Except there's this little niggle called "Intellectual Property" that kind of complicates the issue.
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.
Psystar Exits Bankruptcy, Launches New Xeon-Based Systems Running OS X
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Except there's this little niggle called "Intellectual Property" that kind of complicates the issue.
"Ignoratus" would be the passive form of the latin "ignorare" = "to not know", meaning "somebody who is not known", and "ignorati" would be the plural - "those who are not known". Or something like that
EULAs aren't IP.
Second the free market doesn't mean the "clone" vendors have to install Mac OS X, so can even skip around that if market demand was really high enough.
The specific approach that Psystar is using may have problems, but doesn't exclude the free market. If can/could install an unmodified copy of Mac OS X then takes practically all of the air out of any IP issue.
Once Apple resigned to building computers with industry standard parts then the "clone" market is open. The more industry standard the more clones are pragmatically given opportunity.
Apple has been up front about the issue of claiming the high market share. they have said they aren't all about that.
They don't want to have to support every possible hardware set up in the world. They can do the whole Genius thing because of the limited choices.
If they had the dominant share they legally wouldn't be able to tie hardware and software anymore. It would be abusive and a violation of anti-trust. that they have only like 7% of the market (personal computing systems) is why they are in the clear.
you might be correct, but it doesn't make Psystar in the right.
The Digital Copyright Millennium Act make it a criminal act to produce or spread any technology, device or service that circumvents protection measures to copyrighted works. This program, which is intended to get around the hardware checks in OSX, is certainly that type of technology. Psystar knew this and tried to argue that Apple legally couldn't tie hardware and software due to anti-trust laws. but the courts tossed the notion that there is such a thing as a "Macintosh Market" and that Apple is a small part of the personal computer system market which also includes machines running Windows, Unix, Linux etc. And as such a small part of the market, the tying was valid and non abusive. Making Psystar's argument void.
Now they are trying the whole EULA argument but we shall see if that works. Because the argument is "once I have PAID" and they can't even prove that they did that. they 'lost' the purchase records. so as far as anyone knows they shoplifted all those boxes.
Apple is about high market share of the Personal Computer market.
It is "highest" that they have said they are not about.
If Apple's objective was 2-3% of the market they could probably be charging more and selling alot less. Fortunately, that is not a viable percentage for a company their size.
The limited hardware mantra sounds rather hollow when if someone uses the exact same set of major components (the ones that primarily matter) as Apple, but still doesn't want to allow that. I can see perhaps not support it because they didn't make it, but don't even want folks to do it.
Why doesn't the EULA exclude non qualified hardware replacement parts if that matters so much ???
That is all premised that can draw the boundary around the overall market.
( that the Mac OS X market isn't a distinct market. ) That would partially evaporate long before Apple got near 50%. of the overall market. (if they were to even try).
Is the users objective to have a computer or is the objective to have a computer that runs your Mac OS X only software?
As long as there is lots of cross platform offerings ( MS Office, games , Adobe CS, other major software packages ... another reason to put Safari and iTunes on Windows and for MS to keep Office on Mac OS; small anti-trust blanket for Windows. ) and keep the market share below 13-5% (or so), that whole "Windows PCs" are directly substitutable carries more weight.
Apple wants to be just large enough to get the volume to be profitable and competitive, but not going to drive past that. All long as there are large number of competitors in the overall market that are beating on each other as much as Apple, it is a reasonable status quo for them to settle for.
This is the standard anti-trust dodge these days. Try to loop in as many substitutable equivalents as can, to "grow" the market so that percentage doesn't look as bad.
However, all the mass marketing is geared toward exposing how it is a complete experience/segmentation from the Windows market that is worth the price premium.
It is the talking in forked tongue that bugs people.
In the context of copying that applies. This work is a legal Mac OS X copy (presuming purchased), so there is no circumventing copies being made here. This is interoperability being respun as a copyright issue. Other than the normal for this media function of loading the program into memory, there is copying being done. So no circumvention.
Similarly a slippery slope whether the key itself is copyrightable. It is just a number/encoding of very limited length. There is no circumvention if just hand back the key value.
You actually think that??
Mate, no use arguing with him - PNW sees himself as the online legal expert and all knowing guru; what ever you say to him will fall on deaf ears. One only needs to look at the 'oh so certainty' in the tone of his posts which speaks volumes for the mass delusion of self importance he has.
By "stealing" you mean "paying the price Apple charges", right ?
By "develop better hardware" you mean "building cases to hold the components companies like Intel and Nvidia actually create, just like Dell, HP, IBM, and dozens of others", right ?
If Apple addressed the gaping holes in their lineup by selling the same sorts of machines Psystar does, and their customers want, Psystar would be legitimately and fairly out of business in 6 months.
