Mac's are PC's and now they are clones of PC's to boot.
Good night.
You really need to learn what a clone is. For instance, you are becoming a clone of Teckstud.
Actually, ou?re going back to the ignore list. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt but you are getting more and more like Teckstud and Jfanning with your lack of comprehension and your ability to derail threads.
I thought those Psystar idiots were gone for good. They are like a character in a bad terror movie that keeps coming back, over and over ad nauseaum...
They aren't "fighting" for anything. If they were fighting for the betterment of society and the freedom to use software on any kind of hardware, they wouldn't be selling their EFI software. Nor would they be packaging and selling PCs with OS X on them. Nor would they be stealing code from the OSS community to make those two enterprises profitable...
Later operating systems came along to make the application coders job more easier. Still different operating systems came and went, but you could still use the same hardware pretty much.
Even today you can take a PC and put Windows, Linux, Unix or various other operating systems on it.
Apple comes along as says "you can't use our OS on anything but our machines".
You are wrong!
Hardware and software were strongly tied and that was the norm until the IBM PC and clones came into dominance.
Even today you'll see a lot of examples of hardware-software integration, whether it is servers, smartphones or embedded systems.
Try getting HP-UX to run on anything except HP's server hardware, or AIX on anything except IBM's sever hardware, or WebOS on anything except Palm's smartphones, etc...
Every video game console ties the software to hardware. Try forcing Sony to let you play God of War 3 on your PC or Mac. They'll laugh you off and rightly so!
Hardware-software integration is the right way to do things. That's why Microsoft released the Zune and XBox.
Your right of course and not defending Pystar but...
Computers from the earliest days, were machines that people ran different programs on. In fact there wasn't even a operating system. You wanted to run a program you stuck the 5 1/4 " floppy in or the spools of tape and turned the machine on.
Later operating systems came along to make the application coders job more easier. Still different operating systems came and went, but you could still use the same hardware pretty much.
Even today you can take a PC and put Windows, Linux, Unix or various other operating systems on it.
Apple comes along as says "you can't use our OS on anything but our machines".
Well that just smacks in the face of everything a geek learns in school and how the computing world works.
Sure it was easy before because Mac's used the PPC processor so that gave them a hardware lock so OS X wouldn't run on the rest of the computers in the world.
But now that's gone and Mac's ARE PC's in every way. One can even run Windows, Linux, Unix and all the other PC operating systems on Apple branded computers.
Apple should change their ad campaign from "Get a Mac" to "Get a Apple", like "Get a Dell".
With the release of Bootcamp, allowing Windows and Linux to be the native boot OS of a Apple computer, is it a "Mac" anymore? Of course not, it's a Apple branded PC.
So Apple should call their computers PC's with the choice of operating systems, either OS X, Linux or Windows and be done with it. Triple their sales volume too boot.
Ok, I'm done playing devils advocate. Just wanted people to know what the other side thinks.
Yeah? Well, waist of breath. Macs are Macs. Apple make that distinction. Sure, they're 'personal computers...' So were the ones that predated IBM's 'typewriter.'
It may be semantics. Yes and no. Apple call it a Mac and it works in its own special way. A badge of honour and distinction. Apple call it a 'PC'. Dream on. Because it's 'not.'
As for Psycho-star. Do they have any ethics? You can't take someones software and do whatever you like with it, modify it, change it...pass it off as you're off and make a profit off it.
They were in clear violation of EULA. They were trying to be smart. Cute. And those steaming pile of bandits got their ass handed to them care of Apple legal.
Sure, I'd like Apple to make their products a little cheaper, sure I'd like a mid-tower and feel they easily could. But that doesn't validate Psystar's postion. If they're so creative...why not make their own OS?
Since it's now possible to place other operating systems on Apple's PC's and erase OS X completely, does it still make a Mac a Mac anymore?
Is a Apple branded PC with only Windows to boot into a "Mac"? It's not.
What makes a Mac is the combination of Apple branded PC and OS X.
