the case they are using for this thing is amazingly close (but still quite different) to the case I have my fake mac pro in (see link in sig)

Guys, this sucks. None of us are making money "copying" others efforts. Many people have burnt their midnight oil to get that pc efi v8 emulator which they are boasting about. And many have contributed to get the odd soundcard, graphics string working. Now many noobs many not know about us and they would think that Psystar is the messiah. But if Apple returns with a vengeance we all will bear the brunt of it. However, like many others I do believe that God is with us, we have managed to survive and we will... no matter what. Psystar will pay for plagiarism and hence their bad karma.

I wish i can help clean your room... i can't stand it... grrr...

Steve Jobs will always be Steve Jobs and apples philosophy will remain standing for quite a while. If somebody to come up with non apple computer with leopard installed without apples permission its doomed to fail, legally that is. But no matter what, we are going to here, alive and well !!! Plus if you think how project osx86 evolved there is no way it can stop now... in fact i predict that in the near future our installs are going to be no different and not recognizable by apple at all and all updates including kernel are going to be 100% compatible...

They're using the same case on the OpenPro that I have. Crap.

Maybe I should get a new case, so people won't think that I associated with these people.

as a producer/beatmaker/dj i second your comment, ya heard me.

i HATE laptops but apple refuses to make a dual core mac pro for musicians, apparently they only care for those artists who work with video, i don't need 4 or 8 cores (i've looked for excuses to get a quad core but i still haven't found one true reason yet, just excuses). plus, i can upgrade my current pc for half the cost of a comparable equipped mac pro.

i want to know what motherboard they are usin' too. i betcha that they are usin' the cheapest parts that they can find. it will cost me over a $1000 to upgrade my pc with a intel e8400/asus p5n-t deluxe (i'm replacin' everything except for the hard drive and dvd burner, i'm even gettin' a new case even tho' my old case is still good...)... but i'm usin' top of the line parts from newegg. but since i will use it for music production i really can't afford to go cheap when it comes to parts.

^ok, so i may be off, i forgot about the fact that you get parts cheaper when you buy them in bulk/sets of 100's and 1000's...
ASUS P5N-T Deluxe

I simply cannot believe this. This reminds me of people selling warez. We are blessed with netkas, kalyway, JaS, etc and now we are faced with the extreme exploitation of this community. And to top it all off I.M. = Psystar's tech support? I don't think so. Profiteering gluttons.

I can't believe the audacity of this company--the balls they must have to mention EFI v8 as if it's something they created, and then direct their customers to InsanelyMac, like we're all sitting around to tend to their customer service! Wow. That's all I can say. Wow.

I visit this site daily, and I'm amazed that Apple has left us alone for so long. This may be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

I hope InsanelyMac's management is considering some legal action. Seriously. Beyond that, however, this is the sort of thing that "our community" needs to put an end to *before* Apple does--self policing. This is an act of betrayal to "this thing of ours," and it can not STAND!

What can we do about this? (And I'm not talking about petitions.) As a former "script kiddie", I can think of a million ways I would have marshalled the forces of Hell against these guys more than a decade ago. Do people even do DOS attacks anymore? Anyway... At this point, I think we need to show Apple that *we* can deal with bad apples in our community. That would go a long way to prove that we're not a real threat to their business. At this point, I think that's the only plan of action that can save InsanelyMac and the OSX86 movement.

I agree with Rufus, it seems to me to be a huge underestimation of peoples intelligence on all sides of the OSx 86 fence, by introducing this product to the world they have drawn unnecessary attention both good and bad to the fact that people are using Osx on non Osx hardware, as you rightly pointed out the idea behind the movement is not one of commercialism and people really do buy Macs or at least Mac products, as a result of their HOBBY interests in Osx. Hopefully this is a storm in a tea cup and that the storm quickly passes!!!!

Plucka

But can we believe that Apple never know about x86 project ? so why it never did anythings yet about that?

