Huh? Apple has made it quite clear they aren't huge fans of DRM, and will only use it when forced to. The Apple engineers I've talked to have made it quite clear this move was about laptop chips and speed.
No, they don't do any checking. None at all. The reason that a beige G3 won't run is because the motherboard design is incompatible with OS X. A beige G3 uses an entirely different motherboard than any current machine.
Because they don't do checks, as I said, you can load Mac OS X on any PowerPC machine. All you need is something to emulate the proper bootstrap of a Macintosh, and you're off and running. From that point on you can give Mac OS X full access to hardware and it doesn't complain one bit. As I said, the only check used to be the Macintosh ROM, but that hasn't existed for many years and has been built into OS X for a long time.
So now, of course, your point boils down to the Mac OS X license forbidding you to install on non Apple hardware. And as I said earlier, this is the case. There is no Mac OS X license included with your machine. The restrictions are on the license for Mac OS X. And guess what? If Apple really wanted to keep you from installing Mac OS X on any PowerPC box, they're doing a damn poor job of it. Funny, don't you think? The Apple engineers I've talked to that work on Mac OS X x86 aren't even sure if they are going to make a point of securely locking down Mac OS X x86 for Intel hardware. The only thing violating the license means is that they won't support you. The police will not come and arrest you for loading OS X on a non-Apple box. The engineers I've talked to on the x86 team know this very well, and some of them don't see the point in trying to lock down OS X x86. Apple is much more willing to allow people to run Mac OS X on non Apple hardware than you think. Willing to take support calls for non Apple hardware Apple will not. Apple's not preventing you from going out, buying the full (I don't know why you keep calling it an upgrade) version, and installing it on your generic PowerPC non-Apple box. The same may be true for Intel Mac OS X.
No, OS X doesn't check for the presence of Apple hardware. It doesn't even check for an Apple ROM anymore. Thats why i can install OS X in PearPC without an Apple ROM. The only reason OS X won't boot on normal PPC hardware is because Apple uses a different bootloader (not proprietary, just different). You can easily get Mac OS X running on generic PowerPC boxes using software that does little emulation. All it does is emulate the proper bootloader. A entire company called Pegasus used to sell generic PowerPC boxes and include Mac On Linux so that a user could load Mac OS X on these boxes. The same boot strap that Apple used also made it hard to boot Windows PPC on the Mac, further re-enforcing it's not some extra ship Apple threw onto the machine. The Macintosh ROM chip is so far out of use, all copies of OS X include a software copy of it. This has been in practice since Mac OS 8.5 iirc. So no, there is no key on Apple's hardware to allow it to run Mac OS X. Again, the license to only run Mac OS X on Apple hardware comes with the software.
No, as someone who worked in ordering huge lots of Apple machines, I know you can get Apple to load whatever you want on them at the factory. Linux, Mac OS, they don't care what image they use.
When I buy a Dell, it is not tied to Windows upgrades forever and ever. It comes with one license for one version of Windows that it comes with. Just like the Mac, I can continue using Windows or I can switch to another OS. Really. What is Apple doing that is so different here? I can take my Mac and install Linux (or back in the day Windows PPC) and Apple won't give a damn. They sell hardware. They don't care what OS you use. They DO however care that every copy of OS X they sell cannot be loaded onto another vendors box because they want to sell more hardware. Apple just wants to sell hardware, thats it. They'll gladly sell you a Mac with something else on it as long as it gets more Macs out the door. Apple even maintained a Linux (mkLinux) distribution based loosely on Mac OS X for a good long while. You're thinking because Apple does not allow Mac OS X to be installed on anything else, that means when you buy a Mac you're buying into a Mac OS X upgrade cycle. That is completely wrong. The license for Mac OS X states it can only be installed on Apple branded hardware (and you can still install it on your clone too. Apple simply stopped the vendors from providing the Mac OS on their machines, and what is the point of selling past that. Its the same thing as Red Hat one day revoking Dell license to provide Linux on their machines).
No, like I said, you have things reversed. Mac OS computers don't come with any license for Mac OS X built in. They could not even give you a copy of OS X is they wanted. When you buy Mac OS X, you get a license to install only on Mac machines. You have it entirely backwards.
And yes, there are Macs that come with Linux that are blessed by Apple. They have a full license to do so granted by Apple: http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/products/apple/ Do you even use Macs?
No, read the license agreement sometime. It's the opposite. The Mac OS X license only allows you to install on computers that are Apple branded.
When I bought a brand new iMac 2 weeks ago. It did not come with Tiger. It was not licensed for Tiger. We bought the iMac. We did not pay for Tiger. We got a license ONLY for the version of Mac OS X that it came with. We even have a license sheet for the copy of Panther that came with the iMac on paper. My copy of Tiger came with a paper license. I can install that OS on any Apple branded machine no matter what OS it came with. OS 9, Linux, etc. The license is provided to me on paper when I buy the software. Can it get more specific than that?
Do you even use a Mac?
It shipped with Mac OS 8.5, but that's an entirely different OS. It's like saying Windows NT and Windows 98 are the same OS.
And if you already own Mac OS X and are covered under the upgrade program, there are upgrade discs. Currently one of my Tiger discs (the boxed one) is a full install. It can install on a computer that has no Mac OS X installation present at all. I then have two more upgrade discs. These discs require the computer already have Mac OS X.
And another user already brought up a point you fail to factor into the Mac Mini, what about all the other Apple and non Apple software the Mac Mini includes?
Oh, I forgot to mention. My copy of Tiger came in a box. For $129. It was not an upgrade. And it installed wonderfully on my machine that never shipped with OS X and was built before OS X even existed.
Um, my main machine up until a year ago never came with OS X. Ever. I bought it separately. Read my post. Never came with OS X. Never came with any rights to OS X. Ever.
You're calling the Fedora users fanboys and you're raving about how much better the Mac is? This is a Fedora thread, no one forced you to post about the Mac here.
That review you linked to is possibly the worst, mis-informed article ever. If AAC is so proprietary, why does RealPlayer use it? How come I can play it on my Palm?
I run virus checkers, adware checking...am behind a hardware router/firewall. Basically the same thing I would be running on OSX also. I don't even think about it and just get on with my day.
Virus checkers and adware checkers? I never run those on my Mac, never been infected. In fact, they don't even make adware checkers for Mac. You wouldn't be running them on the Mac because they don't exist.
This is why I'm a Mac developer. My code will run on any Macintosh system running OS X. The user doesn't have to compile for their distro, they don't have to install a bunch of libraries (hell, I can pack libraries into my application myself if needed), and they don't even need to run an installer. They just download, double click, and go.
On Linux for the best compatibility, I'd probably distribute the source, require the user to build (which can take a while on a slow machine), and then they'd have to install it. This is assuming the user didn't have to download 3 or 4 libraries. Distributing binaries would mean compiling for every single Linux distro out there. And guess what? Using any solution that involves the terminal in any way, shape or form would be a bad thing. The average user is scared by a terminal. A huge problem on Mac OS X is getting old school Mac users even comfortable doing basic operations in a terminal. Terminal = scary text place for the average user. A nice solution would be to wrap make in a nice GUI for distribution with programs, but again that requires the GUI be compiled on the machine depending on the distro... oh crap... problem not solved.
Earlier I posted on how today Microsoft had declared beta software as ready for production, and how root is apparently completely safe.
Microsoft calling themselves open source enough just takes the cake though.
Yearly? Panther (the last version of OS X) arrived in 2003. This is 2005. 10.0 was $129. 10.1 was FREE with major new functionality. 10.2 and 10.3 were $129. Lets see here... $387. Now in that time the Microsoft side has gone through Windows 2000 and Windows XP. Thats $400 in upgrades. Windows is still higher. And considering this is probably the last upgrade on the Mac side before Longhorn, it will eventually be $600 to keep your PC current at least, compared to $387 on the Mac assuming you used Mac OS X since day 1 and didn't have a computer that came with it.
As a developer, I can say GCC4 is optional, and GCC3.3 and GCC2.9 are still included and I can tell my XCode projects to flip back to them/
Re:There are other differences...
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 1
Yeah! All those processors it runs on! You have your x86 compatible processors and... oh wait...
Ummmm.. Windows only runs on x86 processors. Mac OS runs on PowerPC processors. PowerPC's are made by IBM and Freescale. They are used by Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, Apple, and IBM themselves.
If you want something to blame, don't blame variety of hardware. Apple is already using processors from two different manufacturers. Blame Apple's markup, which is much higher than the industry norm.
FYI, I use both platforms. I built my own 3.6 ghz P4 for $700. My Powerbook running Tiger runs circles around XP on my PC, and I have the feeling it will run circles around Longhorn too. I had intended on using my PC for many tasks, but I've found Windows is not powerful enough to do anything besides games, and on Windows they charge you an arm and a leg for stuff Apple gives away for free.
Longhorn won't be as feature rich as Tiger. Not until it has a UNIX command line, free developer tools, and a rich programming environment like Cocoa (which is still better than.Net).
The dancer shown is a Mon Calamari. They were very important in Return of the Jedi. The giant pod looking ships in the Rebel fleet were Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, and the attack was led by Admiral Ackbar, a Mon Calamari. You can see him in Return of the Jedi. Admiral Ackbar also made a cameo in the X-Wing game. He's the guy who orders "Launch the X-Wing fighters!" (I loved the game, what can I say).
So, Lucas isn't pulling this out of his ass. It is consistent with Episode 6. Whether or not having a Mon Calamari dance is a good idea, thats a different story.
Re:reluctance of corporate America
on
Hacking Mac OS X
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Thats a horrible idea. You want them to ditch great next generation technology just to fit in? Apple is all about next generation technology like Quartz, and how would dropping Quartz help them fit in? Every platform has it's own programming interfaces. Linux does, Windows does, Apple does. Are you suggesting that Linux drop its own API's and have everyone standardly use WINE because thats what everyone else uses? Cause Cocoa is so easy, if I had to code using other API's, I would leave the Mac platform.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? Apple has made it quite clear they aren't huge fans of DRM, and will only use it when forced to. The Apple engineers I've talked to have made it quite clear this move was about laptop chips and speed.
No, they don't do any checking. None at all. The reason that a beige G3 won't run is because the motherboard design is incompatible with OS X. A beige G3 uses an entirely different motherboard than any current machine. Because they don't do checks, as I said, you can load Mac OS X on any PowerPC machine. All you need is something to emulate the proper bootstrap of a Macintosh, and you're off and running. From that point on you can give Mac OS X full access to hardware and it doesn't complain one bit. As I said, the only check used to be the Macintosh ROM, but that hasn't existed for many years and has been built into OS X for a long time. So now, of course, your point boils down to the Mac OS X license forbidding you to install on non Apple hardware. And as I said earlier, this is the case. There is no Mac OS X license included with your machine. The restrictions are on the license for Mac OS X. And guess what? If Apple really wanted to keep you from installing Mac OS X on any PowerPC box, they're doing a damn poor job of it. Funny, don't you think? The Apple engineers I've talked to that work on Mac OS X x86 aren't even sure if they are going to make a point of securely locking down Mac OS X x86 for Intel hardware. The only thing violating the license means is that they won't support you. The police will not come and arrest you for loading OS X on a non-Apple box. The engineers I've talked to on the x86 team know this very well, and some of them don't see the point in trying to lock down OS X x86. Apple is much more willing to allow people to run Mac OS X on non Apple hardware than you think. Willing to take support calls for non Apple hardware Apple will not. Apple's not preventing you from going out, buying the full (I don't know why you keep calling it an upgrade) version, and installing it on your generic PowerPC non-Apple box. The same may be true for Intel Mac OS X.
No, OS X doesn't check for the presence of Apple hardware. It doesn't even check for an Apple ROM anymore. Thats why i can install OS X in PearPC without an Apple ROM. The only reason OS X won't boot on normal PPC hardware is because Apple uses a different bootloader (not proprietary, just different). You can easily get Mac OS X running on generic PowerPC boxes using software that does little emulation. All it does is emulate the proper bootloader. A entire company called Pegasus used to sell generic PowerPC boxes and include Mac On Linux so that a user could load Mac OS X on these boxes. The same boot strap that Apple used also made it hard to boot Windows PPC on the Mac, further re-enforcing it's not some extra ship Apple threw onto the machine. The Macintosh ROM chip is so far out of use, all copies of OS X include a software copy of it. This has been in practice since Mac OS 8.5 iirc. So no, there is no key on Apple's hardware to allow it to run Mac OS X. Again, the license to only run Mac OS X on Apple hardware comes with the software.
No, as someone who worked in ordering huge lots of Apple machines, I know you can get Apple to load whatever you want on them at the factory. Linux, Mac OS, they don't care what image they use. When I buy a Dell, it is not tied to Windows upgrades forever and ever. It comes with one license for one version of Windows that it comes with. Just like the Mac, I can continue using Windows or I can switch to another OS. Really. What is Apple doing that is so different here? I can take my Mac and install Linux (or back in the day Windows PPC) and Apple won't give a damn. They sell hardware. They don't care what OS you use. They DO however care that every copy of OS X they sell cannot be loaded onto another vendors box because they want to sell more hardware. Apple just wants to sell hardware, thats it. They'll gladly sell you a Mac with something else on it as long as it gets more Macs out the door. Apple even maintained a Linux (mkLinux) distribution based loosely on Mac OS X for a good long while. You're thinking because Apple does not allow Mac OS X to be installed on anything else, that means when you buy a Mac you're buying into a Mac OS X upgrade cycle. That is completely wrong. The license for Mac OS X states it can only be installed on Apple branded hardware (and you can still install it on your clone too. Apple simply stopped the vendors from providing the Mac OS on their machines, and what is the point of selling past that. Its the same thing as Red Hat one day revoking Dell license to provide Linux on their machines).
No, like I said, you have things reversed. Mac OS computers don't come with any license for Mac OS X built in. They could not even give you a copy of OS X is they wanted. When you buy Mac OS X, you get a license to install only on Mac machines. You have it entirely backwards. And yes, there are Macs that come with Linux that are blessed by Apple. They have a full license to do so granted by Apple: http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/products/apple/ Do you even use Macs?
No, read the license agreement sometime. It's the opposite. The Mac OS X license only allows you to install on computers that are Apple branded. When I bought a brand new iMac 2 weeks ago. It did not come with Tiger. It was not licensed for Tiger. We bought the iMac. We did not pay for Tiger. We got a license ONLY for the version of Mac OS X that it came with. We even have a license sheet for the copy of Panther that came with the iMac on paper. My copy of Tiger came with a paper license. I can install that OS on any Apple branded machine no matter what OS it came with. OS 9, Linux, etc. The license is provided to me on paper when I buy the software. Can it get more specific than that? Do you even use a Mac?
It shipped with Mac OS 8.5, but that's an entirely different OS. It's like saying Windows NT and Windows 98 are the same OS. And if you already own Mac OS X and are covered under the upgrade program, there are upgrade discs. Currently one of my Tiger discs (the boxed one) is a full install. It can install on a computer that has no Mac OS X installation present at all. I then have two more upgrade discs. These discs require the computer already have Mac OS X. And another user already brought up a point you fail to factor into the Mac Mini, what about all the other Apple and non Apple software the Mac Mini includes?
Oh, I forgot to mention. My copy of Tiger came in a box. For $129. It was not an upgrade. And it installed wonderfully on my machine that never shipped with OS X and was built before OS X even existed.
Um, my main machine up until a year ago never came with OS X. Ever. I bought it separately. Read my post. Never came with OS X. Never came with any rights to OS X. Ever.
You're calling the Fedora users fanboys and you're raving about how much better the Mac is? This is a Fedora thread, no one forced you to post about the Mac here.
Kettle... meet Pot..
That review you linked to is possibly the worst, mis-informed article ever. If AAC is so proprietary, why does RealPlayer use it? How come I can play it on my Palm?
I run virus checkers, adware checking...am behind a hardware router/firewall. Basically the same thing I would be running on OSX also. I don't even think about it and just get on with my day. Virus checkers and adware checkers? I never run those on my Mac, never been infected. In fact, they don't even make adware checkers for Mac. You wouldn't be running them on the Mac because they don't exist.
