I've just been browsing through Apple discussion forums and read a topic where a some guy was asking how to make his PC look more like a Mac?!!
I mean,why in a world would you ask that at Apple.com?!
Then,other morons were giving him tips and links to AquaXP, StyleXP,wincostumize and Aqua dock at download.com. A day later,Apple locked the topic and I'm so afraid will take actions against Aqua Dock now.
There is no action to be taken against AquaDock since it's ILLEGAL anyway. This is so sad that people here actually think AquaDock is a legitimate dock utility.
Glad that moron didn't mention my site too
Apple already know of Aqua-Soft, at the very least, and I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't know of the existence of various other emulation sites such as AXP...
As for asking that sort of question on Apple's forums, it's kinda fair enough - if you were an utter n00b, where would you think to ask about making your system look like an Apple? Apple, of course! >.<
@ rolandx1 - mind to give the url to the threads?
@ Sid: I know AquaDock is not legal,taking actions as in taking it off from download.com and other sites that you can download it from.
@alang: Here it is:
http://discussions.info.apple.com/webx?14@...pcE.3@.68946e6f
I'm more worried at the what they might do if they find out what AquaDock actually is. We don't want Mr Yz to get in trouble for someone else's rip. Also, they pointed out PearPC, please say they already know and don't care or things in modding community may start going backwards for a while.
EDIT: I don't think the guy who asked is a complete moron, just lacking in knowledge of the area he asked about. It's the people who replied about it on the Apple forum with links to programs Apple wouldn't like that are the morons.
I dont really see how elppa knowing about pear pc is a bad thing... Is it illegal to create something that emulates a ppc proc. Its not like they are giving away an iso with panther on it or anything
Originally posted by Acaeris@Jun 15 2004, 12:03 PMI'm more worried at the what they might do if they find out what AquaDock actually is. We don't want Mr Yz to get in trouble for someone else's rip.
Mr. Y isn't going to get in trouble for Aquadock. His position on Y'z Dock is crystal clear, and he isn't even developing for PC anymore.
It's the same reason why Playstation emulators, N64 emulators, etc. are Illeagal. Whereas older emulators are emulating systems that are not sold anymore and therefore the companies do not care, Power PC is the architecture Apple uses now and so they are stepping on toes.
ePSXe gets away with it just because it isn't using any of the original code and legitimately as long as you own a Playstation you can have 1 backup of the Bios chip. If ePSXe was all one package (i.e. the emulator had fully implemented graphics and sound chip emulation) it would be breaking the law cause it would cloning a copyrighted system, as they come as Plugins they can't be sued cause they are only recreating a part of the machine. Same will be true for Pear PC.
Edit: @Toby: Yes, but the fact that the program is still being distibuted and now with a new name and unknown author. Apple might think it suspcious. (I know I'm probably being paranoid but sometimes it's better to be paranoid than ignorant of the possibilities (Don't take this as offence, i'm just stating opposites)).
I don't think the emulators are illegal, but the ROM's are. Only in Nintendo's case are emulators illegal.
No, newer emulators aren't illeagal but that's cause they learnt something when Sony sued Bleem!. Bleem! didn't even use any of the original Playstation architecture, not even the BIOS but it was still considered illeagal. As I said above, modern emulators get away with it by using plugins so they are not actually creating am emulator but a series of things that emulate seperate parts of the machine they are emulating.
Nintendo registered all emulation apps under itself. So any emulation app is considered illegal
No, that doesn't make it illeagal just technically Nintendo owns the rights to all emulation apps. Just as MS now owns all rights to the double click function.
As I just stated, what is said there isn't entirely true. They actually have a leg to stand on against the patent if the Zodiac has higher specs than the Gameboy Advance.
The patent is for low capability systems, not PCs, etc. which are high capability systems.
A software emulator for emulating a handheld video game platform such as GAME BOY.RTM., GAME BOY COLOR.RTM. and/or GAME BOY ADVANCE.RTM. on a low-capability target platform (e.g., a seat-back display for airline or train use, a personal digital assistant, a cell phone) uses a number of features and optimizations to provide high quality graphics and sound that nearly duplicates the game playing experience on the native platform. Some exemplary features include use of bit BLITing, graphics character reformatting, modeling of a native platform liquid crystal display controller using a sequential state machine, and selective skipping of frame display updates if the game play falls behind what would occur on the native platform.
Originally posted by Acaeris@Jun 15 2004, 12:24 PMPower PC is the architecture Apple uses now and so they are stepping on toes.
Edit: @Toby: Yes, but the fact that the program is still being distibuted and now with a new name and unknown author. Apple might think it suspcious.
