Technically not. MacOS wouldn’t be what it is today if apple didn’t get any money out of it. They get that money from selling the hardware the software is exclusively on among other things. Let’s say i. e. Ubuntu: When it first got released then it relied on its owners personal revenue for a long time. None of the hardware sold financed Ubuntu, because Ubuntu didn’t earn money through hardware. It’s obvious that the money earned by apple through its sales also go back into macOS, because if the hardware didn’t make any money, macOS ceases to be developed as well.
With OPs logic, every software is technically free. But no, you pay for macOS with the hardware you purchase. You purchase the hardware because of the OS, not because of the hardware. Technically, you could spin the argument and say that you pay for the OS, and for it to be run a certain way and the hardware that comes with it is free. If that sounds like bogus it’s because it is bogus.
Is hackintosh not still a thing? Did they neuter it somehow? Or are we just not considering that since it’s a pain in the ass to set up and works out of the box on a very limited selection of hardware?
I believe macOS 26 will be the last that’ll run on Intel hardware. So functionally, a year from now, Hackintosh is dead. Well, Hackintosh running the current macOS, of course. I imagine there’ll be a thriving community working to keep existing hardware chugging along.
It’ll be interesting to see the momentum of Linux on Macs though. If Asahi manages to crack those last few hurdles with the M1/2 hardware, it’ll be a rock solid OS, particularly as ARM64 software becomes more common. Suddenly you’ll have a bunch of incredibly capable Macs going cheap because they can’t run the largest macOS.
I don’t understand this argument. It makes no sense. Just because a piece of software is included for free with an Apple computer doesn’t mean you’re paying for it. It’s like you see the word “free” and just decide it means something different than what it really means.
Because I am capable of critical and complex thinking. Just because something is labeled as “free” does not necessarily mean there are no costs associated with procuring or using a product. If you’re handed a proprietary piece of technology for “free”, but the only way to use it is to pay for another piece of technology or software that you have to pay for… it’s not free. It’s complementary, but it’s not free. You still need to pay some amount to use it.
This is the same faulty logic as arguing that Linux also costs money because you have to pay for a computer to run it on. Any operating system requires that you own a compatible device to run it on.
You’re just drawing some imaginary line at Apple computers. It makes no sense.
To be extremely pedantic, there’s licensing costs involved with a bunch of 3rd party libraries included in the OS (HDR, h265, radios, etc), but they cover those royalties / fees via hardware sales and the license to use it follows the hardware
That’s a pretty specific and bolt claim. Presumably, you have proof of this? I doubt it, because this sounds like, at best, a guess.
Because every piece of evidence is that the license to use macOS is free. In fact, if you claim otherwise, then please, show me where I could possibly pay for it.
Any windows license always cost money.
That’s the difference between “free” and not free”. One cost money, and the other one does not.
The license to use macOS is not free. You must run it on a Macintosh computer and, keeping in terms of the license, cannot be run on non-Macintosh hardware. You must therefore purchase a Macintosh computer to use macOS. See Page 2, Section 2 of the Software License Agreement.
You keep repeating this argument of “show me where I can possibly pay for it” presumably because you know that it is not for sale and this is common knowledge.
What is being omitted here is that because anyone has the ability to put a PC of their own components together, Microsoft has two roads for these people: give Windows away where Microsoft sees none of that money back, or sell you a license to use Windows - they choose the second option. This is why you can buy a license for Windows. If you could only use prebuilt machines and were unable to make your own PC, the license cost would be passed onto the manufacturer and thus amortised in the final sale price, and you would also not have the ability to purchase a Windows license directly
Apple doesn’t need to do these extra steps because they are both the software vendor and manufacturer, thus the development costs associated in macOS is also amortised in the final sale price.
Please stop defending a trillion dollar corporation over specific pedantics and omissions. macOS is complementary software, it is not free.
The first link is evidence that video codecs cost money and, as per that source:
Most video codecs such as H.264, H265/HEVC, MPEG-2, MPEG-4… requires the manufacturer to pay a license fee. The fees are then added to the final product, but the actual codec fees are usually unknown to the end user.
This was in response to the earlier discussion about third party libraries costing money.
It’s paid for as a part of the hardware and not listed separately on the receipts. All those 3rd party components in the OS are not free and has to be paid for. That comes from the hardware sale.
You agree that the terms of this License will apply to any Apple-branded application
software product that may be preinstalled on your Apple-branded hardware
you are granted a limited, non-exclusive license to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-branded computer at any one time.
to download, install, use and run for personal, non-commercial use, one (1) copy of the Apple
Software directly on each Apple-branded computer running macOS Sonoma, macOS Ventura, macOS Monterey, macOS Big Sur, macOS Catalina, macOS Mojave, or macOS High Sierra
(“Mac Computer”) that you own or control
and you agree not to, install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so.
You’re only allowed to use Mac OS and software for it on a Mac computer, which you have to pay for.
The license additionally calls out included 3rd party licensed fonts which which you can’t use unrestricted without a specific license from the market of that font
You have to agree to that same license agreement even if you download macOS from Apple’s website without paying for it. So I still don’t see what in the world you’re talking about except for twisting yourself into pretzels to make sense of your nonsense argument.
You’re not allowed to use it after downloading it for free unless you use it on Apple hardware that it paid for. If you don’t have Apple hardware you only have a file you’re not allowed to use. Paying for Apple hardware pays for the license permitting you to use it.
That’s like saying that using a fixed cost subscription service is free because you’re not paying at the time that you access it.
Do you also think the engine that comes with your car is free because the manufacturer doesn’t sell it as a separate item and it’s not listed on the receipt?
Edit: His answer proves he’s just a troll. Weird thing to troll about though but I don’t judge what someone gets off to ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
The OS is a component of the whole product by Apple’s own reporting and marketing material. If you bought a Macbook directly from Apple and it came without MacOS preinstalled, would you consider that a fulfilled transaction?
Alright Theseus, how many components of a macbook need to be removed until you’re no longer buying a macbook? Would you be satisfied receiving an empty box since the monitor, CPU, motherboard etc. are not individually itemised on your receipt for a MacBook?
By the way, when you buy pretty much any PC laptop, I’ve ever seen, the cost of the Windows license is definitely itemized on the invoice and receipt. Since macOS has no cost and is free, that’s why it’s not listed.
Of course, all of those other components you listed are itemized on an Apple invoice, especially if you have to pay extra for upgrades.
I own and use Apple products. That’s how I know you’re talking bollocks. You also realised at some point that you were talking bollocks, which is why you’re now pivoting to absolutely absurd responses to pretend this is some elaborate troll attempt.
If including it with a paid product has a cost for the manufacturer, then you did pay for it as a part of the price of the product which you did pay for.
The entire forum has already proved the point that you’re wrong. You’re incapable of understanding that you lost. An economics teacher might be able to get it into your head.
As they need to be installed on Apple hardware, there’s an implicit cost associated with it.
If you want to be super pedantic for no reason, you’re correct, it is technically free.
Technically not. MacOS wouldn’t be what it is today if apple didn’t get any money out of it. They get that money from selling the hardware the software is exclusively on among other things. Let’s say i. e. Ubuntu: When it first got released then it relied on its owners personal revenue for a long time. None of the hardware sold financed Ubuntu, because Ubuntu didn’t earn money through hardware. It’s obvious that the money earned by apple through its sales also go back into macOS, because if the hardware didn’t make any money, macOS ceases to be developed as well.
With OPs logic, every software is technically free. But no, you pay for macOS with the hardware you purchase. You purchase the hardware because of the OS, not because of the hardware. Technically, you could spin the argument and say that you pay for the OS, and for it to be run a certain way and the hardware that comes with it is free. If that sounds like bogus it’s because it is bogus.
Is hackintosh not still a thing? Did they neuter it somehow? Or are we just not considering that since it’s a pain in the ass to set up and works out of the box on a very limited selection of hardware?
I believe macOS 26 will be the last that’ll run on Intel hardware. So functionally, a year from now, Hackintosh is dead. Well, Hackintosh running the current macOS, of course. I imagine there’ll be a thriving community working to keep existing hardware chugging along.
It’ll be interesting to see the momentum of Linux on Macs though. If Asahi manages to crack those last few hurdles with the M1/2 hardware, it’ll be a rock solid OS, particularly as ARM64 software becomes more common. Suddenly you’ll have a bunch of incredibly capable Macs going cheap because they can’t run the largest macOS.
I don’t understand this argument. It makes no sense. Just because a piece of software is included for free with an Apple computer doesn’t mean you’re paying for it. It’s like you see the word “free” and just decide it means something different than what it really means.
Because I am capable of critical and complex thinking. Just because something is labeled as “free” does not necessarily mean there are no costs associated with procuring or using a product. If you’re handed a proprietary piece of technology for “free”, but the only way to use it is to pay for another piece of technology or software that you have to pay for… it’s not free. It’s complementary, but it’s not free. You still need to pay some amount to use it.
This is the same faulty logic as arguing that Linux also costs money because you have to pay for a computer to run it on. Any operating system requires that you own a compatible device to run it on.
You’re just drawing some imaginary line at Apple computers. It makes no sense.
To be extremely pedantic, there’s licensing costs involved with a bunch of 3rd party libraries included in the OS (HDR, h265, radios, etc), but they cover those royalties / fees via hardware sales and the license to use it follows the hardware
That’s a pretty specific and bolt claim. Presumably, you have proof of this? I doubt it, because this sounds like, at best, a guess.
Because every piece of evidence is that the license to use macOS is free. In fact, if you claim otherwise, then please, show me where I could possibly pay for it.
Any windows license always cost money.
That’s the difference between “free” and not free”. One cost money, and the other one does not.
Here you go https://www.cnx-software.com/2017/10/30/h-265-hevc-license-pricing-updated-for-low-cost-devices/
The license to use macOS is not free. You must run it on a Macintosh computer and, keeping in terms of the license, cannot be run on non-Macintosh hardware. You must therefore purchase a Macintosh computer to use macOS. See Page 2, Section 2 of the Software License Agreement.
You keep repeating this argument of “show me where I can possibly pay for it” presumably because you know that it is not for sale and this is common knowledge.
What is being omitted here is that because anyone has the ability to put a PC of their own components together, Microsoft has two roads for these people: give Windows away where Microsoft sees none of that money back, or sell you a license to use Windows - they choose the second option. This is why you can buy a license for Windows. If you could only use prebuilt machines and were unable to make your own PC, the license cost would be passed onto the manufacturer and thus amortised in the final sale price, and you would also not have the ability to purchase a Windows license directly
Apple doesn’t need to do these extra steps because they are both the software vendor and manufacturer, thus the development costs associated in macOS is also amortised in the final sale price.
Please stop defending a trillion dollar corporation over specific pedantics and omissions. macOS is complementary software, it is not free.
You sent me the license of agreement for a completely different piece of software and think that’s evidence of macOS costing money?
Are you hallucinating?
The first link is evidence that video codecs cost money and, as per that source:
This was in response to the earlier discussion about third party libraries costing money.
It’s paid for as a part of the hardware and not listed separately on the receipts. All those 3rd party components in the OS are not free and has to be paid for. That comes from the hardware sale.
https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/
You’re only allowed to use Mac OS and software for it on a Mac computer, which you have to pay for.
The license additionally calls out included 3rd party licensed fonts which which you can’t use unrestricted without a specific license from the market of that font
You have to agree to that same license agreement even if you download macOS from Apple’s website without paying for it. So I still don’t see what in the world you’re talking about except for twisting yourself into pretzels to make sense of your nonsense argument.
You’re not allowed to use it after downloading it for free unless you use it on Apple hardware that it paid for. If you don’t have Apple hardware you only have a file you’re not allowed to use. Paying for Apple hardware pays for the license permitting you to use it.
That’s like saying that using a fixed cost subscription service is free because you’re not paying at the time that you access it.
Do you also think the engine that comes with your car is free because the manufacturer doesn’t sell it as a separate item and it’s not listed on the receipt?
Edit: His answer proves he’s just a troll. Weird thing to troll about though but I don’t judge what someone gets off to ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
I don’t see how cars and engines have anything to do with the fact that macOS is free.
And, yeah, if it’s not listed on a receipt as something I paid for, you can’t argue that I paid for it. Or that anyone did. That’s absurd.
The OS is a component of the whole product by Apple’s own reporting and marketing material. If you bought a Macbook directly from Apple and it came without MacOS preinstalled, would you consider that a fulfilled transaction?
None of this means that macOS costs money. You’re spinning a pretty crazy fantasy here to try to disapprove the fact that macOS is free.
“It costs money because something else costs money!” is a nonsense absurd argument
Alright Theseus, how many components of a macbook need to be removed until you’re no longer buying a macbook? Would you be satisfied receiving an empty box since the monitor, CPU, motherboard etc. are not individually itemised on your receipt for a MacBook?
Oh, I see. You just hate Apple.
That doesn’t mean that macOS isn’t free. It is.
By the way, when you buy pretty much any PC laptop, I’ve ever seen, the cost of the Windows license is definitely itemized on the invoice and receipt. Since macOS has no cost and is free, that’s why it’s not listed.
Of course, all of those other components you listed are itemized on an Apple invoice, especially if you have to pay extra for upgrades.
Your entire argument is nonsense
I own and use Apple products. That’s how I know you’re talking bollocks. You also realised at some point that you were talking bollocks, which is why you’re now pivoting to absolutely absurd responses to pretend this is some elaborate troll attempt.
If including it with a paid product has a cost for the manufacturer, then you did pay for it as a part of the price of the product which you did pay for.
That’s a guess, not evidence of your claim.
Go take an economics class
Why should it be my job to prove your point? Your failure is your own.
The entire forum has already proved the point that you’re wrong. You’re incapable of understanding that you lost. An economics teacher might be able to get it into your head.