeCamera is not the solution for you. That said, you probably wouldn't be using a BeeStation Plus as the brains behind the system either. BeeCamera (and BeeStation in general) is clearly aimed at households that want to avoid sending personal data to Google and Amazon, and now want to add some cameras to keep an eye on their home and their pets while they're away. BeeCamera excels at doing this. The target market isn't interested in creating cases, tying multiple views together in a single pane of glass, or the like, and for the intended use case, the system works great. Where it starts to fall apart a bit is with more advanced features. Not being able to use a desktop app is a major compromise in my opinion, and having to do all of the configuration on a mobile device is annoying, but not impossible. If you don't want to have a full-fledged NAS device in your home, but still want control over your data (or maybe want an easy way to backup your data for World Backup Day), and want to add a couple of cameras to keep an eye on your house and your pets, this is a great, cheap, and easy way to go, and I suspect more functionality will come over time. If Synology releases a desktop app or at least a way to configure cameras and view footage on a desktop browser, this would be a near-perfect solution for a general home user. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • I forgot to add on my comment that when robots will take physical jobs, it's when they become more cheaper to manufacture and sell. That will be the starting point of the end to lanscaping, trash pickup, factory jobs, etc.
    • How many people can actually use a 2.5gig ethernet port? Most people do not have more than a 1gig internet connection, heck most have less than that. Most people at home do not have a switch that has multiple 2.5gig ports either.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
    • First Post
      mike_rumble earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      477
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      172
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      104
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      88
    5. 5
      neufuse
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!