Psystar Files for Bankruptcy

[macUser2007]

They won't go after you. Unless you want to run a business behind it a la Psystar.

Oh, and I thought one had to enforce their rights consistently....

Again, I am not defending Psystar. I am just surprised by the nerdy gloating that there's less competition.

IMO, it would make many happy, if someone offered a pre-configured OS X netbook for $600. But Apple will sue them, even though it doesn't offer a competing product. And the fan-boys will support it, just because.

 

[iMacmatician]

A 9600GT is great, for 2007.

The 9600 GT was released in 2008.

 

[JohnnyLemonhead]

I explained that in a previous post: The sale of a software license with a license agreement is a contract, and contracts are enforceable unless there is a specific situation that makes it unenforceable. And as you so eloquently showed, there are plenty of terms that one _could_ theoretically put into a license that would not be enforceable.

You can download Apple's MacOS X license at http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf . You should download and carefully read it; if you find anything that in your opinion is not enforceable, please tell us. I'm quite sure that first-born children are not mentioned anywhere.

And what I am arguing is that Apple has no right to dictate and/or enforce the terms at issue in this case. Simple as that.

 

[IWantItThatWay]

Excellent rebuttal. Please tell me when you have some evidence proving me wrong.

http://searchwarp.com/swa329149.htm 2007 and 2008 was a little better.

Apple has no more than 5% of the market.

Speakers, microphone, webcam, laptop charger.

OH, AND IT ISN'T LED BACKLIT.

Nice try.

Who cares about those features (I mean seriously, speakers?), when it is super glossy (you see yourself more than the webpage you're looking at). when it has a horrible response time and still lacks a high contrast ratio found in other brands. Why get a ACD when you can get 2 high end Samsung 24 inch monitors with HDMI imputs, HDCP, and a much higher contrast ratio AND 5ms response time?

 

[Ansuz]

If anything the comparison isn't fair to MS. Seriously, what Apple is doing here is so much worse. The only reason they are getting away with it is that they are so small in comparison to others. As others have said, if Apple pulled this same crap with a 90% market share instead of whatever share they do have, this would not be tolerated and it would probably be on the front page of the NYT. Apple gets to unfairly harass a company out of business just because they are flying (relatively speaking) under the radar. Oh and big shock that all the Jobs fanboys sycophantically rush to defend him. Jobs could open concentration camps for Windows users and you would find a way to support him.

The reason they are getting away with it is because they aren't doing anything illegal. You may not like it but your personal taste has nothing at all to do with the legality of an action.

Microsoft was using their clout to force other people who were making indepent products out of business becaus they wanted their prodcut to dominate - this is a violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Apple was/is stoping a different company from using Apples own IP in a way they don't approve - Psystar is breaking the DMCA.

I pray you can see the difference between these two situations.

And what I am arguing is that Apple has no right to dictate and/or enforce the terms at issue in this case. Simple as that.

It isn't that simple. They do have the right to dicate somethings as part of the contract. The point of the trial was to find out if the Apple branded restriction was one of the things they could dictate.

 

[IWantItThatWay]

The 9600 GT was released in 2008.

I know this, what I am saying is PC users are past 9600GT. It's mid-range at most.

 

[smurfjammer]

I am just surprised by the nerdy gloating that there's less competition.

They were never competition, all the did was skim off Apple's sales and never brought anything to the party.

 

[gregorsamsa]

That, quite simply, is because Apple sells to the rich and their student offspring, and the rich and their student offspring are always least affected by recession. The guy who could only afford a Dell will now get no new Dell, while the guy who could before afford a Mac can still afford a Mac.

You missed a smiley. I have 2 Macs, but like many Mac users I'm not rich & AFAIC no-one has to be rich to buy a Mac. If you value excellent engineering, intuitive OS, realize total cost of Mac ownership compared to PCs, you'll find the dough to buy Mac, even if it means making basic cutbacks elsewhere.

If however you're talking about the vast majority of people who don't value the importance of a reliable working tool (which, frankly, is all that a Mac is to me) & who'd rather spend their cash on other things, well that's another kettle of fish. IMO, stereotyping Mac users (or PC users) does no-one any credit whatsoever.

 

[*LTD*]

And what I am arguing is that Apple has no right to dictate and/or enforce the terms at issue in this case. Simple as that.

