Yes. The cost of developing and maintaining OS X is covered by the sale of hardware. Apple was overly generous to sell Snow Leopard at such a bargain price.
Exactly. If you want to know what the full retail cost of an operating system is (neither an upgrade nor bundled with a hardware sale) you only need to look at Windows.
Just because there's very little stopping you installing a Snow Leopard upgrade on non-Apple hardware that doesn't mean you aren't still infringing copyright.
Building a hackintosh requires lots of patience and a fair bit of technical know how. Most people wouldn't even bother trying, so why not let the tinkerers tinker.
It could certainly make Apple look like hypocrites in principle when it comes to the Psystar case.
Hackintosh users are copyright infringers. Apple does not need to go after them legally, but it would make sense for Apple to be seen as attempting to take steps to secure their rights.
1) We don't know what proportion of hackintosh users actually bought OS X for their computers. Let's not automatically assume Apple is giving up a big chunk of OS sales on this one.
2) I've yet to hear a strong argument for how it hurts Apple to thwart hackintosh installations. If it doesn't, in fact, hurt Apple to do this then why wouldn't they try to shut it down or at least curtain the activity?
It could certainly make Apple look like hypocrites in principle when it comes to the Psystar case.
Hackintosh users are copyright infringers. Apple does not need to go after them legally, but it would make sense for Apple to be seen as attempting to take steps to secure their rights.
I don't think that's necessarily true. I agree that Apple should take measure against anyone breaking an EULA, but Hackintoshers aren't trying to make a profit off of anything, they're just doing it as a hobby for the most part. Psystar is trying to make money off of Apple's IP. That is against the law, not just Apple's license agreement.
Tinkerers can often be the best supporter of a platform, especially through word of mouth...
I would strongly disagree. Tinkerers, as you call them, are generally regarded as weirdos by their families and neighbors. They usually have ultra-inflated egos, tend to turn off people rather than influence them, and are true bores. The more they tell you how tech savvy they are the more you know they aren't. So whatever they recommend is considered to be too complicated to use by the average Joe. The old Saturday Night Live "Your Company's Computer Guy" skit about sums them up.
So, no, they are not good for any platform let alone Apple.
I say as long you paid for that disc and only intend to use it privately, why not?
Because it's an upgrade - not a full retail copy. You're only allowed to use it to upgrade a machine with an existing licensed copy of Mac OS X on it. If you copy it other than in accordance with the license that's illegal and no different from any other breach of copyright.
It could certainly make Apple look like hypocrites in principle when it comes to the Psystar case.
That's true but then again I wasn't trying to defend Psystar.
I've owned a number of different Macs (a PowerMac, a mini, two iMacs and two MacBook Pros) over the years as well as several iPods and an iPhone. I now have a hackintosh too for which I bought the Mac Box Set. Am I really ripping Apple off? I know that strictly speaking, YES I AM. But, I will still buy Apple hardware in future.
If anything I consider my hackintosh experience to be more of an experiment than anything. Mind you, it makes for a very good encoding machine.
I would strongly disagree. Tinkerers, as you call them, are generally regarded as weirdos by their families and neighbors. They usually have ultra-inflated egos, tend to turn off people rather than influence them, and are true bores. The more they tell you how tech savvy they are the more you know they aren't. So whatever they recommend is considered to be too complicated to use by the average Joe. The old Saturday Night Live "Your Company's Computer Guy" skit about sums them up.
So, no, they are not good for any platform let alone Apple.
WOW... just WOW! Can you tell me tonight's Lotto numbers as well? Sheesh, I try my best not to pigeonhole or label people, but I guess someone people just can't help themselves.
NTinkerers can often be the best supporter of a platform,
They *can*, if they recommend people buy Macs instead of running them on unauthorized hardware.
Do you honestly see that happening? Or is it more likely they'll try to get everyone else they know to run OS X on the cheap on the hardware of their choice?
Running OS X on unauthorized hardware is not supporting Apple.
If anything I consider my hackintosh experience to be more of an experiment than anything. Mind you, it makes for a very good encoding machine.
And this is the right attitude. But there comes a point when Apple can't necessarily be expected to distinguish between "experiments" and other uses. Not that you're asking them to, anyway.
Arguably, Apple has a much weaker case against consumers who buy a legal copy of OSX, and then put it on a Hackintosh. The consumer, however, must be doing it for non-commercial purposes. Psystar's problem is it is actually trying to make a buck off of infringing Apple's copyright.
However, for most users to buy a legal copy of OSX they must buy the $169 copy if they don't already own a Mac. Most Hackintosh people will tell you what they are doing is OK because they paid Apple $29 for the OS. Problem is that Apple specifically states that that is an update version for people switching from Leopard. The $169 version is the full install version. So, if you paid Apple $169 for the OS, you have a much stronger case for what you are doing is reasonable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Hackintosh users are copyright infringers. Apple does not need to go after them legally, but it would make sense for Apple to be seen as attempting to take steps to secure their rights.
