Home

Who Do You Trust?

Mon, 08/08/2005 - 15:41 — kebernet

Gruber runs down the Trusted Platform Module stuff in OSX86:

The gist of the situation, reportedly, is that at least some portions of the Intel Developer Transition Kit version of Mac OS X are strung up in such a way that depends upon the TPM module on the Transition Kit motherboard. I say “reportedly� because I can’t say for certain there is in fact such a module on the motherboard, because I don’t have a Developer Transition Kit, and if even if I did, I’d be under an NDA that would prevent me from discussing it. But I think it’s safe to assume these reports are true.

The effect of this, surprise surprise, is that the version of Mac OS X that ships with the Developer Kit hardware only runs on Apple’s Developer Kit Hardware. Which state of affairs is exactly what Apple stated, clearly and publicly, when they announced the transition at WWDC in June. What Apple hasn’t stated publicly is how, technically, they were going to keep Mac OS X compiled for x86 from running on non-Apple x86 computers. The TPM chip is, apparently, at least part of the answer.

It’s hard to see how this news is surprising to anyone. Given (a) that Apple has stated, adamantly, that Mac OS X will only run on Apple hardware; and (b) that despite a lot of effort and a lot of interest, no one has been able to get the Developer Kit Mac OS X release to run on non-Apple hardware; it seems rather obvious that the Developer Kit boxes contain some sort of hardware that the software is tied to. This affects no one other than those who hope to install bootleg copies of Mac OS X on their x86 PCs.1

And so ends the reality-based portion of the saga.

Tin Foil Hat Country

...

Daring Fireball

Comments

Tue, 08/09/2005 - 15:45 — Fox Mulder (not verified)

RE: Who Do You Trust?

Trust no one.

Tue, 08/09/2005 - 18:48 — atrox (not verified)

RE: Who Do You Trust?

This apple TPM thing is stupid. I guess they consider themselves a hardware company and dont want to cannibalize their own hardware sales by just damn releasing OSX and saying - whatever it runs on it runs on - but any way you cut it its just stupid for them to make OSX run x86 and then TPM it to particular hardware. This is apples opportunity to get over its own self image and eat MSes lunch, and thats done by selling the damn OS to all sorts of hardware vendors. I mean that would be a.) very popular and b.) PROFITABLE AS HELL. Apple just seems stupid for not taking the leap and becoming a hardware and software company. People that want fancy Apple hardware will still buy it, and people that dont might pay a little more with their cheap hardware to get OSX - both ways Apple makes money - and the world has better products.

Oh well, TPM my ass.

Wed, 08/10/2005 - 09:26 — cooper (not verified)

RE: Who Do You Trust?

LOL, that is just what DVORAK said!

I think Apple is right to keep OSX on their hardware, for a couple of reasons:

1. Apple sells an entire user experience with their systems. I know for sure that Steve wouldn't want to see someone running OSX on a Dell because he knows that the experience would have less over all quality associated with it.

2. Apple controls the hardware. That is a big one, and one that is a big part of why Mac OS has constantly been seen as higher quality than Windows. Because they control the hardware, they don't have to worry about drivers for every POS WinModem or Ethernet card. They don't have to worry about supporting 5 different kinds of UART controller and 15 flavours of USB Root. That has a big impact on the cost of developing that OS and it means that they are not dependent on the slew of "poorly debugged device drivers" and idiotic plug and play limitations that make Windows so much more cumbersome to use. Again, it goes to that user experience and giving up what makes you better while trying to parlay your "better" into "more users" would hurt them as much as it would help.

All that said, I think TPM is the wrong way to go about it. I mean, really. Apple could just stick a CMOS key on their boxes and get close enough to the effect without buying in on the TPM stuff, which frankly is a Darth Vader in waiting as far as the whole tech market goes.

Wed, 08/10/2005 - 09:58 — atrox (not verified)

RE: Who Do You Trust?

Ok, so I have to change my approach if I agree with Dvorak, thats just not right.

But for now I will go with the debate:

"1. Apple sells an entire user experience with their systems. I know for sure that Steve wouldn't want to see someone running OSX on a Dell because he knows that the experience would have less over all quality associated with it." And they STILL CAN SELL SUCH, some people will elect that "experience", some WONT, either way Apple makes money and either way BOTH PEOPLE have at least a little better experience.

"2. Apple controls the hardware. That is a big one, and one that is a big part of why Mac OS has constantly been seen as higher quality than Windows. Because they control the hardware, they don't have to worry about drivers for every POS WinModem or Ethernet card. They don't have to worry about supporting 5 different kinds of UART controller and 15 flavours of USB Root. That has a big impact on the cost of developing that OS and it means that they are not dependent on the slew of "poorly debugged device drivers" and idiotic plug and play limitations that make Windows so much more cumbersome to use. Again, it goes to that user experience and giving up what makes you better while trying to parlay your "better" into "more users" would hurt them as much as it would help." This is a non issue. Apple can say you can run OSX on whatever you provide drivers for, just these X chipsets are supported by us, even if X is ONE. Still doesnt mean they have to say no one can do it. They DONT have to worry about all the drivers and shit, screw that, let whomever wants to use it on their hardware ensure it has drivers, apart from a select few - again even if one - their own - hardware vendors apple elects to support.

Wed, 08/10/2005 - 14:23 — cooper (not verified)

RE: Who Do You Trust?

Still doesnt mean they have to say no one can do it. They DONT have to worry about all the drivers and shit, screw that, let whomever wants to use it on their hardware ensure it has drivers, apart from a select few - again even if one - their own - hardware vendors apple elects to support.

I think for people like you and me who still remember the WinNT HCL or have dealt with driver hell over and over that is a reasonable stance. The problem is you are asking Apple to support it in some way. If they put some arbitrary thing in there that I can get around with some VMWare hack, so be it. However, if they actually shrink wrap it and sell it to people they are admitting they will provide the (typically stellar) Apple support for it and that is a serious cost since Apple support is usually good and never says "Screw you, call nVidia".

I think a policy of... tacit acceptance.. rather than outright acknowledgement would do them better, and I think that is what we are going to get anyway.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.