Better call the judge in the case and tell him. Hell, you could have saved the Florida courts and all parties involved all that time and money.

I suppose you know something they all didn't.

 

[IWantItThatWay]

Selling on volume is a losing game. Apple makes a killing on margins. The rest are struggling. Margins vs. Volume. You sell less but get a helluva lot more per unit. It's assumed that you can command more because of quality. And the quality is certainly there. Apple's market says it is with each sale.

I gave a solution earlier were apple could continue to sell "premium" desktops but be more affordable and still very profitable. a $800-$1000 mid-range desktop.

Your market share numbers are a bit off. There are 35-40 million OS X users anyway.

Compared to billions of Windows users.

I have no problem dropping $1999 for an Apple notebook. I prefer it. It's a very well put-together package. And it's the real deal. I actually *feel* better about it. And I feel quite good about it months later. Every penny is worth it. I recognize real value in Mac/OS X, as do millions upon millions of others, from all walks of life, especially professions, those in academia, medicine, you name it.

And why is it better than the $800 Windows notebook I bought? OS X is only $130 so that can't justify the $1200 difference in price. Is it because it has the Apple logo? I can buy an Apple logo sticker for $1 though, so what justifies the $1,199 difference in price?

Keep running OS X on your hackintosh then. If you are running OS X on a hackintosh and are happy with that, why are you here complaining??? Your problems are solved.

Your manufactured problems, again, are your own. Stop projecting them onto everyone else, LOL.

You dropped $1999 on a mid-range outdated notebook. You have no right to say I am the one manufacturing problems.

 

[VoR]

They were never competition, all the did was skim off Apple's sales and never brought anything to the party.

I'd be surprised if they didn't know that they were going to end up with no money half way through a court case
I've no idea how many they sold, I suspect it was a fair bit less than 'a skim'.
I don't think the osx86 community was hugely fond of what they were doing (using other people's code) but I think they did bring a little bit back to the party - openhaltrestart etc.

@beg ne - Thanks for your definition and example usage of a screen resolution (and your amusing post on quality), you could try mine again if you wanted.

 

[Ansuz]

Again, I am not defending Psystar. I am just surprised by the nerdy gloating that there's less competition.

While I can't speak for everyone, I'm happy the Psystar is out of business not because they were a competitor of Apple's but because they were basically stealing the work of the hackentosh community and turning a buck. That never sat right with me.

 

[JohnnyLemonhead]

The reason they are getting away with it is because they aren't doing anything illegal. You may not like it but your personal taste has nothing at all to do with the legality of an action.

Microsoft was using their clout to force other people who were making indepent products out of business becaus they wanted their prodcut to dominate - this is a violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Apple was/is stoping a different company from using Apples own IP in a way they don't approve - Psystar is breaking the DMCA.

I pray you can see the difference between these two situations.

It isn't that simple. They do have the right to dicate somethings as part of the contract. The point of the trial was to find out if the Apple branded restriction was one of the things they could dictate.

"Microsoft was using their clout to force other people who were making indepent products out of business becaus they wanted their prodcut to dominate"

Hmmm...that sound almost EXACTLY like what is happening here...Can you not see how fine you are having to split these hairs?

"They do have the right to dicate somethings as part of the contract."

Again, not necessarily. They have the right to dictate reasonable terms only. Psystar, myself, and many others are arguing that the terms as stated (or as enforced) are not reasonable.

 

[Ansuz]

"Microsoft was using their clout to force other people who were making indepent products out of business becaus they wanted their prodcut to dominate"

Hmmm...that sound almost EXACTLY like what is happening here...Can you not see how fine you are having to split these hairs?

Its not even close to the same. Apple is protecting their IP from being modified and sold against their wishes. Microsoft was strongarming people into using IE. Very different.

"They do have the right to dicate somethings as part of the contract."

Again, not necessarily. They have the right to dictate reasonable terms only. Psystar, myself, and many others are arguing that the terms as stated (or as enforced) are not reasonable.

Yes, and until a judge says that the terms are unreasonable or reasonable we don't know who is right. Please read the rest of the statement you quoted.

 

[*LTD*]

Oh, and I thought one had to enforce their rights consistently....

Again, I am not defending Psystar. I am just surprised by the nerdy gloating that there's less competition.

