Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
pearpc
- Thread starter Anarchy99
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In what country 
. Seriously, I don't think so. It would be breaking the law to run Virtual PC then too (in a way...). I think I need to go to bed. Somehow I can see Microsoft making a lawsuit out of that. But really, no, it's not against any law (that I know of).
Chase
. Seriously, I don't think so. It would be breaking the law to run Virtual PC then too (in a way...). I think I need to go to bed. Somehow I can see Microsoft making a lawsuit out of that. But really, no, it's not against any law (that I know of).Chase
No, but you're breaking Apple's software license if you install OS X on it.
The license states that it must be installed on an Apple branded machine.
The license states that it must be installed on an Apple branded machine.
grabberslasher is referring to contract law. By breaking the MacOS X 10 end user license, you will be liable for civil damages.rendezvouscp said:In what country
Chase
PearPC itself breaks no laws, but, as grabberslasher states, using it to run Mac OS X on a non-Apple branded machine is in violation of the Mac OS X EULA (end-user license agreement).grabberslasher said:
Yeah, I forgot about the EULA they seem to have us agree to . So, yes, in a way you are probably breaking a law, just not the same way as running a red light.
Chase
. So, yes, in a way you are probably breaking a law, just not the same way as running a red light.Chase
Then again in order for Mac OSX to install it needs a Mac BOOT ROM. Which I believe is copyrighted. So if it contains the Mac BOOT ROM then it is illegal. Apple could sue on those grounds.
VPC is not breaking the law since Microsoft owns it ;P
VPC is not breaking the law since Microsoft owns it ;P
A Mac bootrom is not needed, the PearPC project simply emulates a PPC system in its entirety using OpenFirmWare. This shows that you can run OSX on PPC systems built NOT by apple. I hope no one goes out of business for this...
I don't think apple is going to care unless it A. becomes faster B. more people start using it, etc....
I think it'll be good for Apple when it gets to a usable speed (~500 MHz G3). It will let enthusiasts try out the OS without having to buy new hardware, and if they like it then they'll buy a real Mac so that they can use it "properly"
Not true. Rights unenforced are rights abdicated. If Apple does not enforce the EULA against installation of MacOS X 10 on PearPC, it may find that it has given up its rights to enforce the EULA against LemonPC when it ships a 15 THz Power 7-based system with MacOS X 10.8 installed. The bottomline is that the law does not give Apple the option to enforce against its EULA against some and ignore others. Within the bounds of reason, it is either everybody or nobody.javabear90 said:
jhu said:
Doubt it, but an agreement is boundable (funny to think that in the U.S. in some states a verbal agreement is binding). Is boundable a word?
Chase
MisterMe said:
But Apple can't really do anything about it, because they can't go after everyone who installs OS X under PearPC. They simply don't know who's doing it and who isn't. It's possible that the next version of OS X (be it 10.4 or 10.3.5) will prevent installation on PearPC, but 10.3.4 users will still be able to run it.
Remember, PearPC is just a PowerPC emulator. In itself, it's doing nothing wrong. Its intention was to allow people to install PowerPC Linux on an x86 computer.
grabberslasher said:
You know those Apple stickers that come with new Macs? Just stick one onto the side of your computer, and voilà! An Apple branded machine