Now start downloading, all you closet Windows fanatics.

Not your computer system. I mean your human system.

Let the hacks continue. They give Apple all the ammunition they need to know how to PREVENT it when the actual machines come out. Does anybody seriously believe they didn't forsee (and want) this?

Only RC and Rob Enderle are that naive. (hmm, one in the same perhaps?????)

So? Did anyone not know this would happen? It's sad to see that piracy is now news.

I heard the same thing from my pirate buddies, apparently getting this to actually run was cake. Whether or not this is actually a good or bad thing, I've yet to decide on. I'm sure Windows users would pay for OS X, but seeing as how it needs to be cracked, users would might as well pirate it while they're at it. Oh well. It's still Windows 2003 Ent for me.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was a module in the developers version that will garbage the HD after the date the developers are required to return the development units. Continual changing of the system date might help - like a lot of people did to avoid the Y2K problem, but that's a pain.

All this does right now is let a lot of PC users try a Mac OS. A few might buy a Mac from the experience, but it's not a big deal.

The real issue is what Apple will do for their actual product release. I believe it will be both a hardware and software approach and it might already be in Tiger, maybe Panther as well.

I have a feeling that the hack irritates MS more than Apple.

Apparently people are jazzed about this prospect.

Apple's stock is up more than $2 a share.

Dell's is down more than $3 a share.

The price difference is now almost $10.

Uh, Michael, is anyone out there still with you???

Time to get a PC, Mac fans! This runs faster than your crap that you paid for!

I'm sure Apple will make it a bit tougher to get the final release of OS X for Intel to run on your basic el cheapo Dell box. For starters, they could insert the check for the TPM chip in enough places to make it a real pain to run for long without requiring the chip to be there. And they could always pull some tricks, like self-modifying code, to make locating the TPM check a little harder.

Sure, a determind hacker can figure it out, but as long as it keeps Joe Sixpack from purchasing OS X to run on their Intel box, it should serve the purpose of keeping Apple's hardware sales afloat until they can identify another reliable revenue stream.

It'll be interesting to see how heavy Apple Legal gets with these guys, given Apple's recent run-in with bloggers releasing company secrets.

A high end pc might be faster, but it's still crap.

A rocket on wheels can move pretty fast, but it's certainly bound to crash.

Quote

mahuti wrote:
A high end pc might be faster, but it's still crap.

A rocket on wheels can move pretty fast, but it's certainly bound to crash.

Does anyone agree Apple should trackback the NDA offender and make them pay a price? In all likelyhood we as shareholders should trumpet TPM and registration. If Apple legal was tasked to follow the product preannouncements, should we expect no less than finding and outing the perps?
These "members" of the Mac community are no friends of us and our favorite platform.

"Time to get a PC, Mac fans! This runs faster than your crap that you paid for!"

Bzzt. Wrong answer. Macs are PCs to begin with, and they'll soon come with Intel processors, anyway. Try again.


"A high end pc is what Apple will be moving to. You just criticized Apple! I love it!"

So you're saying Macs are going to be high-end PCs. You just praised Apple. I love it.

Actually it's not any faster. XBench gives far worse results on these PC:s than even on a single processor 1.8GHz G5 iMac. Even the original Intel development machines have worse results than the 1.8GHz iMac.

Some people might arque, that these XBench results aren't accurate. Well, they are the best ones we have for now, since not that many MacIntel-applications are out there yet.

Actually it's not any faster. XBench gives far worse results on these PC:s than even on a single processor 1.8GHz G5 iMac. Even the original Intel development machines have worse results than the 1.8GHz iMac.

Some people might arque, that these XBench results aren't accurate. Well, they are the best ones we have for now, since not that many MacIntel-applications are out there yet.

Apple doesn't need to worry about this. The people who'd download OSx86 most likely wouldn't pay for a real Mac, anyway. Apple won't be losing much money, if any.

Microsoft, on the other hand, should be sweating bullets right about now. The number of people using pirated versions of Windows is absolutely huge, and they're all potential users of OSx86. Once they start installing it on their Dells and HPs and custom PCs, they'll get to experience it running side by side with Windows, and word is going to spread about how much better it is. On a massive scale.

Hell, right now, a person could install Vista and OS X on the same computer and have a real good laugh.

I still prefer my Timex Sinclair.

There's going to be a lot of heat in the PC market over the next couple of years – least of all from the processors

Mac OS X will cause quite a stir on Intel, so much so that major players like Sony will be clamouring for the Apple license. On the retail front the traditional marketing diferentiations of "PC" and Apple will have become more ambiguous because of the MacIntel factor. It will be a win-win situation for Apple. In this scenario the x86 crack doesn't cut any ice –it will be totally irrelevant.

The only reason that Apple might license would have to do with it's ability to satisfy future market demands for native MacIntels.

I hope they fix it somehow and make it so it won't work anymore w/ windows. Because, I think hacking OS X is wrong.

-Addison
Mississippi

Right now it runs on 86 processors, but what will be the chip in the retail Macs? Will they have something quite a bit different from the x86 that won't be sold except in an Apple branded Mac?

This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, least of all Apple. (I'm quite certain that it isn't to them.)

Let 'em hack. Or waste money trying to stop them. You're not going to stop them, so it's just a waste of time and money and more important but less tangible resources. Better to have those same developers work on new features rather than try to stop people from using current ones.

Everyone here with a pirated version of Windows somewhere, raise your hands. I'd venture a guess that there are 2:1 pirated copies of Windows to all copies of Mac OS. Maybe even more. Is Microsoft hurting because of that? Most legitimate businesses, particularly large corporations, do a good job of running legal copies.

People hacking OSX to run on a PC will, as has been mentioned, spread the word about OSX. If it runs faster than on G5s, great. But I don't think anyone will argue that OSX doesn't run faster than Windows on the same hardware once they can give it a shot. This will spread like wildfire.

I just built a "new" PC. It's nearly identical to the one I built in 1999. Back then it cost me hundreds. This week it cost me about $75. I was going to install Free BSD on it and use it as a file server, but now I'm thinking I'll give this hack a shot and see how it runs.


- Jon

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
"Time to get a PC, Mac fans! This runs faster than your crap that you paid for!"

Bzzt. Fingers in electrical sockets is fun. Macs are done with, and they'll soon be forgotten. Fry chicken!


"A high end pc is what Apple will be moving to. You just criticized Apple! I love it!"

So you're saying Macs are going to be butt-ugly. Where can I buy one? I can't wait.

In other countries such as in the Philippines or in China where software piracy is rampant, many PCs are sold to the public with pirated software, including Macs with pirated copies of Final Cut Pro, for example. I foresee no-name-brand PCs with pirated versions of Mac OS X being sold in these countries too. The average Joe buying these PCs isn't going have to deal with the problem of installing the hacked versions of Mac OS X; the shop that he buys it from will do it for him as part of their service. Never mind if some features are disabled as long as it's cheaper than a real Apple-made Macintel. Apple Asia will then see a drop in their sales as a result. The same thing will happen in Eastern Europe and Russia, with Apple losing tons of sales there.

Judging by all of the software you need to hack OS X into a WalMart PC, it's going to run really slow and buggy, just like Windows. How fitting for PC users.

To lose tons of sales in the Philipines, China, Eastern Europe, and Russia, doesn't Apple first have to be MAKING tons of sales in those places? I don't think they are.

"Judging by all of the software you need to hack OS X into a WalMart PC, it's going to run really slow and buggy, just like Windows."

Oh, come on, it can't be just as buggy. If you put a copy of OS X into a toaster oven and set it to broil, it'd still be less prone to disaster than Windows.

According to my friends in Manila, Apple is actually doing very well there thanks to the iPod and its halo effect on iMacs and Powerbooks. Apple's worldwide sales account for nearly half of the profit it makes every quarter. If they lose a substantial amount of those sales due to pirates installing a hacked copy of Mac OS X to no name brand PCs and selling them to people, then Apple's stock is going to start sliding downwards when Steve Jobs reports lower profits to the stockholders. Apple makes money from selling hardware; Mac OS X provides a compelling reason for people to buy hardware from Apple. Once Apple loses Mac OS X to the pirates, then its hardware sales to those countries will tank and the fervent wishes of those who want Apple to die will soon come to pass.

So, this 'trusted platform module' is there to force people to buy Apple's overpriced hardware. This sounds like something the hated Microsoft would do. Why shouldn't we be able to run Mac software on 'el cheapo' Dell boxes? Just because I enjoy the 'superior user experience' of the Mac OS doesn't meant I wouldn't mind paying less for the experience!

You guys seem to love being fleeced.

I firmly believe that to have an easily accessible Mac OS on the Intel platform is the greatest thing since koolaid

Intel is not a PLATFORM, nor is it lashed to Microsuck anymore. Intel is providing the chip, Mac is providing the firmware or "BIOS" as Wintel people call it. The "BIOS"/firmware will be totally different than the Windows-friendly ones currently in use and you can take it to the bank that Apple will make this the cornerstone of their security and anti-piracy construction. This is because the "BIOS" is the Achilles Heel of the Intel chipset and will be the only significant forseeable point of entry for viruses (viri). Luckily, BIOS-level viruses are very difficult to write, however you can count on some hackers getting very good at it in order to crack the so-far-uncrackable Mac OS X.

So, if Apple's future as the most secure OS and the largest proprietary hardware computer company is at stake by this ONE weakness, then they will devote a huge amount of time/money toward squashing any security problems and OS portability issues BEFORE June '06, when the first machine is released. For all we know, Apple, having forseen this, is letting the hackers do some of their work for them.
Lazarus

So has anybody actually used this first hand yet? I ask because I assume this is different than the "Install Mac OS X on Your PC!!!" thing on their page. Mainly because that is just instructions on how to install Pear PC and Darwin.

Somehow I don't think TPM is going to be just a kernel extension in the retail release. People are going to get stuck running this old Mac OS. Then I guess they'll have to buy a Mac if they want Leopard.

But hey. Who knows what Apple's intentions are? We'll just have to wait and see.

"So, this 'trusted platform module' is there to force people to buy Apple's overpriced hardware."

Except that it isn't overpriced. That's a nice try ignoring the facts, though.

"This sounds like something the hated Microsoft would do. Why shouldn't we be able to run Mac software on 'el cheapo' Dell boxes?"

Hello, Winbot; have you forgotten that with the exception of the cloning days, the Mac OS has always run on Mac hardware? And do you know why that is?

It's because Apple makes money on hardware. If we all buy Dell boxes running OS X instead of Macs, then Apple will die from loss of hardware sales. Because hardware sales are what they make money off of. Do you follow?

Of course, the second reason not to want Mac software on a Dell, is that Dells are slapped together from the cheapest of the cheap hardware components and have a much, much, much higher failure rate than Macs.

"Just because I enjoy the 'superior user experience' of the Mac OS doesn't meant I wouldn't mind paying less for the experience!"

That's why Apple put a stop to Mac cloning. If someone bought a cheaper clone instead of a more expensive genuine Mac, Apple lost money. So, if Apple's dead, just how much are you going to enjoy that 'seperior user experience'?


"You guys seem to love being fleeced."

You seem to love chugging the Microsoft Kool-Aid. But hey, don't stop. The more Windows zombies that get publicly debunked, the better.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
"So, this 'trusted platform module' is there to force people to buy Apple's overpriced hardware."

Accept the fact that it is overpriced.

"This sounds like something the hated Microsoft would do. Why shouldn't we be able to run Mac software on 'el cheapo' Dell boxes?"

Hello, the Mac OS just threw an exception. And do you know why that is?

It's because Apple makes counterfeit money, and stores it in their huge cash reserve. Then they can afford to take on Dell. Then Dell will die, of course, and the judge will slap Apple's hand for monopolizing, and selling much, much, much hotter iMacs.

"Just because I enjoy the 'superior user experience' of the Mac OS doesn't meant I wouldn't mind paying less for the experience!"

That's why Apple supports cloning. If someone bought cheaper money, you going to misspell 'seperior'?


"You guys seem to love being fleeced."

You seem to love suing Apple. But hey, don't stop. The more Apple employees that get public defenders, the better.

Hey, you're starting to get incoherent again.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Hey, you're farting to get noticed again.

I have tested in this last two weeks Windows Vista, and Mac OSX Tiger for Intel. And i would prefer 1000% OSX over Vista. I would love to buy a Mac with a cheaper price but with the awesome power of a PC, i really cant distinguish my Photoshop CS2 running in my G5 and my PS CS2 in the Mactel, and the Mactel is running PS CS2 in emulation trought Rosseta!!!

i just wana have a dual booting MAC with a strip down Windows xp, just for playing games (cause games in the MAC really suck) and the other boot for serious working. I hope i will be able to buy cheaper components, wich are the same for the actual mac but very overpriced just for the sake of apple logo in them.

And finally i would love to build my own system, with my own configuration, not cheap overpriced hardware like apple usually sells to us.

And i wan to see OSX in every home computer in the world

Aberracus

So. Who thinks apple could lose money selling only software????

Microsoft sell sonly software, do you think microsft is losing money for no selling hardware?, pelase think it over...

Cheers

Quote

LazarusAfoot wrote:
Intel is not a PLATFORM, nor is it lashed to Microsuck anymore. Intel is providing the chip, Mac is providing the firmware or "BIOS" as Wintel people call it. The "BIOS"/firmware will be totally different than the Windows-friendly ones currently in use and you can take it to the bank that Apple will make this the cornerstone of their security and anti-piracy construction. This is because the "BIOS" is the Achilles Heel of the Intel chipset and will be the only significant forseeable point of entry for viruses (viri). Luckily, BIOS-level viruses are very difficult to write, however you can count on some hackers getting very good at it in order to crack the so-far-uncrackable Mac OS X.

So, if Apple's future as the most secure OS and the largest proprietary hardware computer company is at stake by this ONE weakness, then they will devote a huge amount of time/money toward squashing any security problems and OS portability issues BEFORE June '06, when the first machine is released. For all we know, Apple, having forseen this, is letting the hackers do some of their work for them.
Lazarus

my g4 goes down way more often than my xp boxes

I love my Mac but Dell is WAAAAAAAAAAAAY ahead in most every way as a company

And Dell is losing market share, having saturated their own market. Sure, Apple makes stupid moves from time to time, just like anyone else, but at least they leave themselves space to expand. ANd OS X on PCs is not always stable or complete. Often there are missing features, such as networking or sound...

Dumb apple/mac user with their thoughtless statements again... What great applications that aplles had realeases recently or even in the pass like Office...

--> You said: <--
So. Who thinks apple could lose money selling only software????

Microsoft sell sonly software, do you think microsft is losing money for no selling hardware?, pelase think it over...

Cheers

--> end of your dumb-ass statement <--

We all know that stupid mac users are only capable of making such comparision; they have no idea how their machines work and yet thinking they know everything. Typical of a submissive group; always obey what's their master telling them. Wake up stupid, don't you know there is only ONE god and he's ain't Steve Job or Bill Gates...


--> You said: <--
Oh, come on, it can't be just as buggy. If you put a copy of OS X into a toaster oven and set it to broil, it'd still be less prone to disaster than Windows.
--> end of your reterd statemen<--

Hey donkey! If "Macs is PCs to begin with..." according to your over-analyzing statement then why does all the Mac users automatically correct me why I tell them their PCs (Macs/Apples) looks funny?

This tell me two things:

1. If a machine is great Mac users assume that their.

2. Else it must be PCs...


That's very impressive... Next thing we'll know Mac users will claim that CRAYs are Mac too.


*******
Bzzt. Wrong answer. Macs are PCs to begin with, and they'll soon come with Intel processors, anyway. Try again.
*******

That's right! Conversion takes time... CPU today... who knows... may be two button mouse is on the horizon....


--> Your stupit statement <---
There's going to be a lot of heat in the PC market over the next couple of years – least of all from the processors

Mac OS X will cause quite a stir on Intel, so much so that major players like Sony will be clamouring for the Apple license. On the retail front the traditional marketing diferentiations of "PC" and Apple will have become more ambiguous because of the MacIntel factor. It will be a win-win situation for Apple. In this scenario the x86 crack doesn't cut any ice –it will be totally irrelevant.

The only reason that Apple might license would have to do with it's ability to satisfy future market demands for native MacIntels.
--> end of your brain fart <--

What that f*ck are you blabing about??? Can't think of any think to say except bitching on miss-spelled word? Time to get a life you stupit low-life...

--> your stupit statement <--
That's why Apple supports cloning. If someone bought cheaper money, you going to misspell 'seperior'?
--> end of your retarded thought <--

Let's us all think this over; shall we.... XBOX 360!

--> you said <--
Microsoft sell sonly software, do you think microsft is losing money for no selling hardware?, pelase think it over...

Cheers
--> end of what you said; now cheer up! <--

Loosing market share is notthing new for a GIANT company like Dell / IBM, ect... I though for sure you brain-washed Mac users should know this and NOT making such a fuss about it. So what else can you say that telling me Mac/Apple is better?

Well let me tell you... Mac/Apple user base is nothing to write home about.

-->
And Dell is losing market share, having saturated their own market. Sure, Apple makes stupid moves from time to time, just like anyone else, but at least they leave themselves space to expand. ANd OS X on PCs is not always stable or complete. Often there are missing features, such as networking or sound...

-->