Psystar to Challenge Mac OS X EULA?

[PeckhamBog]

iphone unlock parallel?

Is this a similar scenario to that of people being locked into Apple's designated carrier? Plenty of people seem happy enough to unlock their phones against Apple's will.

Being a relatively new switcher, I'm impressed with the Apple experience, though admitting it does come with a financial premium.

I'm not sure whether, as a first timer, I like [be confident] to switch to a hybrid alternative. Especially by a new start up like Pystar.

If they can survive on a customer base of current Mac users picking up cheaper more versatile kit for a reasonable length of time, then they could appear attractive to switchers in the medium to long term.

If they survive for just a little time, will there be a gold rush of others jumping in too, with Dell and HP having ago?

 

[paulMASSACRE]

Not quite sure about how this will turn out in the US, but I'm fairly confident that if someone ordered it for the UK, the court's would not find in Apple's favour.

Being a lawyer in the UK, I know how very loose our copyright laws are etc. In fact, only recently it has been decided that Europe won't be implementing anti-piracy laws as supposedly it's a breach of our human rights to freedom! Can't complain really, despite how ludicrous that actually is.

I'm supposing that this, if anything, would be brought under the action of 'breach of contract'. Now I think this is the same as in the US but I'm not entirely sure, so don't hold me to it, I am merely speaking of the situation in the UK. An EULA is very very unlikely to hold as a contract. This is because the contract is based on an 'objective reasonable' person. This thereby meaning the average Joe, and whether or not they would have signed the contract having known all the ins and outs. Because lets face it, it's unreasonable to expect everyone to read every single term and condition of a contract before signing, and the courts recognise this fact.

I also think in the EU at least, there will some kind of competition issues, so I actually think if 'Robert' gets his case done well and thoroughly, there is a strong potential of success on his part.

 

[Padraig]

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?

If Apple were to loose market share to this company, I'm sure that they'd be able to come up with a equivalent product to fend of the threat. Besides, they would still be selling their OS on these machines.

This could be the best thing for Apple.

 

[twilson]

Your opinion is wrong.

I am of the opinion (and seem to be in the minority?) that if I buy and pay for something (in this case OS X) I should be able to put it on whatever machine I want to.

Wrong!!!

You are not buying OS X, you are buying a license to use a copy of OS X as set out in the EULA.

This is the point everyone seems to be missing. You NEVER, EVER buy the software...it's always a licence allowing you to use the software under the terms of some kind of EULA.

 

[christian_k]

As for it being a Win/Win, when Apple has to start dealing with the negative feedback of people using MacOS on computer that clearly aren't designed to work well with it, who do you think is going to get blamed? Mostly Apple, just like Microsoft gets most of the blame even when its problems with other hardware and drivers (NVidia comes to mind).

But look at the system sold by psystar?

All its components are found on other Macs. Some real Mac Minis were much worse, using "crappy" core solo chips, much less memory, smaller HD,...

 

[twilson]

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

What I find absurd, is people don't seem to grasp the fact that if you want OS X you are supposed to have Apple hardware.

Would you buy an PS3/Xbox and expect them to run their native games under a different OS, or expect to be able to run the XBox OS on your Windows machine, no you wouldn't!

That's because you can't, and you except that you can't do that.

Just because it's called a "computer" doesn't suddenly make it exempt. You work within the limits that are set by manufacturers/makers in the case of about 95% of ALL products, why should a computer be different, "just because you want it to be"?

 

[christian_k]

Wrong!!!

You are not buying OS X, you are buying a license to use a copy of OS X as set out in the EULA.

This is the point everyone seems to be missing. You NEVER, EVER buy the software...it's always a licence allowing you to use the software under the terms of some kind of EULA.

Yes. But that doesn't mean everything you find in an EULA is legally effective. At least in Europe Microsoft several times lost legal battles and parts of their EULAs were declared null and void.

 

[kilow]

People just don t get it

HEY. Why don't you get it???

Why does cost OSX only $120?
(Maybe it's in the hardware price?)


Why is there no anti-virus tool for OSX? Why is there no OSX virus? Because Apple has the power created an OS that no one can hack???
(Or, maybe there are just not enough users who could buy anti-virus tools? And who do u think creates viruses?

If they survive for just a little time, will there be a gold rush of others jumping in too, with Dell and HP having ago?

