Psystar Files for Bankruptcy

[*LTD*]

The only way you could have a feasible market here is if one day Apple licensed OS X, which is something highly unlikely to happen anytime soon, if at all.

We don't need that kind of market. God forbid. If it were ever to happen, OS X as you know it would cease to exist. You can kiss goodbye most of the reasons for using OS X. It would fast become a Windoze clone.

I'm not saying that's what you want, I'm merely expanding on your comment, if you don't mind.

Licensing out OS X, and Apple giving away their core business in the process, and letting OS X rot out in the open. All because people want it for cheap so they can run it on their hardware-of-the-month. No thanks.

I'd rather pay a bit more once in a while than play with a Windows clone day-in-day out.

It's the problem Windows faces (which will become Apple's problem if OS X is let loose):

MS is trying to compete against a vendor who uses a vertically integrated model rather than a horizontal model which Microsoft and the PC market uses. The result is that you have a poor integrated approach to marketing, hardware and software design where the experience is as much dictated by the hardware vendor as the quality of the operating system - both of which are developed by two separate companies with different goals over all in regards to their respective strategies.

 

[designgeek]

Oh so Dell, HP, Acer, Asus, Microsoft, Linux aren't competition for Apple?

They are, but barely. Psystar really isn't anyway. Just because it ran the same OS doesn't mean it directly competed with Apple. The same way a netbook by Acer doesn't compete with Alienware because they both run some iteration of windoze.

 

[ziggyonice]

Turns out Psystar was run by Steve Jobs.

He was bored, faked illness, and ran off to make his own company... just to shake up those lazy bums at Apple who can't even design and market a good tablet by 2010.

That would be one of the most interesting stories in tech history were it true.

 

[uberamd]

I put OSX on my Toshiba to get a feel for a mac. I ended up buying two macbooks and two iPhones ultimately because of that experience.

Exactly, I did that too. We are an exception to that rule as we are probably technical enough to understand why feature X may not work on the hackintosh. Plus, how much did that cost us? Free? $0.00? These Psystar customers are paying for a system. $500+, so if it doesn't work or has bugs they will not be as understanding.

 

[Cask]

They have competition... they are just a long way ahead of it all.

HAHAHA those are the words of a true fanboy!

 

[techfreak85]

I wonder who is all behind it......

 

[Tallest Skil]

First, its a hassle getting OS X to install on a PC.

Only if you don't know what a computer is.

Second, Apple does not have a monopoly in the Operating System or Hardware sectors. BMW is the only company allowed to make BMW cars, however they do not have a monopoly on the car market.

Truth.

 

[Eidorian]

Good night sweet prince.

 

[fishmoose]

Time to see who's been hiding in the shadows the entire time! Any bets?

I wouldn't be surpriesed if it's Dell or HP.

They did it to to see if they could win in court, they would ship some computers with OS X.

 

[*LTD*]

I put OSX on my Toshiba to get a feel for a mac. I ended up buying two macbooks and two iPhones ultimately because of that experience.

I totally support the hackintosh/OSX86 model.

I just don't support its commercial development and proliferation.

 

[techfreak85]

Unless Microsoft pulled out. Maybe they didn’t want bad press...?

That could be... and funny.

 

[NuMan]

The court room drama

I would have liked to see Psystar make their case in court, ...

Judge: Pystar, present your case.

Pystar attorney: Bear with me your honor, but here it is in a nut shell: The company is standing by it's previously stated logical defense: Pystar is right! and Apple is wrong! despite the fact that Pystar has no records, no data, no facts, no past present or future investors, no knowledge of the past present or future of any of their operations, no past present or future plans or objectives, no officers or principals, no one that has ever been accountable to anyone --- and we rest out case!

Jurist: A nut shell is right- and empty nut shell.

I agree, it still would have been fun to see.

 

[techfreak85]

http://wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=pystar&t=1000

 

[designgeek]

I wouldn't be surpriesed if it's Dell or HP.

They did it to to see if they could win in court, they would ship some computers with OS X.

I doubt it, they wouldn't be in chap 11 if they had backers like dell or hp.

 

[digitalbiker]

So this may show my newbie status, but is it illegal to legally purchase a copy of OSX and put it on a non-apple computer? If so, how does that not fall under some sort of "monopoly"? I mean, when you boil it down, Apple assembles computer just like everyone else, with parts everyone else can buy too (leaving aside aesthetics off course...). Insight anyone?

You are violating Apple's EULA agreement if you attempt to install OS X on non-Apple branded hardware.

