Mac clone lust.
Ah, spring! When a gentleman's fancy turns to Mac cloning! Like ZDNet's Jason Perlow.
... I have to think that this whole idea of commercially produced Mac Clones has legs...
Ah, so Perlow's a leg man. Well, Jason, the Macalope's not sure what you're into but, just so you know, these particular legs are likely to be of the short, stumpy variety.
But despite all the lusting, is this relationship meant to be? Sure, cloners were able to legally have their way with Windows, but OS X ain't that kind of girl. She's gonna put up a fight.
There is the obvious difference here that Apple owns Mac OS X and the rights to the hardware platform it runs on, whereas IBM had a non-exclusive license from Microsoft which prevented a loophole from being closed, but to use the hackneyed phrase -- when there is a will, there is a way.
There are certainly going to be more attempts to create unlicensed Mac clones. The problem is, who wants to buy a computer running an unsupported operating system from a company that has the life expectancy of a fruit fly?
I have always said that it made absolutely no sense that Apple backed off from the prospect of cloned systems.
And the Macalope has always said that the water fountains at ZDNet must be served with lead pipes.
How easy is it? Well, along with legal copies of Mac OS X and a special EFI firmware emulator for PC BIOS-based equipment and instructions how to put it all together it doesn't really require any more effort than what it would have typically taken a PC homebrewer to assemble their own DOS or Windows-based white box 10 or 15 years ago.
Hmm. The Macalope likes your American ingenuity, Jason, but he's not hearing the words that brings this sleazy scenario to its tacky nadir: steampunk casemod. Think about it.
If you want a clone Mac or a "Hackintosh" that badly, you can have one, for just a small amount of effort and a very modest cash investment in a relatively generic PC motherboard, processor, RAM, video card and case with power supply assembled from an ever-growing list of compatible parts.
Rob Griffiths might disagree with the "small amount of effort" part. Here's what he went through:
After all of the parts arrived at my home, it took a few hours to build the machine. ... But building the hardware is actually the easy part of the process.
...
Next, I installed Vista on the PC, just to be sure everything worked. From there, it then took many more hours to get OS X working right--while the process is relatively straightforward, there are a lot of steps involved, and BIOS settings to tweak. If you want to run Windows and OS X on the same drive, there are more hoops to jump through to get it all working. But after many hours of reading, assembling, disassembling, screaming, installing, uninstalling, reinstalling, saying bad words, pestering friends, and generally not having very much fun, I was done: my machine was up and running, and capable of booting into either Windows Vista or Mac OS X 10.5.2.
Jason, the Macalope decrees your pimp name to be "Sugar-Coatin' Perlow". But over at ZDNet, hope springs eternal:
In all likelihood, you probably can run it on the PC you have now...
That's true! But, in the Macalope's case, that's because the PC he has now is a Mac. You see, time being money, this colossal exercise is only economically worthwhile if your only opportunity cost is the hours you'll lose from your job as a fry chef down at the DQ.
Oh, you'll need to be your own support person, and it will probably be more than a little bit messy, but if you are determined to "screw the man" so to speak, than a private citizen can effectively do whatever the heck they want without any interference at all from the Evil Fruit.
Who burned the Reichstag? Why, Steve Jobs burned the Reichstag, of course. Jason's just having a little fun, but when did the computer company with the 7% market share become the Great Satan?
Don't get me wrong, Ubuntu Hardy Heron is nice and all, but a Mac OS X I could easily and legally install on any random $500-$700 Dell or Taiwanese special from Costco or Wal-Mart?
OK, the Macalope may be an ungulate, but he still doesn't like it when other people make him throw up in his own mouth.
It's baffling how someone could get through an entire article and neglect to address one simple question: what's in it for Apple?
Attracting homebrew Linux users? No offense, Jason, but that's not exactly the gold ring of desktop computer market share.
This is not business analysis. This is technology fantasy porn. And Apple's just not that into you.
All things being equal, the brown and furry one would much rather steal market share from Windows than Linux. The Macalope has a lot of respect for the neck-bearded Linux gnomes who solder and compile long into the night. Sure, they're cheap, but they live by a noble, if smelly and hirsute, code. And the Macalope loves the idea of three viable desktop alternatives really competing against each other.
In any event, licensed Mac cloning is simply not going to happen. The experience from the mid '90s is that licensees don't increase sales, they rob sales from Apple. And the amount of money to be made on licensing is never going to be greater than the sales of Apple hardware lost. That leaves unlicensed cloning which will never be really mainstreamed because of the obvious legal, technical and, well, moral implications.
Sadly, this won't stop some fevered imaginations from going on and on about how very, very hot it gets them.
Ew, indeed.
Mythical beast and rumormonger extraordinaire, the Macalope writes about all things Apple for the CNET Blog Network. Read more at The Macalope: An Apple blog. He is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
There are always those who think cheap is better and will spend anything to prove it. But a beige plastic box with assorted parts inside it is not a Mac, it's a PC in drag pretending to be a Mac.
There is much more to a Mac than just OS.X in a beige box and I am wiling to pay for that experience as are a lot of others. But it is a free world and you can spend your time building whatever but just don't go making a business out it or his Steveness will get you.
Or.. you can buy my G5 at a good price.
Though if you were going to spend nearly a thousand dollars as you suggest, it'd be madness to buy a used G5 on eBay when you could get a warranted, faster Intel iMac refurb or new Mini.
(G5s make sense for people who have software that's PPC only and needs to run as fast as possible and can't quite make it on the Intels using Rosetta.)
Time is money being the key point for me. I switched from Windows to Mac three years ago specifically *because* I no longer wanted to deal with hacked together homebrew machines and unstable operating systems.
Now, here the apologists for cloned Mac OS X hardware would have us return to those dark days where it takes a typical coke-drinking-chip-eating hacker to get your computer working, rather than just buying in to the "Computer as appliance" model that has been so elusive from just about everybody *but* Apple over the years.
I'll pay the "Apple Tax" to have a computer that "Just works" and do so happily. The magic of this is not *just* OS X, although it's a beautiful operating system, but also the fact that when you control all the pieces, you also control the user experience.
When Apple controls all the pieces, you don't. I will limit this to hardware, because I simply can not argue that for average (you) users, OSX is more friendly than Windows/Linux. But, regarding hardware, apple simply throws 3rd party components together same as Dell. Intel motherboard and cpu's, nvidia vid cards, etc. Apple just does a better job of making sure everything is compatable (in pc land if something turns out incompatable, you simply return it) and puts it in a subjectively more pretty box (I mean the packaging more than anything else). Did you have any input into the specs of your vid card, the single most expensive component? No, you didn't. Want to upgrade? It'll cost you TWICE as much as the SAME PC vid card from the SAME vendor with the SAME specs. How 'bout that monitor? Do you know the resonse time? No, you don't because apple doesn't publish this information. It's the same story for EVERY component in you comp. You speak in such vague terms, exactly how apple wants you to.
Don't pull that **** when I'm eating! I almost choked on a cashew from laughing.
As an independent website and graphic designer, I heartily embrace the "computer as appliance" model typified by Apple. Honestly, I don't want to spend money and (billable!) time and build a computer from scratch. I want to use a computer to build websites (videos, ads, catalogs, etc) and MAKE money. That's why I use a Mac, and have used Macs since 1988.
On top of that, when I buy a Mac I not only expect it to work out of the box, but I expect it to keep on working, despite the demands I put on it, for many years. Case in point: I am STILL using a G4 800MHz QuickSilver model. It's six years old now, and while it can't run Leopard, Tiger does just fine, as do the CS2 versions of Adobe's apps. And it all makes me money, rather than costing me money (frustration, time, etc).
I have no desire to fail a client or miss a deadline because some home-built system blows a motherboard, has some incompatibility with peripherals, whatever. Give me a system I don't even have to think about using -- my Mac -- so I can USE IT to make my favorite thing to make: money.
Yeah, seems about right.
2) I'm getting high off of your venom and mouth foam.
3) Can't we all all get along?
Best,
Jason Perlow
So, that's why I'd want to homebrew. To get my mid range game box.
Check!
Difficulties surrounding OS X on 3rd party hardware are merely a technical challenge, not a social one. If there's commercial interest in third-party OS X, then the automatic updates program *will* be hacked so it looks to different servers for "known-good" or pre-hacked updates. Installation *will* become easier, too, if there's commercial backing to find a solution.
- by fcmario May 14, 2008 10:08 PM PDT
- Why don't Apple guy release an Apple certified Hardware list? IF they want to attract more people coming to their camp - especially those PC lovers and gamers, Apple has to UNDERSTAND that the most reason people "love" (they have no choice) PC is the freedom of upgrading or changing the hardware to suit their pocket or their need (perhaps you can say: desire/lust). Does ATI or NVIDIA sell to Apple a different video card architecture than that of the version they sell freely in the shop or ebay? Does Intel give Apple a special version of their Centrino Duo? Does installing OS X on a PC will decrease the performance to 50%?
- Reply to this comment
-
(18 Comments)I know that a Jaguar is far better than a Suzuki Carry (a passenger car), but not all people can afford a Jag. The same scenario fits Apple very well. I really really love a Mac than the PC, even though for all these 10+ years I always use a PC. I had saved 100$ each month for a year to get my self a new Imac, a computer that I want to stick with in my way to heaven (or hell) when I die. But when I went to the computer shop a couple months ago, I just couldn't spend it. A 1200+ $ for a computer? For an Indonesian? My salary is not bigger than a half of yours. I think I better use it as a down payment of a new small house: I'm sick already of my rented room. For a 1200$ I will chose to push the restart button when the blue screen of death come. Sure Apple, I hope you always succeed, and never be sold to Mr. Punjabi from India or Middle East guy just like some European branded and luxury car ended!
PS. Don't ask me to get the Mini.