Apple Sues Psystar over OpenComputer

[macrumorino]

How is Apple stifling competition? They don't stop anyone from building any hardware they want. They don't stop anyone from developing any operating system they like. Oh, you mean Apple is not allowing a wannabe competitor to take advantage of Apple's hard work and huge financial investment and use Apple's biggest competitive advantage, their operating system?

That's part of competition: You invest money and time, and the result of that investment is yours. Psystar is free to compete by doing the same, find a company that is willing to sell an operating system they have developed (like NeXT), buy the company, then invest seven years of hard work to improve on it.

Hey, who died and made you king? That's for the courts to decide, not you!

Antitrust law is what it is, and if it needs to be changed to have the Psystars of this world be free to sell you a machine that runs the software that you want it to run, then let's hope it gets done. But, who knows--maybe the law is good enough TODAY to get it done; like many here, I think it is.

 

[BenRoethig]

Hey, who died and made you king? That's for the courts to decide, not you!

Antitrust law is what it is, and if it needs to be changed to have the Psystars of this world be free to sell you a machine that runs the software that you want it to run, then let's hope it gets done. But, who knows--maybe the law is good enough TODAY to get it done; like many here, I think it is.

If it weren't for those same Anti-Trust laws that some around here seem to despise, Apple might not even exist today. They're the reason they have options. They're why we can buy a T.V. or DVD-player from the company we want and not have to worry about stuff working only on that one device. Competition breads innovation. Monopolies bread stagnation.

 

[gnasher729]

Hey, who died and made you king? That's for the courts to decide, not you!

Antitrust law is what it is, and if it needs to be changed to have the Psystars of this world be free to sell you a machine that runs the software that you want it to run, then let's hope it gets done. But, who knows--maybe the law is good enough TODAY to get it done; like many here, I think it is.

The court meeting where Apple's motion to dismiss Psystar's counterclaims was on the 6th; the decision is to arrive within a few days. And from what was reported on the web, the judge was highly critical of Psystar's arguments. Like Psystar's conclusion that because Mac users like their Macs, Apple must have a monopoly, which the judge didn't quite seem to buy (to say it politely).

So when I predict that Psystar will lose, and 95% that their counterclaims will be dismissed, that is because I read the court papers filed in this case, and they make it quite clear that Psystar doesn't have a leg to stand on.

 

[macbookairapple]

If it weren't for those same Anti-Trust laws that some around here seem to despise, Apple might not even exist today. They're the reason they have options. They're why we can buy a T.V. or DVD-player from the company we want and not have to worry about stuff working only on that one device. Competition breads innovation. Monopolies bread stagnation.

Right Apple has competitions from Microsoft, HP, Dell, Asus, Acer, Blackberry, Google, HTC, etc..

 

[BenRoethig]

Right Apple has competitions from Microsoft, HP, Dell, Asus, Acer, Blackberry, Google, HTC, etc..

On the Mac OS X platform? You can go from HP to Dell or someone else while keeping all that you have. If I switch to one of them, my files from iWork, iMovie, Garageband, etc plus all the applications don't come with. I'm tied to whatever Apple decides to sell me no matter how increasingly unworthy of the Apple logo the hardware becomes.

 

[Mal]

On the Mac OS X platform? You can go from HP to Dell or someone else while keeping all that you have. If I switch to one of them, my files from iWork, iMovie, Garageband, etc plus all the applications don't come with. I'm tied to whatever Apple decides to sell me no matter how increasingly unworthy of the Apple logo the hardware becomes.

The Mac OS X platform is a competitor to Windows, Linux, etc, not a separate market. No one has the right to compete in the "Mac OS X market", because that doesn't exist. It's Apple's offering in the personal and business computer markets. You don't have a right to have the software you want on the device you want, if the company that makes it doesn't want to license it to their competition. Your argument has absolutely no legal bearing, and only serves to indicate how selfish the whole American consumerist mindset has become. You only have the right to choose between the options available or create your own (without stealing from others to do so).

jW

 

[charlituna]

Mac customer service: we make it very clear what we need, and we get totally blown off. The straw that broke the camel's back was the glossy-only option on the laptops and the dismissive instruction to re-orient the laptop so as to avoid reflections. How insulting does it have to get...

given the number of folks buying from Apple Stores everyday, clearly you are not the only opinion. Probably not even the majority opinion. Perhaps 5% of Mac users agree with you.