Re. Power PC: Yes, it is the architecture that Apple currently uses, but it is not exclusively used by Apple.
Re. Mr. Y: Apple and Mr. Y have an understanding (second hand information, but from a source that I'd trust greatly on this matter). They won't go after him. If anything, they will enlist his willing assistance in taking AquaDock down if they go after it.
Ok, I'll try and put this a different way so people can understand what I am talking about and where I am coming from on this. I am a very skeptical person I always look at the possible problems of a situation first. That is what I am doing here.
The messages were put up on Apple's Message Board so it's most likely that Apple will be the only ones who'll bother reading the thread other than those on the Apple message boards.
That Message Board has a delete function for threads yet they haven't deleted the thread (or at least they hadn't when I last checked). This could mean 2 things, they are either not bothered anymore about people emulating Mac (unlikely as they closed the thread) or they want to keep it so they can use the information posted there.
Apple have already had a moan at several people about releasing programs or skins that recreate the Aqua interface on non Apple platforms.
So, in my skeptical view, they are probably looking into this at the moment.
Now onto the problems with Y'z Dock/Aquadock.
Y'z may have agreed and been very nice with Apple, but he doesn't work for them. He works for himself.
Now, take this as an alternate example: Sony blew Bleem! out of the water with legal fees, they didn't beat them in court, they just drowned in the debt they built up in legal fees. Say Bleem! had agreed with Sony to stop making the emulator. What would Sony have done had Bleem! suddenly resurfaced under a different name claiming to be upgraded, and no one knew who had supposedly improved it?
The only people Sony could target is the original Bleem! people. That's most likely who they would suspect as they are the only ones who have the source code. Same scenario with Y'z Dock (Still in Skeptical view here), and just cause Apple can program a lot doesn't mean their legal team knows about the ability to ResHack a Windows Application.
I'm hust trying to point out the possibilities here. You may be right, maybe nothing will happen, but what if it does?...
Originally posted by Acaeris@Jun 15 2004, 10:24 AMIt's the same reason why Playstation emulators, N64 emulators, etc. are Illeagal. Whereas older emulators are emulating systems that are not sold anymore and therefore the companies do not care, Power PC is the architecture Apple uses now and so they are stepping on toes.
ePSXe gets away with it just because it isn't using any of the original code and legitimately as long as you own a Playstation you can have 1 backup of the Bios chip. If ePSXe was all one package (i.e. the emulator had fully implemented graphics and sound chip emulation) it would be breaking the law cause it would cloning a copyrighted system, as they come as Plugins they can't be sued cause they are only recreating a part of the machine. Same will be true for Pear PC.
Edit: @Toby: Yes, but the fact that the program is still being distibuted and now with a new name and unknown author. Apple might think it suspcious. (I know I'm probably being paranoid but sometimes it's better to be paranoid than ignorant of the possibilities (Don't take this as offence, i'm just stating opposites)).
Apple does not own the PPC cpu or it's architecture.
Apple cannot say squat about it.
IBM and Motorola on the other hand can, as they jointly developed the CPU.
PearPC emulates the PPC CPU, and it doesn't even do it to the fullest extent either.
There is absoloutly nothing Apple can do about it.
Now if PearPC were to add Apple's bios identifiers, then Apple can get involved.
Note when you boot OS X under PearPC, you get a Apple hardware identifier error because it's Apple specific open firmware tags are not present.
In Apples defense, they can put an explicit statement in the boot sequence of OS X to abort if certain hardware or bios identifiers are not present.
It's not because of the actual PPC structure I'm saying about. According to software licensing, any program that allows software not designed for that system to run, is breaking the software licence unless the software explicitly says you can run it on any platform. Any company making a game for a console could sue an emulator author because he is breaking the license agreement, the only reason they don't is cause they can hide behind the "developement work/backup software" laws. That is why Apple can sue not directly because of the PPC architecture but because their software was designed for the PPC architecture.
I've said enough now, my point was not to cause an arguement but to get people to understand that this may not be something the community will easily be able to shrug off, like you seem to be trying.
I will disagree as the owness falls on Apple to implement the appropriate restrictions on the software.
Since IBM and Motorola make PPC hardware for general use, which PearPC emulates, then PearPC is not in violation of anything related to Apple.
We have several hundred IBM PPC servers/workstations were I work that I can install OS X on without issue.
I receive the same warning as PearPC users about the Apple IO failure.
But the install succeds regardless.
Old Mac OS installs required the presence of an authentic Apple ROM before install would continue.
They removed that requirement from OS X.
Since Apple removed that requirement, the only thing they can do is go after the individual for violating the license agreement by installing it on unauthorized hardware, emulated or not.
Aqua-Soft Forums