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.

No but I think the point being made is that people that have been clinging to Win 10 as a refuge from the crapfest that Win 11 is are going to start running into significant problems soon. Increasingly you're not going to be able to get software for Windows 10. A lot of people are opting to migrate to Linux rather than going from Win 10 to Win 11, and as the holdouts on 10 are increasingly corned some amount of them will make the same decision.

You're missing the core point: Compatibility directly impacts accessibility.
Just because something doesn't have a price tag doesn’t mean it's actually usable without cost.
macOS is only 'free' if you already bought into Apple’s walled garden.
That’s like saying Disneyland is free because walking around inside the park costs nothing—after you paid $150 to get in.

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.

Legal - Software License Agreements - Apple

Apple Legal (www.apple.com)

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

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.

Are you ASD? I'm not saying MacOS isn't free man since anyone can get a copy and use virtual PC. I'm saying I will never get a Mac because they are too damned expensive.

Nuance, man. Nuance.

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.

eGPUs? I ran a Hackintosh because Apple didn't sell hardware in the configuration I wanted. Less to do with GPUs and more to do with the lack of hard drive slots or PCIe slots. I had a nice workflow with some pieces of shareware that slowly lost support with each major OS update and every major update also came with less customizing for Finder. By the time they switched to their own ARM chips, I was ready to drop it. Apple's idea of game support was just mobile shit anyway. They should have become partnered with Valve on Proton.

I cannot believe there is this long, drawn out argument over whether MacOS is free or not when my intention was MacOS + Mac = me not buying because it's too much money for a meh system that doesn't run half of the games or apps (though that's been changing).

I feel like reading between the lines is a skill, or an art form that has gone extinct with young folk.

I did a little digging. It seems like mainline Apple hardware with Thunderbolt 2 had limited eGPU support because of bandwidth constraints. Thunderbolt 3 had full support.

So when someone buys [anything] with a screen, the OS on the screen if free?

I don't have a receipt for the OS in my car, so it means I must've gotten it for free. Same with the seats, steering wheel, mirrors, buttons, doors, you bang it! But what did I actually pay for then?

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 never said that. But it does show how this black-and-white all the nothing approach makes no sense.

macOS is free because it’s free.