Leopard on a "Normal" Pc ?

[EDanaII]

osX86 Project.

I've tried installing Leopard on my T30, without success. It is on their "compatibility" list, however, I tried installing a version later than the one that was identified as compatible. It's possible that only that one specific version was. I'll probably try again later.

As to the legality of it all. If I can install it and get it working, I'll gladly purchase a valid copy and pay for the license.

Ed.

[EDanaII]

You're confusing legality with contractuality. A contract is a legally binding agreement, but it is not law.

The EULA only states that, by not honoring the agreement, the provider is not obligated to help you. It does not state that you cannot do with it as you please.

Imagine buying a car and signing an agreement that says you can only drive it down odd numbered roads or only roads with names that begin with "Z." No such contract would ever be considered legal because of the ridiculous standard it raises.

But, as I said, the EULA is only an agreement on the providers obligation to help you. Violating the EULA is not breaking the law.

Ed.

[EDanaII]

Again, you appear to be confused. Copyright infringement is taking someone elses work and selling it as your own. If someone manages to install osX on a PC, they are not violating copyrights, only the EULA. And, in violating the EULA, the only thing they have to worry about is not getting help from the manufacture.

Now, if they installed it on a PC, rebadged it as their own and tried to sell it to the public, THAT would be copyright infringement.

Ed.

[EDanaII]

I finally got OS X to run on my IBM T30. Now I'm free! FREE!!! Free forever from M$ domination! Muahahahaha!!!

OK, maybe not, but I can dream can't I? ;-)

So far, it runs nicely. I'm posting from it now. I think I'll try it for a month and if everything works OK, I'll happily purchase a license for it.

Ed.

P.S. Let the lawsuites begin! ;-)

[EDanaII]

So it's running without any problems whatsoever? Kudos.

I'm finding some issues: some apps fail, running under VESA, no Airport support. But, other than that, I'm finding the experience very pleasing. Certainly smoother than XP. Imagine that.

If I can get these issues ironed out, I'll definitely buy that license.

Ed.

[EDanaII]

@ monami

what do you get to run that you don't get from ordinary linux considering that a licence must cost you £75? just curious...

* I'm not fond of Linux.
* To make an honest man out of me.
* To support an alternative OS.
* For professionally supported apps.
* A sharp stick it in M$'s eye.
* A chance to encourage more development.
* A smoother more stable experience.
* A More competitive environment.
* To convince Apple to open their architecture to competition.
* To make Bill Gates cry.

Ed.

[EDanaII]

@ monami

do you need to run a virus scanner though?

Not yet, but then I've only just been trying it for a few days. Once I'm convinced I can use it, I'll probably spring for one.


@ bloodline

The trouble is that, after you've used MacOS X on a regular PC for a bit, you'll almost certainly end up buying a Mac...

Are you kidding? :-) I would have bought a Mac years ago but for the overpriced hardware. Crap, even after M$ decided to stick me in the shorts, I was hesitant to spring for an Intel based Mac. But then that's what eventually led me to find the OSx86 project: M$ denying me a license to the software I rightfully paid for...

It's quite a cunning strategy by Apple... See if you can figure out how they did it

I actually see it the other way around, just as IBM lost the PC market to clone manufacturers, this is another crack in the door that (I hope) will force Apple to reopen to their clone market.

But then, I've always considered Apple closing that particular door to be anything but smart.

Ed.