Policy regarding OS X on non-Apple Hardware


Recommended Posts

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'm already annoyed with it - I'm a mac user, trying to read genuine mac threads and I've already had to bypass one... where's the ignore button?

I agree with the previous poster about the origin of the media (as i've seen in other threads)... when someone has to say that they are using genuine media, do we assume they are not? How many OSx86 users would go out and buy it legally just to try it to see if it works?

Those shipped with a mac are only allowed to be used with that mac are they not? Similar to how Windows licenses OEM software...

the OSX EULA doesn't explain why neowin wont let threads exist on OSx86 before this thread...

i will not applaud this sorry should have been this way from the beginning... you can buy OSX! piracy was the issue not because you feel like installing it on your own hardware....

anyone who defends OSX or apple on the "is must be sold with a mac and used on a mac" is a tart

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.

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

I've added that to the first post if that makes you feel better :)

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

Didn't say that, I was just offering a different relevant perspective...

Regardless, it should certainly get its own forum rather than pollute the existing forums.

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.

I don't understand this. You're not here to cater to Apple, so you're willing to let people discuss how to violate their EULA. By this reasoning, you're not here to cater to Microsoft, so why aren't users allowed to discuss how to bypass Windows registration? I mean, you're here for the community, right?

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?

Nope. Its the owner's server. They can post whatever they want on it. Don't like it? Leave.

I for one, will not help anyone I am even suspicious of using OSX86.

But you will help someone installing Windows on their Mac right? Wrong direction :(

For members like StevoFC is the reason I think x86 should have its own section :)

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.

Neowin does not condone warez, but this has really the way it has always been. Neowin is not the internet police. We can't know where software comes from unless you clearly make it obvious that it is warez. It isn't "don't ask, don't tell", we firmly believe users should purchase legit copies of software, which is why we're not allowing discussion of downloading Hackintosh from the internet, someone must have their own legit copy of it.

I don't understand this. You're not here to cater to Apple, so you're willing to let people discuss how to violate their EULA. By this reasoning, you're not here to cater to Microsoft, so why aren't users allowed to discuss how to bypass Windows registration? I mean, you're here for the community, right?

That's different as that's covered by US law. Neowin, as Timdorr has mentioned, allows the discussion of uxtheme.dll, for example, and allows users to post links to patches and modified .dlls. This violates Microsoft's EULA, but does not violate US law.

I don't understand this. You're not here to cater to Apple, so you're willing to let people discuss how to violate their EULA. By this reasoning, you're not here to cater to Microsoft, so why aren't users allowed to discuss how to bypass Windows registration? I mean, you're here for the community, right?

patching windows (uxtheme.dll, icon packs (the ones that replace system files)) is against the EULA yet it's allowed, I think that's what they're referring to

I don't understand this. You're not here to cater to Apple, so you're willing to let people discuss how to violate their EULA. By this reasoning, you're not here to cater to Microsoft, so why aren't users allowed to discuss how to bypass Windows registration? I mean, you're here for the community, right?

"'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."

We allow users to discuss breaking the EULA for Windows. It has already been stated in this thread that by installing the uxtheme.dll file that breaks the MS EULA.

That's different as that's covered by US law. Neowin, as Timdorr has mentioned, allows the discussion of uxtheme.dll, for example, and allows users to post links to patches and modified .dlls. This violates Microsoft's EULA, but does not violate US law.
patching windows (uxtheme.dll, icon packs (the ones that replace system files)) is against the EULA yet it's allowed, I think that's what they're referring to

Ok, thank for clearing that bit up. (Y)

That's different as that's covered by US law. Neowin, as Timdorr has mentioned, allows the discussion of uxtheme.dll, for example, and allows users to post links to patches and modified .dlls. This violates Microsoft's EULA, but does not violate US law.

Exactly.

LOL You all get so whiny about stupid stuff. Why are so many of you so passionate of buying a Mac? Do you all get commission for every Mac Apple sells?
Nope. Its the owner's server. They can post whatever they want on it. Don't like it? Leave.

But you will help someone installing Windows on their Mac right? Wrong direction :(

For members like StevoFC is the reason I think x86 should have its own section :)

+1

I am willing to bet $10 that at least 50% of NeoMac users run either pirated XP or Vista on their Macs. So why should we treat OS X any different? Neowin sure doesn't condone piracy and I am not advocating it either. Just can't figure out all the Mac users on their high horses.

