I can show you many receipts where I bought a Windows laptop without a trace of any Windows licence on it.

Same, you can't really install macOS on anything else than a Mac.

Sure you can do a Hackintosh, or run Windows without a proper licence (you can buy a Windows for like... $2 on the grey market). But you won't have any support...

What does any of that have to do with the fact that macOS is free?

Really? Did you pay for it? Because it’s free for me when I download it.

Sounds like you got scammed

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.

Blizzard used a cheat detection system in wow that allowed their server to send arbitrary code for clients to run. The code failing to return an expected result was a sign that there was tampering going on. Emulating windows api to run on Linux is a form of tampering, though obviously not necessarily a sign of cheating. Guessing they used some code that didn't work on Linux and banned everyone who failed before realizing that some failed due to Linux, and then were able to separate the Linux users from detected cheaters by how it failed (either that or they had to undo all bans from that round).

Though it does make me wonder if it meant they can't/don't detect cheaters on Linux. Probably not, because my guess is they start out by looking for any cheats they can find, install them on test machines, then work at detecting the differences between those test machines and ones without the cheat. So they'd know about Linux-based cheats, too. They might even be able to use timing-based attacks to detect kernel level ones, too.

I want it to evolve to support more desktop applications. This is the one thing that will continue to hamper Linux adoption. Games are the best place to start, but we need all those old obscure, irreplaceable desktop apps to work now.

It is not free if you have to pay a specific hardware from the same company to run it. Same goes for Windows, it is not free if you are forced to buy Windows with the laptop.

In both case you pay for the software through the hardware.

No prob!

I think all your other info in the first comment, as well as this more recent one, is pretty much bang on accurate.

Getting gaming to work on linux is the path toward more mass adoption.

Linux has already been increasingly functional, capable, usable, and solid in many other ways, I'd argue superior in many ways... for a while, and gaming really is the last hurdle.

Of course it is. It cost me nothing to download and install it.

Unless you can show me how you’re actually paying for the operating system, then I don’t see how you can keep making this argument. It makes no sense.

It’s the same nonsense is arguing that you have to pay for Linux just because the computer you are running on cost money.

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.

You can download Windows for free too. But in both case you won't have any support unless you are running it on the authorized hardware. Windows does it though a licence, Apple through the hardware kirks.

Go on, try installing your "free" OS on a Thinkpad, and tell me if you manage to get it running.

That's not the point. You're still going to have to pay money regardless if you want the operating system. Whereas windows and Linux allow you to use their ISOs is any laptop or computer so no buddy.

If I already owned a laptop beforehand and I wanted Linux on it, it's free. If I want MacOS I WOULD HAVE TO GO SPEND MONEY ON A COMPLETELY NEW COMPUTER THAT'S A MAC. that's the point I'm trying to get at.

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)_/¯.

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.

I don’t understand how compatibility has anything to do with the cost of something. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, any operating system requires that you pay money for a compatible device to run it on.

You’re just drawing some imaginary line at Apple computers. But that makes no sense.

Compatibility has nothing to do with how much something costs. The fact is, there’s no way to actually buy macOS. Because it doesn’t cost anything.

As I’ve said elsewhere, by your logic, every operating system cost money to run because you have to pay money for a compatible device to run it on.

You’re just drawing some imaginary line at Apple. That makes no sense.

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.

It's built on Wine, any general improvements to compatibility will generally support desktop programs using the same APIs

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.