[Millennium]

Originally posted by piracy:
Open Firmware isn't a ROM, akin to the old Mac ROMs; it's a bootloader, and, as the name implies, it's open. New World architecture machines no longer have hardware ROMs.

There is a very small amount of ROM, which Open Firmware uses to get itself going, but this is not the same thing as the old Mac ROMs. Open Firmware itself isn't really a bootloader, either; the actual bootloader sits on top of Open Firmware. You could say that OF is a kind of "mini-platform" which sits between the hardware and the software, roughly akin to BIOS on a PC.

When the first iMac was introduced, Apple began its "New World" program, the aim of which was to gradually phase out hardware ROMs by moving more and more code onto the disk. The eventual goal was an architecture called "Open World", which would have no hardware ROM at all. Apple actually got through several iterations of the New World project, moving more code to disk each time, but it was eventually killed before Open World was complete. I don't know if they ever got everything out of the hardware ROM, or just most of it.

[piracy]

Originally posted by Millennium:
There is a very small amount of ROM, which Open Firmware uses to get itself going, but this is not the same thing as the old Mac ROMs. Open Firmware itself isn't really a bootloader, either; the actual bootloader sits on top of Open Firmware. You could say that OF is a kind of "mini-platform" which sits between the hardware and the software, roughly akin to BIOS on a PC.

When the first iMac was introduced, Apple began its "New World" program, the aim of which was to gradually phase out hardware ROMs by moving more and more code onto the disk. The eventual goal was an architecture called "Open World", which would have no hardware ROM at all. Apple actually got through several iterations of the New World project, moving more code to disk each time, but it was eventually killed before Open World was complete. I don't know if they ever got everything out of the hardware ROM, or just most of it.

Yes, Open Firmware really is a bootloader. It's also a mini OS. But it's also a bootloader. The original IEEE spec was called Standard for Boot Firmware; saying that Open Firmware is really a "platform" and the "bootloader" runs on top of it is splitting hairs. Open Firmware is a bootloader. But I'd really like to keep this thread on topic, i.e., that CherryOS is as gaseous as vaporware can get, which is why my response was brief.

And yes, Open Firmware is stored in a hardware ROM. But it's not a "ROM" like people mean when they say "Mac ROMs"; i.e., it's ROM in that it's a non volatile area of memory where the code is stored, but it's not proprietary like Apple's old ROMs. The old ROMs contained critical proprietary bits that Mac OS even needed to run. Even with later versions of Mac OS, the ROM was transitioned into a software "ROM" ("Mac OS ROM") as part of the OS. On New World architecture machines, there is no proprietary Mac ROM, and Mac OS X does not require any proprietary hardware to run (though the EULA specifically prohibits installing Mac OS X on non-Apple-branded hardware).

[Maflynn]

While this may be fake there was a lot of effort put into his site and background material.

Now with that said, there was that product (pearpc?) that was open source showing an emulated osx.

Also I remember a few years back during a Macworld NY, connectix was showing off a virtual mac on a PC. I forget if it was running OS9 or OSX 10.0. Its been a few years and my mind is starting to go

Anyways my point is that there was, and is emulation software. Regardless of the market viability of such a product they still need to get over the legal issue.

I'm sure the legal eagles in Apple will be paying close attention to any product that allows OSX to run on non-apple hardware. I wouldn't be surprised if future versions have a little check in it to prevent it from working.

Mike

[piracy]

Originally posted by Maflynn:
While this may be fake there was a lot of effort put into his site and background material.

Now with that said, there was that product (pearpc?) that was open source showing an emulated osx.

Also I remember a few years back during a Macworld NY, connectix was showing off a virtual mac on a PC. I forget if it was running OS9 or OSX 10.0. Its been a few years and my mind is starting to go

Anyways my point is that there was, and is emulation software. Regardless of the market viability of such a product they still need to get over the legal issue.

I'm sure the legal eagles in Apple will be paying close attention to any product that allows OSX to run on non-apple hardware. I wouldn't be surprised if future versions have a little check in it to prevent it from working.

Mike

*Sigh*

http://pearpc.sourceforge.net/

Yes, it's real.

CherryOS isn't.

Also, the legal burden isn't on the developer of such software, it's on the end user, as it's Mac OS X's EULA that prohibits installing Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware. Making a PowerPC motherboard emulator is not illegal.

