Attack of the Clones! Options

[brainbone]

The best price I see for the Intel Pentium 4 670 (3.8 GHz) is $610:

I think the CPU they are using is an overclocked Celeron. see: "284KB Memory On-Chip" in the description. The Celeron has 256K L2, + 12K instruction cache + 16K data cache = 284K total.

If they can steal the OS they’re selling on it, why would they be honest about any other part of it.

[bofors]

I think the CPU they are using is an overclocked Celeron. see: "284KB Memory On-Chip" in the description. The Celeron has 256K L2, + 12K instruction cache + 16K data cache = 284K total.

Good point, I missed the cache discrepancy.

Does anyone have any ideas about which motherboard they are using? Perhaps some 915 chipset with GMA 900 (note that this is what their "Intel Extreme 3" appears to be), Realtek ALC850 audio, and overclocking features? Or is it possible to overclock Celerons with a regular Intel-like motherboard?

[kikos]

Given the nature of this site, it's somewhat hypocritical to denounce the operations of the third world cloners. The only difference between their customers and most of the people on this site is that we built our own machine and installed the OS. So if you think about it, their customers are really only paying for the service of not having to go through the hassle of installing the OS and building the machine themselves.

Also:

I doubt that many 3rd world people were buying macs over pcs due to cost issues. Therefore each of these mac clone sales are likely impacting pirated Windows sales more than anything.

[MacSpaces]

Given the nature of this site, it's somewhat hypocritical to denounce the operations of the third world cloners. The only difference between their customers and most of the people on this site is that we built our own machine and installed the OS. So if you think about it, their customers are really only paying for the service of not having to go through the hassle of installing the OS and building the machine themselves.

Also:

I doubt that many 3rd world people were buying macs over pcs due to cost issues. Therefore each of these mac clone sales are likely impacting pirated Windows sales more than anything.

amen...

is funny to see a website like this one say no to pirate stuff but supports a pirated o.s?
remember guys os x was and as far as we can see will not be released on windows hardware.

love this site but their whole view on pirate apps is amazing...
if it wasnt for a pirated version of os x this site woulndt exist

[OryHara]

Until Apple licenses the OS for resale by vendors, any clone pre-loaded with the operating system will be completely illegal.

If I buy it I will install it on what I want and sell it to who I want. Apple can't do anything about that. They may not like it, but thats just tough {censored} for them.

Personally, I say more power to the guy. Hes doing what nobody here has the balls to do, or at least admit they do it.

love this site but their whole view on pirate apps is amazing...
if it wasnt for a pirated version of os x this site woulndt exist

Ive been saying this for a while. I am a software pirate, and I support piracy. But nobody here does.

[brainbone]

love this site but their whole view on pirate apps is amazing...
if it wasnt for a pirated version of os x this site woulndt exist

First off, if someone legitimately owns a license for OSX-Intel (only way at the moment if by purchasing an Intel-Mac), depending on the laws of their country, it could be perfectly legal for them to install that OS on another machine they own - be it Apple or not.

However, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a country that would allow copying and re-distributing that OS for a fee without the permission of the copy write holder.

For those that are bound by the laws of the US; if you can't see the difference between piracy for personal use and piracy for profit, regardless of what the law says on the issue, then you probably have other issues as well -- like pushing a death penalty for jaywalking.

[sHARD>>]

amen...

is funny to see a website like this one say no to pirate stuff but supports a pirated o.s?
remember guys os x was and as far as we can see will not be released on windows hardware.

love this site but their whole view on pirate apps is amazing...
if it wasnt for a pirated version of os x this site woulndt exist

I'm sure there are many users who own a legal copy of OS X which they are using on their Intel machines. This site is far from a clearing house for illegal apps.

First off, if someone legitimately owns a license for OSX-Intel (only way at the moment if by purchasing an Intel-Mac), depending on the laws of their country, it could be perfectly legal for them to install that OS on another machine they own - be it Apple or not.

However, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a country that would allow copying and re-distributing that OS for a fee without the permission of the copy write holder.

For those that are bound by the laws of the US; if you can't see the difference between piracy for personal use and piracy for profit, regardless of what the law says on the issue, then you probably have other issues as well -- like pushing a death penalty for jaywalking.

You've got my point exactly. Sure, it's legal in many countries to resell an operating system installed like that. But to do so you still need a legal copy in the first place. An important note is that this cloner is operating in the United States, making most of these issues moot.

[Mr. Bond]

I'd like to see how long they stay in business before Apple Legal comes down on the hard and fast. Though really, it does beg the discussion on what Apple's next move will be, when it comes to clones. I'm sure they've learned a thing or two from last time, and IMO, they probably won't be to quick to jump into the clone market again.

