Psystar Announces Program for Third-Party PC Manufacturers to Enable Snow Leopard Installation

[iksretep]

Maybe some of these same people are the same ones who buy a single copy of the OS and install it on multiple machines instead of getting a family pack?

Well... I was actually told by one of the sales guys at the apple store that instead of buying the SL family pack I could swing it by getting one single license disc... the only reason I went for the family box set instead of single license SL was because I needed to upgrade ilife and iwork as well... I'm sure I could have purchased single license box set and save $60 also

Surprising is the fact that apple fights so hard to kill psystar but makes it so easy to go around their licensing restrictions... are apple users not smart enough to cheat, or are they just that darn honest, or perhaps don't care about money... maybe all 3

 

[mcnallym]

Psystar is playing a very dangerous game. By offering licencess I believe they will want to make as much money as they can now because some way or another they will have to give it up.

Now... if Apple haven't being able to stop Psystar still is because there is something Psystar is doing "right" or has their right to do.

I believe when you are buying an OS that OS belong to you, you are not rentering it like when you get a Direct TV decoder. So you can install that OS when ever you want, even in a PC.

The reason Apple haven't been able to stop Psystar yet is that it hasn't made it too court yet.

So far nobody has said that is right or wrong, although so far most of the preliminary judgements do seem to have gone Apples way.

 

[weckart]

These guys have got to have some serious backing - the question is who ? Microsoft ? Dell ? HP ?

The other question is why ?

Yes, I can just see Microsoft going out of its way to undermine IP laws. Do turkeys vote for Christmas?

If another PC manufacturer wanted to follow in Psystar's footsteps, why in the world would they buy a license from Psystar? The necessary bootloaders are all available via open source channels.

The licensing of this "unique technology" seems very hypocritical on Psystar's part. I wonder how Psystar would feel if another company started using their software without following the rules?

Well, I am using two kexts written by Psystar on my Hackbook. Didn't pay Psystar a penny for them either, so it's already started.

I doubt Psystar cares. The software is free, much like advanced server releases of Linux. What you are paying for is the support, such that it is.

The mentality of pirates regarding intellectual property is scary.

Not half as scary as the mentality of IP licensing junkies. Soon breathing air andwalking in a straight line will be subject to patents.

so why don't they sell their boot loader as software for $100 for the people who want a hackintosh without the hassle?

Probably for the same reason that EFI-X kept its cards close to its chest. It was using Chameleon and charging a fortune for the fancy dongle it was installed on.

we have real law in europe, no case law.

*Glances at UK/Ireland* You want to rephrase that?

 

[3282868]

A few thoughts

I'm a bit on the fence about this topic. As en ex-Apple employee and an IT professional/enthusiast, I respect and understand Apple's position. However, since Apple adopted the intel chip, there has been a troubling gap in their product lineup. The last iMac that utilized a desktop processor was the PowerPC "lampshade" iMac. Soon came the form factor for the current iMac that resulted in the utilization of mobile processors in Apple's desktop lineup with a jump into server grade processors in the G5/Mac Pro's, neglecting a "true" desktop processor Mac product. While Apple's marketing and developing stance may be that the general consumer doesn't need more than a mobile processor to effectively run OS X, this leaves a market that needs a powerful system but not as powerful as the Mac Pro lineup. This move by Apple (as well as their jump to focus on the profitability and expandability of the general consumer base through the iPhone) has been somewhat of a slap in the face to the professionals who once bought Power Mac's and displays that were comparable to other professional products in their market (example would be the last aluminum cinema displays with anti-glare that were decent specs and pricing when compared to professional displays).

Basically, if Apple refocused on producing desktop systems and displays that were aggressively priced a have a sense that some (not all) of this cloning non-sense would lessen. This seems mostly true as the systems Pystar and others "hackintosh" seem to be desktop towers that Apple no longer produces. Most individuals that are interested in clones are Apple loyalists that can't afford a Mac Pro and whose needs aren't met with an iMac. If Apple built true desktop systems I bet a good number of potential clients would lose interest in Apple clones.


As an aside, I built a hackintosh for a friend on their troubled IBM Thinkpad t60p. It wasn't so much as to stick it to Apple as a learning experience on how the system works and the further underpinings of OS X. I hate to admit it but the system screams. Would I use it? No, there are still some kinks and even an official "clone" is bound to have technical difficulties. However, it is a very interesting experience.

