Macintosh clone
A Macintosh clone is a personal computer made by a manufacturer other than Apple, using (or compatible with) Macintosh ROMs and system software.
Background
The Apple II and IBM PC computer lines were "cloned" by other manufacturers who had reverse-engineered the minimal amount of firmware in the computers' ROM chips and subsequently legally produced computers that would run the same software.[1] These clones were seen by Apple as a threat, as Apple II sales had presumably suffered from the competition provided by Franklin Computer Corporation and other clone manufacturers,[1] both legal and illegal. At IBM, the threat proved to be real: most of the market eventually went to cloners like Compaq, Leading Edge, Tandy, Kaypro, Packard Bell, and dozens of smaller companies, and in short order IBM found it had lost control over its own platform.
Apple eventually licensed the Apple II ROMS to other companies. The earliest, the Bell & Howell Apple II+ was manufactured by projector and lens manufacturer Böwe Bell & Howell to capitalize on its stature in schools.[1] The Bell & Howell Apple II+ was notable for its black enclosure with carrying handle, its coaxial video output and a stereo jack for headphones.[2] Unlike the Apple II+, which lacked UL Certification because its case could be opened while it was running, the Bell & Howell was fully certified.[3] Apple also licensed the Apple II ROMS to educational toy manufacturer Tiger Electronics to produce an inexpensive laptop with educational games and the AppleWorks software suite, the Tiger Learning Computer (TLC). The TLC lacked a built in display.[2] Its lid acted as a holster for the cartridges that stored the bundled software since it had no floppy drive.[2]
Wary of repeating history and wanting to retain tight control of its product, Apple's Macintosh strategy included technical and legal measures that rendered the production of Mac clones problematic. The original Macintosh system software was a very large amount of complex code that embodied the Mac's entire set of APIs, including the use of the GUI and file system. Through the 1980s and into the 1990s, much of the system software was included in the Macintosh's physical ROM chips. Therefore, any competitor attempting to create a Macintosh clone without infringing copyright would have to reverse-engineer the ROMs, which would have been an enormous and costly process without certainty of success. Only one company, Nutek, managed to produce "semi-Mac-compatible" computers in the early 1990s by partially re-implementing System 7 ROMs.[4]
Emulators
Before true clones were available, the Atari ST could be converted into a Mac by adding the third-party Spectre GCR emulator, which required that the user purchase a set of Mac ROMs. The Amiga could also be converted into a Mac with similar emulators.[citation needed] Since Apple Computer never manufactured a 68060-based Mac, the fastest way to run native 68000 Mac OS applications on real hardware was to run it on an Atari or Amiga with a 68060 upgrade.
There was also a software emulator for x86 platforms running DOS/Windows and Linux called Executor, from ARDI. ARDI reversed engineering the Mac ROM and build a 68000 cpu emulator, enabling Executor run many (but not all) Macintosh software, from system 5 to system 7 with good speed. The migration from 68000 to PowerPC and the difficulties to emulate a PowerPC in x86 platforms killed the continuity of the project.
The first Macintosh clones
Apple's strategy of suppressing clone development was successful. From 1986 to 1991, several manufacturers created Macintosh clones, including the portable Outbound; however, in order to do so legally, they had to obtain official ROMs by purchasing one of Apple's Macintosh computers, remove the required parts from the donor, and then install those parts in the clone's case. This resulted in very expensive, relatively unpopular clones. Apple could safely say that its share of the Macintosh computer market was not in danger and even granted value-added reseller status to the creator of the Colby Dynamac portable clone.[citation needed]
A Brazilian company called Unitron is thought to have developed a Macintosh clone with 512KB of RAM and some custom chips made by National Semiconductor.[5] The clone was not widely sold because Apple pressed the American government to create commercial sanctions preventing international sales of this computer. To this day it remains a mystery whether the Unitron Mac's ROMs were reverse-engineered or merely copied.[6]
Official Macintosh clone program
By 1995, Apple Macintosh computers accounted for about 7% of the worldwide desktop computer market. Apple executives decided to launch an official clone program in order to expand Macintosh market penetration. Apple's clone program entailed the licensing of the Macintosh ROMs and system software to other manufacturers, each of which agreed to pay a royalty for each clone computer they sold. From early 1995 through mid-1997, it was possible to buy PowerPC-based clone computers running Mac OS, most notably from Power Computing. Other licensees were Motorola, Radius, APS Technologies, DayStar Digital, and UMAX. In terms of exterior styling, Mac clones often more closely resembled generic PCs than their Macintosh counterparts, but they frequently offered better performance at a lower price than true Macs.
Jobs ends the official program
Soon after Steve Jobs returned to Apple, he backed out of recently renegotiated licensing deals with OS licensees that Apple executives complained were still financially unfavorable [7]. Because the clonemakers' licenses were valid only for Apple's System 7 operating system, Apple's release of Mac OS 8 left the clone manufacturers without the ability to ship a current Mac OS version and effectively ended the cloning program.[8] Apple bought Power Computing's Mac clone business for $100 million, ending the Clone era.[9]
Jobs publicly stated [citation needed] that the program was ill-conceived and had been a result of "institutional guilt," meaning that for years, there had been a widely held belief at Apple that had the company aggressively pursued a legal cloning program early in the history of the Macintosh, consumers might have turned to low-priced Macintosh clones rather than low-priced IBM/PC-compatible computers. Had it pursued a clone program in the 1980s, in this view, Apple might have ended up in the position currently occupied by Microsoft—an extremely powerful company with high profit margins and a wide base of consumers perpetually dependent on its system software products. Jobs claimed it was now too late for this to happen, that the Mac clone program was doomed to failure from the start, and since Apple made money primarily by selling computer hardware, it ought not engage in a licensing program that would reduce its hardware sales.
Macintosh cloning today
Since Apple transitioned the Macintosh to an Intel platform in 2006, and subsequent to a major increase in visibility (if not in computer market share) for Apple with the success of the iPod, large computer system manufacturers such as Dell have expressed renewed interest in creating Macintosh clones. While various industry executives, notably Michael Dell, have stated publicly that they would like to sell Macintosh-compatible computers, Apple VP Phil Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.[10] However, modified versions of Mac OS X v10.4 and 10.5, dubbed "Mac OSx86", can be used illegally on generic PC hardware. [citation needed].
One company, Psystar Corporation,[11] has announced the release of a computer with OSx86 preloaded, called the OpenComputer. [12] Initially, there were questions regarding the genuineness of Psystar's products and Psystar itself; however, independent reviewers have confirmed that the OpenComputer does exist, though it has compatibility problems with Apple's Software Update application and as well as the System Profiler and other assorted software. Also, end-users apparently cannot reinstall Mac OS X.[13] Psystar recently released its first service pack to update the version of OS X pre-installed on the open computer to resolve multiple issues discovered in the first iteration. A future update is slated to include patches for the automatic update mechanism enabling updates from Psystar servers. You can download various updates and patches from Psystar's website to resolve some current issues.
External links
- Mac Clones and New O/S movie from archive.org
Notes
- ^ a b c Coventry, Joshua (2006-12-05). "Apples From Other Orchards". Low End Mac. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
{{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|coauthors=(help); Text "authorlink" ignored (help) - ^ a b c Owad, Tom (2004-01-19). "Bell & Howell Apple II+". Applefritter. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
{{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|coauthors=(help) - ^ "Apple II Plus - Bell & Howell Model". MacGeek. 2006-04-09. Retrieved 2007-03-04.
{{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|coauthors=(help) - ^ "MacOS-Compatible Systems: NuTek". EveryMac.com. Retrieved 2006-05-25.
- ^ "Unitron Mac 512 - fotos". página do Chester. Retrieved 2006-05-25.
- ^ "MAC 512 Unitron". Retrieved 2006-05-25.
- ^ Gruman, Galen (November 1997), "Why Apple Pulled the Plug", Macworld, vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 31–36
{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link) - ^ Beale, Steven (October 1997), "Mac OS 8 Ships with No License Deal", Macworld, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 34–36
{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link) - ^ Beale, Steven (November 1997), "Apple Eliminates the Top Clone Vendor", Macworld, vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 30–31
{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link) - ^ "Apple throws the switch, aligns with Intel". news.cnet.com. Retrieved 2005-06-06.
- ^ So exactly who or what is Psystar? We dig a little.. | Technology | Guardian Unlimited
- ^ "OpenComputer: The Smart Alternative to an Apple". Psystar Corporation. Retrieved 2008-04-12.
- ^ "Psystar in the Wild". Gizmodo. Retrieved 2008-04-28.