Apple should make a small and pocketable full Mac, like the OQO or the Vaio P. 350 g would be awesome. No more than 600 g. Video-out and USB 2 ports for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations from NATIVE files. Thus, an Intel Atom is required instead of the ARM processor.
Arguably, Apple has a much weaker case against consumers who buy a legal copy of OSX, and then put it on a Hackintosh. The consumer, however, must be doing it for non-commercial purposes. Psystar's problem is it is actually trying to make a buck off of infringing Apple's copyright.
However, for most users to buy a legal copy of OSX they must buy the $169 copy if they don't already own a Mac. Most Hackintosh people will tell you what they are doing is OK because they paid Apple $29 for the OS. Problem is that Apple specifically states that that is an update version for people switching from Leopard. The $169 version is the full install version. So, if you paid Apple $169 for the OS, you have a much stronger case for what you are doing is reasonable.
Absolutely. Apple isn't going to go after them legally. But making it harder for them to install OS X on unauthorized hardware is a different matter. At the very least, it sends a message. You really can't preach copyright infrongemnt in front of Psystar when you take no steps in principle to address other forms of infringement.
The community will find a way around the issue (I'm assuming, anyway), but it's not Apple's job to make life easier for them.
I dont think Appleinsider should be encouraging thieves.
I don't think you can call someone a thief, who takes the effort to figure it out how to run his favorite OS on a computer model category Apple is obviously too lazy to offer!
No matter how thin the MBA is, a 13" screen notebook is NOT a netbook .
Apple thinks they know what people want, but the exploding number of netbook hackintoshs proof them WRONG!
There is only one effective hackintosh prevention: Bring that damn small footprint netbook/tablet people are waiting for, or shut up! If you don't deliver, people will fix that problem for themselves.
You have no idea how many times I've been tempted to buy a netbook and put OSX on the damn thing. With Win 7 looking not too bad at all, my patience and Apple loyalty stands on its last leg.
And this is coming from someone who has never owned a Windows machine before, and even dares to say her 8-core Mac Pro is worth every penny.
Does anyone even understand this question, let alone the grammar used to ask it?
AI members should show where they live or what their native language is. That would forestall statements like the above. Please let us know where you're coming from. When registering, there is a way to show this. AppleInsider, why not make this a requirement.
Comments
Yes. The cost of developing and maintaining OS X is covered by the sale of hardware. Apple was overly generous to sell Snow Leopard at such a bargain price.
Exactly. If you want to know what the full retail cost of an operating system is (neither an upgrade nor bundled with a hardware sale) you only need to look at Windows.
Just because there's very little stopping you installing a Snow Leopard upgrade on non-Apple hardware that doesn't mean you aren't still infringing copyright.
Building a hackintosh requires lots of patience and a fair bit of technical know how. Most people wouldn't even bother trying, so why not let the tinkerers tinker.
It could certainly make Apple look like hypocrites in principle when it comes to the Psystar case.
Hackintosh users are copyright infringers. Apple does not need to go after them legally, but it would make sense for Apple to be seen as attempting to take steps to secure their rights.
So, why Apple sell it in stores?
Does anyone even understand this question, let alone the grammar used to ask it?
1) We don't know what proportion of hackintosh users actually bought OS X for their computers. Let's not automatically assume Apple is giving up a big chunk of OS sales on this one.
2) I've yet to hear a strong argument for how it hurts Apple to thwart hackintosh installations. If it doesn't, in fact, hurt Apple to do this then why wouldn't they try to shut it down or at least curtain the activity?
It could certainly make Apple look like hypocrites in principle when it comes to the Psystar case.
Hackintosh users are copyright infringers. Apple does not need to go after them legally, but it would make sense for Apple to be seen as attempting to take steps to secure their rights.
I don't think that's necessarily true. I agree that Apple should take measure against anyone breaking an EULA, but Hackintoshers aren't trying to make a profit off of anything, they're just doing it as a hobby for the most part. Psystar is trying to make money off of Apple's IP. That is against the law, not just Apple's license agreement.
Tinkerers can often be the best supporter of a platform, especially through word of mouth...
I would strongly disagree. Tinkerers, as you call them, are generally regarded as weirdos by their families and neighbors. They usually have ultra-inflated egos, tend to turn off people rather than influence them, and are true bores. The more they tell you how tech savvy they are the more you know they aren't. So whatever they recommend is considered to be too complicated to use by the average Joe. The old Saturday Night Live "Your Company's Computer Guy" skit about sums them up.
So, no, they are not good for any platform let alone Apple.
I say as long you paid for that disc and only intend to use it privately, why not?
Because it's an upgrade - not a full retail copy. You're only allowed to use it to upgrade a machine with an existing licensed copy of Mac OS X on it. If you copy it other than in accordance with the license that's illegal and no different from any other breach of copyright.
