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 Suggests Possible Conspiracy Behind Psystar
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And I want the guts of a Ferrari in my Toyota. It certainly doesn't cost the premium that Ferrari charges to actually make those engines and components ... why won't Ferrari just open up and license their technology?
It's just not fair!
Microsoft maybe?
I doubt they would do something this stupid because they know they would be caught but it would be sweet!
I doubt they would do something this stupid because they know they would be caught but it would be sweet!
Agreed. This is better than TV! Conspiracies are fun. I'd love to see Steve Jobs at the end of the keynote, at the "one more thing" going "What the hell, Psystar? Seriously?" showing screenshots of their web store.
Maybe this whole thing will lead to more upgradable Macs. I mean, you can easily swap out the hard drive and RAM on all the laptops, but god forbid if you want to exchange the dead hard drive on your iMac or Mac Mini. I'd love to be able to loosen a few screws to swap out the hard drive and RAM on my Mac Mini. I'd feel bad tossing away (selling on eBay) a perfectly fine computer, just because the hard drive wore off.
haha, wow!!!
but this might explain why Psystar had like 3 different "locations" on their web site when they first "started up"
For who could be hide it, I'd guess not MS, why would MS want Dell, HP being about to get OS X to pre installed?, but I can certainly see why Dell, HP, etc would want it
but this might explain why Psystar had like 3 different "locations" on their web site when they first "started up"
For who could be hide it, I'd guess not MS, why would MS want Dell, HP being about to get OS X to pre installed?, but I can certainly see why Dell, HP, etc would want it
Since day one I've always thought the people behind Psystar must have balls like baked potatoes to do what they're doing.
Like someone else commented, it kind of makes more sense in this light.
Like someone else commented, it kind of makes more sense in this light.
I was wondering about that. Read it like three times and didn't think it sounded quite right.
HP/Dell/Acer. All of them would love to run OSX on their hardware.
It could be that darn company Mapple.
I'm sure Pystar and Mapple are relatable somehow
I heard about that company, it was even on TV!
(This week's Simpson's Episode was hilarious
)
I don't think Psystar is mis-using Apple's tradmark. Apple is not claiming they are.
I have written here many times that I'm absolutely sure it was Psystar's intent from day one to let Apple sue them. They were just baiting Apple. Why? It's a gamble. and a not so good gamble for Apple. Apple is the only one who has anything to loose. Psystar has nothing to loose, no assets. But if they win they win big. Why not take a gamble if there is nothing to loose?
Psystar's goal is NOT to make money by selling cheap PCs at near cost. No what they want is a win in court that would alow them to sell clones. Owning that would make the company very valuable and they could then sell the company (with it's judgment) to Dell, Compaq or whoever.
I could care less about PC's that run OSX..
..but I think your right about other companies backing Psystar and using them as the "meat shield" lol.
I am not taking this at face value. On the contrary, I think this is pure rhetorical persuasion of the "masses". It's sounds more like a tactical game played by Apple.
Yes, of course, it's tough luck for Apple that Psystar didn't crumble at the mere mention of Apple's lawyer team, and obviously psystar have ressources, but from a communications point-of-view, this is exactly what I would do to try to make Apple look LESS like the huge corporation they are, trying to bully the little upstart. By saying Psystar is back by some other corporation - no, perhaps by multiple corporations - they seem to be trying to put themselves in the position of the "little computer company" they used to be in the public eye.
In other words: This seems more like damage control (i.e. regarding their image).
Yes, of course, it's tough luck for Apple that Psystar didn't crumble at the mere mention of Apple's lawyer team, and obviously psystar have ressources, but from a communications point-of-view, this is exactly what I would do to try to make Apple look LESS like the huge corporation they are, trying to bully the little upstart. By saying Psystar is back by some other corporation - no, perhaps by multiple corporations - they seem to be trying to put themselves in the position of the "little computer company" they used to be in the public eye.
In other words: This seems more like damage control (i.e. regarding their image).
I think that Pastry has got something to do with it.
The whole thing is an apple pie
obviously the 300M ad campaign didn't work out,
so this is plan b) sell mac os x illegally well done boys.
so this is plan b) sell mac os x illegally
well done boys.even if Psystar won apple could go around it because they would have to sell their OS (they would never be forced to give it away) therefore they could sell their OS for say $1000 and then do complimentary knock say 900 dollars off of the hardware price for purchasing the OS so apple wins regardless they will win the actual legal battle however so if they play dirty we play dirty
No sane lawyer would take this case on contingency. They're getting paid per hour.
And isn't it normal for large corporations to set up lawsuits through puppet entities? I wouldn't call it a conspiracy, just how things work in corporate law.
But if a company from basically no where can sell OS X on machines, then so could Dell, HP, etc...so if this theory that Apple seems to have is true, it makes sense for a big name to challenge Apple through a start up vs through a company that has stuff to loose