I think it is the time to Apple to make upgradable mac mini and other devices (hope they do so)

LoL, they are gonna get in trouble thats for sure, infact I've seen this being discussed ages ago, from a person that works at Apple, the reason they don't want to make a version for PC is because sales will drop big time, at least when it comes to computers, they generate a tremendous amount of $ from Apple Systems, considering how expensive they are, if there was an OSX version for PC, most people would be buying OSX and using it on there older pc. Anyway thats the reason it's illegal to run OSX on pc hardware. Apple is expensive period, some people argue that it's more compact, quiet, etc.. that is true, but regardless it still has its drawbacks, you can't overclock, upgrading is impossible, memory is expensive, not a gaming system, application support, expensive..

Otherwise it's great, I mean if you have the money for it then no doubt a good choice, but most users don't have that much money to spend, even the cheapest Apple Mini is much too expensive for what you get.

Anyway I'm no fanboy or anything, I plan on buying an Apple iMac for designing, mainly because it looks nice, compact, etc.. :], I was supposed to get one ages ago, but like i mentioned b4 what made me change my mind is the price, I settled for a PC spent less then $900, and i got everything you see in specs, would've been cheaper if i settled for a different case, and the nicest thing is it's faster then any Apple system out right now. lol not to mention memory is like $16 for 1GB DDR2 right now.

Just my thoughts

I agree that the reference to this site is most unfortunate. I have this terrible feeling that the only losers in all os this will be the osx86 community.

OSX spans a wide array of devices and Apple can't afford to lose control of it. This is not the NeXT/OpenStep situation or even the Data General case of so many years ago.

This isn't good...

ls

unless such kinds of society don't bloom too big,
this will retain in a win-win situration.
i doubt that Apple don't know about this project,
but somehow they just turn a blind eye on this.

but i'm sure Apple will do something to take down that site,
i am interested in the further news on this about the Apple's actions.

well, it's totally *INSANE* for a company like that to dump
all their technically supports to insanelymac ...
are they all INSANE so that they think the ppl in insanelymac are INSANE too??

lol, why don't we set up a poll to guess how long will that site can up for? X)

calm down ppl. this action will have good things and bad things for us all. but we should watch it, wait and smile ... imo this must happen earlier or later - its the beginning of the end and also of something good says my tummy (sounds {censored} - yeah, im insane lol)

only REAL asshole {censored} is NOT TO MENTION NETKAS for doin ALL this possible! they should SHAME their asses off ..

maximum respect to the scene!!!

I read this. http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/a...lone_maker.html

He also said Psystar believes Apple's prohibition against third-party installations might not hold up in court: "What if Honda said that, after you buy their car, you could only drive it on the roads they said you could?"

What kind of dumb analogy is this?

I don't care about Psystar computers. I don't care if they install Mac OS X on their computers or not. They can fight that out with Apple.

What does bother me however (and has been pointed out multiple times in this thread) is Psystar's appropriation of the hard work done by others (who were simply doing it for fun and not for monetary gain) to make the Mac OS run on non-Apple hardware in order to profit from it. What is further troubling is their repeated references to the OSX86 Project and linking to the Insanely Mac forum as a substitute for proper technical support. All of this gives the impression that the OSX86 Project and the Insanely Mac forum are in collusion with Psystar Corporation, which in fact they are not. My suggestion would be for the IM forum admins and the OSX86 Project staff to make a clear and unequivocal statement stating that neither entity has any affiliation with Psystar nor condones their business model.

For anyone who doesn't think Apple is aware of the OSX86 Project or this forum, I can assure you they are aware of it. I don't think they care that much, we are small potatoes and nobody here is doing this to make a buck. I do think they would start caring if they thought we were assisting Psystar (or any other companies that will inevitably pop up) in cannibalizing Mac sales. I own a MacBook Pro. I am a long time Mac user. I left the Mac for the PC for a couple of years and finally came back to the platform. The fact that I could convert my existing PC hardware over to the Mac OS was the deciding factor in my purchase of a MBP. I think this is true of a lot of the members on this forum. We support Apple. We like Macs. Let's face it, building a hackintosh and installing OSX86 is not exactly the most "Mac-like" experience in the world. We do it because it's fun and we can build the computers that we wished Apple would make (like a lower end version of the Mac Pro).

