[OSx86] I Hope Apple stops these OSX86 installs


Recommended Posts

If people want to install OsX on their hardware I would let them do it. I dont see one reason for Apple to "stop" or "forbid" people to install their OS on other hardware. Will it work out of the box as on Mac hardware? Most likely not, but some people do it as a challenge, a side project. I've install multiple OS's over different hardware and I dont see a reason not to do it with Apple's OS, if that is what I want to do.

And If I make it work good for me.

These kind of requests from people are just so irritating and obnoxious. Let people do what they want to do, after all they've paid for the OS. As long as I am concerned they can microwave their disk if they want, and it wont hurt my feelings.

Then simply move into the Windows style online activation - since every Mac has a distinct serial number making a database should be a trivial task. then the little pirates could no longer hide behind the "EULA" as they would be forced to reverse engineer and patch the activation system.

I find it humorous how people come and tell me "Yeah I run hackintosh i bought leopard yayayaya" only to see them brag on another thread how they warezed it from Mininova or Piratebay. Yeah I bet you guys all bought it. I believe that, completely. I bet you also have 5 macbook pros and a few mac pros at your desk, you're just running hackintosh "for fun".

Seriously you want WGA style functionality in OS/X?

I suggest a much more drastic measure - take the TPM chip that is being used in every Mac into good use - when a pirated copy is detected, format all the drives.

**** the pirates.

Bad, bad idea.

The legality of EULA's is questionable, especially outside the United States. Formatting someone's disks, however, is much more universally frowned-upon (can be classified as anything from vandalism on up to malicious unauthorized intrusion, which carries up to a life sentence in the US) and could hurt Apple badly if it destroyed the wrong kind of data or even just the wrong person's data.

personally i dont mind activation in windows ( when it actually is able to contact the servers/works)

and i think the Psudo-Activation is already in OSX through the register function when first installing OSX

Seriously you want WGA style functionality in OS/X?
as far as its legalese, i dont think any EULA has ever held up in court

because they suck, everybody knows nobody reads them, and prosecuting your potential customers it's something companies usually dont do. except for the music industry, but we all know how deep that ship will sink :D

If it helps to stop these freeloaders? Bring it on.

I have no issues with WGA (and never have I), but I thought the number of people complaining about this in the Windows world would dissuade the Apple crowd....

true, but making OSX support the vast array ( i wont deny it ) of hardware that windows supports, it will ( highly probable ) lead the the same issues of windows as far as stability, unless apple makes all the drivers themselves instead of the windows route of hardware vendors making the drivers. ( i think apple makes the drivers for the hardware in their machines, not fully shure )

I don't think Apple sue even companies like Psystar because they are curious as to what could happen with OSX86. It could be a viral revolution against Windows. You never know.

As I mentioned in our announcement, Apple does not even remove discussions from their own servers: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1282871

i just realized i spelled the thread title wrong :(

I'll fix that.

As I mentioned in our announcement, Apple does not even remove discussions from their own servers: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1282871

You forgot to notice that: This topic is locked - replies are not allowed.

It was locked even if it wasn't deleted.

they barely go in there as it is

As I mentioned in our announcement, Apple does not even remove discussions from their own servers: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1282871

I'll fix that.

I don't think Apple sue even companies like Psystar because they are curious as to what could happen with OSX86. It could be a viral revolution against Windows. You never know.

They really don't have a legal leg to stand on to sue Psystar and hope to win. The best they can do is keep suing until they run out of cash.

Wait until people start putting the EFI code in firmware so that Apple can't tell the difference between an OSX86 and Mac. Now that will be entertaining.

Also, on a side note, could the people that "know everyone is pirating OSX" please use their amazing psychic powers and email me next week's lottery numbers? I'll buy a mac with the winnings.

If it helps to stop these freeloaders? Bring it on.

Except it won't. WGA has been cracked six ways 'til Sunday and it doesn't stop anyone anymore.