Once you take OS X away, it's no longer a "Mac" because OS X is (at least) half of the user experience.
That was my point.
Now you're just being a bit ridiculous. If you buy a Chevrolet, and put Dodge rims on it, does it make it a Dodge? Of course not. It's a Mac brand, and no amount of silly word play will change that.
..As for Psycho-star. Do they have any ethics? You can't take someones software and do whatever you like with it, modify it, change it...pass it off as you're off and make a profit off it.
Yes they were wrong. They also used EmpireEFI to make RebelEFI too.
Quote:
If they're so creative...why not make their own OS?
Or use Ubuntu Linux, it's already available.
However one thing is a problem, the lack of third party software.
Business wise it makes sense to code for the operating system with the most market share and we know who that is.
Apple has been struggling with this problem for decades, so their approach has been to open retail stores and sell as many Mac's as they can to increase their market share so more developers will code for OS X. This in turn will strengthen the platform.
Pystar was trying to cash in on the low margin market that Apple is ignoring (and has to ignore or people will buy the less margin machines), thinking that Apple would allow them to continue and thus increase OS X's market share, which helps Apple in the long run against Microsoft.
But obviously Apple has other plans. The iSlate, with the iPhone/iSlate OS UI and the App Store combination to eventually replace OS X UI as we know it.
If Apple prices the iSlate to sell to gain market share, it will turn the cheap PC market on it's behind.
Your right of course and not defending Pystar but...
But now that's gone and Mac's ARE PC's in every way. One can even run Windows, Linux, Unix and all the other PC operating systems on Apple branded computers.
Apple should change their ad campaign from "Get a Mac" to "Get a Apple", like "Get a Dell".
With the release of Bootcamp, allowing Windows and Linux to be the native boot OS of a Apple computer, is it a "Mac" anymore? Of course not, it's a Apple branded PC.
So Apple should call their computers PC's with the choice of operating systems, either OS X, Linux or Windows and be done with it. Triple their sales volume too boot.
Ok, I'm done playing devils advocate. Just wanted people to know what the other side thinks.
Why is this playing devil's advocate?
Apple advertises BootCamp and Windows + Mac OS on a Mac (and, no, "Apple" is not the name of the computer, nor is "PC")
By the way, I've run Windows on PPC Macs it seems like forever...though not anymore. There is no longer any Windows software giving me a reason to. iWork 09 does better by legacy MS Word and PowerPoint documents than Mac Office 2008.
Now you're just being a bit ridiculous. If you buy a Chevrolet, and put Dodge rims on it, does it make it a Dodge? Of course not. It's a Mac brand, and no amount of silly word play will change that.
You can't change a user experience with a car as easily as you can with a computer.
Anyone who has had the displeasure of running Windows on a Mac knows all about this.
I'm just playing devils advocate anyway, trying to explain how and why Pystar thinks like they do.
Why they think it's ok to run any operating system on any computer.
You can't change a user experience with a car as easily as you can with a computer.
Anyone who has had the displeasure of running Windows on a Mac knows all about this.
I'm just playing devils advocate anyway, trying to explain how and why Pystar thinks like they do.
Why they think it's ok to run any operating system on any computer.
And yet I still have a better experience running windows on my Mac's than I did with my Vaio's, or my HP laptops. It's still a Mac, and the OS is irrelevant. All cars have the same basic components, yet they all retain brand names regardless of how much you customize them. The degree of the 'user experience' is irrelevant.
Anyone who says a Mac isn't a personal computer should do less drugs. Anyone who says 'Windows' is a PC also needs to do less drugs. Windows is an OS, and a Mac is a PC. This whole sub-thread is stupid.
Apple advertises BootCamp and Windows + Mac OS on a Mac (and, no, "Apple" is not the name of the computer, nor is "PC")
Apple advertises "Bootcamp" to sell hardware? That's interesting. Slowly sliding to the dark side I assume.
Quote:
By the way, I've run Windows on PPC Macs it seems like forever...though not anymore. There is no longer any Windows software giving me a reason to. iWork 09 does better by legacy MS Word and PowerPoint documents than Mac Office 2008.