I think so. And the consequences of that will be that
- OSX will become up to 20 or more market share...
- all by people who are not willing to pay for an OSX.

What follows is an OSX, which will cost $300 or more => many black copies => first viruses will come up => first anti-virus tools. And we have a second Windows.

Well THANKS Psystar.
BTW. "Reinventing The Wheel: Open Computing" Come on Psystar!?!


I really hope that this is not going to work. I really do!

 

[oldwatery]

So to the good folk out there who think it is Apples duty to do as you demand...ie...give you a cheap computer...or cheaper than those currently available.
If you come to my restaurant and demand that the sandwich I sell be prepared with WonderBread because you can't or wont pay the premium for real bread, am I supposed to capitulate.
Get real will you.
Since when does any company have to do what you want?
It is up to Apple to decide what kind of product they make and up to us to decide if it's worth it.
The market will eventually make it's voice heard.
I'd say with their recent successes Apple are proving that they know exactly what their target market wants and is doing a pretty good job of providing it.
What is truly funny is how all you naysayers are frothing at the mouth while openly admitting that the Apple OS and experience is really so great you want it to work on a clone.
Otherwise I guess you would not be so incensed by this subject in the first place. Unless this is plain old bashing and nothing else.
Oh and by the way Apple have not made any public statement about this clone as far as I'm aware so all of this is pure speculation anyway.

 

[AlexisV]

I'm supposing that this, if anything, would be brought under the action of 'breach of contract'. Now I think this is the same as in the US but I'm not entirely sure, so don't hold me to it, I am merely speaking of the situation in the UK. An EULA is very very unlikely to hold as a contract. This is because the contract is based on an 'objective reasonable' person. This thereby meaning the average Joe, and whether or not they would have signed the contract having known all the ins and outs. Because lets face it, it's unreasonable to expect everyone to read every single term and condition of a contract before signing, and the courts recognise this fact.

I think you're right about the contract, but I think a court would find that a computer reseller would have the knowledge to read and understand the contract. They seem to be admitting they have breached the contract, but that the contract is invalid because it is 'unreasonable'.
The fact they are making money off the breach of the contract would be the final nail in the coffin in my opinion.
Now they wouldn't be able to be fined in the UK, but Apple would get damages. I assume this would be related to how many machines they had sold and how many machines Apple have lost selling.

 

[IHateUserNames]

Indeed, Apple's EULA agreement is not cast into law, but simply represents an implicit agreement ("contract") between the user and company.

Maybe in the USA. According to German law, EULAs don't represent an agreement or valid contract and therefore are absolutely meaningless. By clicking "I agree" you actually agree to nothing.

Of course that doesn't give you the right to do anything you like with the purchased software (like, for instance, selling copies of it) as there are laws you have to obey. But installing your copy of Leopard on a PC and selling it would be perfectly legal in Germany, and Apple could do nothing to stop you.

 

[Sabenth]

All this about eulas and things we buy the hardware to get the software do we not i will be the first to admit i just click agree and enjoy the expereince of having an os that is relaible and works. I dont know the ins and outs of the law never have never will. But what i do know is this i bought a computer with an operating system i want to use. If the company thats offering this same option only with cheaper hardware then there no diffrent than apple them selfs as its been said all the hard ware used is already pc based. But my understanding of all this mac osx on a pc well Macs are now PC's Right???



Once agian iam no expert iam an end user who enjoys the OS that works for me. As usual ive probaly gone of the beaten track.

 

[RoDe]

Part of what makes the Mac so great is the marriage of hardware and software. I don't think that Apple is served well at all by having their software hijacked by some two bit company with no respect for the EULA. Allowing clone makers at this time, would hurt Apple considerably.

Can't agree more!!!!

 

[Tacitus]

I'm supposing that this, if anything, would be brought under the action of 'breach of contract'.

I think the legal side could be quite interesting. Not because of the EULA but under Sale of Goods legislation. I'm talking UK here so YMMV elsewhere.

Let's go back to the car analogy. If I buy a Ford, it is built of components from various people - say alternators from Lucas or Delco, fuel injectors from Tecalemit etc. Suppose one of these components fails. In that case I go back to Ford and ask them to replace it since my contract is with them not Lucas etc. Suppose Lucas then say, ok but we don't warrant alternator xyz for use in that model and have explicitly stated to Ford that we don't and they use it at their own risk. Where does that leave me?

