First Customer Receives Psystar Mac Clone

[ungraphic]

I really can't believe how many idiots there are here who are so hung up on corporate branding, most of you are blind brandwhores suffering from the sheep syndrome after being affected by steve jobs' reality distortion field.

A mac is a computer.
A pc is a computer.

Get that through your thick skulls, these psystar computers are not going to 'fade out' depending on the hardware, good or crap, psystar or not, these computers will perform no worse than any of your holy macintoshes. To say these will 'die' in quick time based on less than impressive hardware is ridiculous and shows only how stupid you fanboys are and, more importantly, how little you know about computer hardware. Hardware failure is not exclusive to just pcs, it happens to macs as well, and if the parts are cheap crap they will obviously be more prone to failure or damage. What you morons fail to realize is that replacing these individual parts is a ton easier than any of your macs and a ton cheaper. How easy is it to go out and buy a new PSU for a mac pro if it fails? Or let alone, and god forbid, the motherboard? I can only see that none of you have any need or knowledge of 3rd party components, in the example, RAID controllers, apple's costing nearly $1,000 and pc starting at $50. Or, how about the recent geforce 8800GT debacle. How ridiculous is it that owning a hackintosh you have more video card selection than having a legally purchased mac?

Of course, none of you seem to care about choice.

 

[daveporter]

Watching the video it becomes apparent that this "clone" is not a clone in reality. It may run Leopard in some fashion, however, the user experience is not one that the vast majority of users would be happy with (the lack of easy update capability alone should prevent most potential main-stream purchasers from buying this machine).

Secondly, the engineering of the computer on the whole is far below Apple standards. Take a look inside this "clone" and then a Mac Pro and even the most technically inept potential computer purchaser will immediately see the huge difference in the two machines. Once the "clone" power button is pushed, the sound of the hardware booting up and running should scare off most potential main-stream purchasers.

Then there is the lack of Apple Care which many folks consider one of the most important options one can purchase when they buy and Apple product.

I personally know a fellow that has built a hackentosh. He is a very well trained PC technician who has commercially built PCs for folks and sold them for many years. Even he has a very hard time keeping his hackentosh working and getting a lot of software to work on it correctly. If he has this kind of trouble, the average users is going to find using a "clone" a disaster.

I would agree with many of the others that have posted in the tread; this "clone" will most likely be attractive to only the most geeky technical computer jockeys and will not be popular with main-stream (read that the the average person). If that is true, they aren't going to sell very many of them.

I would not be surprised if Apple just lets this thing go until it dies on its own. That way they won't have to take any negative publicity from press for being the big mean giant trying to stifle competition (and using their enormous clout to bust the little guy).

Dave

 

[socamx]

Nobody buys a Mac computer for its hardware.

I do, I think Apple makes the best hardware designs in the business. I can't stand for one second at how ugly all other computers are compared to a Mac.

Don't assume you speak for everybody, just makes you look like a fool.

Of course, I also want the OS.


If I were Apple, I'd see about going after them from the standpoint that this makes the Mac OS and Apple hardware look bad. If one person buys this cheap pile of crap of a computer, gets unsatisfied with the noise, inability to update, he'll start bashing all Macs, Apple made or not. That's bad PR.

 

[hayesk]

I doubt Apple can or will do anything legally, and I don't think they should. Just keep selling more copies of Leopard... those who really enjoy the experience will eventually get a mac.

That'd be all well and good except for the fact that it costs a lot more than $129.95 per copy of Leopard to develop it. Geez, even MS can't sell Windows as cheaply as Leopard and they sell more than 10 times as many copies.

 

[hayesk]

Also, why is everyone so giddy and confident about Apple pursuing litigation with the company?

Because we don't want Leopard to cost $500, and we don't want people to turn away from Macs because they saw a buggy Psystar clone and concluded Apple produces crappy computers.

 

[Padaung]

Weird seeing a Mac boot up with the Energy Star screen and all the BIOS checks!

The thing is rather noisy.

If they can somehow get around the software update issue, the company can hang in there financially (their prices are very good!) and the machines prove to be reliable I think there will be a lot of people interested in the long term. That's a lot of things to resolve and I guess only time will tell (and by which time Apple may have squashed them into Apple clone pie!)

I love my Mac but I am also fully aware that the same parts go into a lot of Pee Cees. Ultimately I buy a Mac because I love the use and stability of OS X.

