Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

G3/Mac OS X Settlement

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
50,414
11,803
ZDNet reports that there has been preliminary approval on a settlement for a class-action suit based on claim that "the company had failed to fully support Mac OS X on some G3-based Macs".

Many readers noted that Apple had posted a link to the settlement site on their corporate homepage (Apple.com)


The settlement terms for affected G3 owners provide a refund for Mac OS X or a $25 coupon off a $99 purchase at the Apple Store. The G3 machine must have been specific models sold between Nov 1997 and Sept 2000 and Mac OS X must have been purchased on or before May 15, 2003. Details at settlement site.
 

FelixDerKater

macrumors 68030
Apr 12, 2002
2,966
1,082
Nirgendwo in Amerika
It would have been funnier if they had to pay out the price nedded to upgrade to a least a low-end G4.

Either that or supply them all with acceptable graphics cards. Maybe 1st generation TiBook owners could sue for similar reasons on grounds that the included 8MB Rage128 Mobility does not allow OS X to be used to its fullest since it is not compatible with QuartzExtreme...
 
Comment

Oirectine

macrumors regular
Aug 11, 2003
243
75
Maryland
There's a tiny link near the bottom of Apple.com's main page. I saw it today, didn't know what it was, thought I just hadn't noticed it before.
 
Comment

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,546
1,196
Before there are a lot of ignorant posts about people--like me--who think this is a legitimate issue, please understand EXACTLY what the issue is BEFORE you make assumptions and post :)

This is about machines Apple DID claim to support, losing fundamental hardware capabilities that both the machines and the OS advertised as working.

Even Panther still doesn't tell me that I'll lose my video board if I install X. No hardware acceleration, no OpenGl, no DVD. Yet Apple still says my Lombard is supported by OS X.

What a lot of trouble a simply footnote could save. Or better yet, some drivers from ATI!

(This is not in reference to anything posted above--its a PREemptive strike against the inevitable flood of posts about machines Apple never CLAIMED to support. Which I have no problem with, and is not the subject of this case.)
 
Comment

reh

macrumors 6502a
Oct 24, 2003
639
1
Arkansas
Re: G3/Mac OS X Settlement

Originally posted by Macrumors
G3 machines must have been purchased on or before May 15, 2003.
Not true. From http://appleosx.rosenthalco.com/notice.html
TO: ALL END USER PERSONS OR ENTITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES WHO BOTH (1) OWN OR OWNED CERTAIN APPLE G3 COMPUTER MODELS SOLD BETWEEN NOVEMBER 1997 AND SEPTEMBER 2000 ("COVERED PRODUCTS") AND (2) ALSO PURCHASED ANY VERSION OF MAC OS X FOR A COVERED PRODUCT ON OR BEFORE MAY 15, 2003:
 
Comment

ITR 81

macrumors 65816
Oct 24, 2003
1,052
0
Well if they get a free OS out of it or refund it's not that bad of a deal.

The final outcome comes on Jan of 2004.
 
Comment
As long as this costs Apple more than it would have to write the damn drivers in the first place, it's fair.

$25 off a $99 purchase from the Apple Store? Apple's still making money off you!

At least they stated flat out that beige boxes and non-native USB laptops aren't supported in Panther, so even if a hack gets them to work, they're in the clear (for those machines at least)...
 
Comment

pgwalsh

macrumors 68000
Jun 21, 2002
1,639
218
New Zealand
Originally posted by nagromme
Before there are a lot of ignorant posts about people--like me--who think this is a legitimate issue, please understand EXACTLY what the issue is BEFORE you make assumptions and post :)

This is about machines Apple DID claim to support, losing fundamental hardware capabilities that both the machines and the OS advertised as working.

Even Panther still doesn't tell me that I'll lose my video board if I install X. No hardware acceleration, no OpenGl, no DVD. Yet Apple still says my Lombard is supported by OS X.

What a lot of trouble a simply footnote could save. Or better yet, some drivers from ATI!

(This is not in reference to anything posted above--its a PREemptive strike against the inevitable flood of posts about machines Apple never CLAIMED to support. Which I have no problem with, and is not the subject of this case.)
I think Apple got away with a lot on this one. However, I can't think of a more reasonalbe solution. Maybe a fat discount on upgrading your machine if you send in your old one... Ha fat chance.
 
Comment

the_dalex

macrumors member
Sep 2, 2003
89
0
As a reseller, I received one of the class-action letters saying I am a participant unless I request exemption.

Interestingly, anyone who claims a refund from Apple has to make a declaration saying that they have not used OS X, under penalty of perjury:

"I have not regularly used Mac OS X on my Covered Product. I agree not to use Mac OS X on this computer in the future and I am returning the Mac OS X disk containing this version of Mac OS X to the address designated in the Claim Form. I agree not to reinstall the returned version of Mac OS X on my Covered Product in the future."

They also have to send in the discs, or declare that the discs are lost or destroyed. I'm amazed people are so upset about this, unless OS X doesn't run on their computer in any usable fashion. I'd give up DVD playback for OS X features any day...
 
Comment

besson3c

macrumors member
Apr 9, 2003
98
0
Originally posted by FelixDerKater
It would have been funnier if they had to pay out the price nedded to upgrade to a least a low-end G4.

Either that or supply them all with acceptable graphics cards. Maybe 1st generation TiBook owners could sue for similar reasons on grounds that the included 8MB Rage128 Mobility does not allow OS X to be used to its fullest since it is not compatible with QuartzExtreme...

