Rebel EFI from Psystar

[pαuℓzurrr.]

Quick Overview
Featuring Psystar's newest technology for allowing for the smooth interfacing between operating systems and generic Intel hardware, Rebel EFI allows for the easy installation of multiple operating systems on a single system. The authenticated version allows for the permanent installtion of these OS's on your system, as well as providing the DUBL, supported hardware profile features and related drivers, and support for the application.


Rebel EFI is free to try and download, though it will have limited hardware functionality and a run-time of two hours.

Free trial here: Download Rebel EFI (http://cdn.psystar.com/RebelEFI-20091022_1256231301.iso)

Regular Price: $89.99
SPECIAL PRICE: $49.99

Installing Snow Leopard using Rebel EFI
1. Download the Rebel EFI file, available here.
2. Burn the file to a CD.
3. Insert the Rebel EFI disc into your CD drive.
4. Start or restart your computer.
5. As computer boots up select, Boot Options or Boot Menu Key
**Boot Options or Boot Menu Key differ by motherboard manufacturer.
6. Select CD ROM
7. After CD loads press enter to run the CD
8. When prompted, Eject the CD and it will ask for the Snow Leopard DVD
9. Insert the Snow Leopard DVD
10. Select Main Language
11. Click Continue, if you want to continue with the installation of Snow Leopard.
12. Click Agree, if you agree.
13. Select the disk that you want to install Snow Leopard on.
a. If no disk shows, Click on Utilities on the tool bar, then select Disk Utilities.
b. On the left you should see your hard drive.
c. If not, a disk is not connected or cannot be read by your computer.
d. After selecting your hard drive click on Partition.
e. Under Volume Scheme, click current and select 1 partition.
f. Under Volume Information, name your hard drive.
g. Format: Mac OS Extended (Journaled)
h. At the bottom of the window Click on the Options Button.
i. Select the GUID Partition Table
j. Click OK
k. Click Apply
l. Click Partition
m. Quit Disk Utilities
14. Select the disk that you want to install Snow Leopard on.
15. Click Install.
16. When Installation completes. restart the computer
17. As the computer starts up, insert the Rebel EFI CD
18. As computer boots up select Boot Options or Boot Menu Key
**Boot Options or Boot Menu Key differ by motherboard manufacturer.
19. Select CD ROM
20. Once CD loads you will see both the Hard Disk and the Rebel EFI CD
21. Use the arrow keys to highlight the Hard Drive
22. Press Enter to boot Hard drive.
23. Launch the Rebel EFI application from the CD.
24. Follow the on-screen authentication procedure.
25. Click Continue
26. Select your Keyboard
27. Click Continue
28. Select, Do not transfer my information now.
29. Click Continue
30. If, you have and Apple ID enter it now
31. If not, Click Continue
32. Enter your Registration Information
33. Click Continue
34. Create your Account Information
35. Click Continue
36. Select Time Zone
37. Click Continue
38. Click Done

I don't encourage anyone to buy this since you can build this yourself with a boot-132 cd or usb stick...

Edit 9:42:
The website just went offline completely!

Prasys posted a screenshot of a file which shows that it has lspci inside it.
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/9277/screenshot20091024at120.png
Source: prasys.co.cc (http://prasys.co.cc/2009/10/psystars-rebel-efi-is-evil/)

[scififan68]

lmao wow that is pretty much pointless.

[TechSgtChen]

The website worked fine for me just now. I wouldn't say it's pointless, if their "supported hardware profiles" help make building a Hackintosh easier. How many users have systems that work 100% or even 95%? Complaints about bits of hardware not working fill this forum. I've never been able to get sleep or hibernation to work on my system, and that's with one of the most highly recommended motherboards and various combinations of VoodooPower, OpenHaltRestart and SleepEnabler. Assuming they can work out the bugs and offer 100% working profiles, I'd be willing to pay the $50. But that's a very tall order.

[Kabyl]

They have to release the changes for that, since it's based on boot-132 and is under APSL, if they don't, it would be a gift given to Apple on a golden plate.

