Jump to content

Anyone used CHERRY OS


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Not exactly. :P

And not only this in violation of the Mac OS X EULA, isn't it in violation of the hardware in some way? I'm lot a licensing genius, but isn't just emulating the hardware a violation by itself?

Apple doesn't own or have any legal claim to the PPC architecture or any of it's manufacturing processes.

That belongs to IBM.

Apple just made an OS that will run on it.

And no, it's not illegal to emulate it (PPC Processor). It is illegal to make an exact physical copy of the CPU without gaining permission from the patent holder (IBM). Of course that would also be very expensive too.

BTW... Intel's x86 architecture has been emulted on PPC for years. Virtual PC is a prime example.

And Motorola's 68k architecture has been emulated as well, Basilisk II is the best in my opinion. Caviat with Basillisk is that Apple does own the ROM, which is required in order to run Mac OS in Basillisk.

But that's an entirely different conversation.

Link to post

Heh, from their own "Documentation" page:

CherryOS is still under development and is only available as a beta release for selected users. We are still working out the bugs and some performance issues on the AMD System.

We are aware of the stories out there and it is up to you to believe in CherryOS, or not. We do not have any doubt or disbelief.

CherryOS is real!

If you would like to play with a different product from our company, please check out www.vx30.com.

We have received a lot of requests for a trial version, so we have reconsidered providing one on the same date that CherryOS is released.

Seems they've heard the 'rumors".. still sounds kinda fishy to me. "We do not have any doubt or disbelief."? What a funny thing to say.. why WOULD you have doubt if you're the ones MAKING the software? "It is up to you to believe..." still sounds kinda... ech. It almost sounds as if they don't care whether people think it's fake or not.

Link to post
BTW... Intel's x86 architecture has been emulted on PPC for years. Virtual PC is a prime example.

the x86 arch is an OPEN standard. so open that other companies are allowed to produce x86 processors (Cyrix, AMD, etc). by the way, that's the main reason i think that the x86 arch is spread so widely because it's an open architecture.

edit: btw, i wholeheartedly believe that CherryOS is a fake/ripoff

Link to post

The Emulator itself is nothing apple can do anything about as it doesn't infringe any apple copyright, nor does it contain any apple code or the apple OS. It's just a program that doesn't breach look and feel or anything else apple owns. Apple can't do anything about it as far as I can see. They also can't stop people using OSX on it as no-one (including me) will give a flying fig about apple's eula. If the emulator runs as advertised, apple can kiss my pucker if they don't like it.

Link to post
They also can't stop people using OSX on it as no-one (including me) will give a flying fig about apple's eula. If the emulator runs as advertised, apple can kiss my pucker if they don't like it.
True. Apple would never go after individuals breaking the EULA, but they would go after companies and corporations. However, at the very least they can stop Cherry OS from advertising their product using the Apple name and OS X as leverage for selling the thing. The thing about copyright and trademark is that there are no hard and fast rules. Cases are decided usually by a judge, unless its copyright infringement, then you have a jury of twelve people who usually have no clue what is going on. In the end, this doohickey is prolly some scotch-taped pearPC rip and this will all be gone by next week. I hope not, however. I hope the damn thing works as advertised and I get a copy somehow before Apple crushes it to bits with their fat legal arse. ;)
Link to post
the x86 arch is an OPEN standard. so open that other companies are allowed to produce x86 processors (Cyrix, AMD, etc). by the way, that's the main reason i think that the x86 arch is spread so widely because it's an open architecture.
I totally agree with you
Link to post
the x86 arch is an OPEN standard. so open that other companies are allowed to produce x86 processors (Cyrix, AMD, etc). by the way, that's the main reason i think that the x86 arch is spread so widely because it's an open architecture.

edit: btw, i wholeheartedly believe that CherryOS is a fake/ripoff

x86 is not an OPEN architecture... CISC is.

The base instruction set is 100% owned by Intel.

Intel chose to make the majority of the instruction set code widely available via a usage license for programming purposes. Kinda hard to write a program/OS for a CPU if you don't know how it works.

AMD, Cyrix, NEC, Nexgen and a few others "license" the instruction set from Intel.

And AMD, Cyrix and other CPU's do not contain the complete Intel x86 instruction set as some of it is still propritary to Intel. Only genuine Intel chips will contain this code.

Note... all Intel clones are x86 "compatible". And "based" on the x86 instruction set.

The current AMD x86-64 instruction set is owned by AMD and Intel "licensed" it to be used in the new Nacona CPU, since the Itanium has failed to become the premier x86 based 64bit CPU. See August 30th issue of Info World for details.

Link to post

In a disscussion with the developer of this website, I got the following response:

Me: So you're asking me to pay for 'cherryos' when I can use PearPC for free?

Him: Ours is a much better and faster software. Of course if you can get it free, cheap is good.

Me: I don't get it. Doesnt that also leave you legally liable to suits from Apple for making money off of them without a license?

Him: Not accordingly to our attorneys

Also, anyone else notice that cherryos.com isnt up? Furthermore, have a look at the WHOIS info for that site.

Link to post

http://www6.tomshardware.com/column/20040317/index.html go to this site, and i think this is the same situation. it's all a scam, unless they proved that they aren't. period.

i got really mad that the intro video kinda mocked apple saying " you don't need to buy an apple computer anymore" or something like that, which means they have no intention to promoting apple or their operating system. this is bad news for apple. it makes less people buy apple's hardware.

Link to post
@rjohnstone, yea, may be, but here we are to discuss about this fake?
Umm duh... just answering/responding, to a post that even YOU...
Quote:

Originally Posted by Menge

the x86 arch is an OPEN standard. so open that other companies are allowed to produce x86 processors (Cyrix, AMD, etc). by the way, that's the main reason i think that the x86 arch is spread so widely because it's an open architecture.

I totally agree with you

agreed with.

Menge was incorrect in his statement, so I responded appropriately without flame or disrespect. Just the facts... and yes... I agree with the rest of the community that this emulator is suspect at best.

Link to post
Topics merged again.

If I see another CherrryOS topic around I swear I'm going to eat it.

Thankyou Pe8er.

Let us all agree not to mention it untill there's sometihing really new to mention about it (useable shareware of it, undenieable evedence it to be fake, etc.) ;)

Link to post

I am sorry but i thik this is a bunch of bull ****.

"We are working on G5 emulation"

Um.... 64 bit operations and emulation is not possible on 32bit x86...

G4 emulation.... just doent seem posible to me... G3 obviously is... but G4?

"Mac OS X emulator...." Mac OS X is software and not physical, what about OS 9 or even 8?

Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...