It could certainly make Apple look like hypocrites in principle when it comes to the Psystar case.
That's true but then again I wasn't trying to defend Psystar.
I've owned a number of different Macs (a PowerMac, a mini, two iMacs and two MacBook Pros) over the years as well as several iPods and an iPhone. I now have a hackintosh too for which I bought the Mac Box Set. Am I really ripping Apple off? I know that strictly speaking, YES I AM. But, I will still buy Apple hardware in future.
If anything I consider my hackintosh experience to be more of an experiment than anything. Mind you, it makes for a very good encoding machine.
I would strongly disagree. Tinkerers, as you call them, are generally regarded as weirdos by their families and neighbors. They usually have ultra-inflated egos, tend to turn off people rather than influence them, and are true bores. The more they tell you how tech savvy they are the more you know they aren't. So whatever they recommend is considered to be too complicated to use by the average Joe. The old Saturday Night Live "Your Company's Computer Guy" skit about sums them up.
So, no, they are not good for any platform let alone Apple.
WOW... just WOW! Can you tell me tonight's Lotto numbers as well? Sheesh, I try my best not to pigeonhole or label people, but I guess someone people just can't help themselves.
Because it's an upgrade - not a full retail copy. You're only allowed to use it to upgrade a machine with an existing copy of Mac OS X.
Actually I bought the Mac Box Set for exactly that reason.
NTinkerers can often be the best supporter of a platform,
They *can*, if they recommend people buy Macs instead of running them on unauthorized hardware.
Do you honestly see that happening? Or is it more likely they'll try to get everyone else they know to run OS X on the cheap on the hardware of their choice?
Running OS X on unauthorized hardware is not supporting Apple.
This is a big logic jump
Possibly so. Yet any other explanations seem to explain even less.
I would strongly disagree. Tinkerers, as you call them, are generally regarded as weirdos by their families and neighbors.
Talk about blanket statements!!
I'm a weirdo... so be it.
If anything I consider my hackintosh experience to be more of an experiment than anything. Mind you, it makes for a very good encoding machine.
And this is the right attitude. But there comes a point when Apple can't necessarily be expected to distinguish between "experiments" and other uses. Not that you're asking them to, anyway.
However, for most users to buy a legal copy of OSX they must buy the $169 copy if they don't already own a Mac. Most Hackintosh people will tell you what they are doing is OK because they paid Apple $29 for the OS. Problem is that Apple specifically states that that is an update version for people switching from Leopard. The $169 version is the full install version. So, if you paid Apple $169 for the OS, you have a much stronger case for what you are doing is reasonable.
Hackintosh users are copyright infringers. Apple does not need to go after them legally, but it would make sense for Apple to be seen as attempting to take steps to secure their rights.
Arguably, Apple has a much weaker case against consumers who buy a legal copy of OSX, and then put it on a Hackintosh. The consumer, however, must be doing it for non-commercial purposes. Psystar's problem is it is actually trying to make a buck off of infringing Apple's copyright.
However, for most users to buy a legal copy of OSX they must buy the $169 copy if they don't already own a Mac. Most Hackintosh people will tell you what they are doing is OK because they paid Apple $29 for the OS. Problem is that Apple specifically states that that is an update version for people switching from Leopard. The $169 version is the full install version. So, if you paid Apple $169 for the OS, you have a much stronger case for what you are doing is reasonable.
Absolutely. Apple isn't going to go after them legally. But making it harder for them to install OS X on unauthorized hardware is a different matter. At the very least, it sends a message. You really can't preach copyright infrongemnt in front of Psystar when you take no steps in principle to address other forms of infringement.
The community will find a way around the issue (I'm assuming, anyway), but it's not Apple's job to make life easier for them.
I dont think Appleinsider should be encouraging thieves.
I don't think you can call someone a thief, who takes the effort to figure it out how to run his favorite OS on a computer model category Apple is obviously too lazy to offer!
No matter how thin the MBA is, a 13" screen notebook is NOT a netbook .
Apple thinks they know what people want, but the exploding number of netbook hackintoshs proof them WRONG!
There is only one effective hackintosh prevention: Bring that damn small footprint netbook/tablet people are waiting for, or shut up! If you don't deliver, people will fix that problem for themselves.
You have no idea how many times I've been tempted to buy a netbook and put OSX on the damn thing. With Win 7 looking not too bad at all, my patience and Apple loyalty stands on its last leg.
And this is coming from someone who has never owned a Windows machine before, and even dares to say her 8-core Mac Pro is worth every penny.
Does anyone even understand this question, let alone the grammar used to ask it?
AI members should show where they live or what their native language is. That would forestall statements like the above. Please let us know where you're coming from. When registering, there is a way to show this. AppleInsider, why not make this a requirement.