[korsabad]

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/8123/rebelefi1korsabad.png

http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/8498/rebelefi2korsabad.png
http://img198.imageshack.us/i/rebelefi2korsabad.png

[thorazine74]

The website worked fine for me just now. I wouldn't say it's pointless, if their "supported hardware profiles" help make building a Hackintosh easier. How many users have systems that work 100% or even 95%? Complaints about bits of hardware not working fill this forum. I've never been able to get sleep or hibernation to work on my system, and that's with one of the most highly recommended motherboards and various combinations of VoodooPower, OpenHaltRestart and SleepEnabler. Assuming they can work out the bugs and offer 100% working profiles, I'd be willing to pay the $50. But that's a very tall order.

You mean that when the community works out the bugs and finds the most compatible hardware psystar deserves to be paid for that? Sounds really fair.

[Imkantus]

Somebody made it to mount the initrd?

I would be interested in it's content. :D But I failed on trying to access it, maybe the fs is something else the cramfs...

Would be great if someone could help me. :)

[electro]

How to Install Snow leopard on PC With Rebel EFI, and how works

http://www.ihackintosh.com/2009/10/how-to-install-snow-leopard-on-pc-with-rebel-efi/

----------

Psystar Rebel EFI is Evil ?

http://prasys.co.cc/2009/10/psystars-rebel-efi-is-evil/

Very interesting statement, summaries, and respond to the EIF Rebel, really recommend its reading. I understand that as the environment of OSx86, the creators.

Sorry to my bad english.

[TechSgtChen]

You mean that when the community works out the bugs and finds the most compatible hardware psystar deserves to be paid for that? Sounds really fair.

Read the comments in the second article electro cites above. It's all about the amount of time and frustration you're willing to put into installing OSX86. If I asked a friend who knew a lot about building a Hackintosh to build me one, I'd be willing to fairly compensate him for his time. I have a mostly working system right now. I'm not going to waste days or weeks experimenting and God only knows how many restarts to try to get the final bugs out. If a company can do that for me, I'll pay them, although obviously not the full Apple premium.

[Dies]

They have to release the changes for that, since it's based on boot-132 and is under APSL, if they don't, it would be a gift given to Apple on a golden plate.

Interesting, I was under the impression that the APSL was similar to BSD.

4. Larger Works. You may create a Larger Work by combining Covered
Code with other code not governed by the terms of this License and
distribute the Larger Work as a single product. In each such instance,
You must make sure the requirements of this License are fulfilled for
the Covered Code or any portion thereof.


If I'm reading that right it would mean that I can add as much as stuff as I want and the only requirement is that I release the original code, I can still keep my code or theme or whatever private.

[pαuℓzurrr.]

Somebody made it to mount the initrd?

I would be interested in it's content. :D But I failed on trying to access it, maybe the fs is something else the cramfs...

Would be great if someone could help me. :)

Im interested in this too, i didn't have any success yet too...

[genex]

agree initrd is not a regular id some can confirm if it is a encrypted or what ?

[electro]

Coment Netkas from has blog's :

-----------------------------------
Parasites, such parasites.

You all know who I’m talking about.

Comments Off
-----------------------------------
http://netkas.org/?p=294

[Kabyl]

Interesting, I was under the impression that the APSL was similar to BSD.

4. Larger Works. You may create a Larger Work by combining Covered
Code with other code not governed by the terms of this License and
distribute the Larger Work as a single product. In each such instance,
You must make sure the requirements of this License are fulfilled for
the Covered Code or any portion thereof.
If I'm reading that right it would mean that I can add as much as stuff as I want and the only requirement is that I release the original code, I can still keep my code or theme or whatever private.

Well, their so called "EFI" is not a Larger Work to begin with..


2.2 Modified Code. You may modify Covered Code and use, reproduce, display, perform, internally distribute within Your organization, and Externally Deploy Your Modifications and Covered Code, for commercial or non-commercial purposes, provided that in each instance You also meet all of these conditions:
...
(c) If You Externally Deploy Your Modifications, You must make Source Code of all Your Externally Deployed Modifications either available to those to whom You have Externally Deployed Your Modifications, or publicly available. Source Code of Your Externally Deployed Modifications must be released under the terms set forth in this License, including the license grants set forth in Section 3 below, for as long as you Externally Deploy the Covered Code or twelve (12) months from the date of initial External Deployment, whichever is longer. You should preferably distribute the Source Code of Your Externally Deployed Modifications electronically (e.g. download from a web site).

