[OSx86] I Hope Apple stops these OSX86 installs

[offroadaaron]

So now we come to the "I'm only downloading it off Piratebay / Nova because I want to make a backup".

Never heard that one before.

I dunno if you go to Uni or have a job but most of these places have extra licenses and well they can be used for whatever purpose the user sees fit (or you could use the uni's license and the copy you got retail for backing up). Sooo I'm asking a valid question except apparently people can't grasp the concept and have to go on about piracy.... I'm asking for what is legal and what is not and your throwing it back in my face?

OK can you please either read another thread, Answer my question if you know it, or don't talk about it at all if you don't know what your talking about.

STOP TROLLING THOUGH!!!

PS: I have 2 legal copies of 10.5, because I sold a macbook with 10.4 installed instead of 10.5 I so I actually apply to my theory except I don't particularly want a OSx86 system. ARE YOU HAPPY WITH THAT ANSWER TROLL?

But what IS "patching the OS"? Most of the modifications needed to run osx on a PC have to do with the thing communicating to the hardware, that is, on the driver level. I think that you can even install the 'unmodified' thing, if you install EFI on your PC (for which there are specifications available). You'd still need an already working OS X install, but I think this "bridge" installation can be done from an actual mac computer (to an external disc), and then use it from the PC in which we want to install the vanilla OS X.

So it can be done without actually "Modifying" stuff, except kernel extensions and so on, but this things are called "drivers", and if that's illegal, then we're all criminals. You are not "modifying" the OS if the OS is behaving like it should, that is, a modularized UNIX system. On that level I don't think apple holds the intellectual property, since it's all BSD.

Most of the modifications are actually just drivers so really its not doing anything different to what someone does when they install something on their system. So yeah I agree with you on this one.

Edited June 6, 2008 by offroadaaron

[Windam]

I don't think consumers should care if a piece of software is in vi0lation w/ the terms.

What mama don't know won't hurt her :cool:

[Ashiaveli]

If it wasn't for OSX86 and playing with the OS, I would not have just bought a Macbook Pro.

[Mikee99]

The more I read these the more they follow the same old tired argumentation that every pirate and warez kid repeats on PB or one of the Nova sites:

"I can't afford so it's ok for me to pirate it!"

"I'm just testing, it's not my main platform it's ok for me to pirate it!"

"It doesn't support my hardware it's ok for me to warez it!"

At least you could pretend to be men and just admit you're warezing it because you're too cheap to buy instead of coming up with your lame excuses how Apple is evil, they're trying to force feed you their "overpriced hardware" or how the law in this case twists things in your view.

I especially find the "only a handful".. Just because a small group of people does it doesn't make it acceptable.

OSX86 is not legal. I agree with you on that, however, until the day comes where:

1.) OSX86 can be used on a majority of systems easily and with excellent hardware compatibility and stability

2.) Apple's sales begin to slow down as of a result of OS X piracy

then you simply can't really say it's a big deal.

If it wasn't for OSX86 and playing with the OS, I would not have just bought a Macbook Pro.

You and me also. My next notebook will definitely be a MacBook Pro, and the compatibility problems that I encountered with OSX86 has only made me more determined to get one.

[funciona]

OSX86 is not legal.

Yes it is. Get it thru your head that it is legal.

[Arch]

Yes it is. Get it thru your head that it is legal.

Seconded. OSx86 is not inherently illegal. I can go out to my apple store, purchase a copy of OS X 10.5, place the DVD in my drive, start up my computer and install from it. In fact this is what I have done and am certain that I have in no way broken any law on the books in the United States.

I'd say the likelihood that an OSx86 install is illegally obtained (warez'd) is about the same as that of any other operating system. You can download Windows or OS X from any torrent site just as easily as anything else, but this does not innately mean that the users of those systems are breaking the law.

Edited June 8, 2008 by Arch

[Miuku.]

Seconded. OSx86 is not inherently illegal. I can go out to my apple store, purchase a copy of OS X 10.5, place the DVD in my drive, start up my computer and install from it.

Please do try it on a vanilla PC without using an emulator or a patched DVD - let me know how it goes.

ARE YOU HAPPY WITH THAT ANSWER TROLL?

I thought calling someone a troll was a violation of Neowin rules.

On that note after spending hundreds of thousands of euros in Macs, I'm entitled to be a little miffed because kiddies are pirating things we've paid for in full, in both hardware and software - all with the pretense of "just testing", not seeing the value in buying the hardware or hiding behind quasi-legal maneuvers.

Since this thread or the complaints won't change a thing - I'll take the issue forward via the "right channels" as encouraged by the Neowin admins - shame it has come to this.

[osirisX]

On that note after spending hundreds of thousands of euros in Macs, I'm entitled to be a little miffed because kiddies are pirating things we've paid for in full, in both hardware and software

No, you are not entitled to anything. Only Steve and people who work at Apple can get upset about it.

[RAID 0]

Reading some posts in this thread made me sad.

[Arch]

Please do try it on a vanilla PC without using an emulator or a patched DVD - let me know how it goes.

It goes fine, I promise. You can actually use a true Macintosh to install OS X on any hard drive that you want, such as the drive to your PC, then use Grub to boot it on your Vanilla PC. On what grounds do you consider emulation or a modified DVD to be illegal?

On that note after spending hundreds of thousands of euros in Macs, I'm entitled to be a little miffed because kiddies are pirating things we've paid for in full, in both hardware and software - all with the pretense of "just testing", not seeing the value in buying the hardware or hiding behind quasi-legal maneuvers.

Since this thread or the complaints won't change a thing - I'll take the issue forward via the "right channels" as encouraged by the Neowin admins - shame it has come to this.

I can certainly understand why you would be a little miffed at this, however I have pirated nothing and there is no proof that anyone who runs OSx86 has pirated anything. That is the point people are trying to get across. I am an avid Mac user and have purchased quite a few of their products and will continue to do so.

[Argi]

Why do people care what others do? If they have a legit copy of OSX they can do whatever they want.

[EnzoFX]

It is possible to install using a vanilla disc, it's NOT easy, but it's do-able. Also, I've had a mac for years, and have no issue with OSX86, furthermore I plan on installing it on a system in the future. Frankly I think people here are taking this too seriously. OSX86 and any kind of Mods/Hax are pretty rare, The average user knows of no such thing, let alone comprehend the procedure. Honestly, is OSX86 going to ruin Apple? Not in a million years. Has modding a console ruined a company? Never, if anything, it's made them more popular, and I whole heartedly think that Apple only has everything to gain. It may not necessarily lead to a new computer purchase, but It will benefit them in at least some way.

[nautiqueskier]

Why do people care what others do? If they have a legit copy of OSX they can do whatever they want.

Actually legally they can't... says so right in their EULA

[osirisX]

Actually legally they can't... says so right in their EULA

Actually, legally they can. EULAs aren't a law. You wont be punished in a court if found guilty of breaking a EULA. Unless you breaking it goes against any actual laws. A EULA is only an agreement in relation to Warranty. Break the EULA and you have no right to service under warranty.

It's why Apple hasn't done anything about OSx86 and Psystar. They would lose the case and then everyone and their grandmother would know about OSx86.

Edited June 8, 2008 by osirisX

[CRIKEY]

Actually legally they can't... says so right in their EULA

not having read the topic im guessing this has been posted multiple times all ready but look at https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=639781

1984 Federal Court ruling specifically makes it illegal for a company to force their users to install the OS on specific hardware

[Arch]

Actually, legally they can. EULAs aren't a law. You wont be punished in a court if found guilty of breaking a EULA. Unless you breaking it goes against any actual laws. A EULA is only an agreement in relation to Warranty. Break the EULA and you have no right to service under warranty.

I've been looking around tonight and there does seem to be president in the U.S. that the EULA is enforceable under law and for the clicking of a button to be considered entering into a binding contract, provisionally. You see, if a certain part of an EULA is considered unlawful then it can not be enforced. Read here for an example of a court invalidating a section of an EULA under current law.

This is where the case of DATA GENERAL CORP. v. DIGIDYNE CORP. (linked to here) comes into play. This case sets the precedent that tying a piece of software to a piece of hardware is not legal. And in my opinion this case holds startling similarities to the current situation, where one company was selling clones of another's hardware. Of course, I am not legal council and by reading this post you agree that I am not responsible for any actions you may take, physically or mentally, no matter their relation to what I have written. Herein you agree, by clicking reply, to unequivocally endorse my statements.

Crikey, I was beaten to it.

[Prince Charming]

Please do try it on a vanilla PC without using an emulator or a patched DVD - let me know how it goes.

I thought calling someone a troll was a violation of Neowin rules.

On that note after spending hundreds of thousands of euros in Macs, I'm entitled to be a little miffed because kiddies are pirating things we've paid for in full, in both hardware and software - all with the pretense of "just testing", not seeing the value in buying the hardware or hiding behind quasi-legal maneuvers.

