I usually take a fairly libertarian view of these things, but I can't feel much sympathy a guy dumb enough to hand what he should know is essentially a box-o-child-porn to a third party.
Just like you wouldn't take a truck full of contraband for service at Midas, maybe the ability to work on your own computer should be a prerequisite for this hobby.
Maybe it's too much to ask child pornographers to smarten up, though...
Agreed. I like PsyStar in principle, and it's appealing to my sensibilities, but it seems like they didn't really do much about the diciest part of the Hackintosh proposition, which is working with a completely unsupported OS.
I refuse to worry about every software update potentially breaking my machines, compatibility issues, and so forth, which is why I'm writing this from an ancient Quicksilver G4 rather than shiny new Intel hardware.
If that stuff didn't phase me, though, I'd certainly have no issue assembling working hardware on my own. It would be nice to see PsyStar or whatever vendor break the licensing open in court, but for now I'm not sure I understand why they're necessary.
One important point resonates with me too, I'm afraid.
I love Linux, and FOSS, in principle. As a sysadmin, I've introduced ubuntu into the server rooms at the last three Windows shops I've worked in. I've subscribed to the newsletter and tasted the Kool-Aid.
However, I've been trying to switch to Ubuntu for desktop use since Breezy and always end up back at my Macs. I'm a (very) amateur photographer and while I don't think my needs are that specific or unusual, several pieces of proprietary software are quite important to me.
In my case it's Adobe CS, Lightroom, and some others. It'll be different apps for different people, but I'm sure I'm not alone in that situation. I need those to work seamlessly before Linux on the desktop is viable for me.
Sure, there's Wine, but it's too ugly. Sure, I could dual-boot or virtualize, but I don't want multiple desktops, and what's the point of abiding by some F/OSS principle only half the time?
Some of the problem, as I see it, is that a lot of the community prefers to bark, for example, that GIMP is a perfectly viable PS replacement when most power users understand that it clearly isn't.
I don't care how we get there - Linux binaries from the manufacturer would be fine with me - but I need my handful of apps working natively and properly before I can switch for keeps.
Slashdot Mirror
Just like you wouldn't take a truck full of contraband for service at Midas, maybe the ability to work on your own computer should be a prerequisite for this hobby.
Maybe it's too much to ask child pornographers to smarten up, though...
I refuse to worry about every software update potentially breaking my machines, compatibility issues, and so forth, which is why I'm writing this from an ancient Quicksilver G4 rather than shiny new Intel hardware.
If that stuff didn't phase me, though, I'd certainly have no issue assembling working hardware on my own. It would be nice to see PsyStar or whatever vendor break the licensing open in court, but for now I'm not sure I understand why they're necessary.
If I was going up against the RIAA I would like someone willing to stick his or her neck out for me.
I love Linux, and FOSS, in principle. As a sysadmin, I've introduced ubuntu into the server rooms at the last three Windows shops I've worked in. I've subscribed to the newsletter and tasted the Kool-Aid.
However, I've been trying to switch to Ubuntu for desktop use since Breezy and always end up back at my Macs. I'm a (very) amateur photographer and while I don't think my needs are that specific or unusual, several pieces of proprietary software are quite important to me.
In my case it's Adobe CS, Lightroom, and some others. It'll be different apps for different people, but I'm sure I'm not alone in that situation. I need those to work seamlessly before Linux on the desktop is viable for me.
Sure, there's Wine, but it's too ugly. Sure, I could dual-boot or virtualize, but I don't want multiple desktops, and what's the point of abiding by some F/OSS principle only half the time?
Some of the problem, as I see it, is that a lot of the community prefers to bark, for example, that GIMP is a perfectly viable PS replacement when most power users understand that it clearly isn't.
I don't care how we get there - Linux binaries from the manufacturer would be fine with me - but I need my handful of apps working natively and properly before I can switch for keeps.