AFAICS I would sue Ford, not Lucas since the latter explicitly states they don't warrant xyz for that car and have told Ford to that effect.

Now back to Psystar. Apple state in writing to whoever it concerns and Psystar in particular that MacOSX is not warranted in any form in their machines. They then issue an update that breaks OSX in Psystar machines, which, since they don't warrant it they have every right to do so without redress.

Where does that leave the Psystar customer, since my contract is with them and not Apple?

OK so I fall back on the hacker community if it's a software problem, but outside the enthusiasts here, how many people are going to do that. For Psystar it would be a support nightmare and unless they are seriously well capitalised, I can't see them lasting.

 

[samwight]

I am of the opinion (and seem to be in the minority?) that if I buy and pay for something (in this case OS X) I should be able to put it on whatever machine I want to.

I am of the opinion that if I buy and pay for OSX, I should be able to run it on as many machines as I want to.

Too bad it's not a matter of opinion.

Software & Hondas are different.

 

[ezpk69]

I think it's all a bluff

Round 1 to Psystar's marketing people.

Good god, did you just miss all the free advertising they got when the news of this hit every tech site out there like a tidal wave? They could remove every mention of Apple from their site right now and people would probably still buy this machine for the intended purpose. There aren't a lot of people out there right now who don't know what this is and overnight this move put Psystar on the map. Did you know who they were two days ago?

I think PsyStar knows very well this isn't going to last... after the 1st wave of publicity, they pre-emptively changed the name from OpenMac to Open Computer. After the 1st real challenge from Apple, their "fight the man" bluster will disappear and they'll do what they intended to do all along: sell computers that everybody knows you can install any OS on, even ones you're not supposed to.

Through brilliantly targeted propaganda, they've reached most of their target market in 24 hours. Thrifty Mac fans and "hacker lite" types - those intrigued by the OSX86 project and hackintosh community, but without the time or inclination to figure out everything for themselves. I have to admit, it's tempting at first, but then once you configure a decent system, you're up to $1000, and then building one doesn't sound so bad. Hell, Mac Minis and iMacs start sounding pretty good once I start dwelling on the hassle of building one LOL.

Hopefully for Psystar, I'm right and this is just a publicity stunt. If they really believe their official party line, this will not end well for them or their children, or their children's children. And for the record, not all of us want Apple to win, we just realize they will...

 

[macsmurf]

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.

Antec P182 (SE) is a great and very popular case. One of it's features are that hard drives and PSU are compartmentalized so the higher temperature of these component won't adversely affect the cooling of the CPU. This means that the case is designed for two major airflows (The air intakes are protected by washable dust filters).

The looks are indeed subjective but the build quality is not. I built my system using the black metal P182 and it is very very good.

Non-Apple hardware is not crap by definition.

 

[gnasher729]

Apple has about 14 billion more dollars in the bank than Psystar, including a full-time legal team. It's very clear who will win this case... if it makes it that far.

That is a good argument; unfortunately in my opinion because the amount of money in the bank shouldn't matter in a court case. However, I have a better argument: If you could legally sell PCs with Leopard against Apple's wishes, don't you think one of Dell, HP, Acer, Toshiba etc. would have thought of it first and done it ages ago? I think it is quite obvious that Dell could easily build a PC that runs Leopard, at higher quality and lower price than this company, and Dell would probably sell a significant number of them. So why haven't Dell or HP done this yet? Not because they are afraid of Apple's 14 billion dollar in the bank, but because they know they wouldn't have a case.

 

[macsmurf]

Maybe in the USA. According to German law, EULAs don't represent an agreement or valid contract and therefore are absolutely meaningless. By clicking "I agree" you actually agree to nothing.

Of course that doesn't give you the right to do anything you like with the purchased software (like, for instance, selling copies of it) as there are laws you have to obey. But installing your copy of Leopard on a PC and selling it would be perfectly legal in Germany, and Apple could do nothing to stop you.

According to danish law the EULA is in fact a legally binding agreement. However, the right to patch software so that it may run on your computer is explicitly granted by law, and this right cannot be signed away by agreeing to something else (again, this is explicitly stated). For example, circumventing region protection on DVDs, so that region 1 DVDs will play on a region 2 DVD player is completely legal in Denmark.