One of my reasons for thinking this, is the recent release of Bootcamp. I mean, through Bootcamp, you can now easily run windows on your Apple machine, giving more people a reason to buy an Apple MacBook (or whatever else lies in the future). With this method, Apple is providing you the best of both worlds, but in a way they can control. I'd think with licensing OS X out to other manufacturers and consumers, they would loose a great deal of this control. Not to say that it wouldn't be uber-cool to be able to buy an HP/Dell OS X box. Remotely similar to what HP did with the iPod.

amen...

is funny to see a website like this one say no to pirate stuff but supports a pirated o.s?
remember guys os x was and as far as we can see will not be released on windows hardware.

love this site but their whole view on pirate apps is amazing...
if it wasnt for a pirated version of os x this site woulndt exist

I really do beg to differ. If you've been around since very early in the beginning, when the first murmurs of Apple switching to the x86 platform were swirling around, you'd know that the site was created for anything that had to do with Apple and x86. Sure, in the beginning all we had was the Mactel tar, and a bunch of other illegal Dev leaks, but most of us fully knew that Apple would soon be releasing their official Intel computers. Thus bringing me back to my main point...this site is for Mac OS X, running on x86 hardware, whether it be illegal, or official Apple hardware. We cater to legitimate MacBook users, just as much as those looking to install it on their hackintoshes.

That is, I don't want to deny that a large part of the "scene", if you will, is rooted in an illegal nature. It's simply that we share information on how to use OS X on your x86 hardware. Whether you decide to use that information illegally, or on your Apple hardware, is totally up to you.

[bofors]

Given the nature of this site, it's somewhat hypocritical...

The only thing I think needs to be added to the above responses to this line of comments, is that certain legal absurdities like the DMCA force this site to be hypocritical in order to survive. Please remember that Apple could easily shut down the OSx86Project whenever it feels like it and did take it off-line for a week or so in January by merely writing a letter which alleged a DMCA violation.

[jpolster2005]

the DMCA takes away some of our RIGHTS, such as backing up DVDs so that they dont get scratched, and running linux on our Xboxes right?

[bofors]

Effectively yes, but not directly. The DMCA essentially covers two activities: Producing and disseminating means to bypass copy protection schemes.

This means that if you need some software to back-up your DVD's or a mod-chip to run Linux on your Xbox they will likely violate the DMCA.

[The_Sequencer]

Well, looking back in history, mac clones has been build without licence, but with higher technological requirements - ROM implemantaion.
Today it is very easy to build a clone - a bit too easy. The point is, that Apple had 5 years of developement to take care that the OS won´t run on generic systems. Look at Amiga OS 4.0 that has a very similar hardwarebase under it as a Mac -> Logic Board, G3/G4 CPU. But Amiga has built in a special bootrom, the UBOOT chip. Sure, you can say it is something like the TCPA/TPM Chip, but this TCPM/TPM Chip can be deactivated or hacked. Without the UBOOT AOS4 won´t boot and you need a dongle to run AOS4 pre-release 1/2. This dongle should be built in at retail Amiga One systems, but you know history, the retail version isn´t out, only the developer system is out since years. AOS4 do not work on G3/4 Mac because the UBOOT and it does not work with the OpenFirmware. Question is, why OS X x86 runs without TPM Chip and EFI? Yeah, because it´s hacked. However it shouldn´t run, not hacked and not native. Why did they killed the OpenFirmware? Well, we know the answer but in some way it´s Apple´s fault too, that OS X x86 can run on generic computers. They have the technology and they didn´t built it in. Why? Have they planed redistributation of LEMs? Definitly not or?

Apple sure has seen this situation to come, they have to. OS X x86 is not the first OS from Apple, ok it was from NeXT but Apple build it after Steve Job´s come back, that can run at generic PCs. You may know Apple Rhapsody, based on OpenStep/NeXTStep OS. This thing is very old and it runs on x86 systems, it looks a bit like OS 9 but it worked different. Sometimes you can buy it at eBay, very rare, very cool.

Now Apple has opened the pandora box and the people do what they ever do in such a situation. They just do it.
However, Mac OS X 10.5 will be the challenge. This system will work differrent as 10.4 do and this could be the end of generic system running OS X. So, perhaps the problem resolve itself with 10.5. For now, the situation is just a bit out of control and this is more dangerous as it was before this clone. One clone is out, millions will come and they can´t defeat them all. This is just like it was in history of LEMs.

Well, enough writing. I don´t need a clone. I only need a MACTEL with expansion slots - Mac Pro or if they built one, a Mac Mini with PCIe + PCI Slot, Mac Makro.

[xtraa]

This is a very interesting topic, cause if we look at the future, Apple clones could be a new very strong impulse for the PC market.

They are cheap, and they copy or at least have a heavy Apple inspired design. Design is becoming more important now for office PCs, and the Apple design often has a specific formfactor (iMac).

It would have been very dissapointing, if PC design would have stopped with redneck monstertruck casemodding.

So I am looking very fortunately in the future, if Apple also becomes the design leader of the PC market now.

Every business where good looking and prestiege is important to the customer will switch to an XP-Mac now. "They have macs, we need some of these, too" Nice So imho it is just a matter of time until they also find out, why osx is so much better

And boom, cupertino, we have contact. Bye redmond

[Zappadoc]

welcome to the super SCAM world...
here one sample,just for fun:
http://www.complaints.com/directory/2004/october/4/6.htm

but you can find more on google...