 

[cnorth3]

"Once a product is certified, consumers can purchase it off the shelf or through standard channels and when labeled Psystar Certified would allow the installation of Snow Leopard simply by inserting the retail OS X DVD. "

Um, not really. Did they bother to look at Apple's EULA? Section 2: "You
agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so."

So Psystar is asking you, the end user, to go ahead and violate the terms of your license? Pretty lame of Psystar to invite its customers get in legal trouble with Apple.

 

[hiptobesquare]

I'm guessing this has been brought up in one of the many previous Psystar threads, but can someone explain to me what's different between Psystar offering a solution to install Mac OS X on third party machines (which it otherwise can't be installed on) and Apple offering a solution to install Microsoft Windows on their hardware (which it can't otherwise be installed on)?

I am sincere about this question and not trolling.

There is one crucial difference.

Windows is hardware agnostic, as long as it meets the basic requirements to run the software. It is not under Microsoft's control. (yet...)

Mac OS is NOT. It is restricted to run on only Apple Branded hardware, and that is being worked around.

Apple controls the specifications of their hardware. They opened the door for a non-restricted product, Windows, to be installed on their hardware, and provide technical support for it (boot camp and it's drivers.)

Apple has not opened the door on their OS specifications to be installed on any hardware platform, specifically ones that do not bear an apple logo and certain code in the EFI to identify it.

I love apple products, prefer them, and have issues with Windows... but the fact is, Windows is open, Mac OS is not, and Apple has provided boot camp that can enable the OS loader to recognize other operating system, when they could shut down support for an apple computer to start up anything but Mac OS.

Other hardware manufacturers tend not to be the same company as the OS manufacturer... Microsoft software on Dell, HP, Toshiba, etc... hardware, so it defeats the purpose for Microsoft to lock down, also for those hardware manufacturers to lock down their acceptance of OS... A rough analogy is that highway must accept any and all cars, and cars need to run on any highway.

Apple controls both sides of their particular equation, so can be as open or closed as they like... fairly regardless of what their consumers may want.
They are more like a railroad company... they own the trains and the railway, so if they want to operate a different gauge of track, theoretically they can. but it will cost more for special rail cars, and access to the rail line at stations and terminals will be restricted. The rail companies realized that unique rail gauges caused more issues than they solved.

Proprietary practices are not always a benefit, and it can sometimes limit access, and deny business that would otherwise happen. It is hard to quantify LOST sales, if different decisions had been made, and a different path taken.

Some would argue, and I have as well... that Apple would do well to modestly increase it's product line diversity. Not go whole-hog and throw the OS to the wind, and let anyone and everyone undercut Apple's hardware position...

But there is room for Apple's lineup to grow in strategic ways, from a somewhat narrow, expensive lineup, without risking that over-exposure.

A desktop product between Mac Mini and Mac Pro, without a screen, and with desktop internal hardware, as a lateral alternative to iMac...

A netbook like inexpensive, high-value portable device with more screen and slightly more computer-type usage than iPhone or iPod touch... like viewing, editing and manipulating office, pdf, or other files... but less expensive, and even more lithe than the MacBook Pro lineup.

A more fully-featured Home theater/automation device than AppleTV... or the capability of Mac OS to do so directly on affordable computer hardware, rather than a slave-device.

There are a couple of things that Apple can do to become more diverse and flexible in their product line. Their iPod line is fairly flexible... and the new FM/camera nano is improving it futher... Their computers could use a bit of a shot in the arm.

 

[DELLsFan]

I finally got my hands on one if these machines and the experience was just like I thought it was: terrible! The performance was sluggish, the rendering of graphics and animations was very laggy and the machines Wi-Fi capabilities rendered non-existant at some points. It doesn't even have Bluetooth. Completely poor user experience. Mac OS really does work the best on a Mac. Psystar's support team are idiots. They couldn't even answer a simple question about Automator. I rarely ever have an outburst when posting my views here on MacRumors, but I must say, Psystar = EPIC FAIL. So if you can't afford a Mac, you better save up for one rather than settle for this horrible alternative.

Sorry. Don't believe you ... "newbie".

I bought an open pro from Psystar, it never worked, 100s of emails and 100s of phone calls and they never did anything, no replacement, no refund. I am not a techie guy, so I hired someone to look at my box, when he opened it, nothing inside was connected, one of the hard drives had a crack in it. Then I was told I needed to order a restore disc, still nothing. At last, I contacted the BBB (better business bureau) and Psystar would not even answer to them. Please tell others before they make the same mistake as me. I am donating it now for parts to a local non-profit and buying myself a new mac, but will spends the next couple of years warning others not to deal with Psystar. Not so much for revenge, but really to save others the hassle I had to deal with, I wanted to believe in the underdog, but they were just a wolf in sheeps clothing.