[goMac]

The PearPC developers are noting that many screenshots of CherryOS simply appear to be altered screenshots of PearPC. The screen item positioning, titlebar, and status messages are identical.

Either that, or CherryOS is simply a repackaged PearPC.

[Maflynn]

While I agree with you the burden is on the consumer, which makes it nearly impossible to enforce, I'm sure the legal department is looking at every angle. A startup will have a very difficult time trying to defend against a law suit especially if it turns into a long and drawn out conflict.


Mike

[piracy]

Originally posted by Maflynn:
While I agree with you the burden is on the consumer, which makes it nearly impossible to enforce, I'm sure the legal department is looking at every angle. A startup will have a very difficult time trying to defend against a law suit especially if it turns into a long and drawn out conflict.

Regardless, making a PowerPC motherboard emulator is not illegal. That's why PearPC exists.

I bet that CherryOS will indeed claim, however, that they've conveniently "decided" not to distribute CherryOS on legal grounds. The implication, of course, would be that Apple somehow "stopped" them from distributing it, and thousands of people will view Apple as the bad guy, while vx30.com got tens (or hundreds) of thousands of eyes worth of free advertising.

Hell, even in their note saying they've "reconsidered" releasing it, they direct people to vx30.com!

[piracy]

Keeps getting better and better...now he's deleted his posts in this thread at hardforum.com:

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=813258

(referenced in my original post at http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...=1#post2233435)

[piracy]

For what it's worth, Leander Kahney of Wired actually seems to have gotten his hands on the "product":

http://wiredblogs.tripod.com/cultofm...ntry_id=479527

So, the scenario in which it's just a repackaged PearPC is probably more accurate (especially given that screenshots they'd previously shown, now removed, have PearPC specific strings in the boot screens).

[Eriamjh]

Just for the record, calls of this being fake should be deemed accurate if this turns out to be repackaged PearPC.

[piracy]

Originally posted by Eriamjh:
Just for the record, calls of this being fake should be deemed accurate if this turns out to be repackaged PearPC.

Indeed. And in my estimation, that's almost worse than it simply being an outright fraud.

[Xeo]

Originally posted by piracy:
Indeed. And in my estimation, that's almost worse than it simply being an outright fraud.

But what a complete waste of time.

[ixavi]

Tired of this emulator nonsense.

Hey, but at least it's fun! Wave you watched the video? They could have used VNC to make a "demo" of a mac on a Pc... but no. Instead of this they stay with a screenshot, who's going to believe this? And then the man in the video says they are currently emulating a G4 and G5 emulation is in the works... in a Centrino laptop! Can I get some of what you're smoking???
I think we should be more curious and read more Arstechnica.com articles because, even if you don't understand them fully, you get an idea of all the complexity that lies behind processor and motherboard architecture. Then you know all this emulation doesn't happen by some sort of magic and you don't get tricked every week with new vaporware.



PS: Please forget my mistakes, I'm writing from spain.

[Anubis IV]

Assuming they do have a legitimate product, I suppose the legal issues Apple faces here would be no different than the legal issues Sony faced when it sued Connectix for selling Connectix Video Game Station. It's essentially the same argument from a legal standpoint (at least, as far as I understand it). As has also been said, it's the end user that has to face the legal burden. Just as there are plenty of emulators out there for various game consoles (most of which are legal since they contain no proprietary code), so is this purported product probably legal. Likewise though, just as the game ROMs are illegal to download, so too would the Mac OS be illegal to operate on a machine running Cherry OS.

Sorry...was just the first analogy that came to mind. Is it an accurate one though? Are the legal issues really the same?

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Anubis IV:
the Mac OS [would] be illegal to operate on a machine running [PearPC]?

I doubt the license agreement shown by the installer is legally binding. The operating system is sold not licensed to the end user after all. Also "running" is the designated purpose of a program. I seriously doubt that Apple can enforce any restrictions on the user where he is running a program.

[msuper69]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
I doubt the license agreement shown by the installer is legally binding. The operating system is sold not licensed to the end user after all. Also "running" is the designated purpose of a program. I seriously doubt that Apple can enforce any restrictions on the user where he is running a program.

You have it backwards. The software is sold as a license. You do NOT own the copy of the software contained on the physical media or downloaded.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by msuper69:
You have it backwards. The software is sold as a license. You do NOT own the copy of the software contained on the physical media or downloaded.

You have your opinion, I have mine. *) As far as I know this has never been decided by a court. And I doubt that Apple is going to sue its customers for using their products.

ps:
*) we also live in different countries so the law might be different. I particularly remember dealers de-bundle so called "OEM" software and sell it separately which was not allowed by the license. The dealers won the law w suit in Germany with the argumentation that the software is sold and you can do whatever you want with your property including selling in parts. So I would argue you can also run the software wherever you want no matter what the license says especially if you consider that running is the dedicated purpose of a program.

[rytc]

The pdf that was uploaded previously in itself shows the product to be a scam.
To be able to create this product they would have to know a lot about the Mac OS.


a )Panther is continually referred to as Apple OS
b) They state that HFS is used on Macs and is supposedly used in Cherry OS - HFS+ has been used now for many years and is required for OS X.
c) When booting from the OS X install CDs the computer doesn't boot into the Single user mode as shown on the screenshots.
d) Having F11 as a shortcut key in Cherry OS to switch between guest and host would not work as the same key is used in Panther for Expose.

All of these things would be known by someone who knows OS X well enough to write an emulator for it.

Added to this how bad the English is, anf I think it is a pretty sure bet that it is a hoax.

[RonnieoftheRose]

Before anyone is foolish enough to give their credit card details online or believe any so called reviewers please look at the terrible Photoshop jobs in their screenshots. Notice the scroll bars in the following shots are exactly the same even when one of them doesn't have an OS loaded...

http://www.cherryos.com/images/screenshots/4.jpg

http://www.cherryos.com/images/screenshots/7.jpg

And as others have pointed out the video doesn't show OSX in action at all. Looks like the Russian mafia has moved on from shooting politicians to trying to scrape $50 from gullible Windows users.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

All I have to say is that I like the design of their website.

[Lucidwray]

After visiting theire site and watching the pointless java based video, what this seems like to me is a publicity stunt to get lots of people to visit theire site and watch the view (which is created with their 'technology'). It's a total marketing stunt. Who cares if they piss off every end user in the world. If they can convince 10 IT guys to buy and use their video products for some pointless corporate use like showing company video newletters over an intranet, then their stunt worked. Once its proven to be fake, they can turn around and say, "You're right, it dosen't really exist. But look how awesome our new video serving technology held up under the load of Slashdot.org!" (Which, by the way, it didn't at alll). At that point, they convince 5 morons to buy their 'other' software and they are all the better for it.
The end justifies the means.

Their web site/name just got seen by probably 10+ million people who have never even heard of them before, in less than a week! You cant buy publicity like that. Wired, Slashdot, every mac site on the planet are all talking about you.

CherryOS is fake. But for less than the cost of a cheesy video and web site they gained tons of publicity.

[Sophus]

As mentioned, CherryOS supposedly does exist, see:

http://wiredblogs.tripod.com/cultofm...ntry_id=479527

The reviewer did however not successfully complete the installation of OSX, possibly because he just had an upgrade version of MacOSX available.

Interesting piece of software, though it may be based on PearPC as some of you suggest. Anyway, I must confess that I doubt the claims that it will emulate a G4 running at 80% of the CPU of the host system, if true, this would be a revolution in emulation technology.

Also, Quartz extreme will not be accessible, which will slow down screen redraw significantly as well as place an even bigger burden on the host processor and emulated memory bus.

In an interview with Wired, the developer is everything but clear about his claims as well as the creation of the application. The developer does little to convince in regard to his knowledge about emulation and programming. I am exited to see the follow-up at Wired, once the review is complete.

Sophus

[theolein]

What a load of fu�king bullsh�t!!!! This company is about as much worth as a box of cherries, and they don't taste as good. I did a load of whois on the domain and that fu�king clown, arben kryeziu, the Albanian scamster in the demo (Kryeziu is an albanian name), and discovered that not only is our dear friend responsible for "inventing" CherryOS, but he also has time to be the technical and administrative contacts for the web domain.

Someone else on slashdot did a check on the company's owner and discovered, as piracy showed, that the prick also owns the vx30.com domain.

I mean, for fu�k's sake, how gullible can you get?????? Some di�kwad talks about running OSX on x86 at 80% of host performance and everybody wets their pants! I mean, Connectix, the developers of VPC, who had literally years to develop VPC, only managed to optimize VPC to run at about 25% of host speed absolute tops. Not only this but PearPC, the opensource PPC emulator, which has not been around that long, runs at about 1/40, i.e. less than 3% host speed, on a good day.

Our artful dodger Arben, the video star, talks about demonstrating Cherry'sOS in his little video, and yet all he does is show a supposed installer screen and what could either be a screenshot of theMacOS desktop or PearPC. He DOES NOT SHOW, in that video, Mac OSX actually running. He shows no opening windows, no operations, nothing. he just drags around a window.

And the same guy, as piracy states, is the same guy pimping his warez on the hardforum site as member "dag33k".

My guess is that this is either a huge scam, which is most likely, or PearPC packaged with a nice installer. I mean, please, it's not the first time someone has promised the world on the internet, or have you never heard of the NIgerian 419er scam?

The chances that it is real are miniscule. Write to the company and ask them, and specifically Mr Arben "This is for real and we're making a G5 soon" Kryeziu, to make a new video where he actually demonstrates the running OSX emulator, not a fu�king screenshot in a window. Do it. See what a response you get.

If it is real, I'll publicly apologise, but I don't think I'll have to.

[Horsepoo!!!]

Originally posted by theolein:
If it is real, I'll publicly apologise, but I don't think I'll have to.

No need to apologize. CherryOS is as real as Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny.

[quadgrande]

possibly because he just had an upgrade version of MacOSX available.

I didn't read the blog, but there's no such thing as an 'upgrade' version of MacOS. At least since OS 8.5 all CDs are full versions.

[theolein]

Originally posted by Sophus:
As mentioned, CherryOS supposedly does exist, see:

http://wiredblogs.tripod.com/cultofm...ntry_id=479527

The reviewer did however not successfully complete the installation of OSX, possibly because he just had an upgrade version of MacOSX available.

Interesting piece of software, though it may be based on PearPC as some of you suggest. Anyway, I must confess that I doubt the claims that it will emulate a G4 running at 80% of the CPU of the host system, if true, this would be a revolution in emulation technology.

Also, Quartz extreme will not be accessible, which will slow down screen redraw significantly as well as place an even bigger burden on the host processor and emulated memory bus.

In an interview with Wired, the developer is everything but clear about his claims as well as the creation of the application. The developer does little to convince in regard to his knowledge about emulation and programming. I am exited to see the follow-up at Wired, once the review is complete.

Sophus

I am deeply suspiscious of the above blog entry by Leander Kahney. I upgraded to Mac OSX 10.3 from 10.2, and as far as I know, there has never been an upgrade only disk for Mac OSX Panther. All of Apple's major releases have, up until now, been full and complete OS sets. There is no such thing in the Apple world of having to type in prior version serial numbers or any such thing, as one does in the Microsoft Windows world when upgrading. The OS has no need of a serial number in fact. The Panther disk set does not require a previous OS version on the hard drive in order to install.

I also find it extremely strange that Wired, a web company that does graphic work, was not able to find an alternative OS disk, such as Mac OSX 10.2 Jaguar, or Mac OS 9.2. You're telling me Wired, an online magazine with a whole section devoted to Macs, has no modern Macs available?????

You're also telling me that wired, a company that would have a lawyer or legal advice, I suppose, is openly breaking Apple's Mac OSX EULA which states that Mac OSX may only be used on Apple branded hardware?

I have the suspiscion that wired is playing along in this strange action, for reasons best known to wired itself.

[siMac]

Look at this screenshot from the CherryOS site. Strange how the horizontal scrollbar is all the way to the right, yet we're looking at the extreme left of the MacOS desktop, isn't it?

And coincidentally, CherryOS' target market, ie. PC web developers, is the same as that of the streaming video technology!

This kind of behaviour ought to be prosecutable in the same way as spamming is.

[theolein]

Originally posted by siMac:
Look at this screenshot from the CherryOS site. Strange how the horizontal scrollbar is all the way to the right, yet we're looking at the extreme left of the MacOS desktop, isn't it?

And coincidentally, CherryOS' target market, ie. PC web developers, is the same as that of the streaming video technology!

This kind of behaviour ought to be prosecutable in the same way as spamming is.

Well noticed!

I also should point out that the scrollbars in the screenshots look very very strange. The guy claims that his product is for Windows, which means most likely that he has been developing in MS Visual Studio, if he has been developing at all. MSVS will normally, unless you're willing to take the time to make custom controls, use standard Windows scroll bars etc.

He could perhaps have used WxWindows or Qt from Trolltech, but why would he do so if he had been making a product only for windows????

