Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 16th Nov 2005 01:50 UTC, submitted by Jeremy
Apple ExtremeTech is featuring a How-To on building an OSx86 MacIntel machine that boots both OS X and Windows. On the same hardware, OS X booted almost three times faster than Windows, yet was a disappointment when playing certain games. Update: One more article about it.
Permalink for comment 60682
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: In other words...
by japail on Wed 16th Nov 2005 06:33 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: In other words..."
japail
Member since:
2005-06-30

And if you use it to run linux, you're eeeeevil.

It's always fun to see people support arbitrary and bizarre "contracts." If publishers started putting such agreements on the inside of the covers of books preventing the reader from telling anyone the ending of the book by turning the page, I suppose that would seem perfectly sensible to some parties.

As I pointed out when this same subject came up before, if I buy N versions of OS X for my Mini or my iMac, I'm either stealing several hundred dollars from Apple or Kelly McNeil's estimated valuation is a poor means of rationalizing his argument.

This has more to do with keeping the unwashed hordes from OS X and thus removing it as whatever status symbol certain parties perceive it to be. If anything, Apple would benefit tremendously from the increase in volume of legitimate, unsupported sales of OS X from those looking to select the hardware upon which to run it. Way more than the $0 they'll obtain from the people that aren't going to buy a Mac for the privilege. What they would lose is the exclusiveness of their party, which might tarnish their brand. I have little faith that they'll be able to prevent the combination of dedicated cracking effort and ubiquitous warez channels from proliferating the system, so they should really just welcome the revenue stream and increased ISV relevance not making people go that route would provide.

Reply Parent Score: 2