Mac OS X Cracked For PCs Again 319
An anonymous reader writes "Ars Technica and The Register are reporting the Apple Kernel 10.4.8 has been cracked using Apple's publicly available source trees. This is the first time Apple was hit by hackers again since Maxxuss silently left the scene.The funny thing about this is the hacker who cracked OSx has released his sources according to APSL. He told Ars Technica in an interview that he did this because he believes in freedom of information, but will this now harm Apple's opensourceness?" From the article: "Unfortunately, free and legal are not necessarily the same thing, and the EULA for OS X requires Mac hardware. However, there is an interesting comment on the blog, one that asserts the requirement of Mac hardware is a "post-sale" restriction. Such a restriction may not be applicable in certain countries, such as those of the European Union. Expect to see what Apple Legal thinks about that shortly."
According to Slashdot's front page... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
s/hackers/customers
There, fixed that for you. You're welcome!
Strat
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
use the easy button (Score:5, Funny)
If it's a post-sale restriction, and you're not buying it, problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple gets to get with the program (Score:5, Insightful)
OS X is a great OS. If more people could try it out, there'd be a lot more converts.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That is true but that probably isn't why they aren't doing it. If they aren't doing it, it is because the people good at crunching financial numbers and analyzing potential market share are saying it won't increase their overall profit and value to stockholders.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At this point I highly doubt changing to a software company would make them more profit. It's a lot of software to sell to make up for hardware sales, not to mention other costs (shrinking other departments and trying to get rid of their overhead etc). Maybe you would buy OSX for a pc, but you won't see your average home users moving
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Apple gets to get with the program (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Apple gets to get with the program (Score:4, Interesting)
So it wouldn't just be a magical change in focus for Apple to become a software company. It would require an entirely new business model with entirely new software products that support entirely new platforms. It would kill the company, and nobody would want it to happen anyway because Macs are fantastic pieces of hardware that run a very stable operating system.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Taking those numbers into account, Apple just reported something like $580 million in profit for the last quarter. Gateway (just slightly larger in market share) posted an $80 million loss. Dell (#1 in sales, moving roughly five times as many units as Apple) posted a $510 million profit for its last quarter. So we have two facts:
1 - Dell and Gateway (combined) sol
Re:Apple gets to get with the program (Score:5, Insightful)
In this PC-centric world we now live in, people seem to have a problem understanding this concept, but go back at least at least a decade and this practice of selling "systems" was the norm, until the PC killed them all in the name of commodity. Amiga, Sun, SGI, Apple, NeXT, etc... Now Apple is the only system vendor that's still in the systems business. All others have either gone bankrupt, stopped selling systems altogether, or still attempt to sell what appears to be their older systems, only they're really just overpriced x86 boxen that run Windows or Linux.
Re:Apple gets to get with the program (Score:5, Informative)
(Apple always just packaged somebody else's processor)
Re:Apple gets to get with the program (Score:4, Informative)
"The system is the solution" doesn't always hold (Score:2)
Re:"The system is the solution" doesn't always hol (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here's my statement: Apple is a software company. (Just to be devil's advocate).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Apple gets to get with the program (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
your post reminds me of this weird idea rattling around in my head of what apple will/could do to get a lot of marketshare quickly.
the long release time between xp and vista has put MS in a pretty precarious position with regard
Re:Apple gets to get with the program (Score:4, Insightful)
If you think Apple's margin on a computer is $50, you really need to think harder.
In reality, it's comfortably over 25%. So they'd need to price OS X at $300 or more just to make up for the money they were no longer making selling people a $1500 or more computer.
But it's worse than that. If they sold OS X for generic PCs, they'd have to support OS X on generic PCs, including all the shoddy PC hardware out there. They'd need to spend more on support, more on drivers, more on testing, and so on. There's a reason why Microsoft is so late shipping Vista, it's not just because of bad project management and poor decisions.
So realistically, they'd have to bump the price of OS X up to $400-500. And at that price, nobody would buy it.
Yes, if 50% of the PC market ran OS X, they could sell it for $50 and maintain today's profit levels. The problem is that there's no way to get to there from here without going through bankruptcy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If Apple was smart... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:If Apple was smart... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
(You see this kind of nerd fallacy all the time. A record company dude just said t
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just not 1337 enough to use Linux, being a graphic artist and not willing to have to relearn a completely different OS.
I was using Macs before the PC got to a point of usability for me with Windows, it would be ironic to go full circle.
