News and Editorial: Apple Seeds New 10.4.2 Build

[sHARD>>]

let me reiterate... CRY BABY! You want to lull people into rallying against a company for updating a development OS against illegitimate piracy on unsanctioned boxes. Bad form. If you want to use Mac OS X, then get a mac. OS X is a feature of a Mac, not the other way around. If you want to tinker with an OS like that then use Linux or some other Open Source OS, or have fun bashing the daylights out M$'s exploits. Apple has every right to cut off the exploits made by OSx86 to run it on a generic PC. Apple has shown no sign (to my recollection) of cutting off the masses from using their hardware/software through a Software Update (that is between a major OS release). Sure, some systems can not (without a little finagling) install 10.4 based on hardware limitations, but in all honesty (being a previous owner of such machine) that machine lived well passed it's life expectancy. Lighten up, use your ba$tard of an OS while you can, then get a real machine, get a mac, it comes with Mac OS X.

 

Heh, at this point I really must chuckle at the new techie society we have been breeding these days. 30 year olds who cannot type, spell, or make any sense at all, 15 year olds who pretty much cannot read. People who are unable to take a critique, editorial, or philosphy contrary to their own agenda, let alone produce any material that is readable by the rest of us. Please learn to type, spell, read, think, and produce coherent statements before responding to this post. Thank you.

[arenared]

Heh, at this point I really must chuckle at the new techie society we have been breeding these days. 30 year olds who cannot type, spell, or make any sense at all, 15 year olds who pretty much cannot read. People who are unable to take a critique, editorial, or philosphy contrary to their own agenda, let alone produce any material that is readable by the rest of us. Please learn to type, spell, read, think, and produce coherent statements before responding to this post. Thank you.

 

 

That seems off topic , and pretty much out of line for someone who wants people to visit their site.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

 

Back to the topic:

 

If Apple is protecting its software, I would think that is a normal practice , isnt it?

 

Although i would like to be able to dual boot my "vanilla" pc with Mac OSX 10.5, or whetever it will be then.

[anarkhos]

We should STOP trying to hack any further releases of Mac OS X for intel until the final release is out.

 

No such thing, well unless Apple goes bankrupt and stops developing OS X altogether.

[bofors]

If Apple is protecting its software, I would think that is a normal practice , isnt it?

 

Of course, the problem is that Apple is also overprotecting it's tech-boutique hardware niche. This is simple, people want OS X to run on non-Apple hardware, including PPC machines like the Sony PlayStation 3. Should Apple cater to that market, they will likely gain significant marketshare at Microsoft's expense and earn more money than they do with the "whole widget" business model.

 

To the extent that Apple wishes to deny us freedom of choice with respect to OS X hardware, they are not our friends. Futhermore, like any other company they generally seek to exploit people, that is enrich themselves at our expense. So there is nothing wrong with identifing Apple as being some kind of enemy here. The only confusion is that we also happen to admire and want Apple products at the same time. To me, this is no different than invading Iraq because we want their oil.

[walkingmac]

Heh, at this point I really must chuckle at the new techie society we have been breeding these days. 30 year olds who cannot type, spell, or make any sense at all, 15 year olds who pretty much cannot read. People who are unable to take a critique, editorial, or philosphy contrary to their own agenda, let alone produce any material that is readable by the rest of us. Please learn to type, spell, read, think, and produce coherent statements before responding to this post. Thank you.

 

Thats a nice way to skirt someone. First, politely labeling me a 30 something techie (aka nerd) or inept 15 yr old flunky, of which I am neither. Then basically saying I am closed minded and stuck in the mud with the rest of the "mac faithful". So, I guess my quick, 5 minute, one paragraph response wasn't "readable" enough for "the rest of us". To that, last time I checked this is a forum, not an editorial. Meaning that people who reply (usually to an actual article) aren't taking the same amount of time to share their thoughts as the originating author. Is it possible every post not may be totally coherent, ya. So let me break it down for you.

 

1) It is bad form to rally people against a company for protecting it's product from people who are modifying it, breaking the User Agreement, and developing an illegal product that affects their main product line.

