Mac Netbooks

Ben Long talks about using a Hackintosh (a netbook hacked to run Mac OS X).

For the last year, I’ve been using a hacked MSI Wind as a netbook, but its keyboard played havoc with my repetitive stress injuries. Something about it made me hold my hands in a way that ultimately caused pain. I recently had the chance to type for a while on a Dell Mini 10v and found that I had no pain issues at all, so I sold the Wind and picked up a Mini 10v on sale for only $275.
Compared to my 13″ Macbook, the Mini 10 is considerably smaller and lighter, making it very usable for backcountry trips – something I would never do with my Macbook. With it, I no longer need to carry my Digital Focii FotoSafe for offloading, and I’m not stuck trying to type emails on my iPhone keyboard.

Obviously, if you’re a Windows user, you can use the Mini 10v right out of the box. If you want to use the Mac OS, though, you’ll need to perform a quick and simple hack.
NetbookInstaller is an application that will take care of the hack for you, and using it is very simple. You’ll need a copy of Snow Leopard, and a USB stick with at least 8 gb of capacity. Detailed instructions on the NetbookInstaller site will guide you through the installation. You’ll image your Snow Leopard disk onto the USB stick. and then boot off of that. The NetbookInstaller application will modify the installation to allow it to work on the Netbook.
When you’re all finished, you should have a Mini 10v running the latest Mac OS (at the time of this writing, I’m running 10.6.2). The trackpad supports tapping and two-fingered scrolling, and sleep, restart, shutdown, the web camera, and SD card reader all work fine. The model I got has a gigabyte or RAM and a 160gb drive, though both of these are upgradable. The computer weighs in at 2.6 pounds.

It’s definitely a viable option if you want to depend on an unsupported computer environment, but he neglected to mention a couple of important points:

  1. If you  don’t buy a copy of Mac OS X or have a family pack, you’re pirating the software. Photographers need to be really sensitive about violating the licenses of others, or else we should shut up when people ignore our copyrights and rip off our photos. Can’t have it both ways, folks, although I know a lot of people who try.
  2. Even if you do buy a copy of Mac OS X to run on your Hackintosh, you’re putting it on hardware that isn’t allowed by Apple’s EULA for Mac OS, so you’re violating their T&Cs, which depending on how you want to rationalize it means you’re pirating the software whether or not you have a paid license for it.
  3. If neither of those keeps you up and night sleepless over the moral quagmire of violating Apple’s legal agreements while being hard-ass about protecting your own, it’s still an unsupported and mostly untested hardware/software configuration which may break at any moment (or which at any moment Apple might choose to “make no longer compatible” with a software update, and no matter what breaks — you have no tech support except your own sweat equity and whatever friends you can buy pizza for. And you’re using this computer in a production environment on deadline?

Wherever your choose to draw the lines in the sand in the great “How dare you do that with my photos; but I”ll do what I want with this software!” moral quagmire, you should at least stop long enough to think about it so you know how to explain it if it gets brought up by a client — or by the other party if you happen to end up in court fighting a copyright and this is mentioned to the judge. Whatever you think of them, these EULAs have been mostly upheld by courts. How are you going to react if someone uses the same rationalization for using your photos that you used for choosing to build a Hackintosh?

But I’m not judging. I have enough challenge manging my personal ethical compass, I don’t need the karma of managing yours. But I felt it was important to point these issues out so that photographers understand that this is more complications than “this is unsupported hardware”.

I, personally, would hate to be in a conference room negotiating licensing terms with a client and taking notes no a machine that has unlicensed software on it, or is running software that I knowingly installed in violation of the licensing terms. That to me seems like I’m tempting the karma gods, and they already have me on speed dial, they don’t need excuses to ring me up. You know?

You might also want to read:

  1. Apple releases MacBook, MacBook Pro Software Update 1.2 Apple releases MacBook, MacBook Pro Software Update 1.2 – The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW): That’s because Apple just released a software update for the new...

  • Chuckles48

    I guess I have a real problem with Apple saying “you can only run our software on our hardware”, then trying to charge for it and treat it like it's a commodity. You can't have it both ways, and they've been trying to for a long time now. I can buy a second-hand copy of an OS from someone, and Apple has no recourse or business, so long as the license key is transfered, and the preceding owner wipes it. That's the very demonstration of a commodity.

    Honestly, it reminds me a lot of when MS tried to price-support their vendors by saying any MS OS sold on eBay was pirated. A quick note to the CA AG's office squelched that idea – perhaps it's time to revisit the issue.

    Serriously, just because Apple says “this is what the agreement is”, does not make it a legal and/or binding agreement. Apple may not honor the technical support for a jailbroke copy of the OS, but that doesn't make running it on non-Apple hardware illegal – it's only an unsupported configuration.

  • Chuckles48

    I guess I have a real problem with Apple saying “you can only run our software on our hardware”, then trying to charge for it and treat it like it's a commodity. You can't have it both ways, and they've been trying to for a long time now. I can buy a second-hand copy of an OS from someone, and Apple has no recourse or business, so long as the license key is transfered, and the preceding owner wipes it. That's the very demonstration of a commodity.

    Honestly, it reminds me a lot of when MS tried to price-support their vendors by saying any MS OS sold on eBay was pirated. A quick note to the CA AG's office squelched that idea – perhaps it's time to revisit the issue.

    Serriously, just because Apple says “this is what the agreement is”, does not make it a legal and/or binding agreement. Apple may not honor the technical support for a jailbroke copy of the OS, but that doesn't make running it on non-Apple hardware illegal – it's only an unsupported configuration.