Psystar to Challenge Mac OS X EULA?

[kyledouglas]

Blue Box

All this sounds very hypocritical, anyone heard of the blue box? Anyway as much as much as I love apple, I accept that this is VERY good for us consumers. Apple will win (duh), but I think the statement will live.

 

[e12a]

No they don't.

fair enough. I'll rephrase that. They dont make computers to sell their own operating system on.

 

[ArcaneDevice]

It is not just OSX or hardwares... it is both make what a Mac. It is designed to put both things together flawlessly. It just works! The engineers and software developer in Apple put efforts to brings two things together but now this company just gives out something "OpenMac" want to steal the fruit of these people?.

A Mac is a Mac because of the software and the user base. Only new users think it's because of the hardware.

When Mac OS was running on unremarkable beige Performas and IIcx boxes it was still a Mac. And when it was running on Motorola boxes it was still a Mac. They didn't use any cutting edge hardware and they didn't have any special interoperability.

 

[MacsAttack]

The guy's analogy about Honda is flawed. It would work if he said Honda made cars and roads (keyword: made) and only kept you on their roads.

Apple is a hardware and software company. Without the revenue from sales of their Macs how can they continue to develop software?

Car analogies are always flawed. Anyway, in my case my car comes with the following restrictions...

1. Milage cap - go over it and you pay-pay-pay (3 year lease)
2. Warranty. Void if services are not performed by an approved service center
3. Warranty. Void if I modify the vehicle.

Actually - not that different from the EUL terms on OS X when you think about it.

 

[Rendwich]

They also design their own cases, etc.

Mac Pro:

Open Computer:

Only a blind man would prefer the cheese grater, and he'd have to look twice.

 

[Sir Cecil]

He's having a joke on all of us... look:
-----------

Dictionary:
shyster – pronounced psystar
n. Slang.
An unethical, unscrupulous practitioner
-----------

 

[twilson]

I'm a little confused why so many people want Apple to succeed here.

I'd much rather be able to install OSX onto a computer that I could build for hundreds less and still get the same great experience of using a Macintosh operating system.

You seemed to miss the point, you wouldn't get the "same great experience" as you'd be adding in your own hardware, it also isn't a configuration that Apple has tested with the OS (or care about testing for patches/updates).

Also the CPUs in this so-called Open "Mac" are unable to make use of the nice Intel Vitrualization Technology (i.e. the hardware virtualization) that all except the lowest end Mac Mini support.

 

[oingoboingo]

Before people post their opinions on this subject they need to go back in Apple history and read about the clone wars.

You don't need to have Ive designed hardware to get a perfectly functioning OSX machine. When Umax, Power, Motorola etc. started producing Mac OS machines they worked fine. They worked so fine in fact that Apple ended the program because too many people were buying cheap alternatives to overpriced Apple hardware.

The Umax, Power and Motorola clones you mentioned worked fine, because they were built around motherboards, chipsets and ROMs that Apple developed and licensed to the clone makers.

 

[MattInOz]

Car analogies are always flawed. Anyway, in my case my car comes with the following restrictions...

1. Milage cap - go over it and you pay-pay-pay (3 year lease)
2. Warranty. Void if services are not performed by an approved service center
3. Warranty. Void if I modify the vehicle.

Actually - not that different from the EUL terms on OS X when you think about it.

What's more it's a bundled product.
I mean the wiper blades could be any brand.
The light globes in the dashboard are also just a standard over the shelf product. Same the engine, drive train, the seats. about the only thing the Car manufacturer makes is the frame and the body panels that hold it all together.

Yep
Any real car analogies suggests Apple can do exactly whats it's doing.

 

[MattInOz]

Only a blind man would prefer the cheese grater, and he'd have to look twice.

What about a deaf man.
That thing has next to no cooling ability.

QuoteSnip™ --mkrishnan

 

[KingYaba]

I'm thinking this news will delay the 10.5.3 release so their developers can mash in some code making it impossible to run OS X on non-Apple hardware.

 

[wildmannz]

Nah - you don't get it.

Totally Agree!

Those people who want Apple to "smash" Psystar (who tries to break the Monopoly of Apple with its overly-pompous EULA) are the people who became jealous they bought a couple thousand dollar computers only because of MacOS X . And now it seems that we will be able to get it twice cheaper, so they try to justify their current and much loved purchase

As someone else said, it is a win/win situation for consumers, why would you support the giant (i.e. Apple) when that small company is doing it for YOUR OWN good!

It's not about Apple smashing Psystar.
It's about whether Psystar can do what it is trying to.
It can't.
It's not about jealousy either. If you'd taken a serious look at what it would cost to buy your ideal computer from Psystar - you'd realise that it just isn't a hell of a lot cheaper. Let alone having to patch the stuff and having no reall support.
If you look a bit closer - you will see that nobody wins from this situation.
Apple is obliged to protect it's IP and Psystar will suffer because it isn't quite as financial as Apple in defending itself.

 

[Sir Cecil]

Sounds like a scam.

1. Announce Mac Clone
2. Take Pre-Orders
3. Vanish before shipping anything
4. Profit!

As I posted above, "PSYSTAR" = SHYSTER. It's a big joke and everyone is going for it. LOL!!!!

 

[TJones]

Ultimately I think Pystar will fair in it's endeavors however I think there are two points here that Apple should really be paying more attention to. The OpenMac product has generated a ton of interest because it offers a "Mac" at price point that is more in line with PC prices and it offers them in the configurations that customers want. If Apple wants to sell more computers they need to offer those configurations that customers want and they need to cut back a little on their hardware profit margins. Charging $400 for RAM that you can order online for under $150 is just absurd and it's turning a lot of potential customers off from making that jump.

They don't have to be Walmart but they can certainly give us a better price and stop forcing the customer to pay double for a Mac with a decent video card.

 

[MrCrowbar]

That picture shoult totally replace the title of that news iftem on the front page

 

[twilson]

You don't get it, you're correct.

Honestly, I don't agree with Apple on this one. Microsoft gets in trouble for including various programs and making them work in certain ways, but Apple can be even more restrictive with their software and it's fine? I don't get it.

You are completely right, you don't get it.

Apple made Mac OS, to run on their Mac hardware, that's the way it has always been. That's the way it was designed to be from the start.

That has no similarities at all to Microsoft bundling their brand new Internet Explorer with their 96+% market share operating system to make it the de-facto standard web browser.

 

[hyddan]

Don't like the car analogy either. OSX should more be like the fancy chassi. The guy just changed som parts in the engine (or swapped it). A Scoda with a sportscar chassi. Something...

 

[e12a]

What about a deaf man.
That thing has next to no cooling ability.

you have a great point. the case comparison made was totally subjective. I'd prefer a "cheese grater" to a "finger print mirror" < see what I did there?

Aesthetics of mac pros and powermacs are actually functional..if you've ever seen the inside of one. The whole case is designed to improve airflow and work in conjunction with complex systems of cooling. Something that a stuffy, vanilla antec can't provide.

Not even the Mac Pro logic boards share the same design of manufacturers from HP, Dell, etc. You cant fit one into a ATX case.

 

[hyddan]

(Take Windows, for example. Look how well WPA, or windows product activation worked for them. )

It does work. Thats why most people still run XP.

 

[dolbinau]

I'm a little confused why so many people want Apple to succeed here.

It's not just for the obvious reason - I don't even think this company supports the "OSX86 community" at all, In the FAQ they 'admit' that not all updates can be installed as it may break the installation - and then just link off to insanelymac as if they are obligated to provide support for a paid product. They also talk about the 'technology' as if they developed it and charging for what developers have made available for free is ludicrous.

Only a blind man would prefer the cheese grater, and he'd have to look twice.

I'd take a Mac Pro case over that incredibly cheap/cheesey reflective abomination any day .

 

[e12a]

It does work. Thats why most people still run XP.

um..you forget XP has windows product activation.

 

[bmk]

I hope Psytar succeeds, personally. I feel that EULA are out if control and someone needs to smack some sense into all companies that think they are "licensing" you software when they sell you something.

You clearly haven't thought through the issues. The reason why the Apple experience of computing is so different from Microsoft, and so much better, is exactly because Apple have been able to control both the hardware and the software. And why not? THEY WROTE AND DESIGNED IT. The EULA may be a tad vague but it is not unreasonable - in effect you could say that every piece of intellectual copyright you 'buy' - book, music film - is 'licensed'. OK you 'buy' the physical object, but you also agree legally not to screen it/use it for public/commercial purposes, etc etc. If the books you read or write, the music you listen to or make and the films you watch or produce are governed by copyright laws that certainly everyone who produces intellectual copyright thinks is fair, why not software and hardware design? If Psystar want to produce a computer and an operating system, let them, but it should be their own. What they are trying to do is leverage themselves into the global computer market on the back of Apple's name and its sofware writers with a cheap and clearly inferior product. I hope they fail big time.

 

[Live in 3D]

The Umax, Power and Motorola clones you mentioned worked fine, because they were built around motherboards, chipsets and ROMs that Apple developed and licensed to the clone makers.

Excellent point!

 

[kwikdeth]

i hope the message gets across, not the actual product itself.

i have to pay at least $1200 to get FW800 on a machine for an external hard drive that isnt bottlenecked by FW400.
i have to pay at least $2300 for the "luxury" of being able to add a second internal hard drive.

i find that ridiculous and absurd. I want to be able to use OS X, but I dont want to be limited by Apple's design choices which as of the last couple years have seriously hampered functionality for the sake of style. And to add to that, Apple's sense of "style" seems to be seriously waning. the new imacs are ugly with their heinous glossy screens, the macbook air is nice though. but other than that, asides from the slight revisions of the macbook and the mac pro, apple hasnt had a truly fresh hardware design since the first mini. everything else has been minor tweaks.

 

[bmk]

As someone else said, it is a win/win situation for consumers, why would you support the giant (i.e. Apple) when that small company is doing it for YOUR OWN good!

What a load of crap. It is a lose/lose situation for the consumer if anything. If, in a hypothetical future, Psystar started taking market share from Apple, Apple would have to cut back on all the not-so-obvious stuff which gets forgotten about in this equation - customer support, technical support, updates, Apple stores etc, all of which are not 'economical' in a capitalistic bottom line sense. And how exactly is buying a piece of **** design with no technical support from a company with zero credibility a 'win' for the customer?