=20

- Subscribe=20
- Renew=20
- Give a=20 Gift
- Change=20 Address
- International<= /A>=20
- Questions=20
- Cars 2.0
- Culture
- Entertainment
- Gadgets
- Gaming
- How-To
- Med Tech
- Politics =
- Product Reviews =
- Science
- Software
- Tech Biz
- Commentary =
- Multimedia =
- Wired Biz =
- Wired Insider=20
- All
- Autopia
- Danger Room
- Epicenter
- Gadget Lab
- Game | Life =
- GeekDad
- Listening Post =
- Monkey Bites =
- Threat Level =
- Underwire
- Wired = Science=20
- All
- Automotiv= e=20
- Camcorder= s=20
- Desktops=20
- Digital=20 Cameras
- Gaming=20 Gear
- Hom= e=20 Audio/Video
- Household<= /A>=20
- Mobiles=20 Phones
- Notebooks<= /A>=20
- Portab= le=20 Media Players
- Spor= ts=20 and Outdoors
- Televisi= ons=20

<= /DIV>

=C2=AB= Philips=20 Keeps it (Mostly) Cheap and Simple With New Lineup | Main | Gadge= t Lab=20 Podcast #57: Wired Reviews for the iPhone =C2=BB

Hack of the Clones: Why Apple Can't Stop the = Copies

By Brian X. Chen 3DEmail=20

December 12, 2008 | 5:22:44 = PMCategories: Apple, Hacks &n= bsp;=20

= = = = = = "=20 href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/12/12/eee1.jpg"><= IMG=20 title=3DEee1 height=3D408 alt=3DEee1=20 src=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/images/2008/12/12/eee1.jpg" = width=3D640=20 border=3D0 ilo-ph-fix=3D"fixed"=20 ilo-full-src=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/images/2008/12/12/eee1.jpg"= >=20

Just hours after announcing plans to sell a high-end Mac clone, niche = electronics reseller EFIX USA changed course in order to avoid a nasty = legal=20 confrontation with Apple.

"We certainly don't want to get into a legal battle that's over a = couple=20 thousand dollars," an EFIX USA spokesman said. "Potentially Apple could = have a=20 legal issue there. They may not have a legal issue, but with all the = money they=20 have they might try to make one."

Despite the sudden turnabout, it's getting harder and harder for = Apple to=20 guard the most precious jewel at the core of its success: The Mac = operating=20 system.

Apple forbids Mac OS X from running on anything but a Mac. But in the = past=20 year, an army of Mac cloners has emerged, their rise facilitated in = large part=20 by Apple's 2006 decision to switch to Intel chips. The most prominent = example is=20 Florida-based Psystar, a startup selling Mac clones, which has been in = legal=20 battle with Apple since July. Shortly following Psystar's lead were = companies=20 with similar offerings: = "=20 href=3D"http:///">OpenTech, = "=20 href=3D"http:///">OpeniMac and = = = = = = "=20 href=3D"http://www.muzzle.nl/english-chat/39-interview-davide-rutigliano-= ceo-art-studios-entertainment-media.html">Art=20 Studios Entertainment Media.

Friday morning, = = = = = = = "=20 href=3D"http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/12/12/efi_x_usa_to_sell_p= re_made_pcs_as_do_it_yourself_mac_clones.html">AppleInsider=20 reported that EFIX USA was going to start selling custom-made PCs = with a=20 Mac-OS-loaded USB dongle included inside. But in a phone interview with=20 Wired.com, EFIX USA said it was going to cancel this deal, in fear that = Apple=20 would construe this offer -- a computer shipped with a Mac OS X booter = -- as a=20 Mac clone.

HR&O attorney Eric Overholt said the dongle will likely face = legality=20 issues with Apple. He explained Apple could potentially allege piracy = and=20 copyright infringement in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright = Act,=20 because the Taiwanese company is essentially copying the Mac BIOS and = putting it=20 in a chip (the dongle).

"My thought is that this company will face the same type of lawsuit = and=20 claims that Psystar is facing," said Eric Overholt, an attorney with = HR&O.=20 "This dongle tricks the clone into thinking that the clone is actually a = Mac.=20 There will also most likely be claims against [the company] for 'reverse = engineering' the Mac BIOS in order to create their 'dongle.'"

Art Studios Entertainment Media's dongle shows how the definition of = a "Mac=20 clone" has become blurry. And that gives away just how easy it's become = for=20 manufacturers to steal Apple's operating system -- and market it in = different=20 ways in order to dodge legal bullets.

"I would say that one of the things that's happening to Apple is that = it's=20 less able to keep secrets than it used to be because it has broader = supply chain=20 and broader distribution," said Roger Kay, an Endpoint Technologies = analyst.

Apple wasn't always opposed to Mac clones. For a brief period in the = 1990s --=20 when Steve Jobs was still exiled from Apple -- Apple CEO Michael = Spindler=20 licensed the Mac operating system to several manufacturers: Power = Computing,=20 Motorola, Umax, APS, Radius and DayStar. When Jobs retook the helm in = 1997, one=20 of the first items on his agenda was to destroy the clone program and = eliminate=20 these cheaper alternatives to Apple's goods.

But in 2006, Apple opened itself up to attack again (knowingly or = not) when=20 it ditched its own Power PC processors in favor of Intel's more = power-efficient=20 CPUs. Because Apple then had to code OS X to run on Intel processors, it = opened=20 a door for hackers: They could modify the operating system code to run = on any=20 Intel-powered, non-Mac machine.

The Intel switch gave birth to an underground community of hackers = dubbed=20 OSX86, who = = = = = = = "=20 href=3D"http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/FAQ#What_is_The_OSx86= _Project.3F">anonymously=20 contribute to a wiki that details the techniques required to get the = Mac OS=20 to work on other Intel machines. The OSX86 community is what made = Psystar and=20 all the aforementioned companies possible, and it's also what enables = people to=20 = = = = = "=20 href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/12/gadget-lab-vide.html">insta= ll Mac OS=20 X on a netbook, a popular hack.

"People were talking about Apple coming out with a laptop under $800 = for the=20 first time, and someone already made one and it's a [hacked] netbook," = said Brad=20 Linder, blogger of Liliputing.

Although running OS X on a non-Apple machine may violate Apple's = software=20 license agreements and copyrights, and may be a violation of the DMCA, = the new=20 crop of clone makers have plenty of tricky moves to evade legal = trouble.

One of the trickiest moves comes from Art Studios Entertainment = Media. The=20 company isn't selling a Mac clone, per se. It's = = = = "=20 href=3D"http://www.efixusa.com/">manufacturing a USB dongle that = lets PCs boot=20 up any operating system, including OS X. Conveniently enough, Art = Studios=20 Entertainment Media calls the product EFI-X, and is selling the product = through=20 EFIX USA, the reseller that no longer wants to be known as a maker of = Mac=20 clones. The Taiwanese company is urging EFIX USA to avoid marketing the = dongle's=20 primary feature as booting computers off OS X -- even though that's what = most=20 customers likely want it for.

Confused yet? EFIX USA says it is too.

"We get somewhat mixed signals on what [Art Studios Entertainment = Media]=20 would really like to accomplish," an EFIX USA spokesman said. "They = produce the=20 device and want to sell it, but somehow they don't want it to come out = that the=20 primary function of the device is that it allows people to run OS X on = generic=20 Intel hardware."

Another company with a creative plan to put out a Mac clone was = OpenTech. The=20 Florida-based company launched in July, promising to sell computers = together=20 with a how-to kit on installing the operating system of your choice, = including=20 Apple's. A spokesman for OpenTech made bold statements, saying, "Our = legal team=20 has come to the conclusion that we wouldn't be violating any copyright = laws or=20 any other laws." But just a month later, OpenTech = = = = = = = "=20 href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/08/one-month-old-m.html">shut = down its=20 operation and put it up for sale.

Apple continues to battle Psystar, a Florida-based company that = = = = = = = "=20 href=3D"http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2008/04/apple_psystar">star= ted=20 selling PCs hacked to run OS X in April. Apple in mid-July filed a = lawsuit=20 alleging copyright, trademark and shrink-wrap license infringement. And = much to=20 Apple's surprise, Psystar's legal team is fighting back, leading the = corporation=20 to = = = = = = = "=20 href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/12/apple-cries-cor.html">belie= ve the=20 small company may be receiving help from other parties -- perhaps = another=20 competing corporation.

Since the Mac clone market is young, it's difficult to tell how much = these=20 clone makers and netbook hackers are actually cutting into Apple's = sales. Given=20 the difficulty of getting the hacks to work, or even of getting a clone = maker on=20 the phone, total sales of Mac clones are probably miniscule. And it's = unlikely=20 we'll see Mac clones break into the mainstream any time soon, given = Apple's=20 ruthless legal team.

Even so, Apple's clone problem is unlikely to go away in the near = future. As=20 long as OS X runs on Intel hardware, and as long as the developers = behind OSX86=20 continue their work, it will be difficult for Apple to stop cloning=20 altogether.

