Are you going to buy the Open Computer?

[vansouza]

OMG, why would I buy some cheap rip off... I can see the people taking these to Apple stores for support; and can you imagine them calling Apple for software issues... it is to laugh. My watches are Omega and my computers are Apple.

 

[Jiddick ExRex]

My watches are Omega and my computers are Apple.

Your wallet is too small for your fifties and your diamond shoes too tight.

 

[zjokke]

Remember IBM PC Clones?

Does any of you remember at the end of the 80's when IBM clones where coming up and pushing IBM straight out of the PC market they once ruled?
If remember the first PC clones were considered illegal too, but in the end, IBM lost the 'war'. OK, this was of course mostly because Billy G. had played his sleek part with his MS-DOS, but still, the big blue was considered invincible and surely wasn't.

 

[iFizz]

Does any of you remember at the end of the 80's when IBM clones where coming up and pushing IBM straight out of the PC market they once ruled?
If remember the first PC clones were considered illegal too, but in the end, IBM lost the 'war'. OK, this was of course mostly because Billy G. had played his sleek part with his MS-DOS, but still, the big blue was considered invincible and surely wasn't.

Yes, I remember that. Apple's lawyers definitely read those "lessons learned" before writing the EULA for OSX.

 

[err404]

Does any of you remember at the end of the 80's when IBM clones where coming up and pushing IBM straight out of the PC market they once ruled?
If remember the first PC clones were considered illegal too, but in the end, IBM lost the 'war'. OK, this was of course mostly because Billy G. had played his sleek part with his MS-DOS, but still, the big blue was considered invincible and surely wasn't.

That's a very poor comparison.
Of coarse it's not illegal for Apple and Psystar to make a clone Mac.
Back then the OS vendor and the Clone manufactures wanted to work together. Only IBM was upset, but the the Clones didn't need anything from IBM. The legal system only said that IBM had no grounds to stop them.

In this case one of the required parties (the OS vendor) does not want to participate. Are you suggesting that the courts would FORCE Apple to allow this?

even if the first batch of Psystars off the docks are legal I'd feel bad for the owners. Off the top of my head, their are a dozen ways for Apple to stop this, or at least make it painful for owners.

Label OS X as an Upgrade
Raise the price of OS X
OS X Upgrade only available with AppleCare
OS X only installable by Apple certified tech
Only sell OS X bundled with new hardware
Make OS X install disk only available from the Apple Store
Revoke Apple reseller status to stores selling OS X to Clone makers
OS Activation
Tie some OS functionality to required .MAC account (free with Serial Number)
Add Hardware checks to OS
Add Hardware checks to apps
Explicitly sabotage compatibility with future updates
Encrypt the boot loader and use the DMCA on OSX86 if they break it
OS install requires HW Serial Number
iLife install requires HW Serial Number

A lot of these are over the top and would suck for existing Hackintosh users as well as legitimate Apple owners. but one thing you can be sure of, Apple will not lie down and take it.

BTW - I'm NOT suggesting that this is what Apple should do, rather what I'd be afraid of happening. I'd love to have official supportable Clone Macs as an option, but you can't force the main party into such an arrangement.

 

[zjokke]

As far as I remember, IBM had an agreement with MicroSoft on the MS-DOS, but Bill G. had some backdoor to allow the system to be installed on not-IBM-licenced computers. IBM tried to stop the clones, but in the end, it couldn't. IBM didn't have to support the clones by any law and neither did MS. MS just sold their DOS to anyone who wanted to buy it and anyone who wanted could put a PC together that could work with the DOS system.

Why this comparison? Well, the Open Computer is just that, an 'Open' 'Computer'. They sell a computer consisting of standard parts anyone can buy. And then, they just state you 'could' install Mac OS X on it with the Hackintosh method and if you'd like to, they'll do it for you. As I've read on various websites, it just isn't 100% sure Apple's EULA would hold up in court. It just might be that Apple can't forbid anyone from installing OS X on whatever they want, whatever their EULA says. So, this might be decided in court if and when Apple sues these guys (?)!

Now I don't see how some come up with the idea that Psystar or it's customers will 'demand' Apple to support these clones. Apple doesn't have to in any way and it's clear to me they won't. Psystar sells 'a' computer that can be used as a Hackintosh. Nobody can garantee their computer can be updated when OS X gets an update and they don't garantee this on the contrary. So that's just the buyer's choice... and Apple's if you'd like.

There have been Hackintoshes for as long as there have been Intel Macs. Apple didn't do much about it except for 'not supporting' them and maybe even changing their code just not to make it too easy to hackintosh PCs. I'm sure they will not change that policy just because someone now sells a computer that is constructed in a way it can be easily used as a Hackintosh.

I agree there are many bad things that Apple could do, which all would hit us 'Mac Fan bois' harder than it would hit Psystar, but I doubt they will. Why would they irritate their proper userbase unless they're losing huge profits? I'm sure they'll sit and wait to see how it turns out.

In no way I'm worried. I'm just sitting on the sideline, wondering what will come of it. Will Psystar take off or will it crash...? No mather what, I so like the Apple designs that they don't make a chance with me. I just hope they somehow push Apple to get out even nicer, better performing, more competitive priced products. 🙄

And at this right moment, I'm just hoping Apple will put that new Mini on the shelves soon 😉.

 

[err404]

I feel that consumers that purchase a machine with a pre-installed OS will have a higher expectation of things working correctly vs users who knowingly build a Hackintosh. The people who buy these will be burnt in the end.
I don't think Apple would allow a precedent to be set by a company selling a Clone with OS X pre-installed.

As for the IBM analogy, the big difference is that for Psystar to succeed they would need a supply a product from Apple that works in their machine.

I like the OSX86 project as a hobbyist pursuit but w/o Apple's support, it is not a practical alternative to a Mac

In the end it doesn't look like it matters since Psystar doesn't look to be a real company.

 

[kkat69]

ROFL they changed addresses again. Now they're back in a suburb.

http://www.i4u.com/article16443.html

 

[clyde2801]

Wonder if this is bringing more attention to the whole hackintosh movement? To be honest, I've caught myself thinking that I could buy a system and do a large part of this myself...then I realize that it would be real work.

 

[clyde2801]

dup post