 

[ungraphic]

Watching the video it becomes apparent that this "clone" is not a clone in reality. It may run Leopard in some fashion, however, the user experience is not one that the vast majority of users would be happy with (the lack of easy update capability alone should prevent most potential main-stream purchasers from buying this machine).

How is using the OS on a 'non-mac' any different from using it on a 'mac' ?? Its exactly the same experience.

Secondly, the engineering of the computer on the whole is far below Apple standards.

For $400, what do you expect?

Take a look inside this "clone" and then a Mac Pro and even the most technically adept potential computer purchaser will immediately see the huge difference in the two machines.

Huge difference? Its not like going from PPC to x86 anymore, its the same architecture, and even if there is a difference, does open source matter?

Once the "clone" power button is pushed, the sound of the hardware booting up and running should scare off most potential main-stream purchasers.

To assume the computer is crap simply because it is not using massive sized heat sinks like the mac pro is, or quiet fans is embarrassingly ignorant.

Then there is the lack of Apple Care which many folks consider one of the most important options one can purchase when they buy and Apple product.

With a custom built computer and knowing full well what youd be getting yourself into in terms of a hackintosh, nobody is going to care nor need it, hacking systems and/or modding them is not intended for the average user. Your point is moot.

I personally know a fellow that has built a hackentosh. He is a very well trained PC technician who has commercially built PCs for folks and sold them for many years. Even he has a very hard time keeping his hackentosh working and getting a lot of software to work on it correctly.

False. Software runs exactly the same way.

If he has this kind of trouble, the average users is going to find using a "clone" a disaster.

Even if your claim to software running bad on a mac clone were true, both users would have the same trouble, neither would have greater complications. Either way, you are posting misleading facts.

I would agree with many of the others that have posted in the tread; this "clone" will most likely be attractive to only the most geeky technical computer jockeys and will not be popular with main-stream (read that the the average person). If that is true, they aren't going to see very many of them.

True.

 

[VoodooDaddy]

Sounds like a Vacuum.

More like a jet taking off.

Sounds like my last Windows box. I sure as hell dont miss that sound. This is what alot of naysayers will never get about the cost of a Mac. You do pay a premium for the design and ultra-quietness, and Im perfectly fine with that.

 

[ungraphic]

Sounds like my last Windows box. I sure as hell dont miss that sound. This is what alot of naysayers will never get about the cost of a Mac. You do pay a premium for the design and ultra-quietness, and Im perfectly fine with that.

You actually believe all computers that arent made by apple are loud refrigerators? You know, that open mac sounds like *my* last mac. Remember the wind tunnel mac..?? I dont miss that sound either.

This thread is epic.

 

[elgarak]

I don't think that's true.

I'm 99% sure I installed Leopard on my G4 Mac Mini after a reformat (and subsequent reboot -- essentially it was an empty drive).

After my HD crash, I booted from the Leopard disc, and it refused to install onto the (empty exchange) HD. However, I could restore from my Time Machine backup, which was on an external HD.

So how did you do the reformat? Could it be that whatever program did the reformat left some information behind? Did you do it with the Leopard install program?

Be it as it may, my Leopard disc says clearly "Upgrade DVD" and "This software is part of a hardware bundle -- not to be sold separately."

 

[daveporter]

I do, I think Apple makes the best hardware designs in the business. I can't stand for one second at how ugly all other computers are compared to a Mac.

I agree with you completely.

In 2006 I made the transition from PCs to Macs for my company (consulting engineering firm) and for our home computers.

This change was made after some very detailed analysis of several alternatives. We studied staying with PCs running Vista, Macs with OSX, Sun workstations and standard PCs with Linux.

Based on our user testing of the operating systems, our evaluation of the hardware (including MTBF evaluations of the various components and the systems on the whole), and the estimated total cost of ownership, the Mac won hands down. To be honest, we were quite surprised since our initial guess was that Linux would be a strong contender as would the Sun workstations.

It was the hardware MTBF analysis and the estimates of the total cost of ownership (since Macs last so long) that brought them to the top of the list. The ease of use and good looking OS were important, however, Linux also had good looks and ease of use (once configured properly).

Therefore, I believe that Apple's very high engineering standards and build quality does influence many if not most purchasers.

If I am correct, that spells bad news for this "clone" maker.

Dave

 

[hayesk]

That wouldnt surprise me, maybe they were betting, (like myself, and I think a lot of others) that they would never shift, and that it was a scam.