2) Mac OS X is a feature of a Mac. In other words, you buy a Mac, Mac OS X comes with it. "Mac OS X is the soul of the Mac"

3) Apple has every right to basically plug the exploit that the "OSx86Project" used to enable the development versions of Mac OS X for Intel.

4) I don't recall every hearing about an update to Mac OS X that caused a break in support for either software or hardware. I know of major releases incompatible due to hardware limitations (non-DVD drives and such)

5) You need to lighten up, not every company is M$. M$ is a software company and wants to protect and make sure the windoz you are running is paid for, they don't care what machine you are using as much. Apple however is a Hardware company, who makes great software too. They want to make sure you are running OS X on a Mac.

6) Right now you can use your illegitimate OS X (hence the {censored} title) while you can. If Apple sends out an update that causes it to be non-functional, thats not something you can get upset about or cry foul trying to get other people to see it your way.

 

Also, you want to say Apple will one day stop supporting the G4 like it might happen tomorrow. The problem is that they are still selling Macs with the G4. Dropping support for that is not going to happen any time soon. The G3, maybe. But again, I can't see that happening while they are still selling PPC models, which takes us to 2007. Thats what, 5 years or so at that point since Apple sold a G3 model Mac. Even then, Apple has made it clear they are going to be supporting the PPC for a long time to come. There are still A LOT of companies out there still using Mac OS 9 and just can't leave that platform for one reason or another.

 

To the point, you ask for responses to your article and because people out there share different thoughts about how people should be able to illegally modify a companies product. This is not an Open Source OS where this type of 'port' is something to embrace. This is blatant disregard for the work others have done. The article was well written, just slanted with fear and hoping others overlook the fact that you want Apple not to change their current kernel so you can continue hacking it. Sad

[walkingmac]

To the extent that Apple wishes to deny us freedom of choice with respect to OS X hardware, they are not our friends. Futhermore, like any other company they generally seek to exploit people, that is enrich themselves at our expense. So there is nothing wrong with identifing Apple as being some kind of enemy here. The only confusion is that we also happen to admire and want Apple products at the same time. To me, this is no different than invading Iraq because we want their oil.

Where is the exploit?

[Swad]

I'm not sure that sHARD meant that Apple should just open up the OS for all to use freely. He was simply pointing out that 1)Apple is in the business to make a profit and 2) updates could be used to lock down the OS. I don't think there was anything out of line in his editorial - I think, after rereading it, that he wants Apple to keep their IP just as much as the next guy!

 

However, based on some comments by others (and the provocative digg title), I can see where the other interpretations come into play.

 

No one associated with this site (as in, administrators, etc) wants Apple to give up their OS or intellectual property. But there is a difference between analyzing their moves and saying that they should give us all the OS for free. sHARD did the former, not the latter.

[bofors]

Where is the exploit?

 

If you mean my use of the word "exploit", as opposed to the your usage of it to refer to a software hack, patch or crack, I simply mean two obvious things. First that Apple charges more for its products than they are really worth to make profit, and second that they pay their their employees less than the collective value of their output. In short, captialism is the exploitation of the public by the wealthy elite, people like Steve Jobs. However, to the extent that this exploitation is not confined to the market place, but has also corrupted our goverment and media as evidenced by things like abusive RIAA lawsuits, the DMCA and FOX News, corporations like Apple are a serious public enemy.

[blahsucks]

I don't see why Apple is being evil and manipulative by closing up their software. What else are they going to do? Now, they could go with the retail-box method that has been suggested in 50% of the threads here, but I doubt they'll be successful for several reasons (hardware, brand recognition, the fact that no one knows how to boot from a CD, etc).

 

Anyone who tries to paint a picture which basically says "well, they tricked us into fixing bugs in their software!" is overanalyzing. You chose to use OSx86. You chose to fix the bugs. You know Apple would close it up eventually.

 

Apple doesn't need to support people who illegally downloaded a developer's port of their operating system. Who is Apple supporting?

 

There are some very interesting opinions here.