+1

I am willing to bet $10 that at least 50% of NeoMac users run either pirated XP or Vista on their Macs. So why should we treat OS X any different? Neowin sure doesn't condone piracy and I am not advocating it either. Just can't figure out all the Mac users on their high horses.

I actually use the copy I had purchased for my Macbook Pro, when I sold it I restored it back to 10.4 and kept my Leopard box

Neowin does not condone warez, but this has really the way it has always been. Neowin is not the internet police. We can't know where software comes from unless you clearly make it obvious that it is warez. It isn't "don't ask, don't tell", we firmly believe users should purchase legit copies of software, which is why we're not allowing discussion of downloading Hackintosh from the internet, someone must have their own legit copy of it.

That's just it. Neowin has always had a 'don't ask, don't tell' policy with warez. If the member doesn't specifically come out and say it, the assumption is that they are asking about legally obtained software.

That stance has never really sat well with me, but ah well. I really doubt many people will go out and buy a copy to install on their Dell, Gateway, custom-built computer. That action really doesn't jive with the intent of the Hackintosh community. Perhaps things are different now, but previously the only way to install OS X on a non-Mac was to download a hacked copy from P2P sites. Either that or be the one doing the hacking.

While I agree that the EULA has no legal binding, and therefore the discussion and action of installing OS X on non-Mac computers is not illegal, I can see where Mark is coming from. The Windows EULA would seem to be treated differently than the Apple EULA

Edited by Chad

Contracts, such as EULAs are protected by law, that's why they are written by lawyers and in lawyer speak. So they are protected by US and international laws.

Whether Neowin chooses to abide by specific things in those contracts is up to them and at their own risk to support the breaking of these clauses. I wouldn't be convinced by Neowin pulling out cases that back them up as I'm sure Apple would be more than willing to drag someone into court to prove that case wrong one of these days.

Anyway, I've got nothing particular against it, but as I said, seperate forum please, this will really **** off those who are avoiding this grey area or typical mac users who would not have OSX86's many issues.

Hey everyone, I know some people have been wondering when I'd chime in here.

Just for the record at no time do I officially speak for Apple in any correspondence here on Neowin, all thoughts or material posted here is done as my own thoughts, observations, or so forth.

I would hope that people will respect the decisions of the Neowin Administration in their decision to open this topic up. Though many of us do not agree that it is appropriate, or legal as the case may be, Neowin is free to do as they please in this matter until such a time as Apple (as a corporate entity) were to serve a Cease and Desist order to them regarding a specific topic. With that said, I do sincerely hope this DOES NOT HAPPEN as I know all of us enjoy and love the Neowin Community.

My concern is the (potential) flood of x86 posts clogging up the Apple Forums. x86 is not Apple related, it is different hardware and software from official distributions of Mac OS from Apple. People can argue this all they way, if you are required to use an EFI Emulator then you are not running the software Native and thus it is not the official method of running it.

I feel that in order to best serve the Apple community here on Neowin, if this topic is going to be allowed there does indeed need to be a x86 forum created for simplicity. How does adding a forum make things more simple? It keeps these threads out of the way of Apple users and allows the x86 community to have their own identity away from Apple users. I feel that many real Apple owners will refuse to aid x86 users, as is their right, and I feel that moving those threads into their own section will cut down on the potential for flame or hostile posting as a result.

These are my thoughts, I do plan to draft up these thoughts into something more solid to send off to the Admins when I get home but until then I hope that the Apple Community here on Neowin is adult enough to handle these x86 threads and not start flames/hostility over them.

We are all Neowinners guys, regardless of the OS being used.

Edited by Cara
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.

That isn't an issue of just an EULA with Vista, it's also a copyright issue. Microsoft, through the 30 day trial program, has implicitly granted you 30 days to make use of the copy of the product. Circumventing that system is breaking copyright law, not just the EULA. That is a US law and is therefore illegal where the servers for this site are housed.

Didn't Vista have some absurd clause in the EULA stating that it couldn't be run in a VM for certain editions? It's the same thing. As long as you obtained the copy of Vista legally or are using it under the copyright of Microsoft, then it doesn't matter with the US courts if you violate the EULA. Microsoft might be able to sue you individually, but that's a (very minor) risk you'd have to take.

Contracts, such as EULAs are protected by law, that's why they are written by lawyers and in lawyer speak. So they are protected by US and international laws.

The law states that Apple cannot force a user to install their OS on specific hardware, that trumps any EULA Apple can come up with, I don't care who wrote it.

Quote from Apple Insider, ""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".

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!