Yea the last couple of years I have been running XP and Vista in Fusion, thinking Apple was going to kiss off OS X.
After all why the heck call it "Bootcamp"? It's definition means a training camp, training for what? no more OS X?
Sometimes I think Apple doesn't research their names very well, like Mighty Mouse for instance.
And yet I still have a better experience running windows on my Mac's than I did with my Vaio's, or my HP laptops. It's still a Mac, and the OS is irrelevant. All cars have the same basic components, yet they all retain brand names regardless of how much you customize them. The degree of the 'user experience' is irrelevant.
Anyone who says a Mac isn't a personal computer should do less drugs. Anyone who says 'Windows' is a PC also needs to do less drugs. Windows is an OS, and a Mac is a PC. This whole sub-thread is stupid.
Yes, I should have used "personal computer" instead of PC in various locations to avoid confusion.
But in my opinion a Mac is isn't a Mac anymore without OS X. Windows and Linux just cheapens the experience that makes the Mac what it is.
In fact, running OS X on anything but a Apple PC cheapens the experience as well.
And yes, I'm not going to respond anymore, it's gone round and round enough.
Comments
Well you basically just said what I said then.
Mac's are PC's and now they are clones of PC's to boot.
Good night.
You really need to learn what a clone is. For instance, you are becoming a clone of Teckstud.
Actually, ou?re going back to the ignore list. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt but you are getting more and more like Teckstud and Jfanning with your lack of comprehension and your ability to derail threads.
Good night.
Except that one is consistently #1 in satisfaction ratings, year after year, while the others are not. Must be fairy dust or something.
Later operating systems came along to make the application coders job more easier. Still different operating systems came and went, but you could still use the same hardware pretty much.
Even today you can take a PC and put Windows, Linux, Unix or various other operating systems on it.
Apple comes along as says "you can't use our OS on anything but our machines".
You are wrong!
Hardware and software were strongly tied and that was the norm until the IBM PC and clones came into dominance.
Even today you'll see a lot of examples of hardware-software integration, whether it is servers, smartphones or embedded systems.
Try getting HP-UX to run on anything except HP's server hardware, or AIX on anything except IBM's sever hardware, or WebOS on anything except Palm's smartphones, etc...
Every video game console ties the software to hardware. Try forcing Sony to let you play God of War 3 on your PC or Mac. They'll laugh you off and rightly so!
Hardware-software integration is the right way to do things. That's why Microsoft released the Zune and XBox.
Want the OS X look without OS X?
Install Ubuntu Linux and the Mac4lin theme.
http://images.howtoforge.com/images/..._m2ad3b0cf.jpg
There is even a OS X theme for Firefox, for Windows.
Several minutes and your done.
If you want OS X on your PC and don't have RebelEFI, get the original open source EmpireEFI.
But fair warning, OS X on a Mac is a much nicer experience.
You can't fix Stupid.
That sums up Psystar rather nicely.
Your right of course and not defending Pystar but...
Computers from the earliest days, were machines that people ran different programs on. In fact there wasn't even a operating system. You wanted to run a program you stuck the 5 1/4 " floppy in or the spools of tape and turned the machine on.
Later operating systems came along to make the application coders job more easier. Still different operating systems came and went, but you could still use the same hardware pretty much.
Even today you can take a PC and put Windows, Linux, Unix or various other operating systems on it.
Apple comes along as says "you can't use our OS on anything but our machines".
Well that just smacks in the face of everything a geek learns in school and how the computing world works.
Sure it was easy before because Mac's used the PPC processor so that gave them a hardware lock so OS X wouldn't run on the rest of the computers in the world.
But now that's gone and Mac's ARE PC's in every way. One can even run Windows, Linux, Unix and all the other PC operating systems on Apple branded computers.
Apple should change their ad campaign from "Get a Mac" to "Get a Apple", like "Get a Dell".