I believe to be well within my rights to buy OS X and run it on non Apple hardware.

 

[gnasher729]

Maybe in the USA. According to German law, EULAs don't represent an agreement or valid contract and therefore are absolutely meaningless. By clicking "I agree" you actually agree to nothing.

Of course that doesn't give you the right to do anything you like with the purchased software (like, for instance, selling copies of it) as there are laws you have to obey. But installing your copy of Leopard on a PC and selling it would be perfectly legal in Germany, and Apple could do nothing to stop you.

Wait a second. You are confusing two things: What an end user can do, and what a company can do. In Germany, Psysomething would be in deep trouble because what they do is _unfair competition_ (unlauterer Wettbewerb): Nobody would buy their machines if Apple didn't exist. The only reason why anybody would buy any of their machines is because of the work that Apple has done. They are a competitor, or at least they try to be one , and therefore laws apply to them that don't apply to an end user.

 

[EagerDragon]

honestly, they make more $ on ipods and iphones then macs. I bet they could make plenty selling the OS and selling hw. Try it with leopard. If it doesn't work, make 10.6 proprietary again.

Mac are something like 50% of their income, even if it was only 25% of their income, Apple would fight to the death, they have no choice.

However the hardware this contender makes is perfectly legal and they are not the only one. The issue is the company installing OSX on it. That is it.

People have been able to hack OSX into an el Cheapo PC for a while and has done nothing to Apple. These people are willing to have a brick for a computer every so often due to an update. They revert back and all is well, however they have all the vulnerabilities that were discovered and patched, but since they can not install patches, they remain vulnerable.

Average Joe Blow in the streets will not be buying this once they discover they end with a brick a few weeks later and that none of the bugs can be fixed.

 

[miniConvert]

Well, I believe that an Apple Mac is about the fusion of hardware and software. I believe that what makes Mac's so great is that Apple has complete control over both elements.

I hope Apple win this. They should be able to stop another company from producing Mac clones.

 

[beast]

I think they're in the clear on this one as long as they don't sell OSX preinstalled.

If they sell a PC with a blank hard drive, but it just so happens that it can run OSX, then it's up to the end user, which is who Apple will need to (and won't be able to) go after.

It's not the product that's illegal, it's what the end user does with it that's illegal. If I do something illegal with my car, Volkswagen can't be held responsible. I don't think this scenario is any different.


Apple's programmers will be stopping this much quicker than Apple's lawyers will.

i sell you a weapon and I KNOW that you will commit a murder with that weapon..... does that not make me an accessory to that crime and thus punishable by law????? (i'm not sure whether this holds up interms of software :S)

 

[gnasher729]

1st off, people need to calm the frak down and realize that even IF this guy was successful in doing this - really - how many people would buy this thing as dodgy and complicated as it is.

Look, people buy macs because they want a clean, simple user experience. Not to save money and run a hacked OS.

People buying computers come in many categories; I may leave out a few: 1. People going to PCWorld and picking up a cheap PC running Windows. 2. People going to the Apple Store and picking up a Macintosh. 3. Hackers and enthusiasts who build their own machine and install Windows. 4. Hackers and enthusiasts who build their own machine and install MacOS X - mostly for the challenge. Now group 4 is already small.

And then comes a tiny, tiny group: People who are afraid of the challenges that group 4 faces, so they buy a ready-made PC, but not from a reputable company but a complete unknown, and the don't visit x86.org (name is probably wrong) because they are afraid, but instead rely on PsyStar, except that PsyStar doesn't give them any guarantee that this will work at all, quite the opposite. If Dell sold Mac-compatible machines, with a guarantee that you can install Leopard and if it doesn't work Dell will fix it, they would sell thousands and thousands. These people we are talking about won't.

 

[Much Ado]

For the future of the Mac Apple have to win this.

If Psystar win, others will follow
If others follow, Apple's hardware business will be slashed into pieces
They will eventually have to ditch the Mac, focus on iPhone
No more Mac OS

People buying computers come in many categories; I may leave out a few: 1. People going to PCWorld and picking up a cheap PC running Windows. 2. People going to the Apple Store and picking up a Macintosh. 3. Hackers and enthusiasