Apple orders Mac sites to remove OS X on x86 videos
Apple's legal department this week sent "aggressive" emails to several web sites that support and advocate its products solely because they linked to videos showing a hacked version of the company's Mac OS X operating system running on off-the-shelf PC hardware.
French language Mac news site MacBidouille was one of the first web sites to receive an "amazingly aggressive email asking for the immediate removal of all links to the videos," the site reported on Wednesday.
In an editorial, the site's publishers said that they immediately complied with Apple's requests, but added: "we deeply think that it will not change anything."
The site, along with others, had used the videos to support news reports that hackers had successfully circumvented Apple's Trusted Platform Module (TPM), which was designed to prevent versions of Mac OS X for Intel from running on non-Apple certified systems.
By issuing e-mail-based cease and desist orders, Apple is effectively validating the the claims made by the news sites, as well as the work of the hackers in conquering the TMP scheme.
At Apple's World Wide Developers Conference in June, the company announced a switch to the Intel processors and began providing developers with a version of Mac OS X capable of running on proprietary Apple developer test systems that are based on the Intel architecture.
Copies of the operating system soon leaked to Internet file sharing sites and BitTorrent trackers. Following the unauthorized widespread distribution, it took only about a month and a half for hackers to successfully crack Apple's TPM scheme and allow the version of Mac OS X to boot on virtually any Intel-based PC.
French language Mac news site MacBidouille was one of the first web sites to receive an "amazingly aggressive email asking for the immediate removal of all links to the videos," the site reported on Wednesday.
In an editorial, the site's publishers said that they immediately complied with Apple's requests, but added: "we deeply think that it will not change anything."
The site, along with others, had used the videos to support news reports that hackers had successfully circumvented Apple's Trusted Platform Module (TPM), which was designed to prevent versions of Mac OS X for Intel from running on non-Apple certified systems.
By issuing e-mail-based cease and desist orders, Apple is effectively validating the the claims made by the news sites, as well as the work of the hackers in conquering the TMP scheme.
At Apple's World Wide Developers Conference in June, the company announced a switch to the Intel processors and began providing developers with a version of Mac OS X capable of running on proprietary Apple developer test systems that are based on the Intel architecture.
Copies of the operating system soon leaked to Internet file sharing sites and BitTorrent trackers. Following the unauthorized widespread distribution, it took only about a month and a half for hackers to successfully crack Apple's TPM scheme and allow the version of Mac OS X to boot on virtually any Intel-based PC.
Comments
Rather than prevent this from happening, which is inevitable, Apple should simply create a version of OSX for PC and sell it. They would at least make money that way. They aren't going to make anything from the cracked copies that will be circulating on LimeWire.
Originally posted by JamesG
I can't see how this is unexpected. These are some very resourceful people, and it comes as no surprise that they are able to circumnavigate Apple's scheme to prevent OSX being installed on "off the shelf" PCs.
Rather than prevent this from happening, which is inevitable, Apple should simply create a version of OSX for PC and sell it. They would at least make money that way. They aren't going to make anything from the cracked copies that will be circulating on LimeWire.
You have any idea what a huge and expensive support issue that would become? There's no way they'd be able to make money with people phoning in because their copy of OS X is having trouble on some custom-built hardware.
Apple wants to sell hardware, plain and simple. OS X is the software that powers that hardware.
Originally posted by Robin Hood
Apple are perfectly, 100% within their right to do what they are doing.
i don't think anyone is contesting that.
Not to mention it would butcher their hardware sales, which is where apple makes their money.
Let's not let this site deteriorate.
Woah - can we please get an ombudsman in here? This has to be one of the most sensational articles I've ever seen on AppleInsider (don't let my post count or join date fool you - I've been lurking for around a year). I realize that those running AI may sympathize with other Apple forum owners, but can we be a little less biased please? True, nothing in the post is actually incorrect, but the way in which it is worded is just so slanted it's sad.
I think you're seeing things - just what part of the AI story do you take exception to. "... "aggressive" e-mails. " ?..
It is in the forum that we are allowed to be biased..No?. My two cents, this is just classic.... Wait a week for the publicity, and then smack and bully the fan-boy mags - who lets face it can be easily scared...
Rather like the behaviour we have seen before. .. Try to sue small sites for Mac mini - leaks. But let large Internation magazines (I forgot which one) get away with leaking the Intel switch....
I doubt there is anything legally wrong with linking to a video for ch$£%'s (iSteve's) sake.
Apple isn't worried about the hacks directly, but they must appear to be doing something to maintain their legal trademarks, secrets and patents etc. All the better if you can prime the media pump at the same time while appearing not to be too much of the big bad corporation.
Back on January 24th 1984 Apple made the mistake not to license the Mac. Then M$ took over just because of such mistake.
Now history repeats with Mac OS X for PC...
Apple, get this clear: either license Mac OS X for PC or the Mac will be history in a few years. Remember that Windows copies and becomes more Mac-like with every release. As Linux does as well.
And remember that when Linux becomes more user-friendly in 5 to 10 years, it will take over any other commercial OS.
So, the sooner the better if Apple would:
1 - License Mac OS X for PC. Start with Dell and HP, for instance.
2 - Fully open Mac OS X, including the Aqua GUI. Full open source as Linux.
3 - Give Mac OS X for free. As Linux.
Then both Linux and Windows would be history in 2-3 years! Or else Windows first and Linux then will take over. Well, probably M$ would give Windows for free to prevent it, as it did with Internet Explorer to kill Netscape.
It all depends on Apple now...
Originally posted by zunx
3 - Give Mac OS X for free. As Linux.
I suppose you think Chrysler should give you free gas to drive a Ford too.
