Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Facebook
Google
YahooLatest Stories on 9 to 5 Mac
- AT&T/Rogers Nexus One now for sale
- Fake Steve Jobs (Dan Lyons) to write 'iCON' TV comedy
- Survey finds 40% of Blackberry owners want to switch to iPhone
- Apple files for more projector patents
- There is something to be said for marketing...
- PayPal iPhone app adds 'Bump to Send Money' feature
- Delays hit iPad accessories, more shortages to come?
AAPL Stock Coverage
224.295+0.455
9to5 Toys
HandHeldItems.com: Up to 90% off iPhone cases + extra 20% off coupon
Shop4tech.com: 15% off with no minimum, deals from $8 + free shipping
Charger Set for Apple iPod and iPhone for $5 + free shipping
Vizio 32" 720p Widescreen LCD HDTV for $349 + free shipping
Iomega eGo II 500GB Portable USB 2.0 Hard Drive for $64 + free shipping
Poll
Recent comments
- That video is so lame. Why
21 sec ago - Behind Us! In other words, we
2 min 39 sec ago - Behind Us! In other words, we
3 min 57 sec ago - you're an idiot.
6 min 7 sec ago - The reason he is only on
7 min ago - maybe Steve has a jailbroken
14 min 34 sec ago - Steve Jobs never answered my
19 min 15 sec ago - I emailed Steve Jobs and I
19 min 59 sec ago - That's awesome, but for $70
55 min 1 sec ago - Didn't Steve Jobs say Apple
1 hour 1 min ago
Who's online
There are currently 9 users and 6 guests online.
Online users
- rtdunham
- tracym1471
- admin
- integ
- lfine39
Comments (57)
I have to laugh at the people who state that once they buy the software that they can do with it as they please. That is like saying you can buy a care and drive however you feel.
When you purchase the software you agree to the EULA. It is not yours to do as you feel. If that was true you could make as many copies of the software as you wished
Life has rules. Some choose to follow them and others to choose to break them.
If it's not hurting anyone then what's the problem? As long as you don't try and sell it then it should be fine. I don't think your analogy of the car - you can't physically hurt anyone by hackintoshing, and you aren't hurting Apple's bottom line: if you had the money, then you would buy a fully fledged mac, as you don't, at least you're giving them the money for a copy of Leopard...
From a card carrying unibody macbook user.
it hurts Apple, instead of buying a brand new mac with leopard for $2000, you buy a pc for $800, with non of that money going to apple and then you buy leopard for $129. Instead of making $2000, apple only makes $129, there fore, IT DOES HURT APPLE!
Thank you so much for saying this. You are spot on. It pisses me off when people say that it's no big deal. It is. The EULA is clear. Same is true for DVD's, CD's and other Intellectual Property. If you're gonna do it, do it. Whatever; that sucks, but whatever. But don't act like it's your god-given right to do what you want. It ain't. You buy it, you agree o the terms. Just like living in the US: you live here, you agree to taxes and abiding by the law. Same thing, son.
It hurts me when I will have to pay $400 for the OS in the future thanks to you guys! Want Mac OS, get a MAC
(you - generalization for PRO-"Hackingtoshers")
Depends on where you live. Here in Germany, for example, there are laws protecting customers and they clearly state that an EULA that you only get to see _after_ having opened the package is void.
If the EULA were printed on the box -- and hence visible before opening it -- would be perfectly fine.
There have been several cases like that and again and again, the concerned EULAs have been ruled void.
That's always been my issue with EULAs on software. You don't get to see them until you break the shrinkwrap - once you break the shrinkwrap, you can't return it for a refund. So, here in the US, what's your recourse when you buy a piece of software and then find the EULA too restrictive?
I've read about the German company selling the hackintosh machines.
You can bet that will change, but quickly. It is only begging the question for a short time.
"When you purchase the software you agree to the EULA"
Sorry, but the EULA is worth shit in most countries.
It's contradictory to fair use policy. Just because Apple have come up with an EULA, doesn't mean that they can enforce it.
It only becomes legally enforceable once a court of law rules such. 'Til then, you can install it on whatever you want.
Note, this doesn't mean Apple have to support it. But there's nothing, *nothing* they can do to take away your right to do with that disc whatever the hell you like, subject to the legal parameters in the country you live.
I like Apple hardware, and so I don't have any hackingtoshes - I only have Macs. But in all fairness.. if I want to install OS X on a PC, I'll damn well do as I please.
...and those that break the rules are those that progress society... for better or for worse. The very same rule breakers you are trashing right now are the same people that pushed the record industry in the direction of digital distribution. It all started with napster, which morphed into itunes, which morphed into amazonmp3, which morphed into drm-free itunes. Customers who broke the rules created the amazing music environment for consumers today. Without them, the world would still be buying fucking cds.
Back to the point: I happen to feel that this rule should be broken; hence, I am breaking it. If more people join me, and it sure looks like they are, Apple may change its attitude towards us hackintosh folks and open up their software beyond the monopolistic system it currently has.