See Also:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/12/apple-cries-cor.html#previo= uspost">Apple=20 Cries Corporate Conspiracy Behind Psystar=20
= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/10/psystar-blu-ray.html#previo= uspost">Psystar:=20 Blu-Ray Hackintosh for Sale; MacBook Clones on the Way ...=20
= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/07/apple-finally-s.html#previo= uspost">Apple=20 Finally Sues Mac Copycat Psystar=20
= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/08/psystar-tags-ba.html#previo= uspost">Psystar=20 Tags Back Apple With Antitrust Suit=20
= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/07/apple-demands-t.html#previo= uspost">Apple=20 Demands That Psystar Recalls All Hackintoshes=20
= = = = = = "= =20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/06/psystar-offers.html#previou= spost">Psystar=20 Offers Cloned OS X Servers=20
= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/08/one-month-old-m.html#previo= uspost">One-month-old=20 Mac Cloner Open Tech up for Sale=20
= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/08/open-tech-launc.html#previo= uspost">Open=20 Tech Launches Mac Clones=20
= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/07/open-tech-apple.html#previo= uspost">Open=20 Tech: Apple Can't Stop Us From Making Mac Clones=20
= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/07/attorney-open-t.html#previo= uspost">Attorney:=20 Open Tech Mac Cloner Subject to Legal Troubles=20
= = = = = = = = = = = = = "=20 = href=3D"http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/07/stupidity-tries.html#previo= uspost">Another=20 Mac Clone To Come

Photo: How-to-Wiki/Wired.com

Stumble

=20

Face it, fanboys.
Apple is just as "evil" as any other profit = seeking=20 entity in this capitalist society. Face it, you got fleeced out of your = extra=20 bucks simply for image, not substance.

FLAME ON!

Posted by: h8menow | Dec=20 12, 2008 3:10:10 PM

I actually wonder, why Apple is not selling MacOS to any PC. They = would=20 immediately take some 30% of the desktop OS market, if not more.

I do realize, that bu controlling the hardware Apple reduces the = number of=20 problems with drivers, compatibility, testing etc. but at least they = could list=20 a number of supported configurations and say that they do not provide = any=20 warranty for usability of OSX on no-compliant hardware.

Posted by: stoffer | Dec=20 12, 2008 3:25:33 PM

To many fanboys are Windows VS MAC. Microsoft dosent build pc's. = Other people=20 do. They just make an OS. The argument should be really Mac vs Dell etc. = After=20 all Macs are just Pc's with a different OS. Cost VS Quaility is not for=20 Microsoft to decide. Scream M$ is a monoply but I can run windows on = anything=20 Legaly. Cant with OSX.

Posted by: m3kt3k | Dec=20 12, 2008 4:16:29 PM

@h8menow

Shhh, be quite fanboy.

Posted by: iAirmanshirk=20 | Dec=20 12, 2008 4:37:52 PM

Apple is probably in favor of a few hackers running OS X on random = hardware.=20 Apple doesn't want to support that, so they don't sell an OS for it. =

Apple does not want someone selling hardware to run their OS.

I think that EFI is just making stuff to let you boot an OS like OS X = that=20 needs the EFI BIOS replacement Intel has been pushing for years (come on = MS, get=20 with the program, and get out of the 1970s).

Posted by: Ronald=20 Pottol | Dec=20 12, 2008 6:11:43 PM

MAybe MS doesnt want to support EFI as that would mean they are in a = round=20 about way opening up support for OS X on all PC's or at least making it = easier=20 to do

Posted by: shane = blyth=20 | Dec=20 12, 2008 6:41:15 PM

well said m3kt3k!
Personally, I don't think I would run Krak OS X = even if=20 I had the opportunity... like you mentioned, I can run Windows on just = about any=20 hardware I want and, there are way more options with better GUIs in the = Linux=20 world waiting for me to download and use FREE
Screw M$ and = Krak

Posted by: not = me | Dec=20 12, 2008 6:41:43 PM

why would I run Windows? It crashes constantly.

Posted by: pz | Dec=20 12, 2008 9:01:38 PM

If it wasn't for piracy then China and India wouldn't have gained = their edge=20 with computers and soon to become superpowers. As a developing nation we = rely=20 heavily on piracy and in our case piracy enables education to people who = don't=20 have enough to feed on, let alone run computers and listen to western=20 music.

Posted by: Hafiz = Al Asad=20 Talha | Dec=20 12, 2008 9:26:54 PM

Just run linux. Ubuntu blows doors on both mac and pc. and it's free. = and it=20 doesn't support a lame ass corporation everyone used to think was the = bees knees=20 and now is nothing more than microsoft in hipster packaging.

Posted by: anomie | Dec=20 13, 2008 12:27:00 AM

You got it half right... Ubuntu blows....

yeah.... Ubuntu rocks.... Neck-Beards rock. WiFi drivers..... well, = they rock=20 too, but on other OS'es.

Until there's absolutely NO command line foolery required to install = Lunix,=20 there's no real reason to run it.

Call us when you guys get it right. Keep that Beryl away from your=20 beard...

Posted by: LJSeinfeld |=20 Dec=20 13, 2008 1:02:17 AM

Apple should have every right to say they dont want to have 3rd party = hardware running their OS ... someone has to answer the phones for = technical=20 support and someone has to pay tech support. Nevermind all the = variations of=20 hardware headaches people will have... Sorry but if you have someone = stringing=20 together crappy hardware they picked up cheap at a fleamarket that has = crappy=20 drivers to go with it... Apple should not have to tell you why your POS = computer=20 crashes... Get over it... Use something like UBUNTU thats free already = if you=20 want free.

Posted by: madhatt | Dec=20 13, 2008 1:06:28 AM

Take a hint Apple. The reason Microsoft has a dominant market share? = Their OS=20 is available to any who want it, for a price. They don't ask that you = don't put=20 it on a Mac, or any other computer. And it works. If you don't want to = have=20 companies cut into your profits, allow select companies to develop Mac = based=20 products. Oh wait. Then Mac would lose its "exclusivity" and would be = much more=20 likely to be hit by hackers and viruses.

Posted by: Erik | Dec=20 13, 2008 1:54:29 AM

@pz - if you're not running it, how would you know if it crashes all = the=20 time.

Posted by: Puzzled | Dec=20 13, 2008 2:30:59 AM

Seriously, if you don't like Apple then don't buy their stuff. = Simple. Case=20 resolved. However, it appears, there is a demand hence the piracy and = hacking=20 and trying to circumvent Apple and loading OSX on cloned boxes. So, you = can't=20 have it both ways.

So, basically, it comes down to this, all your Penguin and Windows = fans out=20 there: Apple is a publicly owned corporation that is required to do = business,=20 and their OS is one of the cores to their business. They paid top = dollars for=20 it, developed it, spent days and riches refining it. Now, you lot want = to just=20 walk in and want a slice if not all. Do you even hear yourselves?

For those of you who are still logic-challenged, say you have a = fantastic GPA=20 that you have worked hard for, and now the bullies in the class want a = share of=20 that and the class average is a flat C. Say bye bye to innovation, hard = work and=20 justice, and replace it with a misplaced socialist mediocrity. Pure and=20 simple.

Then again, with name calling people Apple fanbois etc. I doubt many = A=20 graders are hanging out here at CNET.

Posted by: krquet | Dec=20 13, 2008 2:50:28 AM

The simple answer is for Apple to adapt the OS-X to run on any Intel = or AMD=20 based PC, that way they can compete headon with Microshaft and put the = cloner's=20 out of business by beating them at their own game. I have never = understood why=20 Apple never created an OS to compete directly with winblows. OS-X is far = more=20 user friendly.

Posted by: Jfranklin |=20 Dec=20 13, 2008 3:24:49 AM

IT IS VERY HELPFUL TO EARN MONEY-WEALTH- HEALTH-PR0SPERITY

Posted by: BASAVARAJU.CHALAMALASETTY | Dec=20 13, 2008 3:26:27 AM

If Apple would release the MacOS, they would have to face the same = problems=20 as microsoft. Incompatability with hardware because the lack of drivers = from the=20 manufacturers.
Apple has it easy, they only have to develop their OS = based=20 on static hardware.

@stoffer:
Microsoft has a similair label "Certified for Windows = Vista".=20 Just not many people pay attention to those when buying = soft/hardware.

Posted by: bezoeker |=20 Dec=20 13, 2008 3:47:01 AM

LAWL

Posted by: applecore |=20 Dec=20 13, 2008 4:45:38 AM

Nope, no way dude, the Clones have taken overand are here to = stay!

jess
http://www.anonymity.pro.tc

Posted by: Johnny=20 beebone | Dec=20 13, 2008 5:19:12 AM

Yes, how dare Apple make money! They should just give everything away = for=20 free! Give their hardware away for free and their OS away for free! I = can't=20 stand Apple because they don't give away all their products for free. = They=20 should just make cheap cheap, bottom of the barrel hardware like = everyone else=20 and then give it away. They have billions of dollars, why do they need = to make=20 any more money? Just do the right thing and give everything away and go=20 bankrupt. It's what people want.

Posted by: Goofball=20 Jones | Dec=20 13, 2008 5:20:56 AM

this article misses one very important point.

People want to run OSX on cheaper hardware. I can build a = superpowerful PC=20 for 800$ but it costs 3000$ for a mac desktop. And it can't be updated = with the=20 newest video cards or newer chips.

A Mac laptop doesn't even exist under 1000$ while there is an entire = industry=20 of PC laptops under 400$.