Right. Apple's laptops can't even drive two LCD screens like Dell's can, let alone the three (soon to be four) I have attached to my current desktop. Heck they don't even have docking stations - they're a non-starter as a serious business laptop.
Most business computer purchases are - and will remain - desktops. What possible reason would there be for a business to pay half again as much, for half the performance, on a thousand laptops for its cube farm workers ?
The only reason Apple don't sell a mid-range desktop is because they know it will slaughter their high-margin Mac Pro sales.
Funny. I just got a Precision T3500 of equivalent spec to a quad-core Mac Pro - at least as much as I care about - plus two 22" LCDs and a second video card, for less than the cost of a Mac Pro on its own.
Not to mention my machine comes with a 3 year warranty by default. It's flat-out insulting Apple's so-called "Pro" hardware only comes with a 12 month warranty.
You own any CDs ? If the company who owned the rights to that music decreed you could only listen to it while standing naked on a plastic chair, would you consider yourself unethical if you didn't do so ?
Because the $1500 "fake Mac" is 3-4x as fast and twice as versatile.
You mean like the way Psystar pays the price Apple asks for a copy of OS X ?
drsmithy, hit the button to the right of the quote button and you can quote multiple posts at once. Then you dont have to post 6 in a row (which is a record. at least from what i have seen)
Unless the wedge that they find happens to be universal. Whereupon "All your EULAs belong to us" transpires.
What's in the License is what is in the license. You either agree to those terms or negotiate others ... and invariably pay a different amount.
The key question that gets overlooked is: "If not this way, then how?".
Consider how few PCs would exist in this world if no business licensed their Operating Systems and we all had to write our own OS from scratch.
-hh
But it is saddled with Windows - sorry, you can shout, scream and jump around all you want but until there is a viable alternative to Windows on the desktop that has all the same hardware and software support as Windows, Dell or any other PC vendor is not a viable option.
It isn't a choice of hardware, it is a choice of operating systems - do you want Mac OS X or Windows - end of story. The hardware you choose is merely window dressing.
The Holy Grail of Linux Distros which has yet to exist. It'll make coffee from thin air.
Having heard 'this is the year of the desktop' for 10 years - its not going to happen. Not because it is impossible but because of a lack of money, lack of focus and lack of leadership.
What are you talking about???
The corporate sector is a completely different market.
The consumer desktop market is DYING. The numbers don't lie.
Except that it runs Windows. Why would anyone here want to run the worst operating system ever conceived, no matter the hardware? Windows sufferers have been getting shafted with garbage operating systems since 2001, and XP wasn't anything to be proud of in the first place.
I'd rather pay DOUBLE for an OS X rig, which naturally means a Mac.
wow. i'm kinda surprised at this. i hope that they get to keep selling systems, so apple will have to do something about them, something like lower prices and upgrade their hardware sooner
OS X wasn't something to be proud of until 10.3. It was bearable and usable in 10.2 if you had a decent G3 and Quartz Extreme support. You might as well not use a Mac if you don't have Quartz Extreme.
Sadly I can't do everything that I want on OS X and I'm limited by Apple's choices on the hardware as well. Using Windows is the lesser of two evils for me.
Until we get a case that goes to the Supreme Court and rules in favor of upholding a corporations EULA it will be up to vague interpretation (the pages of debating here is a prime example).
Isn't that why Psystar is still going after Apple's customers? Until they are told "Stop or face a jail sentence" I guess they are going to continue selling their 'products'.
Personally I don't care because I wouldn't buy one even at 50% cheaper than a comparable Mac Pro but if they are going to provide a solution for the small market that has been clamoring for a real desktop (iMacs don't count sorry) between the Mac Mini and the beastly Mac Pro have at it Psystar. Just stop before the Apple gets a bite out of you! (sorry couldn't' resist)
Isn't that why Psystar is still going after Apple's customers? Until they are told "Stop or face a jail sentence" I guess they are going to continue selling their 'products'.
Personally I don't care because I wouldn't buy one even at 50% cheaper than a comparable Mac Pro but if they are going to provide a solution for the small market that has been clamoring for a real desktop (iMacs don't count sorry) between the Mac Mini and the beastly Mac Pro have at it Psystar. Just stop before the Apple gets a bite out of you! (sorry couldn't' resist)
Where am I wrong - or are you just going to post snarky and pointless comments?
Every year is the year of the Linux Desktop.
Just like new Apple products Next Tuesday™ and ever so the desirable elevator spy shots.
Every year is the year of the Linux Desktop.
Just like new Apple products Next Tuesday and ever so the desirable elevator spy shots.