Sorry. Don't believe you either ... newer newbie.

I'm looking forward to this going to court. I think EULAs are unenforceable and Apple should just license OS X to anyone who wants it to run on their 3rd party computer hardware. After all - since OS X is the best operating system in the world, it should stand and sell very well on its own. Bump up licensing costs as needed; not that this would be required, since OS X can stand very well on its own merits. And lest we forget, Cupertino still can sell their exquisitely designed and overpriced hardware and still make a decent profit and return to share holders.

 

[macharborguy]

How would you clean-install your system as a maintenance step or to recover after a hardware failure?

Hard drives are large enough, and some PC manufacturers have made a recovery partition (my friend's dell system was like this), where the recovery partition contains the OS installer.

What happens if the hard drive completely fails? Thats what AppleCare is all about, and if you don't have AppleCare, you could still get a hard drive from Apple that contains the OS partition on it. When my friend's Dell's hard drive died, we called up Dell support and they sent a new drive with the recovery partition already on it.

 

[andiwm2003]

*Glances at UK/Ireland* You want to rephrase that?

you're correct. but given that fact that both islands aren't really fans of the EU anyway............

 

[bruinsrme]

Why does this company keep getting press?

Does anyone even buy these Pystar computers?

I wouldn't by a computer from them but I surely would consider purchasing a boot loader program

 

[Shivetya]

Pystar has gone from interesting at the beginning to just freakin annoying now. They just don't seem to quit or they just don't get it..

Actually I love them now.

down with the evil empire!!!

A$$le needs to go buh bye

 

[Master Chief]

I wouldn't by a computer from them but I surely would consider purchasing a boot loader program

You won't even have to purchase it since it is OSS and free as in free beer.

 

[gnasher729]

I think it's more like Psystar waiting for Apple to say something like this:

"OK, what's it going to take for you guys to shut down for good and just go away forever."

And Apple would be hoping for the reply "Over my dead body"

Seriously, after winning the first court case (which should put Psystar out of business), Apple will go after the founders of the company personally, and then after anyone who bought a Psystar computer to discourage anyone to try the same thing again.

 

[Ximie]

I believe making osx available for everybody is great in theory. But as more people use this os, more viruses are going to spread.

Dont forget, it is possible to get a virus on mac!! Unlikely, but definetly not impossible

 

[EagerDragon]

I believe the trial is scheduled for January, assuming no games, this will be solved one way or another by June at the latest.

 

[sneezymarble]

Psystar "certified" ... that's hilarious.

They're essentially pirating OS X.

That's just an odd way of putting it. Imagine two people, Bob and Tom, and each one goes to Best Buy and buys a legitimate full installation version of Snow Leopard. They report to a computer lab where they're instructed to install Snow Leopard on two computers. Each computer is hidden behind a wall and each one has the exact same Apple LCD, keyboard, and mouse attached. The difference is that one is a Mac and the other is a Hack.

Unknown to Bob, he installs Snow Leopard on the Mac. Unknown to Tom, he installs Snow Leopard on the Hack. According to you, it seems that Tom is a pirate and Bob isn't.

Of course, things can get even more bizarre. What exactly is Apple hardware? Do Apple engineers design the logic of the mainboard? What about the CPU? The audio controllers? The GPUs? How about the hard drives? It seems that the only thing we can say Apple is genuinely an engineer of is the case, the design of the LCDs (not the internal components), the keyboard, and the mouse.

So, now let's imagine that each computer, the Mac and the Hack, are using type-identical internal components (or as type-identical as possible). Essentially the same mainboard, type-identical CPU, same hard drive, same GPU, and same Apple branded peripherals. The only material difference, then, with respect to the actual computer, is the case.

Thus, if this Hack-makers are Pirates charge is valid, then it's also true that in the case that two individuals actually legitimately purchase a piece of software and perform type-identical procedures with respect to installation and use, one is a pirate and one is not simply because one performs the same set of procedures as the other on type-identical computer components inside a certain sort of case and the other does not. Thus, being a pirate, with respect to Apple's OS supervenes on by whom the case is made...

I wonder how Psystar management would feel if some other company decided to ignor Psystar's license and begin distributing Psystar's bootloader without their permission?

