# Mac on cutom built PC's?



## Bloodyskullz (Oct 12, 2006)

Is it true that leopard is being made to work with PC's that run windows? That would be great as it would be more of a reason to purchase it without getting a Mac product.

Anyone able to back this up?


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

You can illegally run OS X on a PC, but there is no official way to do this and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple patched OS X and disabled all the PCs running OS X.


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

yes you can.. but no one on here will tell you how to.
it is illegal!!!


----------



## Bloodyskullz (Oct 12, 2006)

Guys I meant legally. I already know about the illegal part. Its more like who doesn't? lol.

But seriously from what I have heard, leopard is being made to support those who have made custom built machines and want to run their software.


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

nope. illegal. as of now. it may change down the road though.. or at least i am hoping.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

As I said earlier, there is no official, legal way to run OS X on x86 (PC) architecture. There is a company, Psystar, that claims they will be making and selling so called "Hackintosh" computers running OS X, but there will undoubtedly be some legal ramifications for them. You must realize Apple does this because they are a hardware company, if they did not sell Macs, their business would be much smaller.


----------



## monckywrench (Nov 29, 2007)

""This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time."
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx104.pdf

Yet another reason to run Linux or BSD.


----------



## Bloodyskullz (Oct 12, 2006)

Excuse my ignorance, but BSD?


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

monckywrench said:


> ""This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time."
> http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx104.pdf
> 
> Yet another reason to run Linux or BSD.


I would use Linux, but there are too many programs that don't work on Linux. Flash, Photoshop, Final Cut, and Aperature just to name a few.


----------



## monckywrench (Nov 29, 2007)

"I would use Linux, but there are too many programs that don't work on Linux. Flash, Photoshop, Final Cut, and Aperature just to name a few."

Since you can afford the retail versions of that software, the cost of a Mac is trivial and there isn't any reason to run Linux or bother attempting to make a Hackintosh.


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

> Excuse my ignorance, but BSD?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

monckywrench said:


> "I would use Linux, but there are too many programs that don't work on Linux. Flash, Photoshop, Final Cut, and Aperature just to name a few."
> 
> Since you can afford the retail versions of that software, the cost of a Mac is trivial and there isn't any reason to run Linux or bother attempting to make a Hackintosh.


I actually get software from my dad's work, they have volume licenses of everything and never use every "seat" or registration, but I see your point. I just want to make it known that there's a reason why many of us can't use Linux, since there are many die-hard Linux aficionados who are pressuring everyone to use Linux (don't worry, you're not one, in fact, when it comes to Macs I probably am one   ) .


----------



## dharrington (May 1, 2008)

Apple would never want to do this, they would lose out completely in the hardware market then! Their hardware is overpriced and any company can beat them. The minute they make Mac OSX available on PCs, their computer hardware market will disappear.


----------



## loserOlimbs (Jun 19, 2004)

Bloodyskullz said:


> Guys I meant legally. I already know about the illegal part. Its more like who doesn't? lol.
> 
> But seriously from what I have heard, leopard is being made to support those who have made custom built machines and want to run their software.


Not gonna happen.

Macs are PCs, and not a thing is special about them other than the case.

You are paying for the limited serials on the hardware and Apples markup. They aren't going to change that.


----------



## MacPwnsWin (Feb 22, 2006)

Illegal? kinda. It'll just be a breach of contract with the software license agreement for the operating system. I don't know what the repercussions are. I would gladly tell you how, if i knew, because I really have no regard for that part of the contract. If I want to build my own mac, let me... Besides, they're not going to waste their time hunting you down. You still bought their software, you should be able to use it how you want. they would never patch it though; Apple is the laziest company ever when it comes to copyright protection and things along those lines.


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

MacPwnsWin said:


> You still bought their software, you should be able to use it how you want.


Wrong. You bought a _license_ to _use_ their software pursuant to the terms of the license agreement. You do not _own_ the software. Whether or not you have "regard" for that part of the contract is immaterial. It is part of the contract. The process of installation cannot be completed unless and until you click the "I agree" button. That means you are agreeing to _all_ parts of the contract. Even the ones for which you have little regard.

Is it _likely_ that Apple will come down on one person violating that agreement? No. But if there are enough people like you, and Apple can find you, the odds of being included in an infringement case certainly go up. And I guarantee you they have deeper pockets than you or I have.

These agreements have been tested before in the courts. And most of the time they are held as valid and enforceable (only when a term is deemed by the court to be unconscionable have they been invalidated--and even then it is only the unconscionable language that is stricken. The rest of the contract is still held as valid).

This public service message is brought to you by someone who knows a thing or two about the law, for the best interests of all involved.


----------



## MacPwnsWin (Feb 22, 2006)

that's exactly what I said, just a lot more verbiage. There is no law written saying that it is illegal to install mac on a non-apple computer, but there is a contract, and a breach of that contract has legal repercussions.

What I was saying is that, in my own mind, I own the software and can do what ever I want with it. Like I said; I, _myself_, do not care to follow that law or any law I disagree with.

I said that I did not know what the repercussions as listed in the contract were. I know it's a legally binding contract and the court would require me to uphold my end. I'm not stupid. And Apple is never going to sue any home user for installing mac on windows. It is not worth it to them financially. And they're not going to know. How would they know? Unless you sent them the error reports with the hardware profile when an application crashes, they're not going to know. Even then, the chances of them recognizing that it wasn't an apple-built PC are so slim, you have a better chance of winning a 7-digit lottery.

So, please don't try to be condescending. It is very rude. Read posts fully and completely before you try to tear them apart to make yourself feel smart. You could be an adult, and look for a conflict and politely correct it. Or maybe you could elaborate (politely) on my short little post for those not-so-bright people who would not understand or misinterpret what I was saying.

Don't be a child, please.


----------



## monckywrench (Nov 29, 2007)

Best to take Hackintosh discussions to places made for them anyway. 

This forum isn't that, and there are plenty of others that are.


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

> that's exactly what I said, just a lot more verbiage. There is no law written saying that it is illegal to install mac on a non-apple computer, but there is a contract, and a breach of that contract has legal repercussions.


So... it is illegal. 
IMO if something that legal repercussions then it is illegal.


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

MacPwnsWin said:


> that's exactly what I said, just a lot more verbiage.


Is it? Allow me to quote you:



MacPwnsWin said:


> You still bought their software, you should be able to use it how you want


Again. No, you did _not_ buy their software. You bought a _license_ to use the software. You own _no_ part of the software.



MacPwnsWin said:


> There is no law written saying that it is illegal to install mac on a non-apple computer, but there is a contract, and a breach of that contract has legal repercussions.


Contract law is well-established in common and statutory law. The former is not "written law" in the form of codified law, however the precedents _are_ set by and in court cases which _are_ written down. Statutes are, of course written law. Breach of contract can, and does, run afoul of both common law and statutory law. I'm afraid you are quite mistaken on this point. There is "written law" that covers this quite well on federal and state levels.

You are also forgetting other areas of the law that this sort of thing touches upon. Copyright, intellectual property, even possibly tort law could be implicated. And there are likely others that I'm not thinking of at this late hour.



MacPwnsWin said:


> What I was saying is that, in my own mind, I own the software and can do what ever I want with it. Like I said; I, _myself_, do not care to follow that law or any law I disagree with.


I understand precisely what you were saying. And I disagree with it wholeheartedly.



MacPwnsWin said:


> I said that I did not know what the repercussions as listed in the contract were. I know it's a legally binding contract and the court would require me to uphold my end. I'm not stupid. And Apple is never going to sue any home user for installing mac on windows. It is not worth it to them financially. And they're not going to know. How would they know? Unless you sent them the error reports with the hardware profile when an application crashes, they're not going to know. Even then, the chances of them recognizing that it wasn't an apple-built PC are so slim, you have a better chance of winning a 7-digit lottery.


I, myself, said the odds were against Apple taking any action. But it is a risk, nonetheless.



MacPwnsWin said:


> So, please don't try to be condescending. It is very rude. Read posts fully and completely before you try to tear them apart to make yourself feel smart. You could be an adult, and look for a conflict and politely correct it. Or maybe you could elaborate (politely) on my short little post for those not-so-bright people who would not understand or misinterpret what I was saying.


There was nothing condescending in my reply. I refuted your position with fact, as I am doing again. I am sorry your feelings were hurt, but your position is not a tenable one.


----------