I'm actually surprised Apple hasnt acted on this yet.

They probably have, but they sent the C&D letter to one of the three non-existent Psystar mailing addresses so they never received it.

 

[hayesk]

I must be in an extreme minority, but I think this "Open Computer" concept is awesome! Nobody buys a Mac computer for its hardware.

Actually lots of people do. Back when there were legal Mac clones in the late '90s, I still bought Apple hardware, and so did most Mac users. Apple has the highest QA in the industry and their hardware is well designed.

The day I can just go into my local wal-mart and buy the Mac OS to install it on whatever computer I deem necessary will be a great day indeed.

Will it? How much do you think MacOS X will cost if that day comes? (Hint: a lot more than $129.95)

 

[daveporter]

How is using the OS on a 'non-mac' any different from using it on a 'mac' ?? Its exactly the same experience.



For $400, what do you expect?



Huge difference? Its not like going from PPC to x86 anymore, its the same architecture, and even if there is a difference, does open source matter?



To assume the computer is crap simply because it is not using massive sized heat sinks like the mac pro is, or quiet fans is embarrassingly ignorant.



With a custom built computer and knowing full well what youd be getting yourself into in terms of a hackintosh, nobody is going to care nor need it, hacking systems and/or modding them is not intended for the average user. Your point is moot.



False. Software runs exactly the same way.



Even if your claim to software running bad on a mac clone were true, both users would have the same trouble, neither would have greater complications. Either way, you are posting misleading facts.



True.

I will not debate you on these issues nor will I call you ignorant. Your opinions are your opinions and you may express them. However, having said that, I do not think you understood my basic point. The AVERAGE user (who make up the majority of users) in my opinion will not have a satisfactory experience with this "clone." Hackers and highly technical users MAY be willing to work around the negatives and perhaps they will purchase this thing. The bottom line however is, "Will enough of them be purchased to keep this company in business?" My guess is they will not and therefore, there is no need on Apples part to squash them with litigation and take the PR hit. Time will tell.

Dave

 

[ungraphic]

Will it? How much do you think MacOS X will cost if that day comes? (Hint: a lot more than $129.95)

Doesnt that kind of tell you something about the overall pricing of a mac?

 

[ungraphic]

I will not debate you on these issues nor will I call you ignorant. Your opinions are your opinions and you may express them. However, having said that, I do not think you understood my basic point. The AVERAGE user (who make up the majority of users) in my opinion will not have a satisfactory experience with this "clone." Hackers and highly technical users MAY be willing to work around the negatives and perhaps they will purchase this thing. The bottom line however is, "Will enough of them be purchased to keep this company in business?" My guess is they will not and therefore, there is no need on Apples part to squash them with litigation and take the PR hit. Time will tell.

Dave

I dont post opinions when it comes to numbers and facts. This isnt an opinion matter either.

 

[christian_k]

I believe most people here overlook something that makes Psystar's actions illegal:

Apple does not sell standalone copies of Mac OS X.

Apple sells a pre-installed version of Max OS X with every computer they sell. They also sell updates. But they sell no standalone copies that can be installed on brand new, empty, hard drives. No one, either here or on other forums, seems to recognize that the discs you get when you bought Leopard was an UPDATE license. The installer program refuses to install itself when it does not find a hard drive with sufficient remnants of a previous or current version of Mac OS X.

This is nonsense.

I do have a first gen MacBook that came with 10.4 preinstalled. I bought a 10.5 box, replaced the HD with a brandnew and empty one (I needed a bigger one) and installed 10.5 on it with no problems. I did not need the old HD or the 10.4 install Discs at all. A friend did exactly the same after his original HD had failed.

In the office we have an old G3 PowerMac that still came with OS9. We installed a bigger HD from an old windows machine, upgraded RAM and installed a 10.4 Box version. No problems at all.

As far as I know there are only two exceptions: There was a free update CD from 10.0 to 10.1 that required a previous 10.0 install. There was a "drop in Disc" with 10.5 that required a previous 10.4 install, but that was only sold together with a few machines during the 10.4->10.5 transition.

The Disc in the 10.5 Box can be installed on an empty drive´and a lot of old retail versions also can.

Christian

 

[sushi]

Apple does not sell standalone copies of Mac OS X.

This statement is incorrect.

Apple has sold standalone copies of the Mac OS from pre-X through 10.5.

