7 ms·
If you want non-Apple hardware, go buy it. There's nothing stopping you (or anyone else) from doing so. I think Apple fills an obviously valuable niche (several
by bronxbomber92 14y ago
If you want non-Apple hardware, go buy it. There's nothing stopping you (or anyone else) from doing so. I think Apple fills an obviously valuable niche (several niches, really) and I don't see any incentive for them to open up like you suggest. A lot of us do like to pay for design, reliability, and the end-to-end experience, and I'm glad there is a company like Apple to provide for customers like myself.
- bane 14y ago"If you want non-Apple hardware, go buy it. There's nothing stopping you (or anyone else) from doing so. " Unless I want to use non-Apple hardware with Apple software.
- bombtrack 14y agoI just built a fairly powerful desktop hackintosh and I'm running OSX 10.7.3. The little bit of research that went into ensuring all the parts were compatible was well worth the cash savings.
- rurounijones 14y agoJust to make a slight change: "I just build a fairly powerful desktop hackintosh and I'm running OSX 10.7.3 illegally" Now you might not care about the licensing restrictions on Mac operating systems (I don't) but saying "Oh you can just do this" when it is technically* breaking the law is not an alternative for many people. * Rather up in the air at the moment to be sure, but err on the side of caution
- bombtrack 14y agoYou are correct and that is unfortunate. For what it's worth, I purchased a copy of Lion.
- rurounijones 14y agoSorry, I did not mean to imply that the copy was not paid for; just talking about the licensing restrictions.
- jiggy2011 14y agoYour not breaking "the law" as nobody can come and arrest you for running OSX on your PC. The worst that could happen is that Apple would try to sue you, but have there been any successful cases of this? End user being sued that is , not companies that were selling PCs with OSX on.
- rurounijones 14y agoYou're breaking "the law" in that you are (in the US at least) violating the DMCA (Possibly, like I said, grey area). Having said that, I am not interested in arguing pedantic semantics about about what constitutes "the law" and what "breaking" it entails.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jiggy2011 14y agoWould it be a DMCA violation? I'm not really sure of the specifics here. You wouldn't be breaking copyright , since you're not making a copy (assuming you bought a legit copy of the OS). You also aren't circumventing any of the copy protection afaik since OSX doesn't really have any.
- rurounijones 14y agohttp://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9121798/Apple_adds_DMCA_charge_to_lawsuit_against_Psystar http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9121798/Apple_adds_DM... Basically Apple says there is code in there to lock their OS to their hardware, it doesn't have to be particularly good, as long as it is there and has to be circumvented for a hackintosh (you cannot just pop a DVD in and install, unless things have changed since I last had a look). The Apple statement is in that article if you want their legal definition.
- itsboring 14y agoWhether something is a federal crime (you know, with warrants and handcuffs and all that) or not hardly seems pedantic. You're the one making the assertion here, so do you have any legal sources to cite or are you sticking with the "pedantic semantics" argument when someone challenges your point?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]