Re: (Score:2)
The mac buy-in is too steep for most. Now with the mini, many people might be more tempted.
I recently bought a new mac, and have been so very happy. Once I figured out the minor differences, one being the apple key ves the alt key, not to mention the lack of a context menu (yay shit ctrl).
I left my gf in the futureshop. She played with the mac for a little here and there. Over the course of a couple of weeks, she was dreaming of it. Now we
It's the branding, stupid. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:If Apple was smart... (Score:5, Insightful)
But as I've commented in earlier discussions on this topic, I also suspect Apple has projections on just what would happen if they turned Microsoft into a full-blown, no-pretense-of-partnership enemy. Because if Apple ever released OS X for non-Apple Intel hardware, Microsoft would perceive it -- correctly -- as the most serious assault on the Windows platform that they've ever faced. No offense is intended to Linux and *BSD variants by that; it's a simple recognition that OS X has much more "end user" friendliness and a much wider range of commercial applications (including some pretty big name ones) than any other Unix relative ever has, and Apple has one of the highest brand recognitions in the world.
Given how Microsoft has reacted to much less dangerous competition in the past, what do you think their response would be?
Yes, I know you were suggesting Apple could just release an OS X that had only license restrictions and "just happened" to be able to run on non-Apple hardware, nudge nudge wink wink. But if Apple sold enough copies of OS X to non-Mac owners to actually affect their bottom line, that would be enough to attract the attention of the industry press -- and of Microsoft. And at that point, if Apple didn't take very loud definitive actions to put a stop to it, it'd be effectively throwing down the gauntlet just as much as slapping "Now compatible with your Dell, HP and your crappy white box PC!" stickers on every OS X Leopard box.
It's nice to dream, but an OS X that just breezily installs on non-Apple hardware won't happen unless Apple decides they're willing to engage in a fight to the death with Microsoft.
Before you go searching for a torrent... (Score:2)
The only snag: you can't boot into the familiar GUI. (...) In any case, the code will boot up into single-user mode, which has a certain interest for Unix and command-line geeks, but isn't going to get Mac fans rushing off to buy cheap Dells instead of Apple machines.
So this doesn't mean it's time to download a newer version of a so-called "OSX86" distrobution, anyway. C'est la vie.
Darwin ONLY (Score:3, Informative)
Now if they get around the binary signing on critical GUI components (Finder, WindowServer, etc) then I'll be more impressed.
EULA (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple's EULA says Mac OS X can only be used on an "Apple-labeled computer." But what does that really mean, legally? I've heard some people suggest that if you stick your own label that says "Apple" on a PC, then it should count as being "Apple-labeled," but I'm assuming the real meaning is "a computer that has been labeled by Apple."
So, what if you buy an old Blue & White G3 tower, remove the motherboard, and install a P4 or Core 2 motherboard (along with CPU and RAM)? Can this machine still be considered "Apple-labeled"? Surely you can upgrade the hard drive or RAM without voiding the EULA; which other components are OK to replace before the result can no longer be legally considered "Apple-labeled"?
Of course I'm talking about using a legally purchased retail copy of Mac OS X.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
However, I dont' think that it will be an upgrade. I don't believe that the retail version of Tiger (for PPC) is an upgrade. But, I am still on Panther, so I don't know for sure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not necessarily: one could buy an Intel Mac, wipe the hard drive, and use the OS X install DVD on a PC. This would violate the EULA, but probably not violate actual copyright.
Cracked = wrong word! (Score:5, Insightful)
Post Sale Restrictions (Score:5, Informative)
"Post sale restrictions" are IMHO the legal flaw in just about *every* EULA.
You've gone to the store, you've purchased a product, you've driven home, you've opened the product and are in the process of installing the
product and WHAMMO -- you're forced to agree to something after you've already expended time, energy and money towards posession of that
product. If you disagree with the EULA, you'll need to expend further time, energy and money (and bereaucratic frustration) in order to
undo the financial transaction and receive compensation. (Ever try taking XP back to Staples and saying you didn't agree with the EULA?).
This is a form of trickery and extortion that goes far beyond bait-and-switch. It is a transaction in which 'good faith' on the part of the
manufacturer is non-existent. EULA's are legal documents which cannot be given due diligence (because the expense of said diligence would vastly
exceed the price of the product), and they are agreed to by minors, the elderly and consumers with no legal background every day. The price
for disagreement is more wasted effort, more lost time and more lost money.
Post Sale Agreements should be illegal.
Re:Post Sale Restrictions (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If they want me to treat it as an upgrade, they should offer upgrade pricing.
Re: (Score:2)
All the Apple EULAs are available online, so there's no need to be "tricked" oir surprised. How is this any different to you not doing your research on a household product, only to find it doesn't have a particular feature or legal use that you wa
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone can read an EULA, but it takes a lawyer to understand it.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, there are sites around where experts analyse EULAs to give warning to people, free of charge.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone can read an EULA, but it takes a lawyer to understand it.
If you cannot or do not understand an agreement, you cannot legally enter it. Practically speaking, they can run you into court and litigate every word of the thing to death, but if you can prove that there was truly no "meeting of the minds" between you and the writer of a contract, the contract is not enforceable. They can't just throw legalisms onto a page and hold you to it for breathing while looking at it, you have to understand it i
Re: (Score:2)
Yes [wikipedia.org] (see the part near the end about "Window Refund Day").
Post Sale Agreements should be illegal.
Orthagonal to the question of click-through-licensing, which is what we're really talking about. HOWEVER, I do think that if a software vendor does not fully respect the requirements to cancel the sale if the EULA is refused, that then the EULA should be regarded as void. Microsoft defers to the hardware vendors and they defer
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So, take the example of Wolf garden tools. They make handles and a bunch of stuff that snaps onto them. There is nothing to stop them making them of a different fit. There is nothing to stop them voiding the warranty on their tools and thei
Re: (Score:2)
The real question is when will 'licensing' vs. purchasing software be adequately tested in court.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because words on a box are not a condition of sale. It's not something the buyer agreed to.
Have you ever put duct tape on something other than a duct? It's ok, don't answer that. I wouldn't want you to admit in public, that you violated the usage contract.
Re: (Score:2)
I think I need to put a sticker on my car, that says, "being a dumbass isn't a crime."
That's true, but not applicable. Apple may have some interesting plans for how they intend to distribute future versions of MacOS, but I can
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, if it doesn't identify that as a licensing term rather than a practical requirement.
If I buy a piece of software that says on the package it requires a particular operating system and processor, and run it on a different OS and processor and get it to work, I'm not breaking the license, (OTOH, if it doesn't work, I'll have even less ability to take the vendor or manufacturer to court for a refund then I would norma
Post sell restriction (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Technically, it's not a problem as Tiger doesn't run without modification on non Apple hardware and you can't assume that you'll be allowed modify shrink wrap software.
Re: (Score:2)
Does an XBox game box list all of the consoles that game doesn't run on? No. It says, "For XBox."
This is just a new "OpenDarwin". (Score:3, Interesting)
What's the big deal? That if you take things a few steps further you can use this to run the GUI on top of Darwin on Intel instead of just Power PC? Well, yes, that's a big deal, but that's not possible with what this guy's released. It's not XPostFacto.
cracked? "hit by hackers"??? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple will do whatever they will do in response to it. If they're smart, they're just going to leave it alone: in the end, this really doesn't matter, since people by Macs for the whole package; OS X itself really isn't all that special.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, geez. It's true that people buy Macs for the whole package, but Mac OS X is the user experience driving the whole package, and I'd argue that it's the most "special" aspect of the Mac experience. Otherwise, people wouldn't be porting its kernel to run it on their flimsy PCs.
Re: (Score:2)
All that stuff makes the machine fun to use, which is a good thing. But I don't think the Mac is actually any easier or more efficient for getting things done (and I'm writing th
Depends ... (Score:2)
More to the point, what effect will this have on sales?
If Apple (or independent hackers) use this information to quickly produce a fix and publish a patch, as typically happens with open source, I'll take it as a good sign, and OSX will be ranked higher in my future purchase decision.
If Apple tries to harrass Soghoian or anyone else, or closes the source, I'll take that as a sign that they're more interested in PR than fixing problems, and OSX will be ranked lower
Re: (Score:2)
I believe Soghoian is the chap with the printing out of NW airlines boarding passes, not with the computer hacking skills.
GUI is possible... (Score:2)
Sounds like the guy who posted the hack can get the gui to work (and so can you), but it's not on by default for legal reasons.
Yu can't violate a EULA (Score:2)
This is why people use clean room reverse engineering.
hardware requirement (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:No GUI (Score:5, Informative)
From TFA:
I had to remove a key which you need to reinsert if you want to run its GUI, due to legal issues. I called it the "magicpoem" maybe you got the point now. The hex for it is around so don't mail me about it, I want [won't] spread anything illegal.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No GUI (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There are many ways Apple can (and probably will) tie OS X to Mac hardware. They've got people who can do it (to date, there has never been a crack for Logic 7 Pro and its USB dongle).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
recording studio software is a niche market.