This story is worse than the ending of Citizen Kane, when "Rosebud" turned out to be his sled.
Well thanks for ruining it for me!
How exactly do you know it doesn't play DVD's?
I had a very pro-Windows friend who visited these labs once.
I believe his words were "They had one of those gay Macs there so they could see why people still bought them."
Yep. Some nice spin on that one.
And by later this year you mean 5 days from now on April 29th?
This is why I'm a Mac developer. My code will run on any Macintosh system running OS X. The user doesn't have to compile for their distro, they don't have to install a bunch of libraries (hell, I can pack libraries into my application myself if needed), and they don't even need to run an installer. They just download, double click, and go. On Linux for the best compatibility, I'd probably distribute the source, require the user to build (which can take a while on a slow machine), and then they'd have to install it. This is assuming the user didn't have to download 3 or 4 libraries. Distributing binaries would mean compiling for every single Linux distro out there. And guess what? Using any solution that involves the terminal in any way, shape or form would be a bad thing. The average user is scared by a terminal. A huge problem on Mac OS X is getting old school Mac users even comfortable doing basic operations in a terminal. Terminal = scary text place for the average user. A nice solution would be to wrap make in a nice GUI for distribution with programs, but again that requires the GUI be compiled on the machine depending on the distro... oh crap... problem not solved.
Earlier I posted on how today Microsoft had declared beta software as ready for production, and how root is apparently completely safe. Microsoft calling themselves open source enough just takes the cake though.
First root is completely safe, and now beta software is fine for production environments?
Yearly? Panther (the last version of OS X) arrived in 2003. This is 2005. 10.0 was $129. 10.1 was FREE with major new functionality. 10.2 and 10.3 were $129. Lets see here... $387. Now in that time the Microsoft side has gone through Windows 2000 and Windows XP. Thats $400 in upgrades. Windows is still higher. And considering this is probably the last upgrade on the Mac side before Longhorn, it will eventually be $600 to keep your PC current at least, compared to $387 on the Mac assuming you used Mac OS X since day 1 and didn't have a computer that came with it.
As a developer, I can say GCC4 is optional, and GCC3.3 and GCC2.9 are still included and I can tell my XCode projects to flip back to them/
Yeah! All those processors it runs on! You have your x86 compatible processors and... oh wait...
.Net).
Ummmm.. Windows only runs on x86 processors. Mac OS runs on PowerPC processors. PowerPC's are made by IBM and Freescale. They are used by Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, Apple, and IBM themselves.
If you want something to blame, don't blame variety of hardware. Apple is already using processors from two different manufacturers. Blame Apple's markup, which is much higher than the industry norm.
FYI, I use both platforms. I built my own 3.6 ghz P4 for $700. My Powerbook running Tiger runs circles around XP on my PC, and I have the feeling it will run circles around Longhorn too. I had intended on using my PC for many tasks, but I've found Windows is not powerful enough to do anything besides games, and on Windows they charge you an arm and a leg for stuff Apple gives away for free.
Longhorn won't be as feature rich as Tiger. Not until it has a UNIX command line, free developer tools, and a rich programming environment like Cocoa (which is still better than
The Playstation 3 just has a cell, no PowerPC970.
I hate to show my Star Wars geek side but...
The dancer shown is a Mon Calamari. They were very important in Return of the Jedi. The giant pod looking ships in the Rebel fleet were Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, and the attack was led by Admiral Ackbar, a Mon Calamari. You can see him in Return of the Jedi. Admiral Ackbar also made a cameo in the X-Wing game. He's the guy who orders "Launch the X-Wing fighters!" (I loved the game, what can I say).
So, Lucas isn't pulling this out of his ass. It is consistent with Episode 6. Whether or not having a Mon Calamari dance is a good idea, thats a different story.
Thats a horrible idea. You want them to ditch great next generation technology just to fit in? Apple is all about next generation technology like Quartz, and how would dropping Quartz help them fit in? Every platform has it's own programming interfaces. Linux does, Windows does, Apple does. Are you suggesting that Linux drop its own API's and have everyone standardly use WINE because thats what everyone else uses? Cause Cocoa is so easy, if I had to code using other API's, I would leave the Mac platform.