2.3 Distribution of Executable Versions. In addition, if You Externally Deploy Covered Code (Original Code and/or Modifications) in object code, executable form only, You must include a prominent notice, in the code itself as well as in related documentation, stating that Source Code of the Covered Code is available under the terms of this License with information on how and where to obtain such Source Code.


Is that enough?

source: http://www.opensource.apple.com/license/apsl/

[Dies]

Well, their so called "EFI" is not a Larger Work to begin with..

Is that enough?
Not really...

It looks like a "larger work" to me, it looks like they not only consolidated a few things, *maybe* made them easier to use, prettier to look at, etc. added some custom applications. Whatever BS they did, I'm pretty sure it's larger than what they started with. ;)

From:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/apsl.html

The FSF now considers the APSL to be a free software license with two major practical problems, reminiscent of the NPL:

* It is not a true copyleft, because it allows linking with other files which may be entirely proprietary.
* It is incompatible with the GPL.


See section 2 of the NPL for the reference above

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/netscape-npl.html


In any case, there is really no sense in us arguing about it. We're not lawyers ( well, at least I'm not ) and this isn't a court. I also don't enjoy pissing off people who contribute to the community. :)


The only point I was trying to make is that it cracks me up when people release their code to the public under a pretty liberal license then get pissy when someone does something they don't like with it.

Seems very childish to me. Either don't release the code at all, release it under a restrictive license or deal with it.

In the end it doesn't really matter because if someone really wants to steal your code they will. Not much can be done about it in some cases, even if you have a legal department at your disposal.

[pcmaczone]

If it works then $50 is not a lot to pay for the convenience. As has been pointed out, that's what your paying for. I know there are other free options but for many it's just too much messing about and often wasted time.

Of course the way to stop this is for the community to produce the same thing and make it free to everyone :) and by same I mean a one stop option, just load it up and away you go. If Pystar can do it I am sure the community can.

[Kabyl]

Not really...

It looks like a "larger work" to me, it looks like they not only consolidated a few things, *maybe* made them easier to use, prettier to look at, etc. added some custom applications. Whatever BS they did, I'm pretty sure it's larger than what they started with. ;)

I want to make sure that we're talking about the same thing which is the boot loader; osxlinuz from their ISO.

OK, so this boot loader is based on boot-132 + code from Chameleon like the GUI (and all the back end code).

Now I'm sure they did modify few things in the GUI code, they obviously used another theme (which we have a whole section in our forum on how to do that, you probably already have seen it), I'm also sure they didn't use some of the code we added to boot-132, even all this is still called a modification to the covered code. If it was a larger work, it wouldn't be based on boot-132 in the first place..

Anyway I'm not sure if you or others understand the technical details, I hope you do because it's important for you to understand how not releasing the changes is violating the APSL.


From:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/apsl.html

The FSF now considers the APSL to be a free software license with two major practical problems, reminiscent of the NPL:

* It is not a true copyleft, because it allows linking with other files which may be entirely proprietary.
* It is incompatible with the GPL.
See section 2 of the NPL for the reference above

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/netscape-npl.html

Well I guess that means you got a little of what I meant, they do have to release the covered code and the modifications they did to it and they do have to include a copy of the APSL, which they obviously didn't do.



In any case, there is really no sense in us arguing about it. We're not lawyers ( well, at least I'm not ) and this isn't a court. I also don't enjoy pissing off people who contribute to the community. :)

It's probably just a waste of time that we're posting in this thread... but maybe not, in which case I hope few people benefit from this kind of discussions (I prefer to call it like that, instead of calling it arguing).



The only point I was trying to make is that it cracks me up when people release their code to the public under a pretty liberal license then get pissy when someone does something they don't like with it.
Well, it's everyone's right to get upset when their work is used this way.



Seems very childish to me. Either don't release the code at all, release it under a restrictive license or deal with it.

You know you don't really have much choice here, if you want to base your work on someone's or some company's work, there are rules here.

I knew after a while that I shouldn't expect things to be fair, so I chose to keep many things only for me and my friends, why should I care, right?

I knew what it meant when I released my code for Chameleon, I know others will use it in anyway they want, and I'm fine with that, would have released it otherwise :)

But I keep my right to be upset and my right to express it too, if people don't like to hear that, they can ignore me, and sorry for flooding their screens :p



In the end it doesn't really matter because if someone really wants to steal your code they will. Not much can be done about it in some cases, even if you have a legal department at your disposal.True, that's how things work.