Posted by: RF11 | Dec=20 13, 2008 5:23:50 AM

The compatibility issue with OSX on all Intel based computers is a = non-issue.=20 Problem is that Windows has its roots in an era with tons of protocols, = tons of=20 drivers and a zillion types of hardware.
Today it is SATA, OpenGL, = USB,=20 Bluetooth Firewire and OpenCL to deal with, and that's about all. With a = little=20 effort from Apple to read-out the specs of the latest Ati/Geforce cards, = most=20 problems are tackled. There really is a big market to sell OSX. We want = a decent=20 3Ghz dual core desktop attached to some serious Eizo screen for 1500$ = for the=20 set. Apple is unable to deliver that quality for that price, but their = OS is=20 awesome.

Posted by: BErt | Dec=20 13, 2008 6:00:48 AM

RF11 has the core of the issue. Many folks that run "hacked" versions = OS X=20 are using software they paid for. They simply want to use it on a = different=20 hardware set than that which Apple provides. The fact that they are = going out of=20 their way to install OS X on non-Apple hardware says that they think it = is=20 superior to other OS's on the market, and support Apple, but do not like = what=20 they offer for hardware.

Posted by: nick | Dec=20 13, 2008 6:28:21 AM

You can have your Hyundai. I prefer my Aston Martin, thank you very=20 much.

Posted by: Nigel_UK |=20 Dec=20 13, 2008 6:31:12 AM

RF11 has it exactly right. I'm writing on a $1500 Dell computer right = now=20 because I didn't want to pay an extra $1100 for a laptop with comparable = specs=20 and an Apple logo. Sure, OS X is superior to Windows and arguably Linux = (though=20 to be fair, if Windows or GNU/Linux ran on hardware designed = specifically for=20 the operating system, they would run much smoother), but $1100 superior? = I=20 hardly think so.

Posted by: Kevin | Dec=20 13, 2008 6:38:08 AM

Apple has the right to license OS X as it sees fit. On the other = hand,=20 installing OS X on a generic PC is not theft, or necessarily even = copyright=20 infringement. If you bought your copy of OS X fair and square, there is=20 long-standing precedent that you can install it on any (one) computer = you like.=20 Suppose that Sony Music sold CDs with the stipulation that they can only = be=20 played on Sony-brand CD players. They would be laughed out of court.

Why doesn't Apple sell OS X for Intel? Steve Jobs tried that during = his=20 tenure at NeXT Computers. It was a flop. Look back 10 years, when it was = not at=20 all clear that Apple would survive. In selling NeXT Step for Intel, NeXT = was=20 competing head-on with Microsoft. Which is a really, really bad idea. = Apple's=20 current strategy was much smarter, business-wise. They did not compete = had-on=20 with MS. Instead, they made themselves a comfortable niche (artists) = alongside=20 MS, and then leveraged that dominance into additional markets (home = computing).=20 Apple has not made any serious attempts at MS's core strength, that is = corporate=20 desktops. In any case, Apple's continued existence is good for = everyone.

I think the lesson learned was that competing directly with Microsoft = on=20 their core product is a great way to kill your business.

In any case, Apple doesn't need to "solve" the "clone problem." For = their=20 business plan to work, they just need to be ruthless enough that clones = never=20 become mainstream, although making a home-brew clone will probably = always be=20 fairly easy. It seems they're being quite successful at that. A few = geeks=20 building Netbook Hackintoshes will not really hurt them as a company --- = especially not if those geeks purchased legal copies of OS X.

Posted by: Bob | Dec=20 13, 2008 6:40:48 AM

I've got a suggestion - Apple should make an OS that runs on all = other Intel=20 machines except their own, it costs $49, and it's not sold on the Apple = website=20 or Apple Stores. The catch would be that it would come with no drivers = for any=20 peripheral at all, and Apple would not give any kind of support for it, = either=20 at the Apple Stores, online or on the phone. Overnight, Microsoft would = drop=20 down to a 60% share or less - for about a month. Then, when people are = going=20 nuts trying to find the correct drivers for their DVD drive, mouse, and = printer,=20 they'd see why Apple puts tight controls on the OS and hardware.

One other poster upthread stated that Microsoft allows its OS to go = on any=20 machine, for a price. That price is hundreds of "How To Make Your = Windows=20 Machine Work" books and magazines, and thousands of hours spent on = searching the=20 internet for help or calling Microsoft, who helpfully refers you to the = maker of=20 the peripheral in question - who refers you back to Microsoft. If it's = between=20 being on my machine to tweak it to get it working, and just jumping on = my=20 machine to get work done, I have no problem paying the extra cash - I'll = make up=20 for it with extra productivity.

Posted by: Matt | Dec=20 13, 2008 6:42:27 AM

With every flavor of linux for free out there, what's exactly the = point of=20 shoehorning OS X in a reluctant wintel PC?
You can call that a hack. = Me, I'd=20 call it bullsh*t.

Posted by: Land = Shark |=20 Dec=20 13, 2008 7:14:25 AM

My guess is that once Apple's numbers go above 30% + they will open = up the OS=20 to clones, either because they want to or are forced to by some=20 court.
.
That will usher in Serial Numbers etc. for the OS. They = are=20 probably working on some sort plan already. Maybe something along the = lines of -=20 if you bought a Mac you get the Apple OS for the regular price (with = some soft=20 of proof of purchase) and if you have a clone you will pay an extra fee = with=20 little to no support from Apple (as stated by the post above by Matt).=20
.
Just a guess.

Posted by: George | Dec=20 13, 2008 7:21:27 AM

FUCK APPLE, FUCK IT IN THE ASS.

Posted by: John = Quincy=20 Adams | Dec=20 13, 2008 7:54:54 AM

so many tardos, so little time...where do we begin?

- Apple = owns OS X.=20 they spent the cash making a good OS, and they spend the cash supporting = it. its=20 theirs. therefore, they are perfectly within their right to decide what = to do w/=20 it.

- Apple's mission is to make money. this is a capitalist = market and=20 its foolish to think anything otherwise.

- OS X is better than XP = in=20 terms of stability and ease of configuration. im a MS developer by day, = mac user=20 at nite. i know this first-hand. (and now i develop on a MacbookPro = using VMware=20 for my dev environment)

- OS X isnt about "image" as some of you=20 teenagers believe. its about core stability. the underlying os, UNIX, = has been=20 far better tested than anything MS will ever be able to = publish.

- macs=20 arent as expensive as some of you purport. desktops can be had for $1200 = new,=20 $950 refurb

- macbooks are $900 new, $850 refurb

- id = gladly pay a=20 couple hundred more than some homemade clone (which ive built for 2 = decades) for=20 the reliability, stability, and ease of use found in OS X + Mac=20 machine.

- lastly -- stop being such closed-minded children. take = some=20 COM SCI classes, learn a few things. no product or corporation is = perfect for=20 everyone. that doesnt mean they suck.

Posted by: kibbles | Dec=20 13, 2008 8:19:49 AM

Apple is perfectly content to let a few hackers and experimenters = thump on=20 the OS to get it running with various hardware. It's free software = research and=20 consulting.

But don't think for a moment Apple will allow any company to profit = from OS=20 X. It's their baby, and despite the misguided notions that this is = somehow a=20 "monopoly", Apple is not alone in right-to-use licensing. There is = plenty of=20 precedent and any attempts to force Apple to license their product will = be=20 laughed out of court. And then, quickly followed by a crushing series of = counter-suits.

Finally, there is no way that Apple will ever permit clones. They do = not want=20 to leave any money on the table for someone else. The instant they = permit=20 third-parties to run OS X on other hardware, they just make OS X a = commodity OS=20 and they lost control of the user experience. And that's what people pay = the big=20 bucks for -- the user experience.

Posted by: Mr. = Solution=20 | Dec=20 13, 2008 8:32:36 AM

@kibbles

a) Macbooks are $1000. Not $900

b) For comparable specs (or even better specs) a PC is far = cheaper...for=20 $1000 I can get a Dell laptop with twice the RAM, a faster processor, a = bigger=20 monitor, a hard drive more than twice as big and a better graphics = card!

c) XP has had a zillion upgrades at this point and I'd bet anything = that it's=20 as stable as OSX...and that's with Apple's lack of software/hardware=20 availability!

d) Apple is all image you idiot! They charge a premium for the "cool" = factor!=20 (It's part of their business model for God's sake) Do you really believe = that=20 the Macbook Air would have sold if it were a PC? Damn thing is an = expensive=20 joke! But Mac types sucked it up like it was greatest laptop ever.

I seriously wonder what gene makes Mac lovers so fanatical...you like = them...great...the other 87% of the computer market couldn't give a crap = about=20 them.

Posted by: Alex | Dec=20 13, 2008 9:59:27 AM

Maybe we will get a surprise at MacWorld like when Apple switched to = Intel=20 and they will reveal that Snow Leopard can be installed on clone = hardware. Or=20 maybe not. It seems to me they would make tons more selling the software = to much=20 wider audience than the hardware combo. In any event, I hope they = release some=20 type of netbook at MacWorld so i do not have to buy an MSI = Wind.

Posted by: doug | Dec=20 13, 2008 10:03:44 AM

@kibbles: Kudos to you! By far the best post yet.

I completely agree. I've gladly shelled out the extra thousands for = my two=20 Macs so that I know I have the security and functionality I need. = Everyone has=20 the right to an opinion but to tout your opinion as the "right" one is = ignorant.=20

Posted by: Sean | Dec=20 13, 2008 10:06:03 AM

Socioeconomic systems suffer phase changes similar to matter. = Lukewarm water=20 is stable, but as the temperature rises, it bubbles more and more = turbulently=20 and then finally changes into a simple gas. Right now we're in the = painful=20 bubbly stage. Some want to keep the water lukewarm, but the overall = trend of=20 progress is keeping the heat on. Apple (and all of us, actually) need to = focus=20 on how to make the phase transition as short and painless as = possible.

Posted by: ray | Dec=20 13, 2008 10:08:57 AM

why would you install crap on you computer

Posted by: rick | Dec=20 13, 2008 10:13:44 AM

Wow. Has anyone asked if Dell or HP would love to sell laptops that = cost more=20 then $1000? Yes, they wish they could but they all have their loss = leaders, they=20 really do not make much off of the $399-$699 laptops. Apple makes a = profit every=20 sale not just when the user buys the 1-3 yrs on-site warranty, which is = where=20 most of the manufactures make money. MS Windows has made all hardware = commodity=20 hardware that is what the average buying public sees. They just see=20 specifications that are similar and usually even if they are different = brands=20 they look like the same hardware. A lot of times there is no real = difference=20 between a $399-$599 hardware other then just more ram and Hard drive = space.=20 Apple offers something more then just cheap hardware regardless of the=20 difference. The public views them like a high end purchase, like a BMW = or=20 Mercedes. Why do you think companies like Alienware or Voodoo or Falcon=20 Northwest still exist (yes, I know that Dell bought AW, and HP bought=20 Voodoo)People pay for things that give the appearance of being different = or high=20 quality. If Apple sold their OS without hardware then would be no = different then=20 MS Windows, just the ame thing just different flavor.

Posted by: Andrew | Dec=20 13, 2008 10:20:35 AM

@Alex
a. If price is such an issue, buy a used one. One of Apple's = strong=20 suits is reliability and long life.
b. Comparing Wintel specs to Mac = specs is=20 apples to oranges and I can't stand when MS supporters pull it. Windows = machines=20 require more resources to do the same things Macs do with less, that's = always=20 been the case. Why do you think Mac processors didn't break the 1 ghz = mark until=20 long after Wintels did?
c. You really believe that anything requiring = "a=20 zillion upgrades" is stable? Let me put it this way, you install OS X = once, and=20 you're largely done. Run a permissions fix and disk repair utility every = once in=20 a blue moon and you'll never have a single issue with a mac.
d. Well = then=20 that makes two of us who aren't hippie artists sold on image. My = family's been=20 using macs for 15 years due to stability and efficiency reasons. Both of = the IT=20 guys agree there are less problems with the Macs than Wintels.

Posted by: Mike | Dec=20 13, 2008 10:20:59 AM

Yes Apple did make OS X and has rights to do whatever it would like = to do=20 with it, but there are laws that prohibit what it wants to do. For = example,=20 anti-trust laws HAVE the possibility to restrict Apple's rights.

Don't play a fool folks. We have seen courts restrict Microsoft. = Those=20 European courts love to bust up MS' chops. I read tech news all the time = with=20 headlines like, "Microsoft ordered by court to pay =E2=82=AC60,000,000 = for=20 anti-competive practices and release a minimal API for application=20 developers."

It's only a matter of time before the cookie, Apple, crumbles. And = I'll be=20 waiting with my glass of milk. *Lol*

Posted by: Rokr | Dec=20 13, 2008 10:30:41 AM

It'd be sort of fun to see free market clones eat Apple's lunch on = the=20 hardware side. They did it to IBM, so I doubt Apple is laughing about = the=20 possibilities here.

Posted by: Anon | Dec=20 13, 2008 11:00:19 AM

You all people are missing the point. Apple is a hardware company, = they don't=20 make their money on the OS, they make it on the premium people pay for = their=20 hardware, OSX is a plus so to speak. If they let people run their OS on = cheaper=20 hardware it cuts into their profits big time (they have already gone = that=20 route).

For some reason commenters around here are very trigger happy on = the OSX=20 vs Windows thing (thanks m3kt3k for pointing the real issue), Microsoft = makes=20 money out of Windows because they're a software company, Apple doesn't = make=20 money that way. In fact, Windows is (I think, might be wrong here) the = only OS=20 to make money out of itself. Every "commercial" open source OS makes = money on=20 support services, some specialty OSes (and OSX) make money because they = sell the=20 hardware they are installed on. That's why Apple can't afford to let OSX = be=20 installed everywhere. They do that and they kiss their profits good=20 bye.

Posted by: A.F. | Dec=20 13, 2008 11:39:36 AM

Listen. I have a Vista laptop, and it has never crashed on me. I make = it work=20 for me, and it does everything I want it to do. I paid 700 dollars. If I = could=20 get a MacBook for that price, I would. But I can't. The reason Microsoft = has=20 such a dominant market share is simple economics. Yes, putting Windows = on many=20 systems causes problems. Apparently, not enough to make people switch. = People=20 may become fed up with Windows, but twenty minutes online and a dozen = small=20 downloads and it runs like a dream. Apple is trading market share/profit = for=20 reliability. Unfortunately, its now coming back to haunt them. =

Posted by: Erik | Dec=20 13, 2008 12:10:44 PM

true

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D763vmCrRBDg

Posted by: timf | Dec=20 13, 2008 12:12:11 PM

tricky waters here....

i use all os's or at least try to, and yes ubuntu and the like are = great but=20 still require a bit of nerd-know-how (i'm a computer technician, so = don't start=20 flaming yet) but i just like it when my computer works. my windows box = works=20 just fine for games, linux has it's ups, but my macbook is probably the = best=20 purchase i ever made. seeing dozens and dozens of windows laptops die = with=20 shitty hardware, corrupted os files, viruses, etc., and be consistently=20 underpowered for vista, i have no qualms about stating which is my = favorite.=20

macs work alot more often and without ridiculous os errors, yes they = have=20 somewhat of the same hardware; but a computer is an investment just like = anything else (hyundai versus aston martin on the nose) and if you buy=20 decent-to-shitty hardware to run a shitty os (most linux's excluded) you = most=20 likely won't be satisfied.

seriously it takes all types to form a market for things but what i = know is=20 that i've been trying to break said macbook for 2.5 years with all types = of nerd=20 wizardry and it won't give. i let my windows box sit for too long = without a=20 reimage of the os, it lags and pops up with errors and all sorts of = shit.

also, run windows with bootcamp and just watch how ur mac runs it = better than=20 generic pc hardware.

Posted by: hmm.. | Dec=20 13, 2008 12:17:57 PM

Take a hint Erik. Apple is a hardware manufacture. OSX is how Apple=20 differentiates their hardware from everybody else. If they allow their = OS to be=20 used on competitors hardware they loose their advantage and will not = sell as=20 many computers. MS is a software company who sells an OS. It is to their = advantage to sell the OS to all comers. They don't care what hardware it = runs=20 on, just that someone buys the OS. Apple doesn't care what OS you run, = just that=20 you buy their hardware. Apple and MS (i.e. Windows) are not competitors, = Apple=20 and the clone makers are.

Posted by: aresee | Dec=20 13, 2008 12:19:52 PM

I bought a Toshiba laptop with Vista. Has run flawlessly for 2 yrs. = Never had=20 a virus, no probs what so ever. Got it on sale for $550. Lets see you do = that=20 with a Mac! Kill the stupid stuff in Vista and it runs great.

Posted by: nobody | Dec=20 13, 2008 1:46:06 PM

This article seems to belie its own premise in pointing out that = Apple in=20 fact has been entirely successful in shutting down all attempts to = commercialize=20 Mac clones. Booting OS X onto non-Apple hardware as a technical hurdle = was=20 solved within a month of the Intel code reaching the marketplace - and = its not=20 really even that complicated. But the point is that the hacker violates = the law=20 when they do so, and this is a settled issue. That's largely of no = consequence=20 to anyone when sporadic individuals do it, but its not much of a basis = for a=20 business plan. So I wonder - what exactly was the point of this=20 article?

Posted by: MFB | Dec=20 13, 2008 1:47:16 PM

What Apple could do is offer a OS X version to third parties that is = a=20 stripped down version. Don't include some added software and sell it = separately.=20 Maybe call OS X lite. You would think this could be good for Apple. It = would=20 allow some who otherwise could not afford a Mac to get OS X. Who knows = they may=20 eventually buy a Mac.

Posted by: John = S | Dec=20 13, 2008 1:54:45 PM

"As long as OS X runs on Intel hardware, and as long as the = developers behind=20 OSX86 continue their work, it will be difficult for Apple to stop = cloning=20 altogether."

Exactly! And that's likely why Apple bought up PA Semi in their = stated desire=20 to "create products that competitors cannot copy".

Posted by: Brau | Dec=20 13, 2008 1:59:38 PM

@kibbles
for that kind of money I can build a pc and dual boot xp = and osx.=20 lol.

Posted by: pooky | Dec=20 13, 2008 2:03:30 PM

I ran linux on my mac for a few weeks, but ended up deleting it. I = need=20 Photoshop CS4, Ableton Live, and Final Cut Pro. Don't tell me Linux is = just as=20 good an OS when I don't have those options. Otherwise linux is a = glorified free=20 PC OS.

Posted by: jim = jones |=20 Dec=20 13, 2008 3:06:48 PM

I built a hackintosh for $200 and installed iAtkos OSX 10.5.4

Here's the $80 motherboard and CPU that I used (it's a 1.6ghz dual = core=20 Atom). OSX runs pretty decently on it.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=3DN82E16813121359
<= /P>

Posted by: TheDoubleUBee | Dec=20 13, 2008 3:15:43 PM

i'm not a gamer, so i don't care about graphics cards..

my audio interface works better with os x, my daw software isn't = supported=20 under any other os, i don't want to find a comporable solution in = windows (btw,=20 i have tried, reaper is good... but not good enough yet), and ardour?!=20 seriously? i'm not paying money to go to sae to learn how to use it when = the=20 software i have runs flawlessly for my purposes.

the issue for me is productivity..

Posted by: LW | Dec=20 13, 2008 3:15:59 PM

well of course if you can build your own machine, and have computer = know-how=20 like most of the folks posting here, you're going to say "no big deal" = about=20 this. But if you're apple, and most of your new customers are probably = ipod-type=20 consumers, (not super-users like you guys) you would try and smash these = companies too. most people aren't going to bother figuring out all the = angles of=20 a hack. but they'll buy a cheapo clone off eBay in a minute.

Posted by: tracester |=20 Dec=20 13, 2008 5:24:44 PM

HOW DARE MACINTOSH BE FORCED TO COMPETE IN A FREE AND COMPETITIVE = HARDWARE=20 MARKET???

Posted by: >:( = >:(=20 >:( | Dec=20 13, 2008 9:51:27 PM

I don't think anyone understands that Apple needs to maintain its = brand. If=20 it doesn't sue anyone using it's brand and intellectual property = illegally, then=20 it loses the rights to them. So it has to sue or it could lose it's = whole=20 business.

Secondly, why would anyone want to run OSX on non-OSX hardware? Apple = isn't=20 about specs, its about creating and end to end user experience.

Everything that Apple touches works. You walk into the Apple store = and you=20 can play with the toys for hours with no hassles. Then you don't have to = wait in=20 a line to buy it. Then all you have to do is turn the computer on and = within 20=20 seconds you're browsing the internet.

Everything you plug in works because OSX comes with like 6 GBs of = drivers=20 installed on it. All you ipods and iphones sync up perfectly with the = Mac, and=20 I've never had any hardware issues. If you do have issues, they take = care of=20 them usually the same day in the Apple store or at a licensed = technician's=20 store.

The point of buying Apple isn't just for specs at a cheap price. = That's why=20 people buy Dell's or build their own PC.

You go to Apple when you don't want to have any computer hassles for = the rest=20 of your life.

If Apple allows people to install something with its brand on = something that=20 will cause people hassles, it risks people getting a negative view of = its=20 brand.

Plus if you want to build it yourself thats fine. Just don't build it = and try=20 to make a business off of someone else's brand.

Posted by: CC | Dec=20 13, 2008 11:08:42 PM

People, rather than bitching about Apple's decision, why don't you = just=20 install Linux on whatever PC you want, and spice it up to look like OS = X? Or are=20 you too noob to do that? I cannot use Zune outside Windows, I cannot = interchange=20 razor blades between brands, I cannot change the brush on my sonicare = toothbrush=20 with other brand's brushes, where's the bitching about those?

Posted by: pika2000 |=20 Dec=20 13, 2008 11:33:53 PM

I'm wondering if EFIx could simply use the Compaq VS IBM case. = Basically=20 reverse engineering the BIOS was allowed, and thus allowed PC = manufacturers like=20 DELL, HP, etc. to exist. Selling Apple-compatible hardware is allot = different=20 than selling a full system. In the end though, I tend to agree with the = article.=20 If a market exists for these clones, there's nothing that can be done = about it.=20 Much like when the MPAA/RIAA busted Napster, a few thousand more will = just pop=20 up.

Posted by: Eric | Dec=20 14, 2008 7:16:54 AM

Imagine the Dire Straits "Money For Nothing" music video animated = guys=20 singing " I want my ...I want my ...I want my P-P-C...". Apple should've = stayed=20 with PowerPC chips.

Wanna go to computer Hell ? Go Intel! This world is some other = planet's=20 digital Hell.

Posted by: Dewd | Dec=20 14, 2008 7:52:51 AM

I can't believe so many folks STILL not get it... "Apple should open = up their=20 OS to run on any PC, yadda-yadda..."

For the love of God, again Apple is NOT only in the software = business, they=20 are in the hardware business. And part of what makes OS X so stable is = the fact=20 they run it on their own hardware... Apple will NEVER allow OS X to run = on "any=20 pc", or allow for "clones" to be made again. It's not part of their = business=20 model and it's the right decision...

Why is the concept of proprietary hardware/software so hard for so = many=20 understand?

Can you run the Xbox360 OS on a PS3? Or Xbox games on a PS console? = Or vice=20 versa?

NO.... right?

Because the HARDWARE and SOFTWARE are mutually exclusive...

Of course, when talking about computer systems its not as simple as 1 = + 1 =3D=20 2, but the example is just to illustrate that in principle, = hardware-specific=20 software is neither new, nor illegal or immoral like so many uneducated=20 individuals seem to think.

Posted by: lancelott |=20 Dec=20 14, 2008 9:19:49 AM

I use both, for different reasons. I don't have trouble with my XP = machines=20 at all, and my Mac has only once given me a problem. Call it 51%-49% if = you=20 want.

But I do have to laugh at those talking about Macs' "reliability = and=20 efficiency". While mine has been okay, I have five close friends with = Macs, and=20 four of them have had to send them in because the motherboards fried = (one guy=20 three times, and in one case, Apple also wiped his (entirely fine) hard = drive=20 for him without asking.) So I can't necessarily buy those reliability = claims.=20

As for efficiency...in nearly any computer these days, the real = holdup in=20 most tasks is YOU, the human. For those things like rendering that take = longer,=20 buy all the damn RAM you can afford/fits into your machine/OS, and learn = about=20 tweaking your system's settings for optimum performance. This is true on = both=20 the PC and Mac sides!

Y'know, use whatever damn OS you want, people. If it works for = you, use=20 it, and STFU. I know for a fact that reading comments on Wired = interferes with=20 efficiency...

Posted by: Ken | Dec=20 14, 2008 10:09:21 AM

Oh, for fuck's sake, what a load of bollocks.

1) you can't "lose intellectual property". First thing, there's no=20 "intellectual property", there are copyrights and trademarks. Trademarks = are not=20 relevant here because nobody is claiming to be Apple: Psystar for = example buys=20 retail copies of MacOSX and resells them to their customers, and it is = perfectly=20 legal. Copyrights: you can't lose it, in this case no matter what Apple = does or=20 does not the copyright of MacOSX is their for 95 years, according to the = law.

2) Copyright doesn't give you absolute power: copyright simply means = that=20 nobody can create a copy of your=20 software/music/film/book/play/email/videogame/picture/painting/whatever = and=20 distribute it without your explicit consent. They can however buy from = you and=20 resell the "thing" to others and you can't deny the people this right: = if you=20 don't like this, you're welcome to buy some congressmen and change the = law. If I=20 buy a retail copy of MacOSX you can't use copyright to forbid me from = installing=20 it in my non-Apple PC, just like you can't use copyright to forbid me = from=20 reading a book in my bathroom.

3) EULA: an EULA must follow the law. I can write all I want in an = EULA; I=20 can even sneak in "By clicking accept you're renouncing to your = firstborn who=20 will become property of the creator of this SOFTWARE", but no court in = this=20 world is going to say to my customers "sorry, you accepted the EULA, now = give up=20 the baby". A judge will review Apple's EULA, and if he will find that = the EULA=20 is in contrast with the laws of this country, then the EULA is not = valid.

That's all folks.

Posted by: Giacomo | Dec=20 14, 2008 11:53:14 AM

Giacomo, you are not nearly the oracle on this matter that you seem = to think=20 you are, and being dismissive does not lend your highly flawed = viewpoints=20 credence - it just makes you both wrong AND an ass.

To point 1): No, one does not lose ownership of IP by not defending = it, but=20 case precedent is pretty clear that by not defending it aggressively = when the=20 opportunity arises, it can be effectively used as a foil against you if = you seek=20 to do so subsequently. So 'defend it or lose it' is not the case in = theory, but=20 it most definitely is in practice.

2) Copyright DOES however give the producer the right to dictate the=20 context

3) This process has happened dozens of times on Apple's behalf. Their = EULA=20 has been quite substantially vetted and their legal right to seek = restitution=20 for violation of the EULA has been firmly established. You are dreaming = if you=20 think that any company of any size will find a sympathetic court that = will allow=20 them to violate Apple's EULA as a component of their business = plan.

Posted by: MFB | Dec=20 14, 2008 12:28:20 PM

If Apple really wanted to capture the PC market (which I really don't = think=20 they care - too many headaches), they should make a scaled version of = OSX like=20 the music software companies.. a sort of OSX LE.
It won't have all = the bells=20 and whistles of a "true" Mac, but enough of functionality to get people = to=20 switch without buying the hardware.. though the hardware is a pleasure = to work=20 on (typing this on my iMac).

Posted by: BB | Dec=20 14, 2008 12:34:32 PM

MFB: from www.copyright.gov

"Section 106
of the 1976 Copyright Act generally gives the owner = of=20 copyright the exclusive
right to do and to authorize others to do the = following:
=E2=80=A2 To reproduce the work in copies or = phonorecords;
=E2=80=A2 To prepare=20 derivative works based upon the work;
=E2=80=A2 To distribute copies = or phonorecords=20 of the work to the public by sale or
other transfer of ownership, or = by=20 rental, lease, or lending;
=E2=80=A2 To perform the work publicly, in = the case of=20 literary, musical, dramatic, and
choreographic works, pantomimes, and = motion=20 pictures and other audiovisual
works;
=E2=80=A2 To display the = work publicly, in=20 the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and
choreographic works, = pantomimes,=20 and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural
works, including the individual = images=20 of a motion picture or other audiovisual
work; and
=E2=80=A2 In = the case of sound=20 recordings,* to perform the work publicly by means of
a digital audio = transmission.
In addition, certain authors of works of visual art = have the=20 rights of attribution
and integrity as described in section 106A of = the 1976=20 Copyright Act. For
further information, see Circular 40, Copyright=20 Registration for Works of the
Visual Arts."

You can't use copyright to limit what the user can or cannot do. = That's the=20 reason Apple forces its customers to accept the EULA.
And the EULA = must=20 follow the law: if a judge decides that the limitation of MacOSX to = Apple=20 hardware is a violation of an existing law, Apple's lawyers and their = vetting=20 process can *******

Posted by: Giacomo | Dec=20 14, 2008 1:38:34 PM

@krquet (and other idiots who apparently think people want OS X for=20 free):

What the hell are you talking about? Did you even read the article? = They=20 developed their OS, and now everyone "wants a slice" of it?

You realize Apple are the ones who would be getting the slice, right? = They'd=20 still be selling their own OS--to more people. And probably making more=20 money.

Looks like you were the C average guy in school, buddy boy.

OS X isn't their only product, true, and it's tied to their hardware. = But if=20 they're so insecure about their hardware that they need to fasten their=20 (questionably more popular) software to it with rivets, maybe they = deserve to=20 lose. In terms of analogies, Apple are the communists here, guys: a = rigid,=20 fascistic, totalitarian regime. No wonder their market share is so = low.

Anyway, Steve Jobs is a huge douche in a turtleneck and needs to live = on the=20 street for a few years.

Posted by: asdf | Dec=20 14, 2008 1:56:15 PM

Also: funny, with all the people in here talking about how Apple's=20 comprehensive hardware-software end-to-end control allows them to make = stuff=20 that "just works," I almost forgot about all the trouble I've had with = Apple's=20 products.

OS X is reliable because it's based on BSD Unix, which Apple by no = means=20 created themselves. It had been around for decades.

MacOS pre-X was a pile of buggy trash.

Safari is notoriously unreliable. The iPhone OS/mobile Safari = likewise.

Hmm. It's almost as if ... as if being free of competition is what = allows=20 them to continue charging huge premiums in spite of all these flaws.

Hmm.

Posted by: asdf | Dec=20 14, 2008 2:03:31 PM

Brian. Four companies does not make an =E2=80=9Carmy of = cloners=E2=80=9D.

Posted by: the = Dude |=20 Dec=20 14, 2008 2:47:06 PM

I imagine that the people wanting to set up a clone fall in these=20 catgories:
1) cannot afford a mac, would not have bought one anyway = (no=20 sale)
2) already have purchased one or more macs but need either an = upgrade=20 or a spare machine (sales made)
3) want to try OS X before forking = out for=20 the real box (no try, no sale)

The response from Apple for all these people would legaly be "suffer" = when it=20 should have been "enjoy".

I also think that once Apple has gained world domination, it will = probably=20 become a lot more open with how their OS is used. But they need to = triple their=20 presence.

Hey Apple, why don't you make a version of your OS X which does not = have the=20 clause about installing it on non-apple hardware? Add US$50 or so for = the=20 priviledge.

Posted by: aris | Dec=20 14, 2008 3:26:51 PM

So much stupidity, so little time.

The copy of OS X sold in stores is an UPGRADE! That's why you cannot = just buy=20 it an install it anywhere you please. It presumes the buyer has a = previous=20 version installed. The $129 is the UPGRADE price, not the full retail = price,=20 which Apple does not sell, as it does not sell the OS, for 3rd party = installs.=20 If it did, the full retail price would be like Windows Vista Ultimate, = over=20 $300.

Posted by: KenC | Dec=20 14, 2008 3:34:52 PM

@KenC

Then what does "Full Install" mean?

Posted by: BB | Dec=20 14, 2008 3:38:42 PM

1. Those making the Aston/Hyundai analogy are inadvertently feeding = the=20 Mac-is- largely-image argument. Of course the Aston may be a more = enjoyable=20 driving experience, but I bet the Hyundai is more reliable, cheaper and = has a=20 better warranty. So, to stretch this metaphor, the Mac may be more = elegant in=20 how it goes about its business, but this doesn't equate with unequivocal = superiority, per se. (Honestly, I don't know if it does . . . And by and = large,=20 those I know who have PCs don't have that many issues with them = either.)

2. The only computer I've had is the iBook I'm now using. I'm = thinking of=20 soon getting something new and am totally on the fence as to what = that'll=20 be.

I bought my current iBook when OSX first came out. It was a most=20 disheartening experience--tons & tons of stuff just wouldn't support = the Mac=20 (or vice versa.) Sure there're often work-arounds, but frankly that too = isn't=20 elegant.

And stuff still doesn't work for Mac, Google's new browser, for = example. When=20 OSX first came out, Acrobat Reader wasn't supported.

And Apple's applications are in numerous ways simply inferior. In = some=20 instances, Preview does not display all the intended text of a = document.

Safari, in my opinion, is a terrible browser. If Firefox hadn't come = out=20 around the time that IE quit supporting Mac, I might've ditched my Mac = right=20 then.

Safari does not fully display all features of some sites. Here's but = one ex.=20 since the last time I checked: using Firefox, go to the New York Times = site,=20 double click on a word, and you'll have the option of opening a new page = that=20 provides a definition of the word. You can't do this with Safari. (And = what's=20 with the annoying auto-complete address bar? I find it far easier to = scroll down=20 to a previously entered choice if that's what I want than to hit delete = for a=20 choice I don't want, which happens very often because I want a homepage, = not one=20 with an extension featuring an article I've already read.)

3. Reliability has been middling. Currently, when I plug in the = external=20 speakers, the screen occasionally breaks what's displayed into four = fuzzy,=20 bluish/purplish images. The not-so-genius guy at the Apple store = explained=20 something's going bad (motherboard?) but the problem doesn't occur when = plugging=20 in headphones.

Yes, the OS is quite stable, though I have lost emails using = Mail.

Posted by: BGB | Dec=20 14, 2008 4:07:22 PM

I built myself a hackintosh, and now use it as my main machine. It = cost about=20 $1000 and Apple lost a $4000 sale because of it.

Mac OS X and Windows are about the same in reliability
Apple is a = hardware=20 company
Apple will never sell Mac OS X to PC users while Steve is in=20 charge
Buying a Mac is very much like buying a Jaguar. It makes you = feel=20 good, but it's still a Ford.

How do I know these things? I was an Apple dealer for 15 years, = before they=20 bankrupted me.

Posted by: manfromcontrol | Dec=20 14, 2008 5:24:37 PM

manfromcontrol - what did you use for the hackintosh.. I'm waiting = for the i7=20 to kick in.. with some newer drivers..

all - apple will make their own chips in the future to stop = hackintosh's..=20 hence stealing intel designer..

regarding windows / vs / mac os..

final cut is very nice for video.. that's why i use it.. otherwise.. = i stick=20 to windows.. end of the day.. u use crappy kitchen ware for every day = use.. and=20 bring out the good stuff for special events / cases.. (video)..

but.. i do use an iphone.. revolutionary product.. interface.. what = happened=20 to zune.. silly MS..

Posted by: Metro | Dec=20 14, 2008 6:18:20 PM

Whatch'n y'all get so bent outta sorts bout this is great=20 entertainment!

Posted by: BHD | Dec=20 14, 2008 7:08:17 PM

But I've learned a lots....

Posted by: BHD | Dec=20 14, 2008 7:09:28 PM

Apple made OSX? How about Apple borrowed an OS from BSD. Then Apple = put a GUI=20 on BSD, then severely restricted the OS.

FUCK APPLE!

Posted by: appleh8er |=20 Dec=20 14, 2008 8:11:02 PM

Time to assasinate Steve Jobs...

Posted by: pam | Dec=20 14, 2008 8:12:14 PM

Time to give Steve Jobs AIDS and syphyllis...

Posted by: clay = aiken |=20 Dec=20 14, 2008 8:13:19 PM

thats just shameful for MS when you see people desperate to run OSX = in their=20 PCs rather than XP or Vista, despite all the mess it takes to make = hackintosh to=20 work (barely).

Posted by: cellow | Dec=20 14, 2008 9:01:48 PM

But How is Done...........

http://look4leads.com/blogger/index.php?null

http://www.look4leads.com/

http://look4leads.com/forum/index.php

Posted by: pieco | Dec=20 14, 2008 10:02:56 PM

The sheer number of comments makes me roll my eyes to the endless Mac = vs PC=20 'colourful' debates that are just not worth it anymore - seriously, I = thought we=20 all were past this already? How about some reason thrown in here-

Lest we forget we went down the whole Apple clone road in the '90s? = Why did=20 Apple can them then - 2 reasons -

1- They were selling BETTER and CHEAPER then Apple's own at the = time;

2- Steve Jobs came into play and decided the control needs to be = brought back=20 in to a financially hurting (no thanks to then CEO Gil Amelio) Apple AND = decided=20 one of the strategies to save the brand and product was EXCLUSIVITY.

But fast forward to today where Apple, just like Microsoft and EVERY = OTHER=20 corporate entity out there is intent on controlling THEIR products as = much as=20 the market will allow and its served BOTH companies very well until = now.

So why all the bitching about 'kill Jobs' and 'fuck Apple' - geez = people why=20 don't you all get it? The PC wars were over in the '90's - Microsoft won = for=20 being good enough', Apple became a niche for offering 'someting = different'.

Everyone will always have their opinion, their preference and their = actual=20 computing needs - just use what makes most sense for you, whether the be = financially, intellectually, and viscerally - why such a need to curse = at=20 everyone who doesn't see your way on either side - THEY'RE TAKING YOUR = MONEY=20 EITHER WAY YOU CHOOSE SO WTF? SERIOUSLY...

Someone will always find a way to hack the Mac/Windows - don't you = realize=20 we're all being sucked into their own economical upgrade & hardware = systems=20 either way - whether it be hardware or continued software/virus updates? = Think=20 about it...

Posted by: Odai = Rony |=20 Dec=20 14, 2008 10:24:46 PM

Buncha thieves. Apple invest billions and risks it all to make = insanely great=20 hardware and software. You thieves endanger all that. Disparage Apple at = the=20 same time you steal their software because it's demonstrably better than = the=20 alternatives and you want it.

I hope they devise some internet bot to fry your rip offs = motherboards.

Pay they load we all do. if not stick with Monopolysoft or load=20 Ubuntu.

Posted by: GmanMac | Dec=20 14, 2008 10:24:51 PM

@Ken
"So much stupidity, so little time.
The copy of OS X sold = in=20 stores is an UPGRADE! That's why you cannot just buy it an install it = anywhere=20 you please. It presumes the buyer has a previous version installed. The = $129 is=20 the UPGRADE price, not the full retail price, which Apple does not sell, = as it=20 does not sell the OS, for 3rd party installs. If it did, the full retail = price=20 would be like Windows Vista Ultimate, over $300."

Ok this is a late comment but Ken, whatever your smoking you should = pass it=20 around.

When you buy Mac OS X Leopard in the store, IT IS THE FULL INSTALL - = umm, if=20 it wasn't then when you chose the option to completely erase your drive = and=20 install it wouldn't let you. Sure there are options to upgrade, but = those are=20 OPTIONS. This has been true for every major Mac OS X increment (major OS = meaning=20 the change of an actual number like OS X.1 to X.2 - the upgrades are = X.1.1,=20 X.2.1, etc.) - now of course its left to the end user to decide if each = 'OS=20 release' is worth their $129 dollars, BUT its still alot less expensive = and much=20 less confusing then choosing at least 5 variations of VISTA - in Apple's = world=20 you have 2 choices - Mac OS X.x (for ANY Mac compatible at the time) OR = Mac OS=20 X.x Server (which in fact is broken down to 10 licenses or unlimited, = but still=20 very simplified).

(sarcasm) Keep up the good work Wired in drumming up traffic and = comments in=20 this Mac/PC debate that never seems to end (end sarcasm).

Posted by: Odai = Rony |=20 Dec=20 14, 2008 10:36:57 PM

Apple licensing its system would be a complete disaster. I don't = think they=20 would benefit from increased marketshare, since Windows is a very well=20 established entity in the administrative and business community and it = would=20 take years and years to realize a switch there, supposing there would be = interest in such a move. On the other side, most of common users would = simply=20 grab a copy through illegal channels. As for me I've always liked = Apple's closed=20 world because it just works. Sad to say but I think that in the next = future=20 Apple will introduce more restrictions to prevent illegal copies of = their OS,=20 maybe thru DRM or online registration systems.

Posted by: alfio | Dec=20 15, 2008 12:37:00 AM

I am no MS fanboy, but this argument that Macs just work and Windows = crashes=20 all the time just irks me.

You would swear windows users never get anything done and that in the = land of=20 Mac its all sunshine and productivity. Dont let the reality distortion = field hit=20 you on the a$$ on the way out the door.

I can count on one hand the number of times windows has crashed on me = in the=20 last year.

If OSX ran on just about any PC supporting an almost unknown number = of=20 hardware configurations, how well would it perform?

Posted by: EbbieA | Dec=20 15, 2008 12:52:43 AM

Have I written somewhere that "Windows crashes all the time" ? I have = a=20 Windows XP workstation at work and in 8 years I've had almost 0 = problems.=20 However I like Mac OS X more.

Posted by: alfio | Dec=20 15, 2008 12:57:24 AM

@stoffer

The reason being is that apple make most of their cash from hardware = - not=20 software - to ship the hardware they need something which distinguishes = them=20 from the competition. For Apple that is their brand and their operating = system.=20 They could just sell their OS but would loose $=C2=A3=E2=82=ACmillions = on the basis that they=20 would not sell as much cost inflated hardware, which looks pretty. = That's what=20 it comes down to.

Posted by: badstyle |=20 Dec=20 15, 2008 6:38:51 AM

@asdf
os x is based off of the mach kernel, elements of darwin, = and it=20 does posses elements of BSD, but its not a berkeley software = distribution=20 anymore..

if you don't like os x (or apple for that matter), go build your own = os, and=20 let us know when you're done, i'm sure that a lot of the wired reader = base would=20 love to test drive an offering from someone with such glorious=20 credentials

Posted by: LW | Dec=20 15, 2008 8:14:25 AM

Mark my words, Apple recently acquired a chip fabrication company. = They'll=20 use it to make a special chip for their macs that is required to run OS = X=20 efficiently.

Posted by: nonlinearmind | Dec=20 15, 2008 9:21:23 AM

MAC4LIFE!

Posted by: pelkin | Dec=20 15, 2008 9:34:56 AM

Linux seems leik a pretty cool guy, he is free and isn't afraid of = anything.=20

Posted by: ibex | Dec=20 15, 2008 10:00:31 AM

apple is evil, couldn't be one if ppl were a little bit smarter! = (& GBW=20 wouldn't be president either) well, we get what we deserve.

Posted by: mac_maniax |=20 Dec=20 15, 2008 11:19:05 AM

You people do realize that Apple is the only old computer company = still=20 making hardware and software. Apple is *NOT* a software company. Apple = doesn't=20 want to be a software company. Apple makes more money from its hardware = than its=20 software, which it practically gives away. Why should Apple invite more=20 competition for its hardware if it doesn't want to? If you can't afford = a Mac,=20 or you don't want to buy a Mac, then tough, you don't get to use the = operating=20 system that was designed for the Mac. And given this generation of Macs, = that=20 means this particular assembly of PC components. Don't mistake Apple and = Steve=20 Jobs' need to control everything for greed. It's not the same. If Apple = were a=20 greedy company, I'd have an serial number key with every copy of Mac OS = X I=20 have, and I'd have to "activate" it at some central server in order to = prove=20 that I legitimately own the software and am using it on one machine.

It's clear, none of you actually write or maintain complicated = software like=20 operating systems. Windows doesn't come with a promise of ease of use at = the=20 hardware layer, Mac OS does. Trying to support the many permutations of = PCs out=20 there would create instability problems and angry end users. Certifying = only=20 certain specific setups does no good. When a consumer buys a Mac clone = that=20 doesn't play well with Mac OS, they won't blame the hardware, they will = blame=20 Mac OS, and then they will blame Apple. Microsoft deals with this same=20 problem.

Most of Apple's revenue is from hardware sales, not software. The = operating=20 system helps to sell the hardware. You can mock that logo and insinuate = that=20 Apple owners are vain all you want, but we obviously have something you = want=20 real bad. And frankly, Mac hardware is better. Sure, it's x86 PC = architecture=20 now, but some PCs are better than others despite having the same = commodity=20 components. And I'll happily take an Apple Mac Pro over anything Dell=20 has.

Posted by: Tony | Dec=20 15, 2008 1:51:00 PM

This is not new at all. In the Amiga days you could insert a board = with the=20 original (or imaged) Mac ROMs in your Amiga (68K), and it would allow = the Mac OS=20 (also 68K) and applications to run fine. That was 20 years ago! Apple = stopped it=20 then just like it is doing now.

Posted by: Takeo | Dec=20 15, 2008 4:34:16 PM

Well now, if iTunes worked under Linux, I'd have no reason to use OS = X or=20 Windows.
Desktop Office Suite - Open Office, runs on all platforms, = the Gimp=20 for graphic editing, all platforms, XBMC, all platforms. And I can make = Gnome=20 look just like OS X/Aqua if I want to, there are some nice dock style = launch=20 bars out there now and compiz leaves Aqua and Aero in the = dust.
However on my=20 home PC, Flash works better in OS X than Linux (not Linux fault, blame = adobe for=20 crappy software)

Posted by: john | Dec=20 17, 2008 2:59:01 AM

Apple, as the makers of both hardware and software, have the right to = decide=20 on which hardware its software can run on.
But if people simply start = finding=20 a way of running the software on something they didn't intended to, then = it's=20 Apple's hardware team work to protect their software. Using lawyers to = do=20 something engineers are supposed to do it's just a proof of = incompetence,=20 IMHO.

Posted by: Gui | Dec=20 20, 2008 2:14:43 PM

See more Gadget=20 Lab

=0A=

Follow Gadget Lab on

=20

EDITOR: Dylan = Tweney=20 | email
ASSISTANT=20 EDITOR: Daniel Dumas
CONTRIBUTOR: Charlie Sorrel | email
CONTRIBUTOR: Brian X. Chen | email | IM
CONTRIBUTOR: = Priya=20 Ganapati | email
CONTRIBUTOR:= Jose=20 Fermoso
CONTRIBUTOR: Mark McClusky

=20

December 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

1 2 3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17

18 19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28 29 30 31 =

Zune = Freeze=20 Result of Leap Year: Microsoft
New = OLED=20 Printing Process Copies Old Model, Creates Rolled-up Displays
Remot= e=20 Control Keeps Going and Going on Single Watch Battery
Blaup= unkt=20 and miRoamer Unveil Internet Radio for the Car
Rumor= : New=20 Mac Minis Dressed in Sexy Aluminum
Rumor= : Mac=20 Tablet Coming Fall 2009
30GB = Zunes=20 Killing Themselves In Droves
The=20 Apocalypse is Coming: What You Need to Pack
Touris= ts=20 Power Up Times Square New Year's Sign Through Spinning Bikes
Modul= ar Car=20 Computer To Debut at CES 2009

=20

Wired= 's=20 iPhone App Gives You Gadgets to Go

Revie= w:=20 Airstream Interstate 3500

Revie= w: The=20 Harman Kardon GLA-55 Desktop Speakers

Review= :=20 Navigon GPS Unit Looks Pretty, Takes Its Sweet Time

Revie= w:=20 Nikon Coolpix S60 Looks Good, But It's=20 Touchy

=20

Anxiety&nbs= p;(66)

Apparel&nbs= p;(218)

Apple (8= 07)

Appliances (165)

ASR (1)
Audio (7= 4)

Automotive (158)

Avoi= d At=20 All Costs (39)

Batteries= (31)

bestsellers= (1)

Bicycles&n= bsp;(148)

Big In=20 Japan (22)

Bike=20 Geek (19)

BlackBerry (6)

Bling (8= 4)

Blu-ray = ;(20)

Books (4= 3)

Cameras&nbs= p;(744)

CeBIT (3= 1)

CEDIA=20 2008 (15)

CES = 2007 (27)

CES=20 2008 (177)

CES= 2008 -=20 Audio-Video (65)

CES = 2008 -=20 Misc (48)

CES = 2008 -=20 PCs (18)

CES = 2008 -=20 Phones (9)

C= ES 2008=20 - Wired Videos (11)

CES=20 2009 (9)

Chips (3= 7)

Contests&n= bsp;(12)

CPUs (41)=

Crazy=20 Deals (24)

CTIA (46)=

CTIA=20 2008 (11)

Current= =20 Affairs (193)

Defense&nbs= p;(80)

Delivery = Porn (12)

Design = (73)

Displays&n= bsp;(110)

DIY (103)<= BR>
DRM (40)
Else= where=20 at Wired (43)

= Elsewhere=20 in the Tubes (232)

Environment= (109)

Fall = Test=20 2007 (2)

Film (58)=

First=20 Looks (91)

Food = and=20 Drink (211)

Furniture= (79)

Future = (2)

Gadget = Lab=20 Audio Podcast (57)

Ga= dget=20 Lab Video Podcast (21)

Gad= get=20 Royal Rumble (9)

Games (3= 38)

Gargoyle&n= bsp;(2)

GooglePhone= (58)

GPS (141)<= BR>
Graphics&n= bsp;(4)

GSMA (23)=

Hacks (3= 05)

Handhelds= (59)

Headphones (34)

High=20 Def (102)

Home= =20 Entertainment (233)

HP (9)

iClones&nbs= p;(51)

Innovations= (675)

Internet&n= bsp;(133)

Interviews (4)

iPhone = (839)

iPhone=20 Hacks (147)

Junk (38)=

Law (137)<= BR>
Lightsabers= (1)

Liveblog&n= bsp;(1)

Mac (128)<= BR>
Macworld&n= bsp;(72)

Mail= Room=20 Breakout (14)

Maker=20 Faire (27)

Media=20 Players (589)

Medicine&n= bsp;(101)

Microsoft= (13)

Motherboar= ds (4)

Movies = (5)

MSRTechFest= (8)

Music (2= 35)

Navi= gation=20 Devices (1)

Netbooks&n= bsp;(72)

Networking (136)

NextFest = 08 (4)

Nokia (7= )

Notebooks= (485)

Other (5= 25)

Our= Cable=20 Overlords (8)

Our= Telco=20 Overlords (50)

PCs (259)<= BR>
PDAs (53)=

Peripherals= (457)

Phones = (1148)

PMA (41)
PMA=20 2008 (13)

Poptech&nbs= p;(3)

Printers&n= bsp;(12)

Pr= oduct=20 Royal Rumble (6)

Prognos= tication (2)

Projectors (21)

Quant= um=20 computing (1)

Readers&nbs= p;(14)

Religion&n= bsp;(42)

Research&n= bsp;(26)

Retail = (42)

Retro (9= 1)

Review = Paella (2)

Reviews&nbs= p;(491)

RFID (4)<= BR>
Robots = (209)

Rugged = (1)

Rumors = (98)

Satelli= te=20 Radio (14)

Scanners&n= bsp;(9)

Science&nbs= p;(66)

Security&n= bsp;(161)

servers&nbs= p;(1)

Shameless=20 Self-Promotion (1)

Singularity= (5)

Snakeoil&n= bsp;(2)

Software&n= bsp;(156)

Space (1= )

Spectrum&n= bsp;(3)

Sports = (121)

Storage&nbs= p;(225)

supercom= puters (1)

survey = (2)

Tablets&nbs= p;(23)

Television (215)

The=20 Greatest Gadget of All Time Tournament (1)

Tools (4= 4)

Top=20 Stories_ (4)

Toy=20 Fair (11)

Toys (104= )

Transpor= tation (148)

Travel = (39)

UMPC (115= )

Unsexy = (27)

USB (3)
Video (1= )

VOIP (43)=

Watches&nbs= p;(2)

Web/Tech&nb= sp;(16)

Weblogs&nbs= p;(1)

Weekly = Round=20 Up (4)

Whitespaces= (3)

wireless&n= bsp;(9)

WWDC (18)=

You = Know,=20 For Kids! (16)

Stay connected = with Wired=20 Mobile: Tech News, Gadget Reviews, and Special Offers - all = delivered to=20 your mobile device.

**December 2008**
Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
				1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18	19	20	21	22	23	24
25	26	27	28	29	30	31 =

Corrections | Sitemap | FAQ | Contact Us | = Wired Staff | Advertising | Press Center | Subscription=20 Services | Newsletter | RSS Feeds

web=20 sites:
Webmonkey.com | Reddit.com | ArsTechnica.com | Epicurious.com | NutritionData.com | Concierge.com | HotelChatter.com | Jaunted.com | Style.com | Men.Style.com | Flip.com
Subscribe to a magazine:=20

View Special Offers

View All Titles

Allure

Architectural Digest

Bon App=C3=A9tit

Brides

Cond=C3=A9 Nast Portfolio

Cond=C3=A9 Nast Traveler

Cookie

Details

Domino

Elegant Bride

GQ

Glamour

Golf Digest

Golf World

Gourmet

Lucky

Modern Bride

Self

Teen Vogue

The New Yorker

Vanity Fair

Vogue

W

Wired

Cond=C3=A9 Nast web sites:=20

YM.com

Allure =

Architectural=20 Digest

Bon = App=C3=A9tit

Brides =

Cookie =

Cond=C3=A9 = Nast Portfolio=20

Domino =

Glamour =

Gourmet =

Lucky =

Self

Teen = Vogue

The New = Yorker

Vanity = Fair

W=20

=C2=A9 = 2008 Cond=C3=A9Net, Inc.=20 All rights reserved.
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our = User Agreement = and Privacy = Policy=20

------=_NextPart_001_003B_01C96C0B.065BF660 Content-Type: application/octet-stream Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://www.reddit.com/button_content?t=1&width=120&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.wired.com%2Fgadgets%2F2008%2F12%2Fhackers-start-u.html&title=Hack%20of%20the%20Clones%3A%20Why%20Apple%20Can't%20Stop%20the%20Copies&css=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wired.com%2Fcss%2Fredditsocial.css =EF=BB=BF Hack of the Clones: = Why Apple Can't Stop the Copies =0A= function showcover() { show("cover"); }=0A=

please login

=20

3 points

------=_NextPart_001_003B_01C96C0B.065BF660-- ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C96C0B.06573B70 Content-Type: application/octet-stream Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://www.wired.com/js/global.js function addLoadEvent(func) {=0A= var oldonload =3D window.onload;=0A= if (typeof window.onload !=3D 'function') =0A= {=0A= window.onload =3D func;=0A= } =0A= else =0A= {=0A= window.onload =3D function() =0A= {=0A= oldonload();=0A= func();=0A= };=0A= }=0A= }=0A= =0A= /*=0A= * (c)2006 Jesse Skinner/Dean Edwards/Matthias Miller/John Resig=0A= * Special thanks to Dan Webb's dom

Hack of the Clones: Why Apple Can't Stop the = Copies

Post a comment