Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Psystar Files for Bankruptcy

digitalbiker said:
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.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the very informative reply! I wasn't aware of the exact EULA. That being the case, I really would have liked to see this cleared up in court.

Say, for instance, that my motherboard went bad on my mac and I replace it and re-install (a legal copy of) OSX, would that fall under "non apple-branded hardware"? ... seems like some area for debate there...
 
Ellizit said:
Say, for instance, that my motherboard went bad on my mac and I replace it and re-install (a legal copy of) OSX, would that fall under "non apple-branded hardware"? ... seems like some area for debate there...
Click to expand...

Won't be a problem as you can't install a standard motherboard in a Mac without major mods.
 
smurfjammer said:
Won't be a problem as you can't install a standard motherboard in a Mac without major mods.
Click to expand...

Point taken. :p

Make it something like ram or hdd then. I guess the bottom line is that if it was originally purchased from apple, then you can swap out whatever you want and still be "legal"?
 
Ellizit said:
Point taken. :p

Make it something like ram or hdd then. I guess the bottom line is that if it was originally purchased from apple, then you can swap out whatever you want and still be "legal"?
Click to expand...

Well Apple does add their label to their HDDs while keeping the OEM label and branding present. So I am not sure that is considered "branding", especially as it applies to "Apple-branded hardware".

I do not recall seeing the Apple logo/label on their RAM.
 
smurfjammer said:
Won't be a problem as you can't install a standard motherboard in a Mac without major mods.
Click to expand...

What about the EFI-X dongle? Put it in a PC with a gigabyte mainboard and you can install OS X from the original installation DVD! Without modification. What about that? It looks a lot more a problem than those ugly Psystar PC's....
 
Hey, you can get around the copyright infringement claims. Just slap an Apple sticker like from an iPod on your beige box. Now it's "Apple branded"

Of course now you've committed trademark infringement.
 
porky said:
What about the EFI-X dongle? Put it in a PC with a gigabyte mainboard and you can install OS X from the original installation DVD! Without modification. What about that? It looks a lot more a problem than those ugly Psystar PC's....
Click to expand...

Expense. You might as well be paying the apple tax directly.
 
porky said:
What about the EFI-X dongle? Put it in a PC with a gigabyte mainboard and you can install OS X from the original installation DVD! Without modification. What about that? It looks a lot more a problem than those ugly Psystar PC's....
Click to expand...

Well that is different then what Ellizit was asking, since a Gigabyte or DFI motherboard likely will not fit in an Apple case. ;)

I don't know enough about the EFI-X dongle itself to comment on how it may or may not infringe on Apple's intellectual property, but it would violate the EULA to use it to install OS X on a PC.
 
Not exactly surprising news, I'm looking forward to seeing who the backer is though.
 
ditzy said:
Not exactly surprising news, I'm looking forward to seeing who the backer is though.
Click to expand...

We won't find out anything useful. If the actual backer was a player in the PC world, they would have been intellegent enough to plan for this eventuality. They wouldn't back directly, instead backing through a dummy subsidiary or completley independent company.

Whatever information is relvealed won't be all that interesting.

MagnusVonMagnum said:
And spare me any its their OS arguments as it's already been ruled ILLEGAL to use one market to leverage another market also known as "tying" and that is EXACTLY what Apple is guilty of when you make that argument since hardware and software are two separate market shares as evidence by innumerable companies that only do one or the other).
Click to expand...

Except the judge already ruled that the requirements Apple placed on their OS did not constitute illegal tying.
 
CWallace said:
Well that is different then what Ellizit was asking, since a Gigabyte or DFI motherboard likely will not fit in an Apple case. ;)

I don't know enough about the EFI-X dongle itself to comment on how it may or may not infringe on Apple's intellectual property, but it would violate the EULA to use it to install OS X on a PC.
Click to expand...

True. But i've seen it working. I think that it could hurt Apple a lot more than Psystar because you can build the PC yourself with the best hardware. It's strange nobody cares about that. I think the imac is too beautiful to build a clone mac, but the thing is, it's possible and it's easy. So EFI-X is next on Apple's black list?
 
I am not sure why so many are happy to see the demise of a company, which offered an alternative.

The enforceability of Apple's EULA is at best debatable, and squashing anyone who attempts to challenge it by making the process extremely expensive, is nothing for anyone to be happy about. Unless you are Apple, and Apple attorney or an investor, or just a brainless fanboy.