[Kabyl]

If it works then $50 is not a lot to pay for the convenience. As has been pointed out, that's what your paying for. I know there are other free options but for many it's just too much messing about and often wasted time.

True, and I really understand when people pay because they don't want to spend time tinkering, it's not everyone's best way of having fun.

I just hope that you get what you're paying for :) I read about their "great" customer support, so.. good luck :)

It looks like we can make some profit too (?) :-$ :-d


Of course the way to stop this is for the community to produce the same thing and make it free to everyone :) and by same I mean a one stop option, just load it up and away you go. If Pystar can do it I am sure the community can.

Psystar hasn't done it, they don't have the skills from what I have seen so far.

[mindlessmissy]

So long as apple can release an update to render every 3rd party hack useless, why should anyone complain ... ? ( or can they !?! )

-
-
-

On a not so related note, why am I being labeled a "cheetah" ? I am a "pussy", gosh darn it !

[Imkantus]

On a not so related note, why am I being labeled a "cheetah" ? I am a "pussy", gosh darn it !Go wiki...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X#Versions

[Kabyl]

So long as apple can release an update to render every 3rd party hack useless, why should anyone complain ... ? ( or can they !?! )
...


I can give them many ways to do that and without really any much efforts.

Why they didn't do it... well, that's open for many to speculate about it :)

[thorazine74]

Read the comments in the second article electro cites above. It's all about the amount of time and frustration you're willing to put into installing OSX86. If I asked a friend who knew a lot about building a Hackintosh to build me one, I'd be willing to fairly compensate him for his time. I have a mostly working system right now. I'm not going to waste days or weeks experimenting and God only knows how many restarts to try to get the final bugs out. If a company can do that for me, I'll pay them, although obviously not the full Apple premium.

I think you are missing the point, from what I can see (without buying it) they are selling a modified boot loader plus an lspci tool that connects to an online database that downloads kexts for the matched hardware, but of course only if its supported on a closed list of components, the ones they are selling with their machines. But the marketing call is "Install OS X on any Computer". That sounds like snake oil to me, its obviously not true, if you have a motherboard with a sis chipset or a sony laptop with an incompatible display controller, how is RebelEFI going to help you?
On the other hand it sounds like a big change of strategy I suppose because of the legal troubles: now instead of selling x86 computers with OS X preinstalled, they could just sell the "proven-to-work" hardware with no OS and just let the user install a bought (or downladed, who cares) copy of OS X, that way the user is the one breaking the EULA, not Psystar.

Not really...

It looks like a "larger work" to me, it looks like they not only consolidated a few things, *maybe* made them easier to use, prettier to look at, etc. added some custom applications. Whatever BS they did, I'm pretty sure it's larger than what they started with. ;)

From:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/apsl.html

The FSF now considers the APSL to be a free software license with two major practical problems, reminiscent of the NPL:

* It is not a true copyleft, because it allows linking with other files which may be entirely proprietary.
* It is incompatible with the GPL.
See section 2 of the NPL for the reference above

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/netscape-npl.html


In any case, there is really no sense in us arguing about it. We're not lawyers ( well, at least I'm not ) and this isn't a court. I also don't enjoy pissing off people who contribute to the community. :)


The only point I was trying to make is that it cracks me up when people release their code to the public under a pretty liberal license then get pissy when someone does something they don't like with it.

Seems very childish to me. Either don't release the code at all, release it under a restrictive license or deal with it.

In the end it doesn't really matter because if someone really wants to steal your code they will. Not much can be done about it in some cases, even if you have a legal department at your disposal.

In my opinion you can split RebelEFI in 2 parts:
- The DUBL bootloader (OSXLINUZ & INITRD)
- The RebelEFI app (REBELEFI.PKG)
Even if you consider the whole package a "larger work" (even though its arguable that it is, it could be seen as just a bundle of 2 different pieces of code) based on Boot132, dfe, chameleon, pcefi or whatever, they would still have to release the code for DUBL.

agree initrd is not a regular id some can confirm if it is a encrypted or what ?

I think its encrypted somehow, or compressed with some unknown tool, neither gzip nor cpio could unpack it. If you open it in a hex editor you would see no clear text at all so I think its probably encrypted
If its encrypted they key has to be in the OSXLINUX file somewhere I think. There is dsa_pub.key inside rebelefi.pkg but I dont think it got anything to do with the initrd.
I dont know why they would encrypt it though, there are supposed to be only kexts inside the initrd right?
I guess that really shows their true intentions, I hope someone cracks it open very soon...

