Slashdot Mirror
OSx86 Shutdown Rumors Explained
n.e.watson writes "The AP has run an article that addresses recent rumors on the internet about Apple Legal shutting down the OSx86 Project, with a statement from an OSx86 administrator. From the article: 'The OSx86 Project Web site stated Apple had served it with a notice on Thursday citing violations of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and the site was reviewing all of its discussion forum postings as a result. The site has always aimed to adhere to copyright laws and is working with Apple to ensure no violations exist, according to a statement by the site administrator.'"
I'm sitting here in front of a PDP-11/73 running RSX and trying to copy a 250 block file from this CDC-80 dishwasher 80MB hard drive to an RX08 8" floppy disk. It's taking freak''n forever! DEC addicts, go ahead and flame me, but why do you insist on using this ancient junk? Try something a little more modern. Like an Osborne. Or even a TRS-80. Sheesh!
There once was a dude with a Mac
Who's code he tried to attack
His grin was short-lived
When Jobs did not forgive
And gave him a boot in the sack.
...for the company that named one of it's System Beeps Sosumi (pronounced "So Sue Me") when Apple Records tried to shut them down a while back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SosumiI don't want to steal your beautiful OS, I truly don't. I am more than willing to pay for it. I've owned Macs in the past, I loved my power book and my iMac, and i'll probably eventually by another power book. But truth be told I like building my own PCs and having the extra options that goes along with that. Don't your get that? A company that has its roots in a garage, you were born out of the hacker mentalitiy. When did you get so damn anal? Please apple, please wake up. We will pay, lots of us will. But I don't want your desktop hardware.
Later,
Phil
a Sun Enterprise 450, with four processors, 4 GBytes of memory and 10 SCSI drives... This is my HOME computer and I don't see that kind of poor performance. Maybe it is time for you to try Ultrix instead of RSX-11, at least you won't have the real-time interrupts bothering you... However, I do like my TRS-80 running NEWDOS-80!
I like my instruction/data fetch cycle on 16 bit word boundaries, thank you! So you think you're fancy 64 bit address range is all that. With your Sun Enterprise this, and your CG3 megapixel sbus card that. Well, when I need to access memory out of its 32KW boundary I have to set an offset vector. And I like it that way! So my RK05 only stores 2.5MB per removable pack. And it consumes more than 1 KW. And my house lights dim every time it spins up. Well, I like it that way!
What, I'm supposed to run some pansy Macintosh 8600 with all its fancy pictures of a dekstop with flippy disks and overlapping windows, and dialog boxes, and a mouse with only one button? BAH!
Ah, its ok, they're Apple - EVERYBODY loves Apple :)
Not nearly as much as everybody hates AOL :)
Roses are red,
Violets are blue.
If you hack my code,
I'm going to kill you!
Nam et ipsa scientia potestas est - Sir Francis Bacon
Want to see _real_ Apple fanbois?
Look at the jacknuts in this thread supporting Apple's use of the DMCA. These assholes really are approving of use of the DMCA.
Back in the day, Compaq built an reverse-engineered BIOS in order to run IBM-DOS on Compaq systems. They won the legal fight, and it opened up a new era in computing.
In this day and age, the DMCA would prevent that from ever occuring, because you would never be allowed to crack the TPM. And these Apple fanbois are actually supporting them.
I'm an Apple fan. I have a powerbook, two mac minis, and I was thinking about buying a powermac G5. But I sure as hell don't support any usage of the DMCA.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
I've seen quite a few posts on this but here are few links in particular that I found to be good. I will finish up by saying that Apple cannot win this battle. The x86 market is far too large for people not to tinker.
1. OSX 10.4.4 Works on AMD and SSE2 CPUs Check out the "related posts" entries for more info.
2. After OSX86 Project recieved it's DMCA shut down notice, people are moving discussion to the OSX86 China Forums
3. For immediate questions, IRC Channel is availabe.
4. To search old posts go to the 360 Online Forums
5. 10.4.4 restore disc has already been released on bittorrent
Early versions of OS X were heralded because they showed such extraordinary potential. At last, a company showed an operating system simple enough for novices while retaining its complexity for masters. A company wedded the *nix experience with a slick GUI. The same machine could easily run MS Office, Adobe programs and a myriad of open source code. Decent developer tools came free in every box. Even if the beta and 10.0 releases of OS X were slow and crashed frequently, a lot of people looked at them and saw the future. That vision was even more radical because Macs in the 90's were so horrendous by comparison.
Prior to OS X, Apple did not have a good reputation. People legitimately predicted their death. If they were mentioned on tech sites at all, it was with appropriate derision. Although some Mac users display the kind of religious zealotry you describe, your argument is still a straw man. There is no "mystique" for most of us. In the Win95 era, Apple had a crappy operating system and so did Microsoft, so a lot of new computer buyers bought Windows systems. More people still do. But Apple now offers a compelling line up. That's why they get respect on Slashdot. The company is far from saintly, as their DMCA threats show, but they are better than Microsoft and easier to use, particularly for laptops, than Linux. OS X turned the company around. It's a good operating system. That's why people use it. That's why people saw the early versions and said "wow."
It's not coincidence that I type this from a PowerBook that originally ran 10.3.