Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 17th Sep 2008 09:15 UTC, submitted by Andrew Youll
Mac OS X If you want to run Mac OS X on a standard, non-Apple-labelled x86 box, you have various options. You can go all creative and build and install one yourself, and then be weary when installing updates from Apple. You can also buy a Mac clone from PsyStar, and then be weary of Apple's crack team of lawyers. A third option has just become available: EFI-X.
Thread beginning with comment 330538
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: hmm...
by sardaukar on Wed 17th Sep 2008 09:50 UTC in reply to "RE: hmm..."
sardaukar
Member since:
2006-05-09

Why? It's the US of A - freedom of the enterprise and so on. It's Apple's legacy on the line here - you can't just nationalize their tech "for the greater good" like some socialist European government ;) it's un-american!

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: hmm...
by CaptainN- on Wed 17th Sep 2008 19:49 in reply to "RE[2]: hmm..."
CaptainN- Member since:
2005-07-07

Allow me to paraphrase, "Yeah screw individual freedom! It's only corporate freedom, that's what the USA is about!"

Seriously, try to think about this stuff a little bit more.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[4]: hmm...
by sardaukar on Wed 17th Sep 2008 19:58 in reply to "RE[3]: hmm..."
sardaukar Member since:
2006-05-09

I'm not saying it's something I like. But come on... corporations are in heaven in the US legal system!

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[4]: hmm...
by progoth on Wed 17th Sep 2008 20:21 in reply to "RE[3]: hmm..."
progoth Member since:
2006-10-28

Allow me to paraphrase, "Yeah screw individual freedom! It's only corporate freedom, that's what the USA is about!"

Seriously, try to think about this stuff a little bit more.


Yes, there are many freedoms that we may enjoy, as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. If you don't want something done with your property, you get to make that claim, whether you created it on your lonesome or if you've been able to grow a business around it.

The right to property is very important to us Americans, and the Constitution is structured around that tenant (along with our other inherent rights).

Perhaps you should think about this more...or, better yet, study and learn some things.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: hmm...
by looncraz on Thu 18th Sep 2008 05:59 in reply to "RE[2]: hmm..."
looncraz Member since:
2005-07-24

Actually U.S. law directly and emphatically permits and supports all efforts in the name of universal compatibility. It is a de facto requirement of a free-market system.

The problem is FAR beyond technology. If you have a part on your car which fails frequently, you can reverse engineer that part and re-engineer a replacement. You can't just COPY, but you CAN create a competing product.

The law ( and precedent ) clearly provides for technical compatibility on all levels without restriction except ( roughly ) as follows:

1. Violation of Copyright
2. Violation of Trademark
3. Violation of Patent
4. Violation of Contract
5. Illegal Possession of Property ( i.e. source code )

Without falling into any of the above violations, one can do as they will in the name of compatibility.

I ( or you ) have every right in the U.S. to reverse engineer ANYTHING and create a competing product, without fear of legal reprisal ( not that lawyers care about the law anymore ).

Not to be condescending, I would not expect ANYONE to know every law pertaining to even a SINGLE matter, and there is every possibility I am unaware of more recent findings or new precedence set which invalidates the written letter of the law. However, the law is written as such, and numerous, fairly recent, cases have been proven to the affirmative of the actual letter of the law, so I feel safe :-)

--The loon

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: hmm...
by sardaukar on Thu 18th Sep 2008 09:06 in reply to "RE[3]: hmm..."
sardaukar Member since:
2006-05-09

Wouldn't EFI-x break


...
3. Violation of Patent
4. Violation of Contract
...


in your list?

Reply Parent Score: 1