A couple of other things, has anyone noticed the Google ads on the IM Forum and the OSX86 wiki are featuring Psystar ads?

Also I built a system over at Newegg and just guessing at the hardware Psystar is using based off their specs, I was able to build an equivalent system for $350. About $50 less than Psystar is charging. Hmmm?


Just my two cents.

This is really shitt for osx86; Basically this people is making money from the work of others (Netkas, peolpe that developed EFI, etc), Second, this will force Apple to take stronger actions about all this 'running OSX on PC' which most probably will affect all of us directly.

FxxK THIS GUYS!

this is far from good for the scene

What's the point of that osx86 then? I thought that was "forcing" Apple somehow to license their beautiful OS to use in our PCs. If that's the case, the Psychostar (or whatever they're called) thing is a logical step. And the netkas and other hackers issue: so you're complaining about Psynuts not giving them credit. I agree to a certain extent: who are those people anyway?

Does anyone know Netkas or JaS or others, apart from their nicknames? If they're complaining about Psy*** not giving them credit, is then credit all that they're looking for? Is that a question of ego? About seeing their little nicknames written on the net over and over? I mean: Psy*** has done wrong not mentioning them. a

But I also feel that they're a bit childish about that "give me credit" stuff: they have to know that they're a lot more meaning for us than Psy***. That being said, Psy*** has BALLS. And that's also needed.

I ask again: What is the ultimate goal of osx86? If it's only about fun, you can have more healthy fun than hacking OSX. I want to think that is enabling somehow OSX on our standard computers, and a see our loved osx96 hackers as pioneers of a less dark and monopolistic era, and Psystar the grunts with balls that broke a taboo.

I think the analogy is great. However, you have the choice to agree to Apple's license or to bring back OS X to the store where you bought it. And there's the real problem for Apple, a lot of stores won't just accept it if you take your Leopard install disc back because you didn't agree with the EULA.

This will also show us if an EULA is actually binding. This has been discussed many times before, for Windows, certain kinds of adware and now the discussion starts for OS X. We'll see what happens, but I for one surely hope that Psystar can win this battle and can seel these computers.

I also noticed that Psystar renamed their cheap machine from OpenMac to Open Computer and that they introduced the Open Pro, a faster PC that will run OS X. I guess they couldn't get away with calling their machine OpenMac because Apple owns the Mac trademark.

There's one last thing I want to add... Apple's lawyers are not stupid either. If they think they can't win a case about the EULA, Apple will probably just let Psystar make their offerings without interruption. Apple can still scare some people off with their EULA that way. If they'd lose in court over their EULA, then any computer manufacturer can start delivering OS X on normal machines. I think my local computer store would like that too.
Regards,

Michael

Hi, no disrespect to you what so ever, but this is like saying that apple has restricted mac users to only surf their websites. This is clearly not the case. I personally feel that apple should not make let their OS be used in PCs, but instead come up with a middle range, more affordable mac pro. I mean the apple "feel" is not abt just the software it's about the hardware and design of their products as well. But that being said, the OSx86 project is a wonderful way to have a "trial" of what you're about to spend a buck load of money on. So this community in my honest opinion is a good thing for apple. But what this Psy* is doing is making money out of some other person's hard work.

To Harlock: I dun think that these ppl here are childish at all. It's not all abt the credits, you have to realise that if they are using these ppl's work so 1) they have to get their permission 2) they have to pay them something. Let's say you invented something and someone just stole that idea of yours and made a company out of it. How'd you feel? Wouldn't you sue their a$$ off?

These are just my personal opinions, in no way did I mean to upset anyone.

1-They intend to make money with something they didnt developed. Is not about little nicknames on a forum. If they work around apple legal, do you know how much money they would do? Dont you thing that the people that actually developed EFI diserves the right to say if they want to sale it or not and if so get paid for it? but well, is not the first time that such a thing happend; isnt it?.