I have my G5 and OS X runs beautifully on it, but I don't have a problem with someone going into an Apple store, buying a retail copy of Leopard off the shelf, and running it on whatever hardware they want. EULAs never meant anything to me personally and as far as I'm concerned, so long as the software has been paid for and the hardware has been paid for, if someone can get them working together then more power to 'em. Apple's been paid for the software, the hardware manufacturer's been paid for the hardware, and making them work together is the same kind of feat that made geeks legends in the '80s - a hack, by the original definition.

Now, I completely agree that Apple should not be forced to provide service for unofficial/Hackintosh installs if they don't want to. I also agree that the negative reviews from people who run OSX86 should be ignored or treated with lesser regard than those reviews given by people running Apple hardware. However, Apple (or any other company for that matter) has no business telling people how to use the product they paid for once they pay for it. Call it a "license," call it whatever you want, I don't care. I bought the product, it's now mine, gityergoddamnhandsoff.

its 4 8 15 16 23 42

buy me a MacPro to go with my Macbook Pro please :)

Also, on a side note, could the people that "know everyone is pirating OSX" please use their amazing psychic powers and email me next week's lottery numbers? I'll buy a mac with the winnings.

I hope this thread dies...

You should not care what people do in their homes specifically something as insignificant as a software install

your lives are jokes if you think this hard about something so simple

boohoo grow up

Edited by 1Way Jonny
its 4 8 15 16 23 42

buy me a MacPro to go with my Macbook Pro please :)

No problemo. I'll use the rest of the money to buy my local Mr. Cluck's Chicken Shack franchise.

If people want to install OsX on their hardware I would let them do it. I dont see one reason for Apple to "stop" or "forbid" people to install their OS on other hardware. Will it work out of the box as on Mac hardware? Most likely not, but some people do it as a challenge, a side project. I've install multiple OS's over different hardware and I dont see a reason not to do it with Apple's OS, if that is what I want to do.

And If I make it work good for me.

These kind of requests from people are just so irritating and obnoxious. Let people do what they want to do, after all they've paid for the OS. As long as I am concerned they can microwave their disk if they want, and it wont hurt my feelings.

+1

Seriously who gives a flying f**k what people do with the software and hardware they purchase? How the HELL will it effect anyone other than themselves. Seriously grow brains people and stop getting worked up over this, who cares? If you don't like it, don't read the threads, SIMPLE!

Nothing's going to be 100% compatible with OSX86 so its a waste of time.

The only reason I see apple allowing such things to happen is maybe because they want people to look at the OS, try it out, see it doesnt work with their windows laptop and then buy a mac... but it could also make "other people" say osx sucks... which is just stupid, because you're hacking it to work on a computer which isnt a mac

I suggest a much more drastic measure - take the TPM chip that is being used in every Mac into good use - when a pirated copy is detected, format all the drives.

**** the pirates.

Give the fact the the Mac Pro's and new Macbook Pro's doe not even have a TPM chip that would not do much good. The new rips are based off of the Mac Pro DVD. Even at that a lot of new motherboard have the same TPM chip on board. Hell my Hackintosh works better that my real IMac.

It should be illegal for Apple to be able to sell a product then make somebody agree to a contract that does not let them use the product before they can use the product...

I don't think people are that stupid, though. Installing OSX on non-Apple hardware is clearly a hack and is never going to work perfectly. If anything it is doing Apple a favour because people can see the potential of the OS but it doesn't work properly, so they are more likely to open their wallet for Apple hardware (which is where they really make their money).

I personally think Apple know this which is why they won't make a huge effort to stop it. Same reason they recently took the activation crap out of their expensive software Logic Pro.

I suggest a much more drastic measure - take the TPM chip that is being used in every Mac into good use - when a pirated copy is detected, format all the drives.