And did anyone else notice the Stop, Play and Pause buttons in the supposed emulator? Don't they look suspiciously like Windows Media Player buttons?

[-Q-]

Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
No need to apologize. CherryOS is as real as Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny.

There's no Santa Claus?

From a marketing perspective, it was a brilliant ploy to get attention to the product. Unfortunately, I think the backlash is going to kill the company once people find out this is a hoax. Which would be exactly what they deserve.

[sushiism]

Originally posted by theolein:
Well noticed!

I also should point out that the scrollbars in the screenshots look very very strange. The guy claims that his product is for Windows, which means most likely that he has been developing in MS Visual Studio, if he has been developing at all. MSVS will normally, unless you're willing to take the time to make custom controls, use standard Windows scroll bars etc.

He could perhaps have used WxWindows or Qt from Trolltech, but why would he do so if he had been making a product only for windows????

And did anyone else notice the Stop, Play and Pause buttons in the supposed emulator? Don't they look suspiciously like Windows Media Player buttons?

one of the features listed is that its "skinnable", which is the trend on windows to make your apps look nothing like windows.

[Sophus]

Originally posted by theolein:
I also find it extremely strange that Wired, a web company that does graphic work, was not able to find an alternative OS disk, such as Mac OSX 10.2 Jaguar, or Mac OS 9.2. You're telling me Wired, an online magazine with a whole section devoted to Macs, has no modern Macs available?????

You're also telling me that wired, a company that would have a lawyer or legal advice, I suppose, is openly breaking Apple's Mac OSX EULA which states that Mac OSX may only be used on Apple branded hardware?

I have the suspicion that wired is playing along in this strange action, for reasons best known to wired itself.

Theolein, I am not telling you anything, just passing along what the blog entry at Wired states. I totally share your suspicions regarding the existence of this emulator.

Given your comments on the authenticity of the blog statements and Wired's possible involvement, I am even more keen on getting to the bottom of this. If it is a hoax, it is a big one.

[theolein]

Originally posted by sushiism:
one of the features listed is that its "skinnable", which is the trend on windows to make your apps look nothing like windows.

I wonder if you noticed that every single fu�king screenshot has the scrollbars in the same place? Even the supposed startup screen has the scrollbars in the same (and wrong place).

Please, pull the other one.

[theolein]

Originally posted by Sophus:
Theolein, I am not telling you anything, just passing along what the blog entry at Wired states. I totally share your suspicions regarding the existence of this emulator.

Given your comments on the authenticity of the blog statements and Wired's possible involvement, I am even more keen on getting to the bottom of this. If it is a hoax, it is a big one.

I'm just totally surprised that as many people have believed it as have done so. One doesn't have to fidget through loads of details to see its a marketing company's address phishing campaign by the company that runs the vx30.com site.

The fact that wired played along with this bullsh�t means nothing. I just spoke to the developer of PearPC and he says that it's probably a repackaged PearPC, but he won't do anything until they release something publicly.

Do you really think the sh�t they sent to that wired journalist was going to work? "Upgrade disks"?

If you're that gullible, I'd be more than happy to also take your money.

[TETENAL]

If this is a repackaged PearPC he will have to tell so when he releases it. But this will not be released. I don't agree on the EULA thing with you theolein though. See my opinion above.

[absmiths]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
I doubt the license agreement shown by the installer is legally binding. The operating system is sold not licensed to the end user after all. Also "running" is the designated purpose of a program. I seriously doubt that Apple can enforce any restrictions on the user where he is running a program.

I have often wondered about this. In many cases the agreement is never actually accepted by the customer (friend, relative or technician installs software, clicks ACCEPT), or includes ridiculous clauses such as "No warranties that this software does anything useful, or that it won't destroy your stuff." How can they so easily disclaim that? I especially like the clause that says "If you don't agree take this box and it's contents back to the reseller and get your money back." I thought about doing that just to see what Circuit City would do.

Them: We don't refund opened software products.
Me: I don't agree to the license. Microsoft says you will refund it if I don't agree to the license.

I have also noticed dump trucks with big signs saying "Not responsible for damages. Stay back 200 feet."

Give me a break. I should put that sign on my car, then I won't need insurance. I can simply say "Sure, I hit you, but my sign makes you legally responsible because you didn't keep your distance."

Anyway, the topic at hand is tired and overworn, and this sidebar seemed more interesting. Back to the vaporware . . .

[birdman]

I know the OS 10.1 CD was available as upgrade-only, because Apple gave them away for free (or $20 through the mail, which was a real crock). 10.1 was also sold in stores as a full install, but alternately, you could burn a copy of the upgrade CD and remove the CheckForOSX file to allow it to do a full install (I tried it, it worked).

Apple lets you have a free copy of the new OS if you buy a new Mac within... a month? of the new OS release. I imagine these are probably just upgrade CDs rather than the full version, but I don't know for sure.

-birdman

[Person Man]

Originally posted by birdman:
I know the OS 10.1 CD was available as upgrade-only, because Apple gave them away for free (or $20 through the mail, which was a real crock). 10.1 was also sold in stores as a full install, but alternately, you could burn a copy of the upgrade CD and remove the CheckForOSX file to allow it to do a full install (I tried it, it worked).

Apple lets you have a free copy of the new OS if you buy a new Mac within... a month? of the new OS release. I imagine these are probably just upgrade CDs rather than the full version, but I don't know for sure.

-birdman

Yes, and there ARE upgrade disks for 10.1 -> 10.2 and for 10.2 -> 10.3. When they say upgrade disks, they mean ones that check for a previous installation of the operating system on the drive before installing. They are still full installation disks (i.e. you can tell it to format the drive after it's checked to see if the previous OS is there).

They weren't sold, and were only given out as "Up To Date" packages. So, if you bought a new Mac after the new operating system was announced, and you still had the old OS, the computer would either have the upgrade disks in the box, or they would be sent to you.

[WizOSX]

originally posted by absmiths:
I especially like the clause that says "If you don't agree take this box and it's contents back to the reseller and get your money back."

The Santa Clause!!! So there, -Q-, there really is a Santa Clause!!

[theolein]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
If this is a repackaged PearPC he will have to tell so when he releases it. But this will not be released. I don't agree on the EULA thing with you theolein though. See my opinion above.

In US courts, EULAs are, as of recently, legally binding. There was a precendent case that went to trial recently in which it was judged that a EULA is binding. (This was the Blizzard vs. Battlenet case where Battlenet reverse engineered Blizzard's game server protocol). American courts work on precedents, so if Apple does take this to court, there is going to be one very buggered Albanian in Hawaii.

I have no idea if Apple will choose to do so. Most probably they see it as a fake, and will not do anything. That or they'll wait until a Cherry is finally popped, so to speak.

In any case there is no way on earth that this one developer, in four months in his own words, managed to make a complete and fast emulator. For crying out loud. Even VMWare, which is native on x86 and is used for running a second x86 OS inside a sandbox, such as Linux on Windows, or vice versa, does not run at 80% of the host system's speed. And the guy himself seems very confused about his arithmetic. From the website:

You can expect to get about 80% of your processors power when working in the Apple Environment._ For example a 3.2ghz P4 would run as fast as a 800 MHz G4 machine.

And on the website they can't even agree what the system requirements are. I quote:

Installation

Before you begin installation you will need the following materials
? A PC with Microsoft Windows installed (98 or newer)

and then later:

How is it done?

To start, you will need a PC with MS Windows 2000, or newer, installed._

Feel free to support a company with as much obvious intention to rip you off if you like. It's your money lost.

[theolein]

Originally posted by Person Man:
Yes, and there ARE upgrade disks for 10.1 -> 10.2 and for 10.2 -> 10.3. When they say upgrade disks, they mean ones that check for a previous installation of the operating system on the drive before installing. They are still full installation disks (i.e. you can tell it to format the drive after it's checked to see if the previous OS is there).

They weren't sold, and were only given out as "Up To Date" packages. So, if you bought a new Mac after the new operating system was announced, and you still had the old OS, the computer would either have the upgrade disks in the box, or they would be sent to you.

Yes, I know about those, and I assume that many who bought a new Mac within the time limit of the new OS's release were given one. What's more I can understand that your average user won't know how to make that CD bootable, but you still had to have the original Mac software in order to get one of those upgrade disks, and I cannot, for the life of me, believe that that Wired reporter only had access to an upgrade disk and nothing else. It just doesn't make sense.

[pliny]

CherryOS Forever, wasn't that the name of one of the Bond girls.

[RonnieoftheRose]

I hope nobody put their credit card details in there. Apart from twice on Amazone I've never bought anything online because even if you purchase from a reputable company there are just too many people out there fishing for and trying intercept account numbers. With any unsecure site like cherryos.com there must be many hackers snooping.