2-Apple gives a shitt about a bunch of guys running osx in their pcs; I dont think they have the same opinion about a company making money out of them and even more: being the cheap alternative for the open public (not for a bunch geeks that have time enough to hack and install osx in a beige box, but for normal people that would buy the 'out of the box' thing). Im shure they are going to add more locks to osx; after this I dont thing EFI_8 will be enough for running it. And Im shure these Psy guys are going to be busted really soon.

I just hope that they don't drag the whole OSX86 community down with the mess they created in the process. Apple will definitely fight, and might just take this chance to get the validity of their EULA legalized. Imagine if Apple turn an blind eye, just imagine, someone will definitely figure out a way to sue Apple for things like OS reliability and stuffs like that on non-Apple hardware. So Apple will be acted on the issue quite aggressively, I reckon.

What Apple should do is come out with a version that installs on a PC (perhaps on intel cpu & boards only), but have it in the user agreement to NOT sell the OS with a pre-built system or a compleat system thats sold as a DIY kit.

Then that way everyone is happy. People can build there own that know how, and people that cant can buy a system from Apple.

If lets say someone wants to sell there system that they built and put it on eBay (with the OS), well they can't, because that would violate the user agreement and eBay would pull the ad. And if someone creates a site to sell pre-built or DIY kit system with the OS then it would be shut down because its in violation of the user agreement.


But in the meantime I will stick to building my own system and using Vista. If I cant build a Mac system legally there's no point.

hi guys this is iHack13

Here are the pics if you need some for the frontpage

regards iHack

Block the referrer http, atleast then they'd 404. Why give them the tech support... it'd also help distance this site from them as well.

At least they are using nice cases. I really dont think its a good idea for them the muck with apple like that - but if Apple let this go they need to at least try and keep a good standard. Maybe Apple should do a thing like intet viiv (or what ever it is) and have a whole lot of hardware which they will only support and all that.

I am right there with you Pizzaboy.I am building my hack for that reason. I dont need to spend $2500 to do the work I am doing. I just need 2 PCI slots.I have macbooks, minis and imacs. (All intel).. They do what I need. I sold my Powermac G5. But now I realize I need the PCI slots. Yet the only PCI slot option starts at $2500I think that was a major mistake. Had apple made a $1600 powermac (mac pro. whatever) I would have purchased that already instead of building my hack.There is a way. LOL. It's called "No More x86"How many PPC hacks were there before the intel switch??????COuld not have said it better myself!!!!! Thats exactly what this is....Isee thay have again amended their ad copy....Before they said they would preinstall OS X. Now they have changed their wording, yet again..... (correction) I see they are using the words free. Though they are charging $26 above the MSRP of Leopard for this FREE install

besides all, is not possible to install from the retail DVD without patching it (even with efi on your HD boot sector)-thats why they sale it preinstalled; and the GMA950 isnt working without mouse tearing (at least in all desktop mobos I know off).

<troll>
Hi, I bought a Psystar system and it doesn't work. They said I could get tech support here for free!
</troll>

Seriously though, I've not been on these boards for a while as I don't run a Hackintosh anymore, I (as a lot of members of this community I expect) liked the OS X experience so much I went and bought an Apple.

But I thought I'd pop in and add my weight to the the opinion that the gall of this company to refer their customers to this board for tech support is quite frankly, unbelieveable.