A little taste of their own medicine?

That would be a taste of their own medicine if it's also true that the other company didn't pay Psystars asking price for their bootloader. What evidence do we have that Psystar is failing to pay for the copies of OSX that are installed on the machines they sell?

So far, the only thing I've seen offered as support for the claim that they're not paying for copies of OSX is that they "lost" records. Suppose somebody has Snow Leopard installed on their authentic Mac. Furthermore, suppose they've thrown away or lost every record relating to their acquisition of the copy of Snow Leopard running on their Mac. Does it follow from that fact that they stole the copy of Snow Leopard that's installed on their machine?

Emphasis mine. The fact is that Apple has done a great job deciding which products to market and sell. The number of people who want what you describe is inconsequential compared to its consumer base.

How do you know that? Here's an unscientific way of getting at the questionableness of your claim. A search in Primate Labs results browser for "Mac Pro" yields 2,369 pages of results. A search for "imac" yields 738 pages of results. A search of "macbook" yields 2032 pages of results. A search of "mac mini" yields 199 pages of results.

There's roughly 5338 pages of results for authentic Macs. There's 1163 pages of results for "hackintosh". At least in this very rough analysis, 1163 is a non-inconsequential number compared to 5338. That's not even taking into account the fact that there are a significant number of seemingly authentic Mac results that are actually Hack results because people edit certain files to get their Hacks to report as Macs.

The sense of entitlement by some and the ability to do what they want is scary.

Naturally, we ought to keep people from doing non-dangerous things that they have the ability to do and want to do.

I find it hilarious that people are defending someone ripping off Apple's own software like this.

Need I remind people that, regardless of the kind of machines Apple sell or whatever their policies are, the computers that run OS X remain Apple Macintosh's.

Well, that's just obviously false since there are loads of people running OSX on a non-Apple computer–me. I take it what you mean is something like "regardless of the kind of machines Apple sell or whatever their policies are, the only computers that are suppose run OS X remain Apple Macintosh's according to Apple."

 

[Cave Man]

The last iMac that utilized a desktop processor was the PowerPC "lampshade" iMac.

That was the G4. The G5 was introduced in the current form factor iMacs.

 

[Bill&Rose]

Cite please

Cite please



I bet you can provide case law to back up the notion that software licensing is invalid since you seem so confident. I really doubt that is the case because otherwise the software industry's business models would be done for.

Looks like Apple or any other software maker is not on such solid ground after all:
http://www.rmkb.com/pdf/28.pdf

 

[sishaw]

one simple way for Apple to stop this dead in it's tracks.

STOP SELLING BOXED COPIES OF THE MACOS

Or go the other way, and sell boxed copies of the Mac OS under a more permissive EULA. State in the EULA that users may install on non-Apple machines, but Apple can offer no support, make no warranties, and take no responsibility for the results on non-Apple machines. Apple would make some money from hobbyists, and Psystar would be done for.

 

[couto27]

if for any reason apple loses against psystar, its better to back to powerpc hardware, i prefer that apple be a smaller company but with exclusive software-hardware of their own.

psystar=thiefs

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Most individuals that are interested in clones are Apple loyalists that can't afford a Mac Pro and whose needs aren't met with an iMac. If Apple built true desktop systems I bet a good number of potential clients would lose interest in Apple clones.

This sums me up in a nut shell. I don't want to spend $3000 on a quad core machine, even if it is from Apple.

 

[pdjudd]

Looks like Apple or any other software maker is not on such solid ground after all:
http://www.rmkb.com/pdf/28.pdf

That's an opinion piece. I want actual case law that says "Software licences are invalid and unenforceable" Unless someone can do that, I will contend that they are.

 

[iksretep]

Or go the other way, and sell boxed copies of the Mac OS under a more permissive EULA. State in the EULA that users may install on non-Apple machines, but Apple can offer no support, make no warranties, and take no responsibility for the results on non-Apple machines. Apple would make some money from hobbyists, and Psystar would be done for.

no support... no warranties... no responsibility... that would turn apple into microsoft

 

[powaking]

Can you imagine working for Psystar and seeing this in the news first thing in the morning? "We're going to do what??" I bet everyone in the office is now searching for jobs.

 

[iksretep]

Can you imagine working for Psystar and seeing this in the news first thing in the morning? "We're going to do what??" I bet everyone in the office is now searching for jobs.

This is an ongoing issue, and I'm sure they've heard of apple's attempt to use their wrath once or twice before