Since this thread or the complaints won't change a thing - I'll take the issue forward via the "right channels" as encouraged by the Neowin admins - shame it has come to this.

You paid for your operating system, OSx86 users paid for theirs. You paid for your hardware. OSx86 users paid for theirs.

I mean, you do realise the hardware inside a Mac is...identical to PC hardware? There is no difference.

[starmatrix]

except it makes them feel special because it costs many monies more

[LTD]

You paid for your operating system, OSx86 users paid for theirs. You paid for your hardware. OSx86 users paid for theirs.

I mean, you do realise the hardware inside a Mac is...identical to PC hardware? There is no difference.

Which is why it's so easy to run OS X on generic PCs. Just pop the DVD into the drive and you're all set, updates and everything.

WTF are the rest of us Mac users thinking!! :rolleyes:

[Julius Caro]

Which is why it's so easy to run OS X on generic PCs. Just pop the DVD into the drive and you're all set, updates and everything.

WTF are the rest of us Mac users thinking!! :rolleyes:

Well, the hardware IS the same, save for the BIOS. Provide an EFI to OS X on a PC, and it will run.

[Mikee99]

1984 Federal Court ruling specifically makes it illegal for a company to force their users to install the OS on specific hardware

Interesting. I never knew that. So, if I make an OS and specific hardware, I cannot tell my consumers that you can only run my OS on my hardware? That's kind of dumb. Also, what if my hardware is specific, and the OS can really only run on my hardware? In essence, by doing that, I am forcing users to use my hardware to run the OS.

I always thought that a EULA is a legally binding contract, and by installing OSX86 on non-Apple hardware, you are breaking that legally binding EULA. However, if that is a federal law, then that EULA doesn't matter. So long as you legally purchase OS X, and don't use any software cracking utilities, then you are golden.

[ThehAWKs]

Now Tell That To The Rest Who Really Don't Understand..... :D

[The Teej]

Interesting. I never knew that. So, if I make an OS and specific hardware, I cannot tell my consumers that you can only run my OS on my hardware? That's kind of dumb. Also, what if my hardware is specific, and the OS can really only run on my hardware? In essence, by doing that, I am forcing users to use my hardware to run the OS.

I always thought that a EULA is a legally binding contract, and by installing OSX86 on non-Apple hardware, you are breaking that legally binding EULA. However, if that is a federal law, then that EULA doesn't matter. So long as you legally purchase OS X, and don't use any software cracking utilities, then you are golden.

There's a difference. It never says you have to assist the user in getting it to run on multiple systems, only that you can't force the user to keep your OS on your hardware. If they somehow get it running via an emulation layer, provided they didn't obtain your OS illegally, then there's not really much you can do about it.

Anyway, Macs are just PCs anyway (save for the BIOS, like others have said). The only reason why games don't run on a Mac is because of the Operating System, not the hardware. Throw Windows on a Mac and you'll be running the games in no time (provided the hardware spec matches the reccomendations).

[tablet_user]

People that are installing OSX on unsupported platforms are going to have alot of issues, then turn around and blame the OS

i can see alot of " OSX sux because it keeps crashing on my AMD64 w/512 DDR "

only saying this because there are already what 3 or 4 threads of people not beign able to get stuff installed properly or askign how to work the OSX86 project ( even though there are probably tutorials on the site

I use the custom installers like the AMD Software Update program that patches all the updates before installing. Im running 10.5.3 with no issues at all.

[Joe User]

Interesting. I never knew that. So, if I make an OS and specific hardware, I cannot tell my consumers that you can only run my OS on my hardware? That's kind of dumb. Also, what if my hardware is specific, and the OS can really only run on my hardware? In essence, by doing that, I am forcing users to use my hardware to run the OS.

I always thought that a EULA is a legally binding contract, and by installing OSX86 on non-Apple hardware, you are breaking that legally binding EULA. However, if that is a federal law, then that EULA doesn't matter. So long as you legally purchase OS X, and don't use any software cracking utilities, then you are golden.

The First-sale doctrine trumps the EULA. Basically, if it gets bought in a store, it's a sale and some of the license restrictions are tossed out, especially if you can just walk in and buy it without proving you have a mac.

Of course, the district courts are not all in agreement on this, so until the supreme court rules, YMMV.

As for cracking utilities, unless you're circumventing a copyright protection measure, they're legal. So, if you want to modify your purchased copy of OSX to run on your microwave oven you can. If you want to bypass something that prevents you from copying the CD, you can't.

(I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, you can look this information up as well)