**** the pirates.

For a start, nobody is talking about pirates so your last sentence is unnecessary. If they put such a capability in the software there would be an uproar. Does anybody remember when cracked copies of Stardock's Windowblinds suddenly stopped working one day (rendering the whole machine inoperable for some people)? There was an uproar, and not just from the people with cracked copies.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Hello, Were you using a product or service from one of the companies affected by the Klue data breach?  See https://klue.com/blog/an-update-on-recent-klue-security-incident for the company's public statement.  That blog post does not list affected customer. From looking around at reports, I created this list: Gong HackerOne Huntress Insurity Jamf LastPass OneTrust Recorded Future ReliaQuest Salesforce Snyk Sprout Social Tanium It is likely there are other companies affected as well. Regards, Aryeh Goretsky  
    • SpaceX reportedly plans a Starlink mobile service for U.S. consumers by Karthik Mudaliar SpaceX reportedly wants to sell mobile phone plans directly to consumers in the United States as part of a wider expansion of Starlink. According to a report from the Financial Times, SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell discussed the plan with investors during the company’s recent IPO roadshow. The company is also said to be considering building a terrestrial mobile network to complement Starlink’s satellite coverage. The plan is quite different from how Starlink currently operates in the U.S. mobile market. SpaceX already provides satellite connectivity for T-Mobile’s T-Satellite service, but T-Mobile remains responsible for the subscription, billing, and customer support. A Starlink-branded mobile service would give SpaceX control of the customer relationship instead. It could also turn the company from a partner of traditional mobile operators into a direct competitor. T-Mobile also began testing its Starlink-powered satellite service in early 2025. The beta was initially limited to text messaging and was also available to some AT&T and Verizon customers. The service has since expanded to support limited data access through selected apps, including WhatsApp, Google Maps, AccuWeather, and AllTrails. It is designed to provide a connection in areas where normal cell towers are unavailable, rather than replace a conventional mobile network. However, if SpaceX actually has a plan to serve nationwide, it needs to do more than just satellite networks and actually support on-ground operations. It can also partner up with existing carriers and become a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO). With that said, SpaceX has already spent heavily to support its mobile ambitions. Just last year, the company agreed to acquire wireless spectrum licences from EchoStar in deals worth a combined $19.6 billion. EchoStar's spectrum includes AWS-4, H-Block, and AWS-3 frequencies that could be used for both satellite and terrestrial communications. According to a SpaceX securities filing, the Federal Communications Commission approved the transaction in May 2026, although it is not expected to close until late 2027. There's no official statement by SpaceX for now. Pricing, availability, and other details remain unknown. Source: Financial Times
    • We had no idea as kids how much time and energy it took to be an adult 😅
    • The Trump administration doesn't want you to use OpenAI's GPT-5.6 without its approval by David Uzondu Image via @realDonalTrump (X) As OpenAI prepares the release of its next model, GPT 5.6, the White House has instructed the company to limit the distribution of the software to a small group of government-approved partners instead of the general public, as it has done with previous releases. According to The Information, OpenAI Chief Executive Officer Sam Altman sent an internal memo to staff on Thursday explaining that the federal government will approve access "customer by customer" during an initial preview phase. Altman noted in the communication that this restrictive rollout is "not [their] long-term model" for software deployment, and the company plans to work toward a "more sustainable" distribution method later. CNN said that both OpenAI and the Trump administration view the capabilities of GPT 5.6 on the same level as Anthropic's Mythos and that government officials intend to "collaborate with frontier AI labs to develop shared approaches for addressing the challenges of scaling this technology." The latest restriction comes just weeks after the US Commerce Department decided to restrict Fable, a version of Mythos with extra safety "guardrails" to prevent users from exploiting software vulnerabilities. Not long after the release, though, researchers at Amazon found a way to bypass these restrictions, prompting an aggressive response from federal authorities. The government ordered Anthropic to cut off access for non-US citizens located outside the US, non-US citizens living inside the US, and incredibly, even Anthropic's own foreign-born employees. Anthropic now appears to be building a workaround to resolve this compliance block with an update to its Privacy Policy that introduces a category called "Verification Data" to handle KYC and Digital IDs. This setup could mandate digital identity checks to filter users by nationality, requiring a government-issued ID and facial biometric data. Who knows? Maybe in the future, you would have to scan your US Passport or State ID to prove your citizenship before you are allowed to chat with Fable 5 (or any other model).
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      xvvxcvv earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      xvvxcvv earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Enthusiast
      Xonos went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      400
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      127
    4. 4
      neufuse
      69
    5. 5
      Xenon
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!