No, it's similar to saying AOL restricts their users to only surf their websites, or Apple saying to only install the OS on their machines, really, I think you're making a slight error figuring out the analogy.It's ok that you think about it that way, I happen to think that if I buy software, be it an operating system or a simple utility, that I shouldn't be restricted to run it on certain hardware only, or only on a certain OS. If EA games would say that I can't run their games on Linux, then I'd really have to think twice before buying any game they make.Yes it certainly is. I happen to own a Mac Mini and an iPod Touch. I don't think there's anything wrong with Apple's price point either, but why can't I choose whether I want my machine big and ugly instead of small and beautiful? And if you do want the beautiful, then you buy the real deal, I don't see any issues with that.Going to an Apple store is a wonderful trial of what you're about to spend your money on. OSx86 is about the ability to choose to run a great OS on hardware that's no different than the hardware your neighbours buy.Perhaps some people will use OSx86 as a trial before buying a real Mac. You can also argue that if someone doesn't use it as a trial, but just uses it and because he gets used to it decides to buy a real Mac that Apple will still profit from it. You could also argue that if he couldn't run it on his current PC he'd buy a real Mac right away. There's lot's of stuff to argue about, but I myself can say for sure that I didn't buy a Mac because I could run OSx86 on other hardware too. If that wouldn't have been possible, I might have thought about buying a Mac instead (well actually a second Mac, considering I own a Mac Mini).What WE ALL are doing is making money out of Apple's hard work. Well actually, we save money by not spending it on Apple's hardware but spending it on a cheaper computer that will also satisfy all our needs. Of course Psystar should talk to netkas and work something out, but on the other hand did netkas ever complain that Kalyway used his stuff on his DVDs? Netkas will reach a far larger public now, whether he likes it or not. If he doesn't like it, he can use legal matters to stop Psystar from using his software, unless he already gave permission in the first place without thinking this would ever happen. Then it's his mistake. Although I can feel sympathy for such a mistake, that's how the world is. Rather than worrying about it, were I netkas I'd ask Psystar to donate him money for his EFI implementation, hire him to further develop it, or hire him anyway because there is some chance Apple will try to find new ways to prevent OS X to run on regular machines. Either way, I think Psystar is not doing wrong YET. If they will start acting like crazy bitches, then to hell with them. Anyone here can figure that is Psystar will just use the OSx86 community that the OSx86 community will say to everyone using Psystar hardware that they can go ask Psystar for support and not the community.Already answered it a bit above, but will answer in short again:1) Shouldn't netkas have restricted permission instead of saying Psystar has to ask permission? Perhaps all that Psystar could've made up from netkas site is that PC_EFI is free for all to use. I must admit I haven't seen any statement from netkas yet, and I do like to know what he thinks about it. 2) You don't have to pay money to use something. Sometimes you do, sometimes you don't. There's no such rule that says that when you use something, you have to pay for it. And again, you're accusing Psystar of what everyone's doing here. How many people here DID buy Leopard because they're running it on a regular X86 machine? Of course some, but again I'm sure I didn't.I don't mean to upset anyone either, I do try to show some of you that statements made here are incorrect or sometimes maybe even hypocrite. I'm not saying that I AM right, but I do think I gave some good points to think about for everyone insisting that Psystar are thieves, unethical or whatever.Last but not least... I bought my Mac Mini for EUR 350. It was new, but an old model. It's a 1.5GHz Core Solo model with 512MB RAM, but I upgraded it to 2GB RAM. Everything works great in Leopard, it actually even feels faster than Leopard on my self-built Core 2 Duo E8400 with 4GB RAM and a Geforce 8800GTS/512 (G92). My Mac Mini thus was cheaper than what Psystar is offering (I know $ != EUR, but the EUR 350 is including tax and about every Apple product has the same pricetag in $ as in EUR, so I may assume it's cheaper than $ 399) and it works flawlessly. I know I was lucky, there were only 150 of those Mac Mini's left and I managed to get 2 of them (one for my gf too) because a friend of mine works at a local Apple premium reseller, but this also means there's still choice. Plus I got the shiny little Mac Mini, instead of the shiny big Open Computer.Regards,MichaelP.s. My new computer actually happens to use the Antec Performance One P182 as case, which is also the case that Psystar is using for their Open Pro, so I can add Psystar does have a great taste! I'm taking your word on the GMA 950 issue(s), but saying it's impossible to install from the retail DVD without patching is of course not true. If they can create a simple bootloader that loads the DVD image after loading PC_EFI than there's nothing to it anymore. And because they, like Apple, have some control over the hardware used, it shouldn't be really hard for them to create such a thing. Actually I think it would certainly be possible to create such a thing without any hardware dependence. There's a floppy boot loader called something like Smart Boot Manager which allows systems that can't do a BIOS-boot from CD to boot from CD using that floppy, so why wouldn't it be possible to create something similar for OSx86? If you also know what video card is uses you can add EFI strings for that too, and you're all set to install with a retail Leopard disc.

