OSNews

Is OS X really so fragile and poorly-designed that it's incapable of running on any hardware that isn't explicitly Apple-"blessed"?

If that's true (and not just a lazy excuse favoured by Mac fans), then that sounds pretty """"broken"""" to me. "

Last time I checked, Apple works with vendors and provides the drivers for graphics cards, wireless, NICs etc... Should you go with hardware that is unsupported... Have Fun. Should Apple decide to brick your computer with a software update... Have fun. It won't be Apple's fault if it doesn't just work, but I'm sure y'all will try to make it out to be.

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/HCL_10.5.2/Desktops

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/HCL_10.5.2/Portables

Some of it works, some of it doesn't. It's a difficult concept to grasp, but Mac OS is designed to run on Apple hardware. It's not going to include drivers to every bit of hardware out there... And trying to run an incomplete system is not giving the OS or Apple a fair shake.

Your argument has ZERO merit, but I'm sure it made you feel better.

...and? Would any thinking, rational person expect differently?

Even on OSNews, I can't honestly say that I've ever read a post by someone suggesting that Apple should be taken to task for not supporting hardware that they don't use. None but the most asinine would assume that any OS would run on unsupported hardware.

The argument is also a complete red herring - because Apple doesn't just prevent (or "protect," as you'd characterize it) users from running OS X on unsupported hardware. They go beyond that and prevent users from running OS X on the exact same ardware that Apple uses themselves, if it lacks Apple's logo. There's no technical justification for that whatsoever - it's purely a deliberate limitation imposed by Apple, done entirely out of financial self-interest on their part.

BeOS had/has absolutely no problem running on generic hardware, as long as drivers are present. It would be truly pathetic if Apple couldn't achieve at least as much, considering that they have exponentially greater amounts of financial and developer resources than Be ever did.



Actually, if they were to deliberately *brick* machines and it was provable, then yes - it *would* be their fault and they would likely be liable for damages.



Speaking of asinine assumptions, how did you come up with that gem?

And "y'all"...?



...which is utterly without relevance, when you consider that "Apple hardware" is little more than Intel and Asus hardware that happens to have been Apple-branded/blessed.

There are no special/magical qualities conveyed by the Apple branding. Any clown can go buy the exact same components from any computer retailer - and if it weren't for the deliberate steps taken by Apple to lock OS X to Apple-branded hardware, then off-the-shelf Asus/Intel gear would run OS X just as well as Asus/Intel gear that happens to carry the Apple logo.



You haven't even supported your own argument yet, chum. Perhaps you should try that *before* you start tossing out unqualified critiques of arguments made by anyone else.