Of course, one also has to look at the consequences. Wait a minute. There are none for single users like us. Apple won't sue me or you for EULA infringement. Apple's sister division, media giant Disney, already learned its lesson with that route.
Personally, I think to get the Mac experience you have to buy the Mac, not just the OS. As the EULA states, "this copy of Mac OS X may be run on 1 apple labeled computer." Okay, fine. Legally, it's apple's ball game to allow people to run OS X on anything but Macs. That's their prerogative. What people are missing is the difference between the occasional user that puts Leopard on a PC and Psystar. Apple isn't going to come after the individual for installing Leopard on a PC because it's not definitively illegal and it's not worth it to them. What Psystar is doing is both violating the EULA and they are making profits off of it. The reason you don't see this with Microsoft is because they only make the software. Apple makes the software to go with their design off hardware, which as shown in the past few months, kicks ass. If you want to save some $$ and buy a copy of Leopard and put it on your old junker PC, no one's stopping you but trying to sell thousands of those is not going to make Apple happy.
I've often wondered, if you just attach one of the Apple stickers you got with your iPod to some cheap Acer computer, would that make it legal?
Point well made!
Also, from the EULA:
"this copy of Mac OS X may be run on 1 apple labeled computer"
Luckily, it doesn't say how many non-apple labeled computers I can install it on, so I assume there's no limit
;-)
Apple has been lenient in testing for the upgrade requirements, but my guess is that this continued push to violate its requirements might change that.
Once it is yours does *not* give you unlimited rights. If you buy an upgrade to Adobe CS4, they require you to have an earlier product. You can't just buy the upgrade and then hack it to work -- not and be legal. Same is true for Windows and so many other packages.
What if you win in court? Well, then we all will lose. Imagine the death of upgrade pricing because you can no longer enforce requirements. If Apple (and others) cannot enforce requirements they set for their license, they will not be able to offer upgrades -- but rather only full products.
The other option: Apple has been and remains a hardware company and will continue to protect its assets. At some point, Apple will clamp down and validate that Mac OS X is running on a true Mac. The result will be pain and suffering for most of the folks that are honest, all because a small group of hackers want to make such a big stink.
I think Apple should make it more obvious that the $129 product is an upgrade and then should offer a "full" retail product for mere $1600/copy to help demonstrate the real value that is added.
Then, if Psystar wants to buy a retail copy for $1600 per machine, they can do it -- but it will remain completely unsupported by Apple and could still break.
I fully support Apple's right to protect its investment. They've spent years designing a combination of hardware and software that just works and that brand would be greatly damaged if people tried to install OS X on funky-ass hardware that was never planned for.
I think, it really does not matter. Those who knows what does it mean to have MacOS with Apple branded hardware, they will continue to buy Apple ONLY. The rest of possible options is not really interesting cause it is all junk which does not have any successes. Only some enthusiast will benefit of this. Still i am in YES camp as well. If it will be officially possible to install Mac OS X on any hardware, they whole concept will break down by creating a chaos in harmonised system...
I bought a copy of iWork 08 right before iWork 09 came out, and I went to exchange it. I figured that since I didn't buy a product, I paid for a license, then Apple should have no problem exchanging the software. But the Apple store clerk seemed to disagree, and said that I bought it, and that I would need to buy iWork 09 because it was 3 weeks later, and they have a 2 week exchange. I tried to explain that I only paid for a license, and didn't buy the product, and therefore the exchange policy on bought goods couldn't be valid. But according to the Apple store, I bought iWork 08. That would make it mine, and I can do anything I want with it.
I really wish Apple would do what it does best, which is make awesome computers and software, and stop being douche bags about the legal crap.
It may be too late, but I called 1-800-MY-APPLE when iLife 09 was announced because I had just bought a copy of iLife 08 to replace a missing disk I need to use for a reinstall. I knew that MacWorld would probably unveil a new version of iLife but I had to have iLife and I was on a deadline.
Apple support told me that I would receive a free upgrade--yeah, that was their words--since I had bought it within several weeks of the new announcement. I knew this sounded fishy and asked the rep if they were sure and they repeated that I would get a new copy.
When iLife 09 came out I went to my local Apple store and the manager thought I had 2 heads. But to the manager's credit, they exchanged the software saying that they would honor the misinformation that Apple Support had given me.
So I guess the moral of the story is hope you get an uninformed support associate and an Apple store manager who is customer centric in their decision making.
Pretty weak policy...huh?
Son, get over yourself. You bought it at a bad time, so deal with it. It ain't legal crap, it's a business. You knew that software was non-refundable once you opened the package. It says it right on the back of the receipt. It's your responsibility as a consumer to educate yourself on your rights, not Apple's.
It is your choice what machine you want to put it on, but Apple does not need to support the hardware you wish to use. However, they should not go out of their way to prevent different hardware from working. I like the current hackintosh community. Only people with the interest and knowledge will create a hackintosh. Regular people should not be making one.
No, it isn't your choice. Just because you buy it doesn't mean you own it. U wouldn't say all this if it were your company.
"Just because you buy it doesn't mean you own it."
In what country does that law apply?
In mine, it certainly doesn't.
it's wrong. because cutting corners is wrong. it always is. whether you'll suffer for it, or face real consequences... well, who really knows in the end. but just because no one sees you run that stop sign, or do those illegal drugs, doesn't mean there aren't potential consequences.
We have a 20" intel iMac, and a Titanium PowerBook. I also use a ThinkPad laptop. Would I ever really consider putting the MacOS on the the Lenovo hardware? No. Sure, I've thought of it, as of a proof of concept really. But then I've also thought of going from XP to Windows 7 Beta... but that doesn't mean I'm gonna do it.
If money's so tight, pick up a used MacBook on eBay or something. Or heck, just stick with what you have for a while. And if you NEED to buy something, there's another factor that is UNDENIABLE. Despite the premium on Apple hardware, it is solid, quality hardware that will last far beyond the normal lifespan of wintel boxes and books.
My G4/400 TiBook, circa April 2001, still chugs along beautifully for normal day-to-day activities such as web browsing & word processing. It lags a little with video-instensive tasks, but can handle skype audio calls across the globe pretty well.
And our iMac, though it looks a little thick in it's white case after a few years (compared to the svelt aluminum designs currently offered) easily handles anything we throw at it.
So is it wrong? Yes. it's wrong. Will they come bang down your door? Probably not. Could they solve the issue by programming Snow Leopard to not be compatible with non-Apple machines? Although I'm sure people would hack it down anyway to make it work, and others will blindly install it on crap hardware for shicks and giggles...I think that would be a smart move for the near future.
PS. I'd rather have an iPod Touch rather than a NetBook any day.
I think everyone here would agree that when you buy something, it is yours to use as you see fit - provided you stay within bounds of all "laws & regulations". ...And there's the catch,... The Apple OSX EULA clearly states (in no uncertain terms) that the software is "LICENSED, NOT SOLD" to you, and that you agree with the terms of the license. So if you load OSX on a "Non-Apple" computer, you are violating the terms of your license. Just like if you run over 25 little old ladies, it's likely your "license" to drive on public roads will be revoked.
"The Apple OSX EULA clearly states (in no uncertain terms)"
An EULA. How cute!
The EULA is worthless. It doesn't matter how sternly worded it is. It doesn't matter how crystal clear it is.
And as for this whole 'you only buy the license' crap, sorry, but that's just complete bollocks.
Until a judge rules such, then everything I buy is mine to use as I please, so long as I don't break a law.
EULA's are not legally binding. They're just not. They've never been proved as being legally binding. Therefore, the law of the country you live in ranks above Apple's little EULA.
sorry, i don't care what anyone says but obviously Apple's product strategy and pricing is such that hardware sales subsidize software development. Apple's much smaller user base and affordable OS pricing means that if people are buying the OS to install on a non-mac PC (which i highly doubt, i'd bet more than 90% of the people doing this are running pirated Mac OS) and deciding against buying a mac because they save money in doing so, Apple is bleeding money. I don't think there's anything wrong with a small subset of hobbyists out there doing this for fun, but when this goes mainstream apple loses. Sure, apple could readjust it's business model, but real mac users are the ones who will be paying more because of these cheap asses. if you want to run a cheap generic PC, you can either put up with windows or run free Linux. or you can fork over a few hundred more for a real mac. get over it.
You couldn't be more right.
Not to mention that using OS X is nothing if you don't use it on a Mac.
Most of the Hackintosh's being installed are on NetBooks..
from what I read or am interested anyway.
I would be happy to pay the apple tax on a real Apple Netbook but they don't or wont make one (so they say) So, until then I guess a Dell Mini 9 will give me what they won't. And stop with the iTouch... I am talking working here, not face booking or some crap.. I love my itouch, but it is not a business tool.
The Mac OS X retail disc gives a license to UPGRADE Mac OS X, NOT a clean install. It's analogous to the Vista upgrade trick (using an upgrade license to install the full thing).
So... I say no, unless you actually buy a Mac for every Hackintosh you have and don't use the Macs.
Wow, some of you people really are hypocrites. If this was Microsoft doing this you would be screaming "Anti Trust", the big bad monopoly is out to get us! But because you are fanboys, it's OK for Apple to monopolize their OS. If they are bleeding money, they need to charge the proper amount for the OS and quit subsidizing through there overpriced, (but very nice) hardware. I use both MS and Apple, PC and Apple hardware, so I'm not biased towards one or the other as far as usage. I think they both bring good things to the table. MS charges more for the OS because they don't sell machines. I WILL build a super nice quad core machine and put Apple OS on it, I'm tired of them waiting to update the MacPro... ridiculous!