We need to show gratitude to Apple for repeatedly taking thousands of dollars of our money? This is a business and comp...electronics company not a religion.
Some of us realize that, Ben. I'm not so sure about others. I used to be an Amiga user once upon a time and I did have a certain 'loyalty' to the computer/operating system. But as time went on and Commodore squandered their chances to make it something better over time instead of languishing in 'used to be' state-of-the-art and then finally going bankrupt (which from a business standpoint they probably deserved), I quickly learned to separate my feelings for hardware, software and the company making it. Apple is a name. Steve Jobs is a rich man. Neither dictates whether I 'like' OSX or not and neither does the current hardware I'm running it on or else I would never upgrade to something better or different. It's the operating system itself that matters, not whom made it, sells it or packages it with a given piece of hardware.
Clearly, others on here don't view things that way. They see OSX, Apple and the hardware it runs on as one and the same thing and thus if they like OSX, they therefore also like Apple, Steve and their personal iMac like it's a member of the family. It's hard to argue against that kind of love, yet it's completely nonsensical to those of us that recognize it's the operating system that is cool, not the hardware it runs on or the case it's put in or the man that's selling it to me. Steve Jobs for all his input didn't write OSX. It's the product of many programmers' efforts, some not even part of the company (Darwin is or at least has been Open, unlike Cocoa). Can I like Linux without worshiping Linus Torvalds? Yes, I think so. Do some people worship Linus? In a way, yes, I think some do or at least idolize him. Linus, for all his work, though is NOT the sum total of Linux.
All of this comes down to the question of whether one believes you should be able to run a given operating system on whatever hardware you choose (within its ability to run on a given hardware platform) or whether you believe a company or even an individual should be allowed to dictate every facet of your behavior if you buy their product. To a large extent, this is about a difference in opinions or viewpoints and that is harder to argue than a sheer fact type situation. In untested laws, it comes down to how you think a law should be interpreted or even written or if a new one should be passed to address it. It does not answer whether such a law is 'good' or not because in something like this, it's a matter of opinion. Some people like Communism and some don't. How do you argue with someone that likes it? You give your own opinion and reasons for not liking it. Well, that's not about facts; that's about preferences.
And when it comes down to arguments about 'laws' that's an argument about what is written, but not necessarily about what is right (ethics). Some people care more about laws and others more about ethics. Personally, I find myself more in the latter category because what good is a law if it's not morally in line with my own ethical values? Before someone argues you can change laws, just try and do it some time. There are outdated and somewhat crazy sounding laws on the books in many cities still because no one repealed them. It's not so easy to do. When you have senators and house members that don't even READ the laws they are passing (which are often thousands of pages long in legal speak), it's not hard to see where and when things seem to go wrong. Even Supreme Court cases often result in 3/4 or 4/3 type rulings. When they highest court in the land can't even agree on something, you KNOW something isn't right. It means people disagree on something. Unfortunately, you can't just go and create a country where people will agree with you on everything. It just doesn't work that way. There's not enough space on the Earth.
Sadly, this will come down to Apple having money and Psystar having not so much and so they will lose by default since the legal system in this country often requires you being rich to win in civil cases or at least the lawyer has to stand to win a huge cut for you. Here, the only thing Psystar can win is the right to keep selling cheap PCs with OSX installed...hardly an incentive for a big name lawyer to jump on the bandwagon.