With the release of Bootcamp, allowing Windows and Linux to be the native boot OS of a Apple computer, is it a "Mac" anymore? Of course not, it's a Apple branded PC.
So Apple should call their computers PC's with the choice of operating systems, either OS X, Linux or Windows and be done with it. Triple their sales volume too boot.
Ok, I'm done playing devils advocate. Just wanted people to know what the other side thinks.
Yeah? Well, waist of breath. Macs are Macs. Apple make that distinction. Sure, they're 'personal computers...' So were the ones that predated IBM's 'typewriter.'
It may be semantics. Yes and no. Apple call it a Mac and it works in its own special way. A badge of honour and distinction. Apple call it a 'PC'. Dream on. Because it's 'not.'
As for Psycho-star. Do they have any ethics? You can't take someones software and do whatever you like with it, modify it, change it...pass it off as you're off and make a profit off it.
They were in clear violation of EULA. They were trying to be smart. Cute. And those steaming pile of bandits got their ass handed to them care of Apple legal.
Sure, I'd like Apple to make their products a little cheaper, sure I'd like a mid-tower and feel they easily could. But that doesn't validate Psystar's postion. If they're so creative...why not make their own OS?
Lemon Bon Bon.
Lemon Bon Bon.
You can't fix Stupid.
No you can't. But Psystar is using the new Stupid 1.1.5 update that makes Stupid much more powerful!
With the release of Bootcamp, allowing Windows and Linux to be the native boot OS of a Apple computer, is it a "Mac" anymore?
Yes. Bootcamp is part of OSX. The Bootcamp code in OSX allows you to select a Start-Up Disc to boot into another OS.
Yes. Bootcamp is part of OSX. The Bootcamp code in OSX allows you to select a Start-Up Disc to boot into another OS.
Perhaps I should have worded that differently.
Since it's now possible to place other operating systems on Apple's PC's and erase OS X completely, does it still make a Mac a Mac anymore?
Is a Apple branded PC with only Windows to boot into a "Mac"? It's not.
What makes a Mac is the combination of Apple branded PC and OS X.
Once you take OS X away, it's no longer a "Mac" because OS X is (at least) half of the user experience.
That was my point.
Perhaps I should have worded that differently.
Since it's now possible to place other operating systems on Apple's PC's and erase OS X completely, does it still make a Mac a Mac anymore?
Is a Apple branded PC with only Windows to boot into a "Mac"? It's not.
What makes a Mac is the combination of Apple branded PC and OS X.
Once you take OS X away, it's no longer a "Mac" because OS X is (at least) half of the user experience.
That was my point.
Now you're just being a bit ridiculous. If you buy a Chevrolet, and put Dodge rims on it, does it make it a Dodge? Of course not. It's a Mac brand, and no amount of silly word play will change that.
..As for Psycho-star. Do they have any ethics? You can't take someones software and do whatever you like with it, modify it, change it...pass it off as you're off and make a profit off it.
Yes they were wrong. They also used EmpireEFI to make RebelEFI too.
If they're so creative...why not make their own OS?
Or use Ubuntu Linux, it's already available.
However one thing is a problem, the lack of third party software.
Business wise it makes sense to code for the operating system with the most market share and we know who that is.
Apple has been struggling with this problem for decades, so their approach has been to open retail stores and sell as many Mac's as they can to increase their market share so more developers will code for OS X. This in turn will strengthen the platform.
Pystar was trying to cash in on the low margin market that Apple is ignoring (and has to ignore or people will buy the less margin machines), thinking that Apple would allow them to continue and thus increase OS X's market share, which helps Apple in the long run against Microsoft.
But obviously Apple has other plans. The iSlate, with the iPhone/iSlate OS UI and the App Store combination to eventually replace OS X UI as we know it.
If Apple prices the iSlate to sell to gain market share, it will turn the cheap PC market on it's behind.
Your right of course and not defending Pystar but...
But now that's gone and Mac's ARE PC's in every way. One can even run Windows, Linux, Unix and all the other PC operating systems on Apple branded computers.
