Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Sues Psystar over OpenComputer
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The marketplace will reach equilibrium on its own. Look at the iPhone. Plenty of manufacturers created an iPhone knockoff, but they all sucked. The $400 made people hesitate, though. AT&T and Apple recognized this, realized that they could make more money at a lower price-point, and voila - today you can buy an iPhone for $200. If Apple thought it would be in their best interest to create the product you're looking for, they would. I'm sure they have investigated the mid-range tower. Most people, when they buy a Mac, since it's already a slightly more expensive alternative, decide to break the bank when they buy one.
Maybe now Apple will release a cheaper model to fill some gaps, maybe they won't. Psystar will have still served a good purpose, and I'm glad in a way that they exist, but they won't exist for long and I'm also glad for that, too.
No.
It's not even close to the Microsoft case. MS prohibited and prevented the use of any other browser. You can use any compatible browser on Mac. Not to mention 95% market share = monopoly. 6-8% does not.
It's not even close to the Microsoft case. MS prohibited and prevented the use of any other browser. You can use any compatible browser on Mac. Not to mention 95% market share = monopoly. 6-8% does not.
I bought my MBP because I wanted OSX at a mobile professional level that was reliable with constant support specific to my hardware.
If Apple bought out a mid-range tower it would create kext hell. Leopard would go Vista. I paid for the right to use OSX, the money I paid will in some small way go towards developing the operating system for MY computer... Not every possible configuration under the sun.
I chose Apple because they offer what I need. If I just wanted OSX for being pretty and browsing the internet I would get a Mini or iMac. If I wanted a decent UNIX based OS with expandability then I'd get a Linux Box.
Psystar are a company trying to sell a broken version of Apples property. I would not like someone messing with and making a profit off of something I had invested so much in. The home-brewers are helping Apple and Apple know this, however Psystar are trying to force Apple to change a working business model whilst making money out of it. That just won't work
If Apple bought out a mid-range tower it would create kext hell. Leopard would go Vista. I paid for the right to use OSX, the money I paid will in some small way go towards developing the operating system for MY computer... Not every possible configuration under the sun.
I chose Apple because they offer what I need. If I just wanted OSX for being pretty and browsing the internet I would get a Mini or iMac. If I wanted a decent UNIX based OS with expandability then I'd get a Linux Box.
Psystar are a company trying to sell a broken version of Apples property. I would not like someone messing with and making a profit off of something I had invested so much in. The home-brewers are helping Apple and Apple know this, however Psystar are trying to force Apple to change a working business model whilst making money out of it. That just won't work
If you're an attorney please see : Apple Computer,Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation
Been there.Done that.
Well we all knew this was going to happen and Psystar was stupid for even trying. I don't agree that OS X should be able to run on any hardware.
If you don't see the benifit of Apple controlling OS X then you should really be using Vista or some other Microsoft product.
Goodbye PsyStar we hardly knew ya don't let the Door hit ya in the butt.
If you don't see the benifit of Apple controlling OS X then you should really be using Vista or some other Microsoft product.
Goodbye PsyStar we hardly knew ya don't let the Door hit ya in the butt.
Not really a big deal, But Toyota makes the Prius, not Honda. haha.
On the car analogy. If a dealer bought a Fusion and used the Parallel Synergy drive, that Toyota has ownership of, and sold it as a modified Fusion (running with Toyotas patented technology) there would be legal actions taken. Just because you purchased the product does not give you the right to modify it and resell it using its name. If they took OSX and made modifications and resold it as pystarOS there sales would be hurt immensly, b/c they are relying on Apples name to sell the product.
On the car analogy. If a dealer bought a Fusion and used the Parallel Synergy drive, that Toyota has ownership of, and sold it as a modified Fusion (running with Toyotas patented technology) there would be legal actions taken. Just because you purchased the product does not give you the right to modify it and resell it using its name. If they took OSX and made modifications and resold it as pystarOS there sales would be hurt immensly, b/c they are relying on Apples name to sell the product.
The thing I don't understand about this whole argument is that some people don't seem to get the idea that they don't have a right to run OS X. It was made by Apple, the right to distribute it is Apple's alone, and that's the way it should be. If you want a Mac, buy a Mac. If you can't afford it, you just can't afford it, but you don't have the right to steal their work, and that's what it comes down to.
I understand people want a more affordable alternative and turn to Hackintoshes, but don't try to argue that it's anything other than stealing, and don't be surprised when the inventor (Apple) decides to defend their rights. I fully support Apple in this case. It would be different if Psystar wasn't trying to make money off of Apple's work.
I understand people want a more affordable alternative and turn to Hackintoshes, but don't try to argue that it's anything other than stealing, and don't be surprised when the inventor (Apple) decides to defend their rights. I fully support Apple in this case. It would be different if Psystar wasn't trying to make money off of Apple's work.
Interesting you'd say that. A response of ignorance. I have a 24" iMac Alu which just replaced my Dual G5 tower. I needed the iMac because it's easier to maneuver around however I use it for editing film (not home movies). I am also a musician so I run Pro-Tools and Reason for audio recording and do a lot of heavy photo editing with Photoshop. I also play NFS Carbon and COD on the side. None of those applications work well with a standard home appliance, they require a more powerful computer and the iMac is quite capable without a hiccup to be seen.
Do you need a monitor? Do you have zero interest in upgrading your video card or other components? Get an iMac.
Already have a monitor? Interested in upgrading your video card and other hardware at some point? Get a mid-range tower.
That better, or you still
Who has said a word about Apple not being able to control their OS? They designed it. They wrote the code. They spent a fortune making that software. I am glad Apple controls the OS. There is no worthwhile competitor for their OS, in my opinion. All the more reason it should be spread.
But saying that Apple also has a right to control the hardware -- to control the Intel chip inside the computer, to control the Nvidia video card, the Samsung hard drive, etc... That I have a problem with.
The sheer number of people on mac forums asking for a mid-range headless Apple is pretty good evidence that there is a demand. I think the burden is on you to explain why it wouldn't make sense for Apple to offer this in spite of the fact that a lot of people want it, rather than on everyone else to justify to you why they want it.
Not so much.
AIO: Dual core CPU
Tower: Quad Core CPU
AIO: 2 SO-DIMM sockets
Tower: 4 DIMM sockets
AIO: Single half speed laptop optical drive. Upgrades require ugly and unreliable external device.
Tower: Two or more bays for desktop optical drives
AIO: Single hard drive. Not user upgradable. Upgrades require ugly and unreliable external device.
Tower: Two or more drive bays that are easily upgradable
AIO: Low to lower high end Graphics. Graphic options are dictated by thermal conditions of the case and better chipsets require a larger display. Not user upgradible.
Tower: Full gambit of graphics options from low-super high end. Upgradable by user.
AIO: no upgrade path to new connection standards.
Tower: PCI-E slots for new connection standards.
Wrong. They bought a copy of Leopard with every Psystar computer they bought. Don't talk about stealing unless you're talking about walking into an Apple store and walking out with a copy of Leopard without paying for it.
Stealing != copyright infringement.
If they sell with no software and tell people to just order OSx from Amazon, it will not install. You need additional software to emulate the BIOS (or whatever apple calls it now). The osx86 project produced a program that allowed OSx to install, but without it the OSx install disk will go nowhere on a plain vanilla pc.
That's not true. A lot of people used other browsers. Netscape was the biggest. And Netscape targeted Microsoft. They were very arrogant toward them. And that was a mistake. Look where Netscape is today even though Microsoft lost the lawsuit.
I may be WRONG, but I believe that the thing that caused Microsoft problems in the courts were the fact that they used 'Inherent Design Characteristics' that they built in and used to make their Browser perform better while not telling the other competitors about all of the design items. AND forcing you to buy a computer with IE installed because it was part of the OS as they claimed.
And I don't like Microsofts tactics and how they did business. But I do see certain parallels between Apple and Microsoft.
Best as I can tell, people want to simply accept whatever Steve Jobs and Apple choose to do as the best possible course of action despite any amount of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Guarantee you that if they announce a mid-tower tomorrow all the fanbois will be talking about how "brilliant" and "amazing" it is to see such great hardware, and how Apple is ahead of the curve again.
Well, the EULA is an "End User License Agreement". So technically Psystar is not violating that since it's not the end user. This might be an interesting lawsuit.
The mac mini is slow & useless for what it cost..
Show me a dell that is 300 that won't run XP smoothly or won't run Vista at all?
Also Apple just doesn't make computers for your needs. What you need & want differs from others need & want...
I would have thought to distribute OS X (or any other OS) the manufacturer would require a license from the OS Owner (Apple). As I doubt Psyster has this I would not be surprised if Apple could get them for copyright or some other infringement.
It is after all, an unauthorized copy of OS X. There may also me trademark infringement in the background and other things we dont know about.
It is after all, an unauthorized copy of OS X. There may also me trademark infringement in the background and other things we dont know about.
But it wouldn't have the same specs as a iMac. That is the point. It would use desktop chipsets and CPUs. Which means not only having PCI cards, but addressing more than 4gb of RAM, using the EXXXX and QXXXX processors which in same cases are about 1/3 the price of comparable mobile processors which is what the iMac and Mac mini use today (and the desktop offers version that aren't even available in a mobile form - such as Quad Core).
The iMac and Mac mini are GREAT machines, but anyone who knows hardware and knows Intel's complete product line knows that they are really mobile architectures in an AIO or small form factor design and there is MUCH more that Intel offers at MUCH better price points.
You've lost me there. As I implied earlier, if that were the case, wouldn't it make used book stores illegal?
Is it, therefore, illegal for me to sell my old Mac (+OS+all discs) on eBay when I'm about to purchase replacement equipment? Is it illegal for me to walk into a store, purchase Leopard, then walk out on the street and "sell" it to a passer-by in exchange for a stick of gum?
That much makes sense to me at least.
I dont think the forums are the best way to quantify demand. You will always see more complainers on the forum, but that does not mean that apple sells bad hardware/software or their customer service is horrendous. Most of the customers for apple are general consumers who do not visit these forums, i would guess 90% or maybe even more. From the 10% who actually visit the forums, if even half of them want a mid/low-range tower mac, then that equates to only 5% of the mac users, which is definitely not a huge number.