The current price for the standalone version of Mac OS 10.5 is $129.

 

[daveporter]

I dont post opinions when it comes to numbers and facts. This isnt an opinion matter either.

Reading your posts (and your signature) it becomes apparent that your quite hostile as it relates to Apple and to American products in general.

Don't let your hostility cloud your judgement since it causes you to post comments that only go to make others consider your points invalid.

I offer this advice to you with the best of intentions.

Dave

 

[steviem]

Sounds like a Mac Pro...

I think the idea of marketing this is very shady, almost like putting a 500GB Hard disk on eBay and saying 'this is has movies on it, but I can't be bothered to wipe it, so formatting the disk is the buyer's duty'.

But I don't disagree with the whole OSX86 project.

They won't damage Apple's sales enough for Jobs to care. The upgradable tower seems to be a very niche area of what is already a niche in the IT world.

 

[ungraphic]

Reading your posts (and your signature) it becomes apparent that your quite hostile as it relates to Apple and to American products in general.

Don't let your hostility cloud your judgement since it causes you to post comments that only go to make others consider your points invalid.

I offer this advice to you with the best of intentions.

Dave

I own a mac pro, and the statement in my signature is a joke. I have no hostility towards *most* american products, I give credit and appreciation where it is due. Apple deserves very little on the part of being anything close to giving any kind of real choice to its customers.

My reasons for buying a mac pro last year were this: upgrading the OS would be a hassle, the cost of a pc with equivalent parts (or similar) would only be slightly less (about $100) which for that difference, id rather pay the extra and have my favourite case design.

However, my feelings are slowly changing and this does not change the fact that a hackintosh's performance will be almost identical to a mac given the same specs and speeds are applied to both. The only differences will be the price and expandability, as macs are hardly expandable (lack of sound cards, raid controllers, and most importantly, video cards)

 

[christian_k]

After my HD crash, I booted from the Leopard disc, and it refused to install onto the (empty exchange) HD. However, I could restore from my Time Machine backup, which was on an external HD.

So how did you do the reformat? Could it be that whatever program did the reformat left some information behind? Did you do it with the Leopard install program?

Be it as it may, my Leopard disc says clearly "Upgrade DVD" and "This software is part of a hardware bundle -- not to be sold separately."

You have that special "drop in disc" that customers got when they bought a Mac during the 10.4->10.5 transition. This really required a previous install of an old version. (But your system should include a Disc that can install 10.4 on an empty HD if you are in trouble).

10.5 Box Versions are different from that and can be installed on empty HDs. For most Macs the HD is a user serviceable part and Apple allows you to upgrade.

Christian

 

[sushi]

After my HD crash, I booted from the Leopard disc, and it refused to install onto the (empty exchange) HD. However, I could restore from my Time Machine backup, which was on an external HD.

So how did you do the reformat? Could it be that whatever program did the reformat left some information behind? Did you do it with the Leopard install program?

Be it as it may, my Leopard disc says clearly "Upgrade DVD" and "This software is part of a hardware bundle -- not to be sold separately."

Yes, you have an upgrade Leopard DVD (Drop in Disc) install disc.

Generally these are not sold, but given away for free. This happens when you purchase a Mac model that was released with a prior system, then the new OS was released.

Take the MBP. When my model was released it came with Tiger. By the time I purchased it, Leopard as out. So Apple included for free, the Leopard upgrade disk. This means if I install a new hard drive, then want to install Leopard, I must use the install discs that came with my MBP (Tiger), then use the Leopard upgrade DVD to upgrade to Leopard. A two step process if you will.

However, if I want to install Leopard directly, I will need to purchase the standalone version for $129.

 

[VoodooDaddy]

You actually believe all computers that arent made by apple are loud refrigerators? You know, that open mac sounds like *my* last mac. Remember the wind tunnel mac..?? I dont miss that sound either.

This thread is epic.

Every windows computer Ive ever used sounded like the one in that video. Every Mac that Ive used (mini, macbook, and iMac) are dead quiet.

 

[mrrydogg]

Me thinks "ungraphic" woke up on the wrong side of the bed.

Angry much?


Cmon, the argument is well stated, this is going to be a niche product at best. Assuming Apple lets them be, which I doubt they will, the success will be marginal.

Until Apple releases of fully independent OS, these will always be for the 1%.

I don't see Apple doing that anytime in my lifetime. Stay Calm.