[bofors]

Well, looking back in history, mac clones has been build without licence, but with higher technological requirements - ROM implemantaion.
...
Well, we know the answer but in some way it´s Apple´s fault too, that OS X x86 can run on generic computers. They have the technology and they didn´t built it in. Why? Have they planed redistributation of LEMs? Definitly not or?

I am not sure what you mean by "LEMs" (Low End Macs?) but I think you mean Mac-Clones.

To the extent you seem to be suggesting that the lack of an Apple ROM in the x86 Macs implies that Apple intends to make it easier to license OS X to say Dell and HP, I think you raise an interesting point.

However, it seems clear that Apple thought it's TPM-based security would be a little more, umm... well... secure.

[brainbone]

However, it seems clear that Apple thought it's TPM-based security would be a little more, umm... well... secure.

I think Apple is fully aware that "if man can make it, man can break it". All they needed to do was make duplication and maintenance inconvenient - and they've done that.

Even in the case of pre-built "clones", what happens when software updates are released? Is the clone maker going to supply you with updates for the life of the machine (3 years or so)?

Illegal clones hold little value. You choose: $499 for a clone with overclocked hardware and no support, or $599 for a Mac mini that works well at it's default clock and is supported? I just don't think these clones are much of a threat to Apple.

[bofors]

All they needed to do was make duplication and maintenance inconvenient - and they've done that.

Yes, but Apple already had "inconvenience" with 10.4.1 and 10.4.3. They took it a step further in 10.4.4 by encrpyting binaries and I think most clued-in people expect them to do more to secure Leopard (10.5).

[The_Sequencer]

...
However, it seems clear that Apple thought it's TPM-based security would be a little more, umm... well... secure.

Perhaps. But the TCPA stated that you can deactivate the TCPA/TPM Chip via BIOS. You are not forced to use this chip if you won´t. So, thinking that the TPM Chip will resolve all problems of illegal running systems is just a fatal error and Apple has to known this for sure.

Yes, I mean Low End Macs. But the LEMs today are better als the MAC LEM (Mac Mini is sure just a LEM). My problem is, that the Mini is not expandable and if you want a expandable Mac you have to buy a PowerMac/Mac Pro. This thing costs around 2000USD without extras, the Mni 599USD. So, there should be a middlesized computer too, priced at iMac price but expandable.

At all, old rumors said that DELL is interested in reselling computers with OS X. This was fastly denied but now it seems more possible as I ever thought.
AND another thing. Sony had stated last year that OS X could run und the PS3. This was denied too, but why the hell manufactors do say such things? Only to show how powerfull the new consoles and computers are or is there more behind all this?

Well, big companies like DELL could support a OS X installation at their systems for sure. You´ll get a cecovery disc and you have to download special update packages from the distributor site. Thats all no big deal.

Apple had all their systems protected against running on normal PPC computers such as IBM RS/6000. Now they didn´t secured X x86 very well and this is definitly a question that only Apple can explain. This perhaps show that they thinking about the big OEM market. OEM + licence market = big profit, they´ll know it, we know it. However, wil a real macian buy a OEM Mac? No! Never!

[bofors]

So, there should be a middlesized computer too, priced at iMac price but expandable.

Yes, I agree there is still a hole in the Macinstosh line. People want a consumer grade Mac with some expandability. Likewise many people complain that the PowerMac only holds a single optical drive and only two hard drives, they want those numbers doubled.

Given the economics of the chips and chipsets with Conroe and Woodcrest are different than that for G5's, it seems kind of silly to sell a machine with only one Woodcrest chip. So we may see an expandable "Mac" based on a single Conroe while the Mac Pro line is all dual Woodcrest. That way the Apple could raise prices on the Mac Pro workstation and double the number of drive ways while covering the lower the end with Conroe-based machine in a different chasis.

At all, old rumors said that DELL is interested in reselling computers with OS X. This was fastly denied but now it seems more possible as I ever thought.
AND another thing. Sony had stated last year that OS X could run und the PS3.

Dell is hurting right now. Their stock is down 25% since August and they are now lagging behind the overall growth of the PC market. Dell would kill to be able to sell Mac-clones. In an interview with Fortune magazine, Steve Jobs said on the record that three big PC manufacturers wanted to license OS X.
http://www.engadget.com/2005/02/10/jobs-sa...me-up-for-os-x/

Likewise, the PlayStation 3 certainly can run PPC OS X with little or no modification and Sony wants it badly. That would be a major feature in their battle against Microsoft's Xbox 360.

This perhaps show that they thinking about the big OEM market. OEM + licence market = big profit, they´ll know it, we know it.

Even if Steve Jobs is in some state of denial about this, economics tells me that Apple will inevitably license OS X. The question is when, but I do not think it is anytime soon.

[CFran]

"PowerPC G6 Macintosh", "Apple G6 Macintosh-Clone Computer", seriously, it sounds gay as f***. Couldn't those sunday bootlegers find anything better? Oh well after all Apple itselves couldn't find better than "MacBook Pro".

"All this leaves us with an important question: When Steve Jobs first re-joined Apple, the clones were dead. When will we see a return of the jedi?"

... dude, can't compare, it's all about piracy/bottleging/scaming, nothing to do with clones.

OT : If we were on Slashdot my post would be modded to -1 in no time lol