But the fact is simple, just because you are not getting what you want doesn't make it automatically legally okay for another company to come in and violate current legally allowed agreements and restrictions. Or to violate copyright and trademark against another company.

And whether you think that what they did is great doesn't care the weight of the law. The courts will decide if Psystar ripped off Apple's software by modifying it, The courts will decide if there is such a thing as an "Apple Computer Market" making Apple's EULA etc a monopoly action. and so on.

Quality control: Apple warranties are ridiculously brief; if you want a normal length of warranty, you have to pay quite a premium which artificially lowers the apparent price on their items.

and what are the warranties when you buy a Dell, Compaq etc. How long do they last, what do they cover. do they come with certified technicians that focus on the one system in an attempt to give the best possible service.

Conclusion: this is a situation that demands competition.

That might be true. HOWEVER that doesn't mean that ripping off another companies software for your own means is right. There are other ways, which Psystar apparently didn't explore. they just said Apple's rules are stupid, flipped them the bird and did what they wanted.

 

[charlituna]

Apple will only do what their users want them to do when it's financially sound for them to do so.

What you have to keep in mind is that 'not financially sound' often means 'too dang expensive for the customers'

Take the whole Blu-ray thing. Jobs has brought up that the licensing costs are too high. This is likely a combination of actual high costs and the likely number of units that will sell. A company like Dell that has a larger part of the market will sell more units and those can spread that cost over thousands of machines.

Apple has a smaller market share and thus is looking at spreading the cost over less machines. Meaning to keep their profit (something every company does so lets stop with the demonizing Apple over it) they would have to raise the costs of the machines higher. and the machines are already on the line of being too expensive for many folks tastes. if you added on another $400-500 for Blu-ray that would be the deciding factor against for many. So Jobs is not ready to do this at this time.

 

[macbookairapple]

On the Mac OS X platform? You can go from HP to Dell or someone else while keeping all that you have. If I switch to one of them, my files from iWork, iMovie, Garageband, etc plus all the applications don't come with. I'm tied to whatever Apple decides to sell me no matter how increasingly unworthy of the Apple logo the hardware becomes.

So what if I have a Blackberry Curve and have purchased many programs from it, with a lot of documents and I have invested in that platforum. I then decide to buy an iphone, how do I get all those documents, files, and expensive programs on to my iphone? I guess I'm now tied to the blackberry platform and RIM, what should I do?

 

[BenRoethig]

Your argument has absolutely no legal bearing, and only serves to indicate how selfish the whole American consumerist mindset has become. You only have the right to choose between the options available or create your own (without stealing from others to do so).

jW

Its selfish to not want to be screwed over by a company that is moving away from useful designs to very low end computers in a pretty package that favor fad teenagers and mindless sheep that are going to ruberstamp whatever the company does. This is not the Mac, this is a Abercrombie/Hollister version of the wintel world. It's paying extra for a cool name, nothing more.

So what if I have a Blackberry Curve and have purchased many programs from it, with a lot of documents and I have invested in that platforum. I then decide to buy an iphone, how do I get all those documents, files, and expensive programs on to my iphone? I guess I'm now tied to the blackberry platform and RIM, what should I do?

First, the blackberry is an embedded device. Second, You cannot spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on software for it.

 

[macrumorino]

given the number of folks buying from Apple Stores everyday, clearly you are not the only opinion. Probably not even the majority opinion. Perhaps 5% of Mac users agree with you.

Once again, circular thinking. The people that like what Apple is doing... like what Apple is doing. !!

Apple was courting a more experienced, knowledgeable user a few years ago. They have clearly opted for some low-hanging fruit now, but in a few years, the lack of quality will catch up to them--specially if competition emerges.

And whether you think that what they did is great doesn't care the weight of the law. The courts will decide if Psystar ripped off Apple's software by modifying it, The courts will decide if there is such a thing as an "Apple Computer Market" making Apple's EULA etc a monopoly action. and so on.

Well, antitrust law did not always exist. It came about because people demanded it. If current law does not allow Psystar to make the computer that its customers want, to run the software that they want, then it'll be a good idea to change the law. Since, after all, competition is what we want.