[Amorya]

Originally posted by RonnieoftheRose:
I hope nobody put their credit card details in there. Apart from twice on Amazone I've never bought anything online because even if you purchase from a reputable company there are just too many people out there fishing for and trying intercept account numbers. With any unsecure site like cherryos.com there must be many hackers snooping.

I agree that you shouldn't give scammers like this your details...

But on the whole the net is a very safe place to shop. You're four times more likely to have your details stolen in a restaurant than you are online. Simple precautions (only buying from secure sites, checking the URL to make sure you haven't been redirected) can make it very safe indeed.

Just avoid the obvious scams like this one


Amorya

[Person Man]

Originally posted by theolein:
Yes, I know about those, and I assume that many who bought a new Mac within the time limit of the new OS's release were given one. What's more I can understand that your average user won't know how to make that CD bootable, but you still had to have the original Mac software in order to get one of those upgrade disks, and I cannot, for the life of me, believe that that Wired reporter only had access to an upgrade disk and nothing else. It just doesn't make sense.

My response was directed at your statement that "...there has never been an upgrade only disk for Mac OSX Panther." Well, technically, the Panther upgrade disks are intended to be "upgrade only" (in the sense that you can't use them to install the OS from scratch without either modifying the disk or having a previously installed version of the operating system on your drive.

I agree perfectly with your assessment of the Wired reporter's statement.

[ivi]

There is a humorous response to CherryOS allready, meat Pickle XOS

http://www.mac360.com/index.php/mac3...inux_mac_os_x/

[mrmister]

"I cannot, for the life of me, believe that that Wired reporter only had access to an upgrade disk and nothing else. It just doesn't make sense."

Leander works from home, and he's not a master of organization--so he didn't have one on hand. I highly doubt he's working with the CherryOS people.

[absmiths]

Originally posted by Amorya:
But on the whole the net is a very safe place to shop. You're four times more likely to have your details stolen in a restaurant than you are online. Simple precautions (only buying from secure sites, checking the URL to make sure you haven't been redirected) can make it very safe indeed.

Yeah, I worked at a Radio Shack were one of the employees (not me) was writing down credit card numbers as people bought stuff, then purchasing things later. Very stupid, and not overly secure.

People think fraud began with evil hackers on the evil internet.

[moodymonster]

the screengrabs seen to obscure the clock part of the os x menubar, therefore avoiding peope being able to compare the clock time between the PC system and the mac system.

This would be important if you were trying to use screengrabs of os x to make it look at though you had it running on a PC. Also on the video you can see both cursors (mac and PC) on the screen at the same time, the mac one doesn't move - even when the PC cursor drops onto the mac area.

Its a con, but the bigger question is why? Is there a bigger picture we're missing? They must be really out of it if they thought they'd con people over such a big thing. Or, as suggested elsewhere, there seems to be evidence (ownership of the site, links to vx30.com etc) that would suggest they're using this as a publicity stunt, (for a video tech that doesn't let you scrub)

[Xeo]

Originally posted by moodymonster:
the screengrabs seen to obscure the clock part of the os x menubar, therefore avoiding peope being able to compare the clock time between the PC system and the mac system.

This would be important if you were trying to use screengrabs of os x to make it look at though you had it running on a PC. Also on the video you can see both cursors (mac and PC) on the screen at the same time, the mac one doesn't move - even when the PC cursor drops onto the mac area.

Its a con, but the bigger question is why? Is there a bigger picture we're missing? They must be really out of it if they thought they'd con people over such a big thing. Or, as suggested elsewhere, there seems to be evidence (ownership of the site, links to vx30.com etc) that would suggest they're using this as a publicity stunt, (for a video tech that doesn't let you scrub)

The other thing i noticed is that the vertical and horizontal scroll bars appear to be exactly the same in every picture. And, the horizontal scroll bar is all the way to the right in those pictures, yet as you said, the clock is cut off (meaning there should be more to the right, not the left, and the scroll bar should be all the way left).

[moodymonster]

Originally posted by Xeo:
The other thing i noticed is that the vertical and horizontal scroll bars appear to be exactly the same in every picture. And, the horizontal scroll bar is all the way to the right in those pictures, yet as you said, the clock is cut off (meaning there should be more to the right, not the left, and the scroll bar should be all the way left).

an�an�and the scroll bars too!