IMO, it would make many happy, if someone offered a pre-configured OS X netbook for $600. But Apple will sue them, even though it doesn't offer a competing product. And the fan-boys will support it, just because.

It's not what rights they enforce consistently, it's they are humanly, feasibly able to enforce consistently. Apple can't go after every single hackintosh user. And as a hackintohs user, you wouldn't be causing any direct, material harm to Apple from an IP rights perspective. No damage.

Apple offers what it wants. Just because something exists in the PC sphere, doesn't mean anyone can compel Apple to offer a competing product. Like, who cares, really? Wait out or accept that Apple doesn't make a netbook and move on with life.

 

[Tallest Skil]

http://searchwarp.com/swa329149.htm 2007 and 2008 was a little better.

Apple has no more than 5% of the market.

Oh, yeah, THAT'S a reliable source.

Who cares about those features (I mean seriously, speakers?), when it is super glossy (you see yourself more than the webpage you're looking at). when it has a horrible response time and still lacks a high contrast ratio found in other brands. Why get a ACD when you can get 2 high end Samsung 24 inch monitors with HDMI imputs, HDCP, and a much higher contrast ratio AND 5ms response time?

I don't really care what you think deserves to be in a display. It boils down to:

If you're going to insult the hardware, you CANNOT link to a comparison that does not have the same hardware.

 

[iMacmatician]

I know this, what I am saying is PC users are past 9600GT. It's mid-range at most.

And I am saying the 9600M did not exist in 2007.

 

[JohnnyLemonhead]

Its not even close to the same. Apple is protecting their IP from being modified and sold against their wishes. Microsoft was strongarming people into using IE. Very different.

Oh--OK. Very different because you say so. Burgundy and Maroon are very different colors, too. Just ask a fashion designer.

O.K.

I guess you didn't want to respond to my second point, huh? I guess now I know which point was more effective.

 

[beg_ne]

"Microsoft was using their clout to force other people who were making indepent products out of business becaus they wanted their prodcut to dominate"

Hmmm...that sound almost EXACTLY like what is happening here...Can you not see how fine you are having to split these hairs?

What you call splitting hairs I call big enough to drive a semi through. You can put up your straw men and try to spin the differences as practically the same, but in reality they aren't.

 

[IWantItThatWay]

Oh, yeah, THAT'S a reliable source.


Just Google it. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/economy-down-pc-sales-up/ 71 million PCs in a quarter (compared to what, 2.5 million for Apple?). Less than 5%

Apple needs to let OS X free.

I don't really care what you think deserves to be in a display. It boils down to:

If you're going to insult the hardware, you CANNOT link to a comparison that does not have the same hardware.

You are right. I feel bad comparing Apple's outdated (with the exception of LED Backlight ruined by glossy display) monitors to (half) cheaper monitors available. Not to mention the lack of aux ports on the ACD.

 

[Ansuz]

Oh--OK. Very different because you say so. Burgundy and Maroon are very different colors, too. Just ask a fashion designer.

O.K.

I guess you didn't want to respond to my second point, huh? I guess now I know which point was more effective.

I went back and responed to your second point, which I initially addressed in my first statement.

Copyright and IP law say that they are two different things. Those laws are the deciding factors. Disagree all you like, but the laws are the laws.

 

[IWantItThatWay]

And I am saying the 9600M did not exist in 2007.

The 8800M GTX is superior and was released in 2007.

So basically, Apple is literally 2 years behind in technology yet they expect us to pay $2500 for it. Unbelievable.

 

[Ansuz]

Apple needs to let OS X free.

The stock price and cash reserves beg to differ.

 

[r.j.s]

Its not even close to the same. Apple is protecting their IP from being modified and sold against their wishes. Microsoft was strongarming people into using IE. Very different.

It goes even further than this ...

The REAL reason behind the IE anti-trust loss was because MS was using undocumented APIs in IE, APIs that Netscape could not use - even though they were a part of the OS. This was the unfair competition that cost them.

Inherently, monopolies are NOT illegal.

 

[iMacmatician]

The 8800M GTX is superior and was released in 2007.

You are comparing a high-end GPU with a midrange GPU.

So basically, Apple is literally 2 years behind in technology yet they expect us to pay $2500 for it. Unbelievable.

Right now they are only a year behind in the GPU (less in the CPU) and that's only because the MBPs are approaching the end of a cycle.