“Hackers have found a way to bypass a chip designed to prevent the Mac OS from running on non-Apple PCs, which are often cheaper than Macs,” Mark Baard writes for Wired News. “Some of the hackers are running the tweaked version of the operating system on their PCs natively. Others are using the system with VMware, which allows the Mac OS to support more PC hardware. Hackers and curious computer users this week have been downloading the tweaked Mac OS X for PCs, nicknamed ‘OSx86,’ from several websites connected to the BitTorrent file-distribution system.”
Baard writes, “OSx86 is designed to run on Apple Computer’s next generation of hardware, which some call ‘MacIntels’ and others “MacTels” because the machines will run on Intel microprocessors rather than the PowerPC processor used in current Macs. The hacked version of OSx86 is based on pirated software, which came from copies of the operating system sent to participants in the Apple Developer Connection. The ADC participants also received MacIntel computers for testing and development. Now the hacked version of OSx86 is running on Dell laptops and other PCs with Intel and AMD microprocessors.”
“The hackers are also writing software extensions so they can run their Wi-Fi cards and other non-Apple gadgets with the Mac OS… Apple employees appear to have been trying to listen in on IRC discussions among OSx86 hackers, according to hackers citing the IP records from their IRC channels. The hackers suspect Apple wanted to demonstrate the weaknesses of TPM security, and may have plans to license its operating system to PC makers eventually.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple had to know this would happen. If you believe that statement, it marks the beginning of a major move by Apple to dramatically reshape the personal computer landscape while putting a nice ding in Microsoft Windows’ universe.
As MacDailyNews’ own SteveJack wrote way back on March 04, 2004:
“iPod success paves the way for Mac OS X on X86. People have argued for years for and against the release of Mac OS X on Intel (and AMD) commodity hardware, but Apple derives such a large portion of its revenue from hardware that doing so could potentially damage the company beyond repair. But, what if Apple replaces that lost Mac hardware revenue with iPod revenue? Steve Jobs would then be free to drop what amounts to a hydrogen bomb on Microsoft. Mac OS X that runs on ”regular’ off-the-shelf x86 hardware. Or partner with a Sony, for example – to insure quality…. Sell enough iPods and the OS war is on again in a big way – and for real this time. Steve Jobs knows this and that’s why, right now, iPod is much more important than Mac hardware to Apple Computer, Inc.”
Related MacDailyNews articles:
How-to run Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger on Sony Vaio laptop posted online with video – August 12, 2005
Report: Mac OS X for Intel hacked to run on non-apple x86 PCs – August 11, 2005
Dvorak: Steve Jobs eventually intends for Apple’s Mac OS X to run on any x86 PC – August 09, 2005
DRM chip in Intel-based developer Macs prevents Mac OS X from running on non-Apple PCs – August 05, 2005
Report: Apple’s Mac OS X Intel kernel employs DRM to prevent OS from working unless authorized – August 01, 2005
Apple Intel-based Macs for developers runs Mac OS X and Windows XP – June 23, 2005
Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ ultimate goal: ‘to take back the computer business from Microsoft’ – June 16, 2005
Apple’s ‘Mac OS X for Intel’ developer build reportedly running on Tablet PC – June 16, 2005
The OS Wars heat up: Apple paves way to release Mac OS X for off-the-shelf x86 hardware – June 14, 2005
Video of Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel running on Dell laptop posted online – June 13, 2005
Report: Apple Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hits piracy sites – June 11, 2005
iPod success opens door to Mac OS X on Intel – March 04, 2004
One can only hope! F Microshaft!
Not only did they know it would happen, I bet they were counting on it. I think Apple just needs more drivers:
“The hackers are also writing software extensions so they can run their Wi-Fi cards …”
That ding you hear is either the bell after another round in the heavyweight battle of AAPL vs MSFT or the dinner bell announcing that you need to stick a fork in MSFT to see if they’re done.
“The hackers suspect Apple wanted to demonstrate the weaknesses of TPM security, and may have plans to license its operating system to PC makers eventually.”
This, ladies and gentlemen, is what we call wishful thinking.
http://www.macnightowl.com/newsletters/2005/08/298.htm Scroll to “THE APPLE/INTEL REPORT: JUST IGNORE THE HACKERS”
I’m sure this is only temporary until Leopard comes out on the new Intel boxes…
I am curious, though, about what kind of security holes these hacked versions may have and if they might be vulnerable to infections of any kind….
Why does everyone leap to the conclusion that Apple is planning to offer OS X for non-Mac use? Just because it can be done doesn’t mean it will.
I saw it on the newsgroups on Friday. If I had a x86 machine to try it on, I would have DL’ed it.
stop with the f-ing Mactel crap!
They arent currently called MacBM’s or Macorolas. So stop it stop it stop it stop it!
I posted last week that Apple was letting the hackers find the security holes in the methods they will use to control use of the OS on non-Apple Hardware. Why do it yourself when other will do it for free?
Mac OS X is da bomb!
So what? These type hackers would download any software on anything just to see if they can do it. They aren´t necessarily interested in MacOSX – the challenge to themis just to see if they can do it.
Once they can, they move on to something new.
I am sure there are some dwits out there trying to put OSX on X-box so they can be first to write: OSXX-box.
Tip to Steve – get your iNTelMacs out in the stores asap.
I guess it was bound to happen. But it will not hurt Apple at all. For the average Joe it will be too much hassle to tweak a x86 system to run MacOS. For the professional user, running a computer without software licence is out of the question. That leaves just a few people who would not buy a pre-assembled computer in the first place. No biggie.
But the PR generated by this can’t be bought for money. It’s a free test ride on MacOS X. The guys and girls who will get hooked on MacOS at home on their hacked system will want to use it at work, too. And that means buying a Mac for the office.
Apple is a HARDWARE company – thats where they make most money…
If they license the OS out (never going to happen – no control of hardware – will destroy their own market) to other vendors then say goodbye to Apple as we know it.
The hackers might have half arsed versions ‘sort of’ running on their peecees but its by no means a full working version like Mac users have right now. By the time MacTels are out the system will be totally locked down.
Reading posts on MDN I get the impression a lot of people seem to think and act like OSX86 is some rough-cut of an operating system ported to PC processors, and it’ll stumble at every hurdle.
Remember, as a PC OS, it’s about FIVE YEARS OLD, and will have been refined more than equilivant (and future) Microsoft offerings.
During that five years Apple’s coders will have iron’d out most of the bugs, looked at possible security holes and seen what will be required for it to run in the world-at-large (drivers, etc).
Whatever Bill and Bullmer might say, they should be very, very worried.
MDN magic word: ‘covered’. As in “Apple will have all of the bases…”
Apples and Pears said: Apple is a HARDWARE company – thats where they make most money…
Microsoft are probably the richest company on the planet, and they make SOFTWARE.
But it’s crap.
So why shouldn’t Apple start selling good software to the other 98% of the world and make more money that way…
Yes, Apple is perhaps doing this on purpose.
It will burst into action once it judges the extent of hacking possible. I am sure Apple/Intel will come out with something new to restrict Mac OSX on Apple hardware only, which will be woven out of the experience gained out of this calculated silence now.
But the PR generated by this can’t be bought for money. It’s a free test ride on MacOS X.
———–
Agreed. If Apple has a strategy here at all, it’s benign neglect. Let the hackers try it before they buy it to whet their appetites, plus look at all the free PR! Microsoft is blowing money on that stupid XP ad campaign and did the big announcement about Vista and no one gives a damn about either. OS X and various iPod rumors is all anyone wants to talk about.
OS X on a MacTel… there’s no chance the iTunes phone, or any other telephone Apple might introduce in the near future, will have enough RAM.
Ok ok, Running cheap wintel boxes would be cool for a desktop (I’d still pony up for a Powerbook), but licensing OS X to the public would mean the arrival of freakin’ serial numbers and copy protection like Windows XP. How crappy would that be? No more seamless installation like we have…
I, for one, hope Apple NEVER officially supports generic Intel hardware builds. This will make the evolution of the Mac OS as difficult for Apple as it is for Microsoft. For all the Microsoft bashing that happens here and other Mac centric forums, any relatively unbiased view must admit that because Microsoft attempts to support a virtually unlimited set of hardware it is a near miracle that Microsoft gets a new generation OS out at all.