Originally posted by zunx
Now history repeats with Mac OS X for PC...
If you sit down and make a list of the things that are fundamentally DIFFERENT now vs. the situation in 1984... you'll end up with a very long list
This would only affect a small portion of the buying population anyway.
The only reason I can think would be to stop the perception that OSX works on non-Apple products right from the start, but who other than use even worry about this?!?!?
Good time to be an Apple lawyer though. The future's so bright, they've gotta wear shades.
The cause of Apple's problems from 80's to the 90's was its own inner turmoil, that was not really directly related to Microsoft.
If it has not been noticed the way Microsoft, Dell, and HP operate their businesses are not 100% perfect. They all have become so large the weaknesses of their business models are showing.
As for licensing the OS wide and far. That business model works better when you don't dominate the market, and when there are fewer OEM's to support.
But when you have tens of thousands of configurations to support, it becomes an entirely different prospect. It is impossible to support all of the various configurations with no stability problems.
Apple has a different philosophy to the computer experience. The advantage of this philosophy is tight integration of software and hardware. That is the point of owning of Macintosh.
If you want an open OS that can run on generic parts, that is the point of owning Windows. The MS philosophy of computing is no more or no less valid than Apple's. It is just a different approach.
From what I've been reading the TPM on the OSx86 developers box was not very strong security. It is suspected Apple should have known this. And that Apple more than likely is not very surprised it was broken.
Its only speculation of what Apple's plans may be. It is likely Apple knew this would happen because the developers version of Tiger cannot receive any future OS updates, and this situation is rather harmless.
Apple may have been testing the TPM for weaknesses. It's possible Apple never intended to use the TPM in the final Macintel configuration. And may use something entirely different.
It is likely the final version of OSx86 will not run on P4, as Intel will introduce new chips next year. Even though Intel publicly introduces its roadmap, we really have no idea what Intel and Apple may be doing in the background. I mean can you really see a PowerBook going from a G4 to Centrino chips?
It's possible Apple feels OSx86 runs faster in comparison to XP on a P4. Apple knew the TPM would be broken by hackers, and really did give Windows geeks a taste of what was coming to the x86 platform.
Originally posted by Apparatus
Apple is just going to have to get used to this, because as long as they're on the Intel platform there will be someone out there able to hack the Mac OS to run on non-Apple hardware.
I agree, but I also don't think it will be a huge problem. At least not particularly more egregious than, say, having the iTunes DRM cracked. The people who crack the code to run Mac OS X on PCs are likely not the same people who would walk into an Apple Store and buy a Mac anyway. It gives me an uneasy feeling thinking of OS X running on a crickety whitebox PC, but I guess that's what we may have to get used to.
Originally posted by TenoBell
One thing that has to be understood. Is that Apple does not want to be Microsoft, Dell, or HP.
The cause of Apple's problems from 80's to the 90's was its own inner turmoil, that was not really directly related to Microsoft.
If it has not been noticed the way Microsoft, Dell, and HP operate their businesses are not 100% perfect. They all have become so large the weaknesses of their business models are showing.
As for licensing the OS wide and far. That business model works better when you don't dominate the market, and when there are fewer OEM's to support.
But when you have tens of thousands of configurations to support, it becomes an entirely different prospect. It is impossible to support all of the various configurations with no stability problems.
Apple has a different philosophy to the computer experience. The advantage of this philosophy is tight integration of software and hardware. That is the point of owning of Macintosh.
If you want an open OS that can run on generic parts, that is the point of owning Windows. The MS philosophy of computing is no more or no less valid than Apple's. It is just a different approach.
From what I've been reading the TPM on the OSx86 developers box was not very strong security. It is suspected Apple should have known this. And that Apple more than likely is not very surprised it was broken.
Its only speculation of what Apple's plans may be. It is likely Apple knew this would happen because the developers version of Tiger cannot receive any future OS updates, and this situation is rather harmless.
Apple may have been testing the TPM for weaknesses. It's possible Apple never intended to use the TPM in the final Macintel configuration. And may use something entirely different.
It is likely the final version of OSx86 will not run on P4, as Intel will introduce new chips next year. Even though Intel publicly introduces its roadmap, we really have no idea what Intel and Apple may be doing in the background. I mean can you really see a PowerBook going from a G4 to Centrino chips?
It's possible Apple feels OSx86 runs faster in comparison to XP on a P4. Apple knew the TPM would be broken by hackers, and really did give Windows geeks a taste of what was coming to the x86 platform.
I agree completely! I think we're actually going to see a whole new line of Intel built, Mac proprietary chips. It makes more sense than anything else.
Only with a Mac do you get a system built by the same people who make the operating system, applications and the computer itself.
i dont think they want to mess that up with having any old dell run OS X
http://www.apple.com/switch/
Originally posted by TenoBell
But when you have tens of thousands of configurations to support, it becomes an entirely different prospect. It is impossible to support all of the various configurations with no stability problems.
The people hacking into OSX aren't concerned about stability problems. It stands to reason that the majority of people running OSX on "unintended" hardware will not have showstopping problems. What Apple does and does not do here is sort of irrelevant, actually. Just like the iTunes DRM has been broken, just like the TPM is now broken, whatever software/hardware scheme they use will ultimately be broken. It all boils down to whether Apple will be in a position to take advantage of the upcoming demand for OSX on non-Apple boxes.
Let's not forget that one of the main reasons that people buy Windows boxes instead of Mac is cost and/or *perceived* cost.
It is likely the final version of OSx86 will not run on P4, as Intel will introduce new chips next year.
I seriously wonder about this statement. Will the new chips have a completely incompatible instruction set? If there's just a software check that looks for the CPU type, once again that can be bypassed by the "hackers".