And where in those terms does Apple say that it will never change those terms? As I said, the problem isn't now, it's the direction Apple is headed in. But even now Apple could say that any of the tonymac tools are "damaging to either the users or Apple." But that doesn't matter since he's not required to sign the apps or agree to any terms when releasing the software. As Apple makes it more difficult or maybe even impossible to run unsigned applications, so does our ability to run hackintoshes.
Before you get too nervous about all this, take a step back and look at the context of the events.
When Apple made the decision to switch to Intel x86 architecture for Macs back in 2005 (which was a long time ago by computer industry standards but not very long ago at all on a human time scale), they made a decision that had implications that would play out over many years.
The implications were not for Apple- they can switch their PC architecture whenever they want- the implications are for their ecosystem- the developers and the other hardware manufacturers that make products that work with Macs. From the perspective of those folks, an enormous amount of money has been invested in making their products work with Intel Macs and they are not going to eat the cost of retooling their products for a different architecture.
As I said, Apple can come out tomorrow and say that they have developed some super-awesome A9x chip that will now be under the hood of every Mac, but if the library of software that runs on a Mac shrinks dramatically as a result, it will be a useless platform and nobody will buy it. There are a few solutions- virtualization, co-procoessors, etc., but those options are costly and they will guzzle energy and thus be very difficult to cram into the footprint of a machine like the current generation Macbook. Oh, and forget about boot camp- which, along with virtualization of Windows, is going to be a must-have for Macs for Apple's latest push into enterprise IT to have any hope of success.
From a technical standpoint, there is little that can be done to differentiate custom-made Apple hardware from generic white-box PC components. Intel owns that architecture and Intel makes all of the parts, so Intel, not Apple, controls this platform. Apple can certainly take the "copy protection dongle" approach and put a firmware chip on each of their system boards and prevent OS X from running unless that device is present, but that will cost money and it will also be subject to hacking.
Bottom line: Apple's products differentiate themselves in ways that are more than sufficient to protect their revenue from homemade counterfeit hardware. Also bear in mind, that what may be well worth the effort to you to build your own machine is beyond the abilities of the average consumer. It is true that they are facing some stiff competition now, and it is becoming obvious that some major investments in Macs and their OS to keep up with the competition are long overdue- but the problem in that regard is Apple, not hackintoshes, which are the industry's way of saying "time to up your game." Hopefully they are listening.