The legality of this "EULA violation" would possibly have been cleared up in this court case. However if the case is terminated then Apple's EULA still stands as a valid contract with the purchaser.

I think the principle area of dispute stems from the definition of the OS. Is the OS an integral part of the entire product? Or is the OS just another piece of software?

If you feel that the OS is integral to the product then Apple has a valid claim to tie the OS to only their hardware, because it directly affects the user experience and Apple has the right to control that experience.

If you think that the OS is only software and that once you purchase the software and if you can install it on any hardware, then it should be your choice as to what hardware you use, not Apple's. Apple is not required to support the hardware that you choose, but Apple should not be able to make it unlawful if you choose to install the software on alternate hardware.

These are the two principle camps and the courts apparently are not going to decide the issue.

 

[chr1s60]

Dang, I was kind of enjoying seeing Apple have some competition.

This wasn't competition. Not only was Psystar not selling thousands and thousands of computers, they weren't developing anything to compete. They were simply stealing Apple's software and using it in their own machine.

To me, what Psystar was doing was essentially like an author stealing another authors novel and placing it in their own cover and changing the title. Hmm, competition or stealing?

 

[hugodrax]

Real competition is when other companies innovate on their own to create a unique product that matches or surpasses another similar product (see iPod; iPhone). Cloning isn't helpful competition. It doesn't add anything of innovative technological value.

Competition is definitely good, but the lack of it doesn't seem to halt Apple from further innovation.

Well if Compaq did not decide to make PC clones, or the guys who cloned the Phoenix bios, Things might be totally different today.

Not that I agree with Psystars method.

 

[lkrupp]

Dang, I was kind of enjoying seeing Apple have some competition.

Give us break will you. That's ignorant.

 

[Jimmery]

Hopefully other companies fill the void of Pystar. Some people like OS X but don't care to pay the "Apple Tax" for the bling factor of a small, shiny case.

 

[electronboy]

Time to see who's been hiding in the shadows the entire time! Any bets?

My bet is no one famous. Folks who have lots of money and/or influence take extra steps to protect their identity in ventures like this. I predict nothing of interest will be revealed.

 

[gkarris]

This wasn't competition. Not only was Psystar not selling thousands and thousands of computers, they weren't developing anything to compete. They were simply stealing Apple's software and using it in their own machine.

To me, what Psystar was doing was essentially like an author stealing another authors novel and placing it in their own cover and changing the title. Hmm, competition or stealing?

LOL... funny...

Yes, Psystar couldn't sell any of their Joe-Shmoe computers, which are just the same as everyone else's. So they had to bundle it with Mac OS X installed in order to make a few bucks....

 

[gregorsamsa]

We don't need that kind of market. God forbid. If it were ever to happen, OS X as you know it would cease to exist. You can kiss goodbye most of the reasons for using OS X. It would fast become a Windoze clone.

I'm not saying that's what you want, I'm merely expanding on your comment, if you don't mind.

Licensing out OS X, and Apple giving away their core business in the process, and letting OS X rot out in the open. All because people want it for cheap so they can run it on their hardware-of-the-month. No thanks.

I'd rather pay a bit more once in a while than play with a Windows clone day-in-day out.

It's the problem Windows faces (which will become Apple's problem if OS X is let loose):

MS is trying to compete against a vendor who uses a vertically integrated model rather than a horizontal model which Microsoft and the PC market uses. The result is that you have a poor integrated approach to marketing, hardware and software design where the experience is as much dictated by the hardware vendor as the quality of the operating system - both of which are developed by two separate companies with different goals over all in regards to their respective strategies.

Indeed, I agree that licensing OS X right across the PC platform would be highly undesirable & is likely to compromise its integrity. However, if Apple ever chose to concentrate on growing OS X market share, then having a major quality PC manufacturer as a partner, maybe selling OS X only on PC mid-towers where Apple has no foothold in the market & which is unlikely to significantly cannibalize existing Mac sales, might one day be an option. Would I buy a mid-tower with OS X? Well, I'd sure be interested.

 

[uberamd]

Only if you don't know what a computer is.

Oh really? I can tell you I have had handfuls of problems with OSx86 and I work on computers daily for my job as well as doing a lot of programming. From it not supporting ethernet, wireless not working and requiring a USB dongle, to Intel graphic chipsets not displaying properly, etc. Any fool can get it installed, but getting every feature to work properly (and thus have an entirely functional system) is not always easy. Do you disagree with that?

 

[Pika]

Maybe Steve Balmer is behind all this.

 

[CaptainScarlet]

I bet the financial backers (if any) pulled the plug on the money train and wrote it off as a lose.