[TechSgtChen]

I think you are missing the point, from what I can see (without buying it) they are selling a modified boot loader plus an lspci tool that connects to an online database that downloads kexts for the matched hardware, but of course only if its supported on a closed list of components, the ones they are selling with their machines. But the marketing call is "Install OS X on any Computer". That sounds like snake oil to me, its obviously not true, if you have a motherboard with a sis chipset or a sony laptop with an incompatible display controller, how is RebelEFI going to help you?
I haven't seen anything that says it only works for systems that match their specs. I'm sure there are some systems that won't work, but without actually testing Rebel EFI, I can't say how comprehensive their database is. When all is said and done, an awful lot of people are like Kabyl and me. What we like about OS X is that "it just works." We don't want to spend uncounted hours scouring forums hoping to solve minor and major problems, downloading various kernal extensions and patches hoping that one will do the job without conflicting with something else. We don't want to ask and be admonished that we should use the search function. We don't want to "learn" about our systems and how to use Terminal commands. If we wanted to do CLI work, we'd get Linux. We just want to use our Hackintoshes. Building a non-Apple Mac is still more of a black art than it is a science, although it's come a long way in the past few years. Even if you have a system configuration absolutely identical to one that works, there's still no guarantee that yours will work the same way.

On the other hand it sounds like a big change of strategy I suppose because of the legal troubles: now instead of selling x86 computers with OS X preinstalled, they could just sell the "proven-to-work" hardware with no OS and just let the user install a bought (or downladed, who cares) copy of OS X, that way the user is the one breaking the EULA, not Psystar.
I've been saying all along in Mac forums that this is what they should have been doing instead of trying to fight Apple in court.

[Dies]

It's probably just a waste of time that we're posting in this thread... but maybe not, in which case I hope few people benefit from this kind of discussions (I prefer to call it like that, instead of calling it arguing).

I agree, discussion is much nicer.


But I keep my right to be upset and my right to express it too, if people don't like to hear that, they can ignore me, and sorry for flooding their screens :p
.

O.K. fine, I guess you get to express yourself too. :p


Truth is, I was just playing devil's advocate and fully expected people to get sensitive / defensive or to take things seriously / personally, as a lot of people online seem to do these days.

I'm just happy to see that it's not the case in this community.

:)

[milanca]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imkantus
Somebody made it to mount the initrd?

I would be interested in it's content. But I failed on trying to access it, maybe the fs is something else the cramfs...

Would be great if someone could help me.
Im interested in this too, i didn't have any success yet too...


Do you guys remember their previous OpenRestore CD? It had, i think i have it somewhere, typical linux initrd, gz/cpio compressed. I was also curious so i extracted it (nothing special in there, most of all i wanted to see the way they handle Audio).

This one isn't gz/cpio compressed, neither it is cramfs, ramfs, reiserfs, ext2, ext3 .. I am becoming more curious, what do these guys want to hide or protect.

[Ianxxx]

Do you guys remember their previous OpenRestore CD? It had, i think i have it somewhere, typical linux initrd, gz/cpio compressed. I was also curious so i extracted it (nothing special in there, most of all i wanted to see the way they handle Audio).

This one isn't gz/cpio compressed, neither it is cramfs, ramfs, reiserfs, ext2, ext3 .. I am becoming more curious, what do these guys want to hide or protect.

The Truth lol

[pαuℓzurrr.]

Found this on a other forum, all readable text in the osxlinux file...

http://pastie.org/669790

Not really useful, but figured it could be handy for some :)

[thorazine74]

AES-ECB-%3d (%s): failed
passed
AES-CBC-%3d (%s): AES-CFB128-%3d (%s):That sounds like variants of AES (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Encryption_Standard) so I guess they encrypted something, maybe that weird initrd that nothing I kow can open. It makes no sense, assuming there is only kexts inside the initrd right, and some of them are just open source like RealtekR1000 and OpenHaltRestart?
Anyone tried replacing the initrd with a standard initrd.img?
Also it seems they are using pxelinux instead of isolinux for the loader if I'm not wrong.

[pαuℓzurrr.]

