Forums | MacLife

No, that is ok but, thank you for some good news. Your post was all I needed to hear tonight. I'm glad there are more alternatives out there... I will keep you in mind when/if I do change to PC hardware though. Thanks.

Well, one last thing. Is it fast? or fast enough?

Aww, come on don't discriminate against black... area.

..lol.. j/k.

You can run OSx86 natively on any PC with at least SSE2, though you'll need either a GMA900/950 or an ATi card for graphics acceleration (only specific models work right now).  It's also a bit complicated to install at the moment - it requires a lot of command-line interfacing - but once installed, it's runs just like the real thing.

Have to be careful.  Still, with Apple's disappointing consumer hardware, once they start shipping boxed versions of OS X that will include an intel version, it will be very tempting.  Not sure if you buy a licensed copy of using it on non-Apple hardware is illegal.  It's in the EULA, but not sure that particular clause is enforceable.  Using OS X on a non-Apple Mac could be considered fair use - as long as you've paid for the software license.

robco wrote:

Have to be careful.  Still, with Apple's disappointing consumer hardware, once they start shipping boxed versions of OS X that will include an intel version, it will be very tempting.  Not sure if you buy a licensed copy of using it on non-Apple hardware is illegal.  It's in the EULA, but not sure that particular clause is enforceable.  Using OS X on a non-Apple Mac could be considered fair use - as long as you've paid for the software license.

It's sold as an upgrade.  It always has been.  It will always be illegal, and always has been.

Just like how it is illegal to hack Windows upgrade to a full install.

yelowpunk wrote:

I've paid for <i>a</i> license, but not for an x86 one. I don't think it's bad <i>at all</i>, and I'm not kidding myself.

Oh, and no command lines. You can find a hooked ISO ready for burn+install, (again) if you know where to look. There's a whole 'nother world of info anyone looking into it should know.

-Tim

You paid for an upgrade.  Your Mac has the license.

Zetetic Apparatchik wrote:

I'm pretty sure that the methods involved to get it to work, break the DMCA.

kb5zhh wrote:

MacBoy4139 wrote:

yelowpunk wrote:

I've paid for <i>a</i> license, but not for an x86 one. I don't think it's bad <i>at all</i>, and I'm not kidding myself.

Oh, and no command lines. You can find a hooked ISO ready for burn+install, (again) if you know where to look. There's a whole 'nother world of info anyone looking into it should know.

-Tim

You paid for an upgrade.  Your Mac has the license.

The apple store says nothing about it being an upgrade.  No idea if the physical box says upgrade, but my 10.2 box doesn't say upgrade.

I'm sure it's in the EULA.

Besides, 10.5 Leopard will probably be the first "boxed" version of OS X that runs natively on Intel machines that will hit the store shelves.

I'm 100% positive that it will be sold as an upgrade.  Why would anyone be purchasing it otherwise (besides of course, making it run on a PC).  Anyone that will be upgrading to 10.5 will either have:

a)  An Intel Mac with Tiger
b)  A Mac with some sort of Mac OS (even OS 9)

Why would they put out a "full version" when no one really needs it (again, except to make it run on a PC).

On top of it all, people are circumventing copy protection, which does violate the DMCA.

It's just illegal.  Period.

MacBoy4139 wrote:

kb5zhh wrote:

MacBoy4139 wrote:

You paid for an upgrade.  Your Mac has the license.

The apple store says nothing about it being an upgrade.  No idea if the physical box says upgrade, but my 10.2 box doesn't say upgrade.

I'm sure it's in the EULA.

Besides, 10.5 Leopard will probably be the first "boxed" version of OS X that runs natively on Intel machines that will hit the store shelves.

I'm 100% positive that it will be sold as an upgrade.  Why would anyone be purchasing it otherwise (besides of course, making it run on a PC).  Anyone that will be upgrading to 10.5 will either have:

a)  An Intel Mac with Tiger
b)  A Mac with some sort of Mac OS (even OS 9)

Why would they put out a "full version" when no one really needs it (again, except to make it run on a PC).

On top of it all, people are circumventing copy protection, which does violate the DMCA.

It's just illegal.  Period.

Actually, no the EULA does not say that the software is sold as an upgrade only.  It does say that you can only use the software on an Apple labeled computer, however EULA's are of very questionable legal binding.

The DMCA is a legitimate example of where this does break the law, though the last time this came up there was discussion of how binding the relevant section of the DMCA would be.

MacBoy4139 wrote:

I'm sure it's in the EULA.

Besides, 10.5 Leopard will probably be the first "boxed" version of OS X that runs natively on Intel machines that will hit the store shelves.

I'm 100% positive that it will be sold as an upgrade.  Why would anyone be purchasing it otherwise (besides of course, making it run on a PC).  Anyone that will be upgrading to 10.5 will either have:

a)  An Intel Mac with Tiger
b)  A Mac with some sort of Mac OS (even OS 9)

Why would they put out a "full version" when no one really needs it (again, except to make it run on a PC).

On top of it all, people are circumventing copy protection, which does violate the DMCA.

It's just illegal.  Period.

Well, It sucks to upgrade everytime I re-install the system. I would much rather use the full version to install the clean system instead of upgrade after install. People may ask, "How often will you reformat the computer?" That is not the point. The point is that I do not want to go through that trouble of upgrading when I can just buy the full version. Its the samething as people bitching about all the updates that Windows has..

I will always wait for a full version instead of an upgrade CD. 

So there you have it, a valid reason for buying a full version of OS X.

ReallyReallyLong LongName wrote:

MacBoy4139 wrote:

I'm sure it's in the EULA.

Besides, 10.5 Leopard will probably be the first "boxed" version of OS X that runs natively on Intel machines that will hit the store shelves.

I'm 100% positive that it will be sold as an upgrade.  Why would anyone be purchasing it otherwise (besides of course, making it run on a PC).  Anyone that will be upgrading to 10.5 will either have:

a)  An Intel Mac with Tiger
b)  A Mac with some sort of Mac OS (even OS 9)

Why would they put out a "full version" when no one really needs it (again, except to make it run on a PC).

On top of it all, people are circumventing copy protection, which does violate the DMCA.

It's just illegal.  Period.

Well, It sucks to upgrade everytime I re-install the system. I would much rather use the full version to install the clean system instead of upgrade after install. People may ask, "How often will you reformat the computer?" That is not the point. The point is that I do not want to go through that trouble of upgrading when I can just buy the full version. Its the samething as people bitching about all the updates that Windows has..

I will always wait for a full version instead of an upgrade CD. 

So there you have it, a valid reason for buying a full version of OS X.

Are you being sarcastic?

Phydeaux wrote:

On top of it all, people are circumventing copy protection, which does violate the DMCA.

Don't be ignorant.

Use mp3 players like iTunes?  Device like the iPod? Buy CDs from a store?

Hi. You're technically a DMCA violator, if the CD has copy protection.

Sorry, but I see the difference.  I bought the damn CD (which none of them had copy protection, just copyrights - there is a difference).  I mainly purchase all of my music from the iTMS ever since it was released.  I even often find myself waiting until something is available from the iTMS. 

I would like to see any of these OS X stealing punk bastards buy another copy of OS X just to run on their stupid PeeCee.

Please.  Oh wait - they already bought it once, so then it's really ok?

If anyone wants Apple to survive, they would do them a favor and not steal.