It can be cracked, as can ALL SOFTWARE.
The very nature of software makes this possible. The question is, "How many people need/want this tool?"
I don't have a recording studio in me basement, and niether do most people.
I did a quick Google check, and it seems there is a crack of pro logic 7 out there.
Mac Pro != MacBook Pro (Score:4, Informative)
The MacBook Pro (laptop) isn't cheaper than a Dell notebook. Though the new ones are closer -- and they come with sufficient RAM (2 GB), hallelujah!
Re:Apple 0x86 Mac = Expensive, Boring 0x86 PC (Score:5, Funny)
You keep using "0x86". I think you mean "x86", denoting [3456]86 chips. 0x86 is the standard representation for the hexadecimal equivalent of the number '134'.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Apple 0x86 Mac = Expensive, Boring 0x86 PC (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Apple 0x86 Mac = Expensive, Boring 0x86 PC (Score:4, Funny)
OK, who gave the guys over at Gartner Slashdot accounts?
Not news. (Score:3, Informative)
They haven't made the GUI shell (Quartz, Aqua, etc...) that runs on top of it OSS, but then neither have all the companies that make accelerated X servers and other system software for Linux made their software OSS.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The answer is right in front of you. There is no "getting around" anything. The GPL requires you to make the source of your modified versions available. It doesn't require you to make your completely unrelated code (i.e. the rest of Mac OS X) GPL.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is it just me or do a lot of folks around here seem
Re: (Score:2)
Comparisons to Microsoft are interesting, but not valid. You can not buy a Mac without a license for some variety of Mac OS.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm not talking about how the discs are built, I'm talking about how the license works. Your Mac purchase includes a license for Mac OS. Any particular retail box updates one license to the version in the box. There's basically no way to buy a "full" license for Mac OS except for buying a Mac.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What was the Mac lacking that Linux has?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Linux on a Mac (Score:5, Interesting)
I plug in the Ethernet cable, a script automatically starts and disables wi-fi card, duplicates NIC settings from the wi-fi card (IP address and so on) then brings up Ethernet. My applications just continue running, still connected to servers and such. If I pull out the ethernet cable, Wi-fi starts up, connects to the relevant network (if it's there) and my applications still aren't disconnected from anything.
This is really useful for me when I need to move around, but every now and then, I need to connect to a wired network so I can do network intensive tasks quickly, such as speedy backups, huge file copies, low latency network gaming, conference calling (works fine over wi-fi, but artifacts sometimes occur).
Mac OS X does this automatically, without needing that little script you wrote. Just give both interfaces the same IP information, and it will seamlessly switch to whichever is higher in the list of connections.
Once again, all kinds of power, and a GUI that makes it trivial to use.
The other thing is, whenever I need to use a scanner, tablet, Bluetooth dongle, wi-fi card -- anything. I can just plug it in, and it works, no need to download drivers, configure the thing. It just works almost instantly. Now, MacOSX? I find a lot of hardware doesn't "just work" on that, if it works at all. I have a Bluetooth dongle that crashes the OS, but works fine on Windows and Linux.
Not exactly persuasive, since it's personal experience. My experience has been that pretty much anything that's USB or Firewire just works, including such dongles, serial adapters, modems, printers, etc. Most PCI/AGP/PCI-Express works as well, although that is more spotty. A lot of that is thanks to class drivers, and a lot is thanks to open source (CUPS and Gimp-Print, for instance).
At the same time, I can sit here and spin tales of how my MegaRAID adapter in my server wasn't recognized by several Linux install CD's, then was broken in the kernel for a few versions, and when I finally switched to an IBM ServeRAID 3L, it wasn't supported by Windows XP!
In 20 years of using the Mac and 10 years of Windows and Linux experience, I'd say you're most likely to get something to work with full functionality on Windows. You may have problems and conflicts, but full feature support is a priority. You're most likely to get most functionality on Mac OS X. Some things are only partially supported (printer or scanner features, for instance), and there are occasional devices that don't work (video cards needing Mac-specific firmware - why is that?). As for Linux, all I can say is it's very hit or miss, distro to distro, version to version. Things break much more often on Linux. It might just need some new package or config tweak, but running a system update (synaptic, yum, emerge, etc) is sometimes like russian roulette. I backup my Linux system fully before applying updates - I don't need to with OS X or Windows.