Is the first generation TiBook the 550Mhz machine? Those machines are actually QE enabled, I just discovered this today.
 
Comment

CraigMiami

macrumors newbie
Aug 9, 2003
5
0
take a guess
lawsuit worthy? i think not. we live in a culture where it has become common place for people who if they're not getting what they want, when they want it, and how they want, or that they're getting screwed in any way, take it to court.
While i do agree that apple should have said those machines were *NOT* supported, i also think this lawsuit could be lumped with the overweight kids who sued McDonald's a few months ago because it caused them to be obese.
Lawsuits are not the way to solve all of our problems. Courts are not where all of our conflicts should be corrected.
 
Comment

jamesatzones

macrumors regular
Aug 29, 2003
129
0
Seattle
This would seem to be a good way to be black listed by Apple... My thought: if you are using a machine that can't run Panther, beige G3 or Wallstreet, (even though they a good machines) it's time to upgrade. Those machines don't even support USB, now an industry standard. You can pick up Blue and Whites for cheap on Ebay. Now, if the OS 9 holdout would just give in we would have a close to perfect Apple world...
 
Comment

the_dalex

macrumors member
Sep 2, 2003
89
0
I think it's ridiculous for people to expect that old systems will be able to take 100% advantage of new OS features. I also think Apple handled this badly, and should have just offered refunds to the affected people. This should never have gotten into a courtroom.

If OS X ran at 90% capacity, meaning 90% of the features worked as advertised, then I would be happy. Heck, in my opinion, 75% of OS X is much better than 100% of OS 9.

I don't know the history, did this guy try to get a software refund from Apple and was denied, then brought up the lawsuit? Or, did he go straight to the lawsuit to try to cash in?
 
Comment

pgwalsh

macrumors 68000
Jun 21, 2002
1,639
218
New Zealand
I think it's funny how everyone always sticks up for Apple even thought they're having to pay for something they did wrong.... Simple mistake.. but sheesh Mac people are so freaking protective... If this was MS.. you'd be all over them.. funny stuff.
 
Comment

prismfinder

macrumors newbie
Oct 30, 2003
9
0
Orlando, FL
Cry Babies!

I can't believe you people. Complaining that a 4mb, 8mb, or even 16mb video card isn't supported by a fully Open GL composited GUI...what are you thinking? And then having the nerve to tie-up our court systems (for which the public pays) and Apple's Attorney fees (for which all Mac users pay) all so you can have your little $25 gift certificate. PATHETIC! So what if Apple said your rinky-dink 3,4, or 5 year old machine would be supported...is it ever a good idea to install a state-of-the-art OS on a machine that's that old? I don't even try to get use out of sneakers that old and people are bitching about Open GL not working. I'll bet all you bitchers and moaners who actually cash in your gift certificate are the same ones who whine about Apple's prices. Thanks alot...all of us realists really appreciate the price hike on our next machines.
 
Comment

jamesatzones

macrumors regular
Aug 29, 2003
129
0
Seattle
Try running OS9 on a classic, like an SE or 512k, I think I should file a lawsuit because I have those machines sitting in my closet and I paid good cash for them.

The nerve some people have to waste the tax payers money on pointless lawsuits...
 
Comment

Phil Of Mac

macrumors 68020
Dec 6, 2002
2,036
0
Washington State University
It's amazing how many people who aren't lawyers and who haven't read the case in question feel like they can make better rulings than the judge and/or jury.

There's a reason we have courts and lawyers. They're not just a formality.
 
Comment

FelixDerKater

macrumors 68030
Apr 12, 2002
2,966
1,082
Nirgendwo in Amerika
Originally posted by besson3c
Is the first generation TiBook the 550Mhz machine? Those machines are actually QE enabled, I just discovered this today.

No. the 550MHz is a Rev. B model.

They include a 16MB RADEON card, which allows for QE support...
 
Comment

prismfinder

macrumors newbie
Oct 30, 2003
9
0
Orlando, FL
Uhh...What?

-----------------------------------------------------
It's amazing how many people who aren't lawyers and who haven't read the case in question feel like they can make better rulings than the judge and/or jury.

There's a reason we have courts and lawyers. They're not just a formality-----------------------------------------


How do you know who is/is not a lawyer and who has/has not "read the case"...it's public domain you know. Besides, more than likely it was a bunch of luddite jurors who run Windows and know nothing about graphic subsystems that found Apple at fault. If the judge had thought Apple had truly screwed over it's customers, he would have mandated more than a $25 gift certificate. The jury system is a joke...they'll offer any jack-off with a bruised knee a settlement.

Lawyers and judges may know the law, but they generally don't know technology. Look at the Microsoft rulings that "ordered" them to load millions of classrooms with it's software.
 
Comment

Tuttle

macrumors member
Sep 25, 2003
37
0
Ok, so these folks have had their public tantrum.

Congrats. What a victory.
 
Comment

mrsebastian

macrumors 6502a
Nov 26, 2002
744
0
sunny san diego
is it just me or is this whole thing really silly?! i mean i'm all for getting a settlement when you get screwed, but come on. can i get a refund too, for trying to isntall osx on my old mac se?

what's really funny is that apple had to pay $350k to the blood-suckin' lawyers. they could have voluntarily put together a refund program that though i don't know the actual number of returns, probably would have cost apple half of that. while they're at it, they could have offered a refund or $100 towards any hardware purchase so people would be more inclined to upgrade.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.