Try that "5% of the people" argument on the notion of whether competition in the marketplace is a good thing and see where that gets you.

and what are the warranties when you buy a Dell, Compaq etc. How long do they last, what do they cover. do they come with certified technicians that focus on the one system in an attempt to give the best possible service.

I wouldn't know about the quality of service, I have never bought a machine from them and I probably never would. However, the standard seems to be 3 years. As for mighty Applecare, I have not had a great experience with it, but since it's limited there is not much a point of going into it--suffice it to say that it is not a "wow, I love these guys" experience.

That might be true. HOWEVER that doesn't mean that ripping off another companies software for your own means is right. There are other ways, which Psystar apparently didn't explore. they just said Apple's rules are stupid, flipped them the bird and did what they wanted.

Well I am glad that you agree with me that competition would be a good thing. As for "ripping off", I think that Psystar is not ripping anything off--they are paying retail for what Apple is selling retail; and as for later modifications, Apple did likewise with BSD Unix.

One thing that I find very disappointing is the utter lack of appreciation for just how much help Apple got from the people that wrote up Unix. If you like OS X, you like how robust it is, how it doesn't get viruses, etc. etc. .... you have BSD Unix to thank far more than Apple.

Now Apple is gravitating from good hardware to crap hardware, and we are supposed to just give up and resign ourselves to either using their overpriced crap, or dumping our software apps along with the time we have spent working in that software environment, just so that corporate laziness and greed can have its day? No no no. If current law does not protect us from this scenario, then we should have it modified to do so.

 

[rickag]

macrumorino

I agree with much of what you say, but really disagree when you characterize Apple hardware as crap.

I believe Apple computers, in general, to be well made, durable with extraordinary attention to detail. Do they have issues(ie. the dreaded white sposts comes to mind), yes, but in my experience Apple has corrected any issues I've had very well(re: maybe I got lucky with the Apple people I've dealt with).

For me the issue is the target markets that Apple seems to be courting.

MacMini = great computer if you value silence and small footprint(although they've not been properly updated in a verrrrry verrrrry lonnnnggggg time.

iMac = great AIO computer, placing a premium on AIO. Sacrifices desktop parts for laptop parts for size, heat and silence.

MacPro = Outstanding workstation. When introduced was a very good value compared to competition.

Laptops = Excellent computers including most connectivityexcept for the recently introduced MacBook and lack of FW) one would want and a laptop for both casual use and professional use and as a possible low end desktop replacement(re: this depends on model)

For me there is just a gigantic glaring hole, the mid to upper end tower and now the lack of FW on the MacBook..

Of course there are other holes in their line-up, but it would seem that as Apple gains market share they would be addressing these holes and not creating more. dropping the 12" PowerBook, dropping the mid to upper end tower the single cpu G4/G5, dropping FW from the MacBook. This just seems opposite to what I would hope for in a company gaining market share and at a very high gross margin at that.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

You don't like it when users tell Apple what to do, yet you want to tell US what to do. Bizarre...

I think the word you're actually looking for is hypocrisy. Don't disagree with ME, but I'm allowed to disagree with you. Do as I say, not as I do.

 

[macrumorino]

macrumorino

I agree with much of what you say, but really disagree when you characterize Apple hardware as crap.

Ok, let me flesh it out just a bit (and I pretty much agree with what you followed up with, except for the iMac which I have slammed elsewhere in this thread). It is not crap... YET. But if they continue on the path that they are on, come 2010, or 2011...

To put it another way: allowing for time-shifting difference, the 2002 Tibook makes today's Apple laptops look like crap. That may be a matter of taste, reasonable people may disagree, etc., but I would shell out $2000 in a minute if they put out the same bloody Tibook with an Intel cpu and a 4+ GB RAM ceiling.

(begin tangent) You know what this reminds me of? When years ago, Coke put out the new Coke; then, a few days later, they "apologized" and put out "Classic Coke". Apple's laptop offerings look like New Coke to me, but they have not gone to the step of apologizing and putting out the Classic again. (end tangent)

Anyway, they may not look like crap because there is not much to compare them against, yet. But at the moment there is so much room for improvement that if a hardware manufacturer decides to do things right, they could put out laptops and desktops that would make the Apple machines look like crap by comparison. Alas, just a few years ago, that would have been impossible.

 

[haydn!]