Apple should change their ad campaign from "Get a Mac" to "Get a Apple", like "Get a Dell".
With the release of Bootcamp, allowing Windows and Linux to be the native boot OS of a Apple computer, is it a "Mac" anymore? Of course not, it's a Apple branded PC.
So Apple should call their computers PC's with the choice of operating systems, either OS X, Linux or Windows and be done with it. Triple their sales volume too boot.
Ok, I'm done playing devils advocate. Just wanted people to know what the other side thinks.
Why is this playing devil's advocate?
Apple advertises BootCamp and Windows + Mac OS on a Mac (and, no, "Apple" is not the name of the computer, nor is "PC")
By the way, I've run Windows on PPC Macs it seems like forever...though not anymore. There is no longer any Windows software giving me a reason to. iWork 09 does better by legacy MS Word and PowerPoint documents than Mac Office 2008.
Now you're just being a bit ridiculous. If you buy a Chevrolet, and put Dodge rims on it, does it make it a Dodge? Of course not. It's a Mac brand, and no amount of silly word play will change that.
You can't change a user experience with a car as easily as you can with a computer.
Anyone who has had the displeasure of running Windows on a Mac knows all about this.
I'm just playing devils advocate anyway, trying to explain how and why Pystar thinks like they do.
Why they think it's ok to run any operating system on any computer.
You can't change a user experience with a car as easily as you can with a computer.
Anyone who has had the displeasure of running Windows on a Mac knows all about this.
I'm just playing devils advocate anyway, trying to explain how and why Pystar thinks like they do.
Why they think it's ok to run any operating system on any computer.
And yet I still have a better experience running windows on my Mac's than I did with my Vaio's, or my HP laptops. It's still a Mac, and the OS is irrelevant. All cars have the same basic components, yet they all retain brand names regardless of how much you customize them. The degree of the 'user experience' is irrelevant.
Anyone who says a Mac isn't a personal computer should do less drugs. Anyone who says 'Windows' is a PC also needs to do less drugs. Windows is an OS, and a Mac is a PC. This whole sub-thread is stupid.
Why is this playing devil's advocate?
Apple advertises BootCamp and Windows + Mac OS on a Mac (and, no, "Apple" is not the name of the computer, nor is "PC")
Apple advertises "Bootcamp" to sell hardware? That's interesting. Slowly sliding to the dark side I assume.
By the way, I've run Windows on PPC Macs it seems like forever...though not anymore. There is no longer any Windows software giving me a reason to. iWork 09 does better by legacy MS Word and PowerPoint documents than Mac Office 2008.
Yea the last couple of years I have been running XP and Vista in Fusion, thinking Apple was going to kiss off OS X.
After all why the heck call it "Bootcamp"? It's definition means a training camp, training for what? no more OS X?
Sometimes I think Apple doesn't research their names very well, like Mighty Mouse for instance.
And yet I still have a better experience running windows on my Mac's than I did with my Vaio's, or my HP laptops. It's still a Mac, and the OS is irrelevant. All cars have the same basic components, yet they all retain brand names regardless of how much you customize them. The degree of the 'user experience' is irrelevant.
Anyone who says a Mac isn't a personal computer should do less drugs. Anyone who says 'Windows' is a PC also needs to do less drugs. Windows is an OS, and a Mac is a PC. This whole sub-thread is stupid.
Yes, I should have used "personal computer" instead of PC in various locations to avoid confusion.
But in my opinion a Mac is isn't a Mac anymore without OS X. Windows and Linux just cheapens the experience that makes the Mac what it is.
In fact, running OS X on anything but a Apple PC cheapens the experience as well.
And yes, I'm not going to respond anymore, it's gone round and round enough.
Yes, I should have used "personal computer" instead of PC in various locations to avoid confusion.
But in my opinion a Mac is isn't a Mac anymore without OS X. Windows and Linux just cheapens the experience that makes the Mac what it is.
As long as it's made by Apple, and branded a Mac, then it's a Mac.