Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st Sep 2009 08:44 UTC, submitted by Cytor
Hardware, Embedded Systems There are several options out there if you wan to run Mac OS X on your non-Apple labelled computer, but one of them appears to be in serious trouble. It has been uncovered that the EFI-X module is nothing more than a USB stick with a DRM chip, with code from the hackintosh community on it - without attribution. On top of that, its firmware update utility uses LGPL code - again, without attribution.
Thread beginning with comment 385211
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by kaiwai
by andydread on Mon 21st Sep 2009 12:51 UTC in reply to "Comment by kaiwai"
andydread
Member since:
2009-02-02

I find this rather ironic; the rabid Apple hating fanboys who jumped around like cheerleaders high on caffeine and chocolate thinking they're 'sticking it to the man' by supporting these group of scam-artists. Well, why are you guys surprised that these people turned out to be scam artists? these people who did this are the same sort of people who are tied up with the likes of Pystar, people so dishonest I'd sooner wish to ask for advice from my local second hand car dealer.

As for the person whining in the message above this post - Apple couldn't care less if you were, by yourself, installing it on a computer in the privacy of your own home; two companies had commercialised it on a large scale which put it beyond just a mere hobby or a group of people interested in tinkering; just as Microsoft is willing to allow things to slide when it comes to the end user installing a copy of Office on more than the number of licensed computers.

All this time spent getting it to work would be alot better spent, quite frankly, on contributing to GNOME to improve something that is free as in speech and beer; something that isn't beholden to a large corporation but to the aspirations of its user base. Image the time spent was focused on meeting the goals of GNOME 3.0 - imagine what could be accomplished.

Kind of reminds me of the billions wasted propping up the dying US car industry instead of investing in the new emerging energy efficient green car companies of silicon valley. Things never change unfortunately.


Please **note** that jailbreaking an Iphone is also violating Apple's EULA.
This is why I go to great lengths to advise my users and customers never to purchase any Apple products and to stay clear of them because they are one of the most draconian companies that exist in the IT world. They are WORSE than Microsoft in many many ways. I just advise people to stay away. Respect their EULAs and stay far far away from Apple. They maliciously brick phones etc. I point this out to ALL who ask "should I buy Apple this or that". The best way to respect the minefield they call a EULA is to avoid their products.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by REM2000 on Mon 21st Sep 2009 13:16 in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
REM2000 Member since:
2006-07-25

i think you'll find that mostly all computer like hardware / software comes with an EULA.

It's not just apple that applies an EULA to their products.

Of course the only group that doesn't is the OSS / GPL group.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by strcpy on Mon 21st Sep 2009 13:29 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
strcpy Member since:
2009-05-20

This is quite.

Since the open source aspect has been yet again brought to the center of the discussion, I would emphasize especially the hardware-side of things.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by apoclypse on Mon 21st Sep 2009 14:41 in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

So what is the difference between this and say a PSP? Apple doesn't really care if you jailbreak your own iPhone. I didn't get a call from Apple when I jailbroke my 1st gen iPhone before OS v.2 came out. What they are trying to prevent is people from pirating which happens to be a big issue, regardless of how much all the jailbreak faithful try to deny it, and distribution. Again Apple, Sony, whoever don't care if you jailbreak your own device, its when you start distributing hacked devices to make money that you start to run into issues. As far as I know Apple has never bothered with the Hackintosh or jailbreak community other than to update their software (most times halfheartedly)to block access.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Mon 21st Sep 2009 19:08 in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Please **note** that jailbreaking an Iphone is also violating Apple's EULA.
This is why I go to great lengths to advise my users and customers never to purchase any Apple products and to stay clear of them because they are one of the most draconian companies that exist in the IT world. They are WORSE than Microsoft in many many ways. I just advise people to stay away. Respect their EULAs and stay far far away from Apple. They maliciously brick phones etc. I point this out to ALL who ask "should I buy Apple this or that". The best way to respect the minefield they call a EULA is to avoid their products.


And please **note** what I said regarding the Apple EULA:

Apple couldn't care less if you were, by yourself, installing it on a computer in the privacy of your own home


It only became an issue because two organisations of ill repute setup and commercialised what was simply a home cottage/hobby by basing their business off the work done by the OSx86 enthusiast community. Apple were quite happy to allow EULA violations slide on a small, non-commercial scale where enthusiasts were tinkering around. The issue came, as I've said, and repeatedly said on this forum, where it was turned into a commercial scale business venture.

Lets not try and fall into this stupid idea that equates a small home cottage/hobby to a commercial scale setup like Pystar or EFI-X. The former are innocent people tinkering around in their homes with software and hardware, the later are scum sucking roaches jumping on the coat tales of Apple because they can't be figged creating a real legitimate business off their own intellectual property.

Edited 2009-09-21 19:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 21st Sep 2009 19:20 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

scum sucking roaches


Why is a company a scum sucking roach, but I'm not? What's the difference? Where's the line? It seems rather arbitrary to me. What if I help a friend set up a hackintosh? Or ten friends? At what point do I become a scum-sucking roach?

And what is so "scum sucking" about it anyway? They are paying for their copies, right? It seems like to me Apple is providing all the means to be scum-sucked. If I hand over my car keys to a random stranger and say "here, take my car", I can't then go to the police and claim with a straight face that my car was stolen, now, can I?

Edited 2009-09-21 19:21 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by apoclypse on Mon 21st Sep 2009 19:41 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

Totally agree with you there.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by boldingd on Mon 21st Sep 2009 22:06 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

The former are innocent people tinkering around in their homes with software and hardware, the later are scum sucking roaches jumping on the coat tales of Apple because they can't be figged creating a real legitimate business off their own intellectual property.


Kinda like the same way that Apple wrote all of the code that went into OS X and WebKit all by their lonesome, from their boundless genius? OS 9 is what you get when Apple uses their own in-house talent: OS X is the result of Apple figuring out whose code they can re-appropriate and get away with. And notice how many patches Apple has contributed up-stream, back to the community. Why FreeBSD's just chock-full of patches from Apple, isn't it?

Don't get me wrong, I know that FreeBSD and KHTML where BSD licensed, I'm not even saying that Apple was out-of-line to do what they did. What I am saying is that you shouldn't bitch about people taking from Apple and not giving anything back.

Reply Parent Score: -1