Its like they have something to prove, like the PirateBay.
Yeah, and look how that turned out :S
Its like they have something to prove, like the PirateBay.
Yeah, and look how that turned out :S
Sold to globalgamingfactory.com for 60 million Swedish Krona, how awful for them.
And all they got was a popular name. Those guys (assuming the deal goes through) aren't going to get that much. As of September, there has been no sale. Not too many people think that it will ever happen.
Even if it does go though, half of that is going to go to pay off their current legal fees to one government. PB can still be sued.
someone just destroy pystar completely...![]()
It totally defies the main reason to do hackintohing commercially - price.
I don't agree.
That's Psystar's primary hackintosh market, but I don't agree that it is the primary hackintosh market/reason. Almost everyone I know who has done the hackintosh process, has done it because Apple doesn't offer a physical product that they're after -- a netbook. And, for me, the only reason I'd go down that path, is the same (but I want a 10" mac based tablet, not a netbook).
As for "how to label it" since you can't use the Mac brand: Hackintosh.
It's a legal form of hackintosh, and everyone knows what hackintosh means (or, at least, everyone in their target market). So, leverage it. Maybe make it distinctive, for trademark purposes:
HACKintosh or HackintoshPro or HackintoshPlus or HackintoshKit
And, like the Modbook, the user is keeping the primary apple component: the motherboard. It's true that they might never get permission to do the pre-conversion for the user (for the reason you gave), but I can't see any reasonable legal block to them selling the kit version (where the end user has to do the conversion themselves). They can't do block that any more than they can block case accessory vendors from selling things that can allow you to make a pimped-out Mac Pro. And, really, it's the same thing as the case mod market, just with a different twist.
Please provide a cite that states that it is the primary component of what a Mac constitutes. Unless you work for Apple, you cannot. True the logic board is important, but the logic board differs depending on the make and model of computer. To Apple (I am willing to bet), the primary component is the whole computer. Apple's licensing says "Apple branded" for a reason. They are the owner, it's their call what constitutes "Apple Branded"And, like the Modbook, the user is keeping the primary apple component: the motherboard.
Could money be coming from the Bank of Redmond?
IF so, its going to be money down the drain....
Bill cannot stop the demise of Windows-any better than he can stop erosion-or the wind-it has had its day in the Sun-let it go out in dignity....er just let it go...
Hackintosh is almost certainly a violation of the Macintosh trademark.
Please provide a cite that states that it is the primary component of what a Mac constitutes. Unless you work for Apple, you cannot. True the logic board is important, but the logic board differs depending on the make and model of computer. To Apple (I am willing to bet), the primary component is the whole computer. Apple's licensing says "Apple branded" for a reason. They are the owner, it's their call what constitutes "Apple Branded"
As far as I know, the Axitron keeps all Apple branded components with the exception of the screen and (I think the keyboard. Other than adding on hardware after market, the rest is all Apple. Its a partial case mod - not a re-casing.
Apple expressly supports these things, so they are free to make an exception to their agreement for these.
Even if they do (which I am willing to accept), I contend that this does not constitute what we would think of as a Hacintosh. Hackintoshing/cloning doesn't use Apple parts. In Apple's mind that is a big no-no. You can't get one part and call what you have a "mac"
I would go as far as Apple not minding case mods (not as far as non OEM cases though - I would think that goes beyond) proving that each customer buy the full hardware. No buying spare logic boards only, you got to do what Axitron does and buy a full Mac or the customer buys one separately and gets the spare casing.
Here we go again. The greedy morons at Psystar appeal the ruling ... absolutely zero surprise there. Hopefully the next time they get the ruling they deserve: 2.7 quadrillion to be paid to Apple and the morons in charge of Psystar to NEVER be allowed to run any business ever again.![]()
I think that's splitting hairs. I think it's one extreme within a spectrum of "Hacking something together, upon which to run Mac OS X". It's the "legal end of the spectrum".
Sorry, I thought that was what you were arguing. I agree that if you want to modify your mac, fine - you just have to get a Mac first. Of course don't expect support.Which is pretty much what I'm suggesting. I never said "you just buy the motherboard from Apple" nor "Psystar just buys the motherboard from Apple". I said you buy the full Apple product, and remove the motherboard. Or Psystar does it for you (still buying the full Apple product, just like Axiotron does, when they sell you the pre-converted modbook).
I would imagine Psystar riding into town not on a horse, but a donkey.And the horse they rode in on.
I don't consider Mods to be hackintoshes. Most google searches for "hackintosh" do not talk about doing a case mod - they are all about using non apple hardware and not buying a Mac (like OSX86) usually doing it with cheaper hardware - form factor doesn't play a factor. For the vast majority of hackitoshes, the only thing they ever get from Apple is the OS and promptly violate the license.
A case mod scenario involves buying actual Apple hardware with a Apple restore disc that is going to work with the hardware. You are not violating any license here since it's a mod. Upgrades would be fine too since you are upgrading from an OEM copy or you meet the license requirements (you have a "mac"). Obviously Apple allows you to modify certain things.
Overall I think the difference between a Mod and a Hackintosh is what you start out with. With a Mod, you start out with a genuine Mac. Most hackintoshes and clones do not start out with a genuine mac unless they use that to make a clone station and commit copyright infringement.
I think the reason the current mainstream hackintosh community only talks about the "license violating" solution is that people haven't really widely considered this approach. One person made their own Mac Tablet by doing this to a Mac-mini ... but aside from that, I haven't seen much in the way of "total case transplant" for the purpose of getting a Mac that is in a "form factor that Apple wont embrace".
The case mod community appears to be just making artistic interpretations, or performance tweaks, of the basic cases. I haven't really seen them going after that form factors that Apple wont embrace" type goal. So I don't really put it in the mainstream of the case mod community, either.
I agree that it is not part of the _mainstream_ hackintosh spectrum ... but, to me, it's a radical change to the hachintosh methology for accomplishing one of the two hackintosh goals (as I said before: not the "cheap mac" goal, but the "form factors that Apple wont embrace" goal).
At worst, I think it's in a transitional grey-area between "case mods" and "hackintosh". It's where those two communities come together.