If it's AES encrypted then we'll probably never be able to open it right?

Edit: Could they be using dm-crypt?
http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/DM-Crypt

[CelciusCool]

what do these guys want to hide or protect.

some change to boot 132 code and loading method i think.

On the same media(Sony CD R-W 10x) chameleon 2 fails with EBIOS error even in legacy mode. But rebel EFI loads without any of them but can't load properly cause of GFX issue(screen stay black with "no entry" on display) on a GTX285

Like i've been read as it's based on boot 132, Apple can take advantage of this situation and i hope they will

[tea]

Rebel EFI inside.
http://tinyurl.com/ygjxfa7

[pαuℓzurrr.]

Thanks tea!
How did you get into the encrypted disk?
Also is it maybe possible that you can upload the files somewhere?

[thorazine74]

Rebel EFI inside.
http://tinyurl.com/ygjxfa7

Thanks! Good work.
Can you explain what method you used? Also people would be interested in the cbboot file used.

[tea]

LOL. VMWare, FreeBSD, 128 Mb or ram, boot from iso, susperd. Search in RAM file something like com.psystar, search up HFS+ marker, copy block with HFS image to new file, mount :)
I'm add link in blog.

[pαuℓzurrr.]

lol nice :p
Thats for posting! :D

[Kabyl]

Nice one tea :)

Just a small correction, you said something about osxlinuz being a modified isolinux, it's a modified boot-132.

Will try to check what other stupid things they have done...

EDIT:

Well, their guarded secret is full of GPL'd and APSL'd code..

And you're right about OpenDevice kext, it's just a modified fakesmc, it's their way of doing things..

Anyone able to decode their message from these words? (maybe remove the words used in the OSK0/1 key):

Apple
better
Banana
blind
check
Computer
Cuban
declined
dentist
Doctor
dont
don't
existing
found
great
guarded
hammer
hard
hardware
he'd
karma
Microsoft
once
pirate
Please
please
psystar
Really
steal
that
that's
There
these
today
uncool
user
Venezuela
whined
windows
wood
words
work
Your

[Imkantus]

LOL. VMWare, FreeBSD, 128 Mb or ram, boot from iso, susperd. Search in RAM file something like com.psystar, search up HFS+ marker, copy block with HFS image to new file, mount
I'm add link in blog.Good work & thanks for posting it here. :)

Just a small correction, you said something about osxlinuz being a modified isolinux, it's a modified boot-132.Err sorry Kabyl, but as far as I understand the way this CD works, the modified boot-132 is located in the file "cdboot" placed in the initrd and not in osxlinuz.
So teas explanation of the osxlinuz file sounds logical and correct for me.

Correct me please, if I am wrong. :)

[Kabyl]

Err sorry Kabyl, but as far as I understand the way this CD works, the modified boot-132 is located in the file "cdboot" placed in the initrd and not in osxlinuz.
So teas explanation of the osxlinuz file sounds logical and correct for me.

Correct me please, if I am wrong. :)

Well you can compare both of them yourself, try opening osxlinuz and cdboot in hex editor, or run strings on them.

[DiRTDOG]

Hi all I am new hear, and I really envy all of the hard work from this project. I wish I could get my head around the OSx86 phenomenon and get my machine to work flawlessly like the Rebel EFI claims. Since I have had little success with my limited knowledge/patience, I wouldnt mind putting down the hard earned cash and purchase the Rebel because I cant afford a Mac or one of the clones right now. I would much rather give my money to the people on this forum where this all started so please release your own version of this boot loader and I will gladly support the cause.

[cwall64]

Well I took the plug last week and purchase the RebelEFI just to try it out, and this week when I got back from a week trip it auto updated from version 0.8.5 to 0.8.7 and lost my registration information. Now when i try and reenter it, it claims invalid as it has already been registered, but if it try with just username and password it ask for registration (catch 22), fired off an email to support and haven't heard back - don't waste your money! This is nothing that the hacintosh communities haven't already worked out. Hell I am on one of the "supported" boards GA-EP45-UD3P, and they still have the orange HD issue that we had worked out a long time ago!!!

[pitashen]

Netkas has varified that RebelEFI uses a good portion of Boot-123 (which is free).. MEH... not something to be surprised with but those who consider spending money for it. Please think it through twice.


http://netkas.org/?p=310