It's becoming quite apparent that a lot of peoples posts here as based purely on personal preference. They're posting want they think should be law, what they think Apple should be doing.

But unfortunately the legal system doesn't work this way and you cannot request a new law simply because your arguments fail against an existing one! Do you think I'd get away with robbing a bank, to reclaim any charges I'd paid, if I proved banks are acting unfair by apply bank charges in the first place?

Now I don't know how reliable this website is, Mac Observer, however they recently posted a news article which contained the following quote:

In the opinion of the attorney who contacted TMO, Psystar's antitrust claims are fatally flawed and fail to meet the standard set forth by the Supreme Court ruling in Twombly. Single brands within a competitive market are not recognized by the courts as a monopoly unless the brand has "market power. "Other federal courts have held that the Mac OS X is one OS in a market that consist of other competing operating systems and that Apple does not have market power, because its market share is less than 30%," he said.

Now this seems fairly logical to me. I never quite understood how a company that targeted and sold to a minority share could be seen to have a market monopoly.

In my personal opinion, the cause of any failings in competition is the fact other manufacturers have chosen not to compete. Apple have proven how successful using your own software to run your hardware can be.

Competition is also about choice. There is plenty of choice in a computer store. You can have an HP, Dell, Sony, Acer or a Mac. Some computers come with big screens - some don't. Some computers come with wireless keyboards, some don't. Some computers have matte screens, some have glossy. Some have Windows some have Mac OS. Their are plenty of choices and differentiating features between computers available. Different features aren't anti competitive, they're what give products competitive edge. Mac OS is just another differentiating feature of a Mac computer.

Again, some also seem mistaken that because they're buying Mac OS in a box they can do what they want with it. Not true. You're buying the box, the disc and a license to use the discs contents. You not buying the actual software. The license agreement dictates what you can and can't do with it. The license issuer can dictate whatever terms they believe are fair, users can either agree to the terms or choose not use the product. After all, there is always Windows, or Linux (More choice... more competition?).

 

[BenRoethig]

I wouldn't know about the quality of service, I have never bought a machine from them and I probably never would. However, the standard seems to be 3 years. As for mighty Applecare, I have not had a great experience with it, but since it's limited there is not much a point of going into it--suffice it to say that it is not a "wow, I love these guys" experience.

I've had very good experiences with Applecare and the several times I had to send in my G3 iBook to have its motherboard at all. I always had it fixed and back in my hands within 72 hours. That being said, I would have been out of luck had there not been a class action suit against Apple. They were trying to sweep under the table that the icebooks were defective and I more or less got a three year warranty for free. I had not ordered applecare with the machine as I assumed the Apple logo meant it wouldn't break. I didn't make that mistake again when i bought the iMac.

macrumorino

I agree with much of what you say, but really disagree when you characterize Apple hardware as crap.

I believe Apple computers, in general, to be well made, durable with extraordinary attention to detail. Do they have issues(ie. the dreaded white sposts comes to mind), yes, but in my experience Apple has corrected any issues I've had very well(re: maybe I got lucky with the Apple people I've dealt with).

For me the issue is the target markets that Apple seems to be courting.

MacMini = great computer if you value silence and small footprint(although they've not been properly updated in a verrrrry verrrrry lonnnnggggg time.

iMac = great AIO computer, placing a premium on AIO. Sacrifices desktop parts for laptop parts for size, heat and silence.

MacPro = Outstanding workstation. When introduced was a very good value compared to competition.

Laptops = Excellent computers including most connectivityexcept for the recently introduced MacBook and lack of FW) one would want and a laptop for both casual use and professional use and as a possible low end desktop replacement(re: this depends on model)

For me there is just a gigantic glaring hole, the mid to upper end tower and now the lack of FW on the MacBook..

Of course there are other holes in their line-up, but it would seem that as Apple gains market share they would be addressing these holes and not creating more. dropping the 12" PowerBook, dropping the mid to upper end tower the single cpu G4/G5, dropping FW from the MacBook. This just seems opposite to what I would hope for in a company gaining market share and at a very high gross margin at that.

I can't disagree with anything said here, but you did forget the large screen iBook. They're getting greedy and trying fit you into machine that fits them and the consumer. While some around argue we have lots of choices, Apple's moves make it very clear they're trying to take advantage of a captive audience.

 

[rickag]

...They're getting greedy and trying fit you into machine that fits them and the consumer...., Apple's moves make it very clear they're trying to take advantage of a captive audience.

Whether it is greed or just Steve imposing his philosophical beliefs in what a user(re: pro or consumer)needs the net effect if the same, fewer choices. To quote Jobs, we like options.

 

[Mal]

Its selfish to not want to be screwed over by a company that is moving away from useful designs to very low end computers in a pretty package that favor fad teenagers and mindless sheep that are going to ruberstamp whatever the company does. This is not the Mac, this is a Abercrombie/Hollister version of the wintel world. It's paying extra for a cool name, nothing more.

It's selfish to claim that because you want something that the owner of that something should be forced to sell it to you at your terms. If you don't like the direction Apple's moving, buy something else. If you can't handle that, then deal with it. That's life, and it's legal, and while it may not be optimal, it's certainly not wrong.

jW

 

[macrumorino]

It's selfish to claim that because you want something that the owner of that something should be forced to sell it to you at your terms. If you don't like the direction Apple's moving, buy something else. If you can't handle that, then deal with it. That's life, and it's legal, and while it may not be optimal, it's certainly not wrong.

jW

That may be how you prefer to deal with it, but we do not have to agree to your terms. I, for one, disagree and decline your offer.

 

[Mal]

That may be how you prefer to deal with it, but we do not have to agree to your terms. I, for one, disagree and decline your offer.

Yes, and you can feel free to do the same to Apple's offer. Unfortunately for you, they don't then have to offer you what you want. You can reject the terms all you want: you also reject the product then, and have no claim to using it if you do not purchase it and agree to the terms.

Obviously this is assuming that there are no laws being broken in those terms, but in this case there is not, which is fairly clear.

jW

 

[macrumorino]

Yes, and you can feel free to do the same to Apple's offer. Unfortunately for you, they don't then have to offer you what you want. You can reject the terms all you want: you also reject the product then, and have no claim to using it if you do not purchase it and agree to the terms.

Obviously this is assuming that there are no laws being broken in those terms, but in this case there is not, which is fairly clear.

jW

Once again, I decline YOUR offer.

What a judge may say is a different matter than what YOU say. What YOUR opinion is is a different matter from a judge's, mine, or anyone else's.

I do not know why you give yourself the authority to make these decisions, but it simply is not there for you to do so.

 

[czachorski]

We the users should welcome Psystar........

Really? And how should we address the risks that they could undermine Apple's funding model for OS X and effectively kill OS X development? Should we welcome them then?

Once again, I decline YOUR offer.

What a judge may say is a different matter than what YOU say. What YOUR opinion is is a different matter from a judge's, mine, or anyone else's.

I do not know why you give yourself the authority to make these decisions, but it simply is not there for you to do so.

As was established clearly earlier in this thread, if Apple loses this case, they can make some very simple changes to their practices and continue to sell OS X and Macs exactly as they please. For this reason, what Mal is saying is very pertinent. You desire to buy their product a certain way is absolutely moot, and it is perfectly legal for Apple to not provide you with the product that you want, as much as that irritates you.

 

[czachorski]

I think the word you're actually looking for is hypocrisy. Don't disagree with ME, but I'm allowed to disagree with you. Do as I say, not as I do.

Call it what you want, but it is the basis of a transaction that was being described. If the seller is smart, and it makes good business sense to do so, they will listen to their customers and incorporate features being requested, but there is no legal basis to force them to do so. On the flip side, the buyer may feel like they are being told what to do (use glossy screens, keyboards with no buttons, etc), and their only remedy is to buy or not buy, and buy from someone else. This is just the way commerce works. If you want to hold a gun to the sellers head to force them to produce a product exactly your way, then why do you think they would want to sell to you any more or make the product anymore? The basis of any transaction is that it provides value to BOTH parties. If that condition can't be met, then the transaction doesn't happen. That's it. Neither party has a right to insist that the other agree to their terms under duress or force. It seems to me that you are more pissed with transactions and relationships of commerce more so that anything Apple is doing specifically.

 

[macbookairapple]

Seems Psystar's useless counterclaim was just thrown out of court.

 

[macbookairapple]

First, the blackberry is an embedded device. Second, You cannot spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on software for it.

Yes you can, have you checked some of the prices of Blackberry software that starts at like 60 dollars.