Policy regarding OS X on non-Apple Hardware

[MMaster23]

Just in case people don't know (and partly why people are crying OSX86 is cracking the software), the whole osx86 project started about 2.5 years ago and the only way to run OSX on a x86 PC was to modify the kernel and surcumvent certain TPM-related modules (breaking not only EULA but also laws). The OSX kernel and the OS itself check the platform it's running on using TPM-related technology. The only way to run OSX on a non-Apple computer back then was to disable the checks. Disabling these breaks the law. This is what gives osx86 the reputation that it is illegal. This practice was and still is illegal!

However over the last years, the hackers have found an alternative to this practice. By installing a small piece of code on the harddrive partition (I believe it's the partition, not sure tough) before installation, you validate your computer as an Apple computer. This is called EFI emulation and it tells the official unmodified osx installation disc that the computer is an offical Mac. Using OSX with EFI emulation is not breaking laws but it is breaking the EULA (which isn't illegal).

(I of course have no experience in this practice what so ever :whistle: )

It isn't illegal but it is morally wrong. If you like OSX, you should buy a Mac (or just snap out of it and run Vista ;) j/k)

[Panarchy]

Okay, created a guide on how to dual-boot windows vista & mac leopard.

Here's the link: https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=639919

Enjoy ;)

Panarchy

[EnzoFX]

Do updates work normally in a hackintosh? Or do you generally stay away from them?

Also, do people here successfuly dual-boot with XP/Vista?

[Panarchy]

^Dual-booting XP & Vista? Yeah, that's simple!

Oh, but I think you mean tri-booting XP, Vista & Mac OSX.

I did that for a while, it worked well! (64-bit versions of XP & Vista)

Though now I've reformatted entire drive and am working towards a hex-boot (6) :p

Oh, and as for updates, I don't think you can do a full kernel update (eg 10.5.2 to 10.5.3) but you can do all other updates (in my experience).

For the kernel updates, usually the maker of the hackint0sh DVD will release an update (for short term) then a whole new DVD that contains the latest kernel (and drivers).

Panarchy

[Mr. Gibs]

Do updates work normally in a hackintosh? Or do you generally stay away from them?

Also, do people here successfuly dual-boot with XP/Vista?

Software updates works fine for all the newer builds. It might be advisable to stay away from the graphic ones though, and I think also if you aren't using the Vanilla kernel

Oh, and as for updates, I don't think you can do a full kernel update (eg 10.5.2 to 10.5.3) but you can do all other updates (in my experience).

For the kernel updates, usually the maker of the hackint0sh DVD will release an update (for short term) then a whole new DVD that contains the latest kernel (and drivers)

Generally this is only required if you are using one of the patched kernels. Such as the speedstep one or whatever. If you are using the vanilla kernels, 10.5.x updates should be possible.

[Panarchy]

^Oh?

I wasn't aware of that...

Edited May 29, 2008 by giga

[Mr. Gibs]

You can update it using software update as long as you are using a vanilla kernel.

If you aren't you can still use software update, but then you will need to boot up using your leopard dvd and run the postpatcher script.

[markwolfe Veteran]

...

Just say get yourself a Mac Installation disk. Most people would know what you're talking about, without having you explicitly state it.

Yeah, as long as you use enough "winks" when you talk about the imaginary "installation disk", then people will know you are really talking about warez downloading.

[Panarchy]

:laugh:

[Mr. Gibs]

Yeah, as long as you use enough "winks" when you talk about the imaginary "installation disk", then people will know you are really talking about warez downloading.

Rofl! I'm not supporting any warez, I have a legal OSX disk. But then nor am I going to condemn anyone who uses it. Use a pirated windows, osx, software whatever, it's your problem.

I generally pay for the software I use so can't hold me responsible

[markwolfe Veteran]

Rofl! I'm not supporting any warez, I have a legal OSX disk. But then nor am I going to condemn anyone who uses it. Use a pirated windows, osx, software whatever, it's your problem.

I generally pay for the software I use so can't hold me responsible

I'm not saying that you are warezing anything. However, the "winks" are an enabler for Panarchy and others. When you say "Most people would know what you're talking about, without having you explicitly state it.", you are telling him to wink about where the source of the "DVD" really is.

[Mr. Gibs]

I'm not saying that you are warezing anything. However, the "winks" are an enabler for Panarchy and others. When you say "Most people would know what you're talking about, without having you explicitly state it.", you are telling him to wink about where the source of the "DVD" really is.

Ooops =| Guess that got worded totally wrong LOL

Bah can't edit my post now =(

[mrt2]

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.

She CLAIMS she's an Apple employee? I sense strong unwarranted disbelief in this one...

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

Good point...