Technically, "Apple hardware" means exactly that, and if the EULA was to be upheld in its entirety, you CAN'T legally use non-Apple provided RAM, HD, or a faster processor.

So, be careful what you wish for.

It seems like there are camps of gloaters: One is the "we want high-end exclusivity" crowd. They seem to have missed the news about Apple setting up in Walmart.

The other is the "it will be like Windows" group. But that just shows complete ignorance of Windows-based systems.

People install Hackingtosh on netbooks, and other hardware which is missing from the Apple lineup. If you don't like it, don't do it.

But gloating is just stupid, and shortsighted.
 
macUser2007 said:
I am not sure why so many are happy to see the demise of a company, which offered an alternative.

The enforceability of Apple's EULA is at best debatable, and squashing anyone who attempts to challenge it by making the process extremely expensive, is nothing for anyone to be happy about. Unless you are Apple, and Apple attorney or an investor, or just a brainless fanboy.

Technically, "Apple hardware" means exactly that, and if the EULA was to be upheld in its entirety, you CAN'T legally use non-Apple provided RAM, HD, or a faster processor.

So, be careful what you wish for.

It seems like there are camps of gloaters: One is the "we want high-end exclusivity" crowd. They seem to have missed the news about Apple setting up in Walmart.

The other is the "it will be like Windows" group. But that just shows complete ignorance of Windows-based systems.

People install Hackingtosh on netbooks, and other hardware which is missing from the Apple lineup. If you don't like it, don't do it.

But gloating is just stupid, and shortsighted.
Click to expand...

Psystar were ripoff artists. The "alternative" is Windows, or Linux, or FreeBSD, etc.

WalMart might carry Macs. They won't be subject to WalMart bargain-pricing. They're just another retail outlet. Who in the world thought someone could actually class up WalMart? It might actually happen.

Technically, "Apple hardware" means exactly that, and if the EULA was to be upheld in its entirety, you CAN'T legally use non-Apple provided RAM, HD, or a faster processor.

"Apple Hardware" is defined by certain limits. The EULA does not prohibit the use of third-party RAM, for instance. Best-Buy, TigerDirect and others freely advertise some third-party RAM as Apple-compatible, i.e., Corsair, Patriot, etc. There's nothing wrong with that.

Gloating is fun when you're right.
 
uberamd said:
First, its a hassle getting OS X to install on a PC. 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.
Click to expand...

haha, good point. However, if I take a BMW engine and put it in a KIA, BMW is not gonna sue me.
 
macUser2007 said:
I am not sure why so many are happy to see the demise of a company, which offered an alternative.

The enforceability of Apple's EULA is at best debatable, and squashing anyone who attempts to challenge it by making the process extremely expensive, is nothing for anyone to be happy about. Unless you are Apple, and Apple attorney or an investor, or just a brainless fanboy.
Click to expand...

Or someone who believes that, when you write software, other companies shouldn't be able to take your work and use it however they want in violation of your expressed agreement and copyright law.

This case isn't just about Apple.
 
doug in albq said:
Nice rebut to the fanboys!

sounds like you read my blog I wrote last December.....(or just thinking similar).

http://dougitdesign.com/blogs/blog_1_07_09_Mac-OS-X-for-PC.html
Click to expand...

Um. If you think that rant was a nice "rebut", you need to get outside and breathe some nice, clean air as well. Magnus has a history of making completely, obtusely inaccurate claims. He does so here again in a post so replete with inaccuracies and fallacies that nobody cares to take the time to go through them one by one. Suffice it to say, he's wrong. Just factually and conceptually wrong, no equivocations.

And of course it doesn't help you to call anyone with a different opinion a "fanboy/fanboi".
 
Ellizit said:
haha, good point. However, if I take a BMW engine and put it in a KIA, BMW is not gonna sue me.
Click to expand...

No, BMW is not gonna sue you; just like Apple has not sued an an individual for creating a Hackinstosh. But if someone opened up shop for "BMW Engine - Now Available in The KIA Sportage!!" - I would hazard a guess that BMW make take small issue with that.

To top it off, Psystar couldn't even back up their numbers or provide receipts to show they had actually legally purchased OSX! Something was not right with that company - just like the new company out there selling clones, and straight up calling them "clones". How in the world do you ship someone a Hackintosh with OSX installed, but make the OSX DVD an "option" to purchase?? :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back