Currently (and hopefully in the future) Apple has only several dozen base hardware configurations to worry about and maybe a few hundred hardware add ins to worry about. This makes evolving the platform easier (both hardware and software). It also makes support realistic. If I go in and modify my Mac hardware to the extent that it does not work with the Mac OS then that is MY issue, not Apple’s.
If Apple tries to support every Intel based box that is crafted by the “shop on the corner” then Apple will have all the nightmares Microsoft has with initially an extremely small revenue base to support it. This will be a much worse situation than the clone fiasco of the 90s. (Cloning did not work in the 90s because — no matter what the cloners claimed — they were going after Apple’s hardware customers more than they were going after the Wintel base. They were canibalizing Apple’s user base. If they had focused almost exclusively on the Wintel base rather than stealing customers from Apple, there would be a vibrant Mac clone industry today.)
If Apple wants to support non Apple built hardware then Apple could launch a certification program whereby any manufacturer shipping Intel based computers could get their boxes sanctioned by Apple. However, the manufacturer (and Apple) would have to explicitly state that any user modification beyond certain parameters would void statement by Apple that Mac OS will run on the box and void any Mac OS support.
I do not want to get into getting a new generation OS every 5-6 years! I do not want Apple to ask for my credit card number the moment I call them — before they know why I’m calling!
i’m wondering how long it’s gonna take virri to appear…
If their are 100 million Windows users that would like an alternative to XP. If Apple can make $100.00 profit on each copy. That’s 10 Billion Dollars. Who the hell would want 10 Billion Dollars for something that they already have, sitting on the shelf?
“Hackers have found a way to bypass a chip designed to prevent the Mac OS from running on non-Apple PCs, which are often cheaper than Macs,” Mark Baard writes for Wired News.
I am surprised MDN didn’t pick up on the typical “cheaper than Macs” statement, which just isn’t true anymore. I just retired an iMac DV from early 1999 that was running Panther and had ZERO issues, that’s ZERO issues over its lifetime. I think I got my money’s worth out of that iMac. It was replaced with a beautiful iMac G5 20″ about a month ago. Can anyone say the same on the PC side?
Virri is not a word, and not the plural of virus.
It’s a free ride on old PC hardware. If you as a PC user like the experience you may buy a new mac later on, but you may also not buy Vista when it comes out since your old PC works just fine. Hey your e-mail now works and you don’t have any viruses. Why upgrade to Vista, and when I do upgrade why not look at Tiger or Leopard.
Think of it as Apple releasing OSX for PC’s without spending one cent in supporting it. I just wonder how well it woks?
Why does everyone think Apple would have the same problems as M$ if Apple wanted to support a wide range of hardware?
Look, M$ software is insecure because it is poorly written, not because so many people use it. Likewise, Windoze is unstable because it is poorly written, not because supporting a wide range of hardware is such a difficult thing to do. Bottom line is M$ does a poor job writing software because they aren’t very good at writing software.
One need to look no farther than Linux to prove the point. Linux runs on a wider variety of hardware than Windoze, is more secure and stable than Windoze, and hasn’t the resources behind it that M$ has.
And any good software engineer will tell you throwing more money and programmers at a project will not necessarily produce better or faster results.
It amazes me how this urban mythology has evolved to excuse M$’s crappy engineering practices. M$ is a company built purely on marketing, and ruthless, unethical business practices; it was not built on technical merit.
Could Apple support a large range of hardware? Most certainly it could. Unix does, and MacOS X is built on top of Unix. Would Apple face the same technical challenges M$ faces? Unlikely. Apple is good at engineering; M$ is not. Should Apple license MacOS X for x86? I tend to think not. Or if they did, to do so for a higher premium than it charges Mac buyers (plus a tech-support surcharge). If people want MacOS X, they should buy a ticket to ride.
But this is great publicity for Apple, and that fact that a hacked OSx86 is exciting people means that the potential for more Mac sales is really quite great. Apple is in the driver’s seat, and with the price of admission only $499, Mac sales will do just fine without licensing MacOS X, IMO.