[Eric Veteran]

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.

Good thing it wasn't the Mac users' decision to make, then, huh? ;)

[Cara Veteran]

She CLAIMS she's an Apple employee? I sense strong unwarranted disbelief in this one...

Bah, I don't mind. ;) I'm here to help the community, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. :)

At the end of the day I'd like to just think that all Apple users, myself included, are simply here to be part of the community, if someone doesn't believe me it isn't going to stop my helping people or change the way I view anything. What is the old saying, "Stick and stones may break my bones, but whips and chain........" wait a minute, wrong saying. ;)

In all seriousness, Apple's official standpoint on OSX86 is currently that they have no official standpoint to the best of my knowledge, I'm not a lawyer by any means. I feel they are watching to see how it plays out, how the market-share is effected by this.

As for a few something that was said about a dozen pages back about this decision making me upset, I think the staff knows exactly how I feel about this and it isn't entirely negative, I feel that it will bring a greater exposure to the community to be honest. I have addressed any concerns I may or may not have in private and have complete faith in the Neowin Staff and Community's ability to police itself to prevent the still prohibited topics regarding X86 from rearing their ugly heads. :)

Keep in mind that everyone here, myself included, is here because we are passionate about technology, no one can deny the technological 'eliteness' shown by several hackers on the X86 team, such as the EFI Emulator, and thus I think it's only fair to say that if viewed objectively, X86 is a very impressive hack in it's own right that will simply drive Apple to further advance their software and hardware in ways previously thought impossible.

I don't know about anyone else but I'd love to see better support for 3rd Party Devices as is being shown with some of the new drivers coming out of X86 Hacking, so perhaps in the long run something good can come of this to the Apple community as a whole. :)

[Eric Veteran]

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 )

What, you mean like all the people installing Vista on hardware it wasn't designed for and blaming Microsoft? :rolleyes:

[Fred Derf Veteran]

What, you mean like all the people installing Vista on hardware it wasn't designed for and blaming Microsoft? :rolleyes:

I've been error free for nearly a week.

[Eric Veteran]

I've been error free for nearly a week.

Can you clarify? :D You mean you're using OSX on a PC with no errors, or using Windows with no errors?

[Cara Veteran]

I've been error free for nearly a week.

Oh wow, flashbacks...

http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/ge...512_480x272.mov

;)

[Fred Derf Veteran]

Can you clarify? :D You mean you're using OSX on a PC with no errors, or using Windows with no errors?

(It's probably the same thing that Cara posted but I don't bother with Quicktime)

[Eric Veteran]

(It's probably the same thing that Cara posted but I don't bother with Quicktime)

I don't either, so my confusion remains... lol

[C_Guy]

Oh maaaan! Steve is gonna be maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad....

Very interesting to see how Neowin came to this decision though.

[Fred Derf Veteran]

I don't either, so my confusion remains... lol

I was talking about the "people installing Vista on hardware it wasn't designed for and blaming Microsoft" and suggesting that I have been error free (with Vista) for nearly a week.

I have not tried to install OS/X on this box.

[matt4pack]

The problem with allowing this discussion that most people don't seem to realize is that Apple subsidizes the cost of OS X through the sale of their hardware. That's why OS X cost $129 while a full version of Vista Ultimate is much more expensive. I don't know if Apple actually makes money selling OS X at $129 compared to the amount of research and development that goes into it but the purpose of OS X is not to sell as a standalone product but to sell hardware. Now if people use OSx86 and then end up buying a Mac then nothing is really lost but if these people don't end up buying a Mac then we could end up seeing a higher price, product keys, or activation in the future.

Edited May 29, 2008 by matt4pack

[Eric Veteran]

The problem with allowing this discussion that most people don't seem to realize is that Apple subsidizes the cost of OS X through the sale of their hardware. That's why OS X cost $129 while a full version of Vista Ultimate is much more expensive. I don't know if Apple actually makes money selling OS X at $129 compared to the amount of research and development that goes into it but the purpose of OS X is not to sell as a standalone product but to sell hardware. Now if people use OSx86 and then end up buying a Mac then nothing is really lost but if these people don't end up buying a Mac then we could end up seeing a higher price, product keys, or activation in the future.

That's Apple's fault, not the fault of the user. :) There are copies of OSX sitting on the shelf at Best Buy that you can just go in and purchase. They do not ask you at the register if you own a Mac, just like they don't ask you if you own a computer when you buy PC software...

I was talking about the "people installing Vista on hardware it wasn't designed for and blaming Microsoft" and suggesting that I have been error free (with Vista) for nearly a week.

I have not tried to install OS/X on this box.

Ok, that makes sense. :) I've been error-free since installing Vista x64 as well.