[walkingmac]

Thanx for chiming in, however while I agree the focus was more on IF Apple would lock out systems through an update (which I shared my views on that) the article was basically opened as how that may affect OSx86 and how by Updating my stop it from functioning. That slants all else following as painting a company, any company, as 'evil' and has to be only trying to make money by protecting their IP's. blahsucks put it best, Apple doesn't need to support illegal copies of OS X, that is the real point here. sHARD played a reverse bait and switch of sorts. While the points are valid, they are tainted by the undercurrent of protecting the interest of OSx86, that is, an illegal theft of an OS.

[sam_the_killer]

We at this community should try to get through the mac os x release making it able to work fullfledged on our x86 boxes without any incompatibility issues, so we should try to hack on the final release from Apple. We should not worry immensely that what technologies Apple will implement finally to prevent hack from running mac on generic x86 boxes. As an example, there were many speculations on what Microsoft would do to avoid hacking of its so called the best os "Windows XP", but Windows XP still tops the piracy charts. Every Software company flourishes only with the popularity gains through the second medium(PIRACY). There are many sophisticated cracking techniques available. We should no forget that "THERE ARE POSSIBILITIES TO CRACK & HACK THE UNCRACKABLE".

[blahsucks]

Excuse me, but that wasn't really the point of the article. This is more of a morality issue than a technical one. Maybe you should consider rereading it.

 

I agree that it will be hacked, but OSX - WXP isn't really a valid analogy. Microsoft didn't have to lock WXP down; they did it weakly, anyway. They are big enough that it doesn't matter, and Windows XP needs no unlocking once freed from activation, since it's a mass-market OS. Mac OS X will be tested more rigorously.

[Takuro]

............................................

[bofors]

Apple could never become an equal to Microsoft.

 

Really, why not? I mean, that sounds like somebody saying that Microsoft could never be IBM back in 1984.

[blahsucks]

Because Apple is a competitor to Microsoft.Google or another Web company is eventually going to evolve into the heavyweight; they're the next stage of the cycle. Microsoft has the market, they're not going to lose their hold unless Apple reinvents themselves completely. And no, releasing the OS isn't the way to do that.

[sHARD>>]

Thats a nice way to skirt someone. First, politely labeling me a 30 something techie (aka nerd) or inept 15 yr old flunky, of which I am neither. Then basically saying I am closed minded and stuck in the mud with the rest of the "mac faithful". So, I guess my quick, 5 minute, one paragraph response wasn't "readable" enough for "the rest of us". To that, last time I checked this is a forum, not an editorial. Meaning that people who reply (usually to an actual article) aren't taking the same amount of time to share their thoughts as the originating author. Is it possible every post not may be totally coherent, ya. So let me break it down for you.

 

Sorry if I've offended, after reading mounds of responses filled with idiodic statements perhaps I jump to conclusions. As to your points, you've read my response and clarified, I can see you've read the article. Thank you. You still hold you opinions and you are entitled to that, even though I may disagree. I commend you for calmly clarifying your statement in order to shift this back to a commentary, not a flamewar.

 

Shard currently holds the record for the most quote/retort nerd-war posts in this topic. Let's see if anybody can top that.

 

Sweet.

[johnniecarcinogen]

To me, this is no different than invading Iraq because we want their oil.

 

I am tired of paying $3 a gallon. Where is all this oil we were supposed to steal from Iraq, I am ready for prices to drop.

[bofors]

I am tired of paying $3 a gallon. Where is all this oil we were supposed to steal from Iraq, I am ready for prices to drop.

 

Again, this is exploitation. Bush's elections were paid for oil companies in Texas. They have no interest in dropping prices, but rather will continue to jack them to the point that the political economy can no longer bare it. If oil prices ever come back down to their previous level in the USA, it certainly will not be while Bush is in office. Really this is about the elite controlling the oil in Iraq, as opposed to stealing it for everyone's use.

 

To the extent that this should be obvious and yet most people just do not get it, the media is to blame as it is clearly the propaganda tool of the ruling class.

[bofors]

Because Apple is a competitor to Microsoft.Google or another Web company is eventually going to evolve into the heavyweight; they're the next stage of the cycle.

 

Let's stay focused on desktop operating systems here, Google and other "Web" companies are not in that game.

 

Microsoft has the market, they're not going to lose their hold unless Apple reinvents themselves completely.

 

Since about 1997, when Steve Jobs came back, Apple has completely reinvented itself and it is still changing drastically. You seem to discounting how fast things can change in the computer industry.

 

And no, releasing the OS isn't the way to do that.

 

Why is it that an offical OS X86 for PCs could not capture say 30% of the desktop operating system market?

[Guest terry]

Why is it that an offical OS X86 for PCs could not capture say 30% of the desktop operating system market?

OS X on every third PC?

 

Who should buy the OS? I don't see how that many people could be interested in it. Even if every geek on the planet bought OS X, I don't think that market shares would go significantly over 10, perhaps 15%.

 

In my opinion, the golden days when you could really sell an OS to customers are long over. People aren't going into the stores and choosing between different offers like MS-DOS and Windows, or DR-DOS and GeoWorks Ensemble, or Windows NT, or OS/2, or NeXTSTEP, or ... (insert your OS of choice) any longer. The introduction of Windows 95 was actually the last time I saw large crowds picking an OS software package from the shelves. In the increasingly commoditized market of today, almost all PCs come preinstalled with a version of Microsoft Windows for which the PC manufacturer has to pay only a small fee. When comparing the prices of a custom computer system that you build for yourself from individual parts with that of a complete PC including software you could buy from Dell, for instance, one could almost say that with the Dell offer, one will get all the software (OS included) virtually for free. All people I know haven't bought Windows XP as an upgrade pack, but acquired a completely new PC system with that OS being preinstalled.

 

Now you might interject that Apple could offer cheap licences to system builders as well. But because Apple is much, much smaller, Microsoft has more power to undercut the price. This isn't a viable way for Apple. Most customers aren't interested in the OS at all, but in the whole package they get, and they can't even be blamed for that. They do not want to have this or that OS, they want to browse the web, write mails, write letters, exchange office documents, play games, etc., all these simple kinds of things. And for most people, Windows does this quite well. And customers get Windows almost for free. Why change? (Actually one reason for me not to change is that there are still a lot of applications I use on a frequent basis in my office work which aren't available for Mac OS, not even as clones, and the originals also don't work in emulation at all. Until this changes, I will always have to check that I can run Windows on the box in the first place, other OSes just being a welcome enrichment. Legacy software is of course also a reason for corporations to act conservatively and stick to Windows if they have used this before.)

 

The only chance I see for a standalone OS X to gain significantly greater market shares in the foreseeable future is by Vista becoming a terrible failure, for example because people feel repelled by the bloatware that Vista is, or due to increased security problems and stuff like that.

[DeathChill]

I have a question: what exactly does this 10.4.2 update DO? I haven't seen any actual confirmation of what issues it addresses really. I am quite interested to know if they're DIRECTLY watching us.

[blahsucks]

bofors: IBM wasn't in the PC OS business against MS at that time either. Not a valid comparison.

 

I have to agree with terry. Apple is using a whole widget business model NOW. I'm sure Dell and co. would be very wary; MS has an inferior product, but they're offering it cheaply to OEMs. I don't see a reason to switch. No one is going to massively flock to the first corp. offering OSX.

 

Dell would probably be the only company that could pull that off. And even so, it would be on one or two concealed models if at all. Any PC company that has the guts to try this will be shunned by Microsoft. And believe me, that's not going to be very appealing.

 

Not to mention the Mac community's dependence on Office, which you can bet will be pulled the second they do this.

 

If Apple tries to do everything retail, they will get pirated massively. The huge 70-90% of users that don't really care about their OS won't buy.

[larrybird]

I'm just a casual observer of this message board who is more into running OS X on generic x86 hardware than I am into having conversations about politics, business strategy, and the direction that Apple ought to take with their products. I constantly check this particular thread for updates regarding the newer releases and cannot help but notice the amount of ridiculous comments that are posted. Are you guys more into conversation than actual information? Perhaps I am the only one who is solely interested in software.

[blkblt]

Perhaps I am the only one who is solely interested in software.

 

No, you're most certainly not.

 

Maybe we need a new section: OSx86 Project Forum > Flame Wars

 

/blkblt

[zfire89]

No, you're most certainly not.

 

Maybe we need a new section: OSx86 Project Forum > Flame Wars

 

/blkblt

 

i agree