I don't see the big deal in not putting someone name. It is wrong, but its the minnor mistake of them. It would be better if they omitted IM too. The big deal of what they done is that they are selling a pirate computer and singing it loud, and making our little weekend-fun (i used "ihack" as a name for my hack... now it seems so cliché, lol) become a problem to Apple. And Apple wanting or not to do this will have to shup us off, unless WE do something about this.
This is exactly the point when the situation we all happened to create or to increase (Hackintoshs) comes to the point of a threat to Apple.
I'm really sad about this, since i don't have money to buy a Apple computer that fits my needs, since apple always sells very expensively middle-end hardware. I'm about to trade my pc and would love to buy a real Mac, but even if i could buy for the US price (I cant understand why thing are even more expensive here... we have to pay the equivalent to 4 THOUSAND DOLLARS if we want to buy a Macbook Air where i live, just for an example) i would not do it, since with 1 thousand dollars and newegg we can buy a very nice machine with 8GB/ram and 1TB/Hd.
Macs are a double product, a good software on a quality hardware, but apple is failing on the second part of that.
They are making a wga-like anti-piracy system for some months and maybe now they will put it down... not to talk to the judicial problems that may - and i think that will - be caused to us all on this =(

Probably 85% of the source code in MacOsx wasn't even written by Apple. It's GNU+BSD stuff with a proprietary UI on top.

Apple, IBM and others are also making money out of free labor.

You are right but the difference is that Apple, IBM, Novell etc are working within the rules of the BSD License or the GPL.

This is why Apple release the Darwin Sources - they are legally obliged to under the terms of the BSD License. And it is also worth noting that "big business" makes significant contributions in terms of actual coding - Open Source is no longer the domain of the hobbyist developer working for free - Linux Code Contributors.

Out of the top 30 contributors of code to the Linux kernel:

Red Hat 11.2 percent
Novell 8.9 percent
IBM 8.3 percent
Intel 4.1 percent

And now, back to the topic du jour - I'm finding the psystar issue to be deeply unpleasant. Hackintosh will not benefit from mainstream news attention and the attention of Apple. Psystar aren't just arse holes, they really are stupid if they thought they could carry this off.

I can't help but think that the days of OSX86 are numbered - Apple will be looking to close this down permanently. Has anyone else wondered why Intel Macs all received an EFI firmware update in the last few weeks?

I think EFI firmware update in the last few weeks is a pure coincidence. Except that, I totally agree with you. I am so worried. But at the same time, I am so enjoying this development of psystar situation. Lots of fun, lots of fun. Someone's ass is gonna be so fried. (I just hope it's not ours.) Cannot help myself.

OpenPro Computer from the same company is now supposed to be equvalent to the Mac Pro

They are quite brave (or extremely stupid). I can give them that. Excerpt from Psystar website on OpenProYou got to be sh*tting me. Which community is that?

I tend to agree. Alternately, redirect to a page condemning them for their actions. Psystar's little stint isn't going to be good in any way from the community.

-They're obviously trying to profit off the work of the community. How much money are they giving the people who actually did all the work here (Netkas, JaS, Semthex, Kalyway, to name a few although there are plenty more both past and present)? I'm gonna guess $0.00. I don't imagine it's a pleasant feeling to give to the community only to have your work taken and resold for profit by someone else.
-Apple was *presumably* content to leave the osx86 community alone. Really, Apple's got a vicious legal department, and they haven't sicked it on everyone here. Now with Psystar in the spotlight who feel the need to drag the osx86project name into their product, that just might be enough for Apple to decide that the osx86 community isn't necessarily as harmless to them as they originally thought (even though the community isn't harmful and may arguably be even helpful, the *work* done by the community is harmful in the wrong hands ie Psystar).

Really, this isn't going to be good for Apple. They're a hardware company - OS X sells their hardware. Yes, some may argue that the *more affordable* Psystar stuff might get people to at least try OSX, get hooked, and then eventually buy Apple's stuff, but in reality the typical Joe-Blow who buys Psystar's stuff is going to end up with a no-boot or KP situation the next time they run software update, then decide that Apple stuff is junk and they're never buying it again. Really, and I mean this nicely, if you're not smart enough or capable enough to put together your *own* hackintosh, you're not smart/capable enough to maintain it over time. The typical person buying the Psystar thing is just signing up for a world of future anguish.

Hopefully, Apple's legal team guts Psystar enough that anyone else thinking of pulling the same stuff ends up so afraid that they pee a little in their pants, and Apple goes on leaving the community here unnoticed. Alternately, if they're going to go for the community, it's probably technically best for the community if Psystar wins a court battle (since the precedent would mean the community's relatively more safe), although a court loss would be bad for Apple since the Psystar sales would cut into their profits, and make the OS-that-doesn't-work-quite-so-perfect-on-non-Apple-stuff look bad. *Maybe* that would drive them to make stuff more affordable and even better, but it's quite possible that less profits would simply equal less quality in their upcoming products, including the OS, which would be bad for everyone.

This isn't good for any of us. It seems most of you haven't been here long enough to remeber, but Apple HAS shut down Insanely Mac and the OSX86 Wiki before and could easily do so again. Apple will shut them down in due time; however, keep in mind that anyone running OSX on non-Apple hardware is breaking the law. You are breaking the EULA at the very least. How many can say they actually purchased a copy of OSX in the first place?

All these guys are doing is bringing more negative light to the community. Apple can't afford to simply switch to another processor as some have suggested. To which I ask what processor would they switch to anyway? There are only to big choices PPC based or X86/X64. Apple has the means to implement more security into OSX86 because it's available to them as much as anyone else. Keep in mind though that heros are in the eye of the beholder. Netkas might be your hero, but he's enemy number one to Apple and anyone running OSX86 is potential money out of their pocket. Netkas claims authorship rights. What kind of rights do you have on software who's only use is to pirate another software?

Finally it's time to learn something. Do you know what argument Apple used to shut down OSx86 project website? And do you know how this community was brought back to life again? Sorry for such noob questions. I just want to know some history.

Another thing is that installing OS X on non-Apple-labeled computer is not breaking a law yet. It is subject to legal interpretation, which is never tried with Apple EULA. I agree that we are in violation of Apple EULA. And I bought my copies of Leopard, Tiger, Panther, ...

Just to clear up some misconceptions.

The BSD license does not require Apple to release the source code.

The GPL license does require source code release, upon distribution.

Apple is not legally obligated to release their BSD licensed source code.

Psystar: Apple’s terms violate U.S. monopoly laws


http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=1685

Though, 2 negatives don't equal a positive...

But it does bring up a valid point -- are EULAs enforceable in law? Honestly, I believe not -- it just allows Apple to deny support to these people. So, if you buy one of these computers from Psystar, you can't call AppleCare for help. And since Psystar IS providing a new copy of Leopard, it IS legal.

So, chances are that Apple can't do squat. (unless the judge is a f--kwad, and gets suckered by Apple's lawyers)

Maybe InsanelyMac should start developing a paid support system

reminds me of IBM PC and COMPAQ let's say nobody will sue me if i buy this "open" mac but what about Mac OS X updates? there are always some issues after installing some updates and there is simply no guaranty that 10.6 will work. i just don't think they can sell those things w/o making fools of ppl that have no idea about osx86 or computers at all and just want to run Mac OS X

Personally, I hope Apple sues their asses.

I bet they're using a pre-made OSx86 Install DVD to install the OS on these things, and that they will never give any credit to the authors of the DVD, kernel makers, patch makers, etc.

When I develop things for OSx86 I do it for fun, and for people's education - not for commercial entities to come along and think "Oh, we could make some money from this"

If you want a Mac, go out and buy a real one. If you don't want a Mac, but want to use OS X, build your own PC.

My $0.02.

~mac.nub

I bought my copies of Leopard (and previously Tiger), and also paid good money for my previous two G4-based Macs. Not that it makes me legal or anything (although I'm not sure EULA's are legally enforcable anyway).

I agree though - it is difficult to justify any level of self-rightous indignation from the "scene" itself given that its main purpose is to break Apple's EULA. Also be aware, whoever is behind Psystar (Rodolfo Pedraza?) was also no doubt a member of the same scene, albeit a lurker as opposed to a contributor.

It was mostly NEXTSTEP code from Steve Jobs NEXT computers / software Inc.

NEXTSTEP > Rhapsody (development codename) > OS X Server 1.0 (1999) > OS X 10.0 (2001)

It's the reason why OS X runs BSD Mach derived kernels. Not that it stole some *BSD code derived frome 386BSD. It does run a NEXTSTEP derived Mach/BSD4.4 kernel and Mach-O format for executable binaries. But the most inportant contribution Steve Jobs NEXT brought to Apple was the NEXTSTEP / OpenSTEP API which is now Cocoa. It does however have some *BSD code in it now. But since FreeBSD isn't a Mach-kernel mostly the BSD code was touched just to get updated. Mach-part is still there, I/O Kit is still derived from Driver Kit even though they rewrote it in C++.

WebObjects is also an NEXT product they got when they bought Steve Jobs NEXT company. It's what the Apple site runs.

They paid for it and it's all developed thanks to Steve Jobs anyway. And it's also why Steve Jobs got back into Apple Inc. He came along with all of NEXTs software

I just hope it's not ours too.
Im not concerned about us one on one... but the project and insanelymac as themselfs. I guess it's time to us to make - at least - and official statement about this.

not sure it'll help anything but i agree. this was never commercial project and ppl are often advised here to at least buy OS X DVD

it's patently illegal to sell hacked Apple software. No one here appears to have done that. No one here strikes me as avaricious bastards out to rip apple off for all it's worth. PsyStar is a different story.

After PsyStar's demise, I wonder if it will be considered legal / ethical (expanding on a previous commenter who wondered about selling "Darwin-compatible boxen") to offer a Kayway-compatible" or "Leo4All-compatible" or "ToH-compatible" PC. Maybe it comes with Ubuntu on it, you fire it up, grab the appropriate torrent and burn it. Re-boot, install, repeat. I wonder if that would be enough to lull apple's lawyers back to sleep.

I built a hachintosh or two, but I've been using Macs since the 512. I own a couple now, but where's the fun in a computer that doesn't break down? Hackintosh re-ignites the excitement we had in 1985, ripping open 512's and installing scsi-clips over the CPU and screwing HD mounts to the plastic case. And yes, Woz and all the others DID sign the molds for the cases, in case you youngsters ever doubted it. I remember when I was your age, we didn't have networks, we had to unplug the phone jacks and twist the wires ourselves </old guy rant>

besides, if you just go out and buy a Mac from Apple, you'll never get to see the Magic Smoke.

The Clonewars just begun?

Sad to see them again. Worst case scenario:

Buying clones will kill Apple and that will kill the only
alternative for everyday operation system we have
today.

(ok there is linux , too but you know what I mean)

On the other hand, maybe Apple will consider to make
OS X available on every computer, now that they have
a new main pillar with the iPhone.

we don't want to fight with Apple. we're just little parasites that show apple what hardware can OS X run on, find some bugs and report them so apple can do their patchwork and tell Apple that ppl want time machine icon on menubar no on dock we're like those litle fishies cleaning up a big whale and we don't want to become whale