scousi Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 http://www.osxbook.com/book/bonus/misc/vmware/ These guys managed to run and install Linux on an iMac and run XP through VMware Linux version. This is kind of weird since the MacOs is not even part of the equation anymore - so what's the point? Another weird possibility would be installing MacOSX in the the same Vmware environment on Linux. This would give you a concurrent MacOS and XP instances. I think that VMWARE is planning future versions that will allow some "binding" of a guest OS to a physical CPU in multiple CPU systems. I guess this would be legal since: 1) It's an iMac so by default you have a MacOs license (and the install disc) 2) But wait a minute - Apple doesn't allow you to run on VMWare! Ironically, you would need a Maxxussed version for this to work even though you would not be violating any EULA or DCMA in this case. This would be a 100% legal reason to use Maxxus patches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Bear Helms Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Apple's lawyers consider a hacked OS X a violation of EULA. There's some language in there about modifying, copying parts, reverse engineering, and so forth. Maxxuss is a violation of at least one of those provisions if not multiple offenses. I would wholeheartedly support a TPM disabling project for Apple Computer owners who do not want the functions of THEIR machine under the orwellian control of Apple. Why is it that Apple had to put encryption and presumed guilt into their OS when Windows XP doesn't go to that extreme? Why must they lock out a user it considers unauthorized as opposed to (the Windows way) giving them a grace period in which they can at least get their data off the machine before it's locked down? I'm sorry but Apple is now making it seem as if 1984 WAS like 1984. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domino Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 It's nice that someone finally got Linux running on a iMac. What i'm surprised about is, ever since vmware has been around, he hasen't noticed how responsive winxp and linux is under a virtual invironment? Wait till he start playing around with wine, cedega, and crossover office . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scousi Posted February 23, 2006 Author Share Posted February 23, 2006 Apple's lawyers consider a hacked OS X a violation of EULA. There's some language in there about modifying, copying parts, reverse engineering, and so forth. Maxxuss is a violation of at least one of those provisions if not multiple offenses. I would wholeheartedly support a TPM disabling project for Apple Computer owners who do not want the functions of THEIR machine under the orwellian control of Apple. Why is it that Apple had to put encryption and presumed guilt into their OS when Windows XP doesn't go to that extreme? Why must they lock out a user it considers unauthorized as opposed to (the Windows way) giving them a grace period in which they can at least get their data off the machine before it's locked down? I'm sorry but Apple is now making it seem as if 1984 WAS like 1984. If Maxxus bought himself an iMac, he could distribute his patch to make it "interoperable" with VMWARE to all people who owned an iMac and VMWARE for Linux. There's a legitamate and legal reason to use his pacthes for people in this case. They would be violating no laws or Apple's EULA. DCMA allows reverse engineering for interoperability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Bear Helms Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Yellow Dog Linux (a port of sorts of Red Hat to PPC/Apple platform) has been out a while. Some are content with it - I tend to loathe most of the hackneyed attempts of making a reasonably good GUI for Linux I've seen thus far. Most look like Windows 3.1, if that good. I don't have any killer apps that make me want to keep OS X around, personally. So its functionality is kinda moot, both on my legal platform and my garden variety x86. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domino Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Since, the Intel iMacs have ATI drivers, I pretty know that he would have good video acceleration at best since I don't think there ATI drivers available for the stock Intel iMac. I would think he will be running the Mesa driver which are equivalent to S3 video cards. iMac users will again have to wait for ATI to roll out with Linux drivers for the cards shipped the Intel iMac. Don't hold you breath... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Bear Helms Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 I've not browsed ATI driver site recently, so am unsure they have any x86 / Universal Binary driver releases. Don't count on a PPC video driver working or even installing on a x86, Apple brand or no. The Electronic Frontier Foundation states that DMCA is being abused by companies, so I am implying Apple would (if they saw a threat) come down on any OS X patching, image sharing, component mods, yadda yadda not because it's legal but because the DMCA doesn't have much of a watchdog looking over it, ASIDE from the EFF themselves. EFF says (paraphrased) "Companies are using DMCA to stifle free speech and scientific research." I consider the case of reverse engineering, patching out TPM, etc., to fall into scientific research category, but am sure Apple feels it's either EULA violating or an issue they can harass people about waving the DMCA in front of a sysop's face. Boycott encrypted operating systems! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-.- Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 'It does Windows.It does Windows. It does Windows. Your Mac may soon seem like your digital oasis, but that doesn’t make you an island. You’ll be able to connect to the office network, share Office files with colleagues, and even use many of your PC hardware devices." http://www.apple.com/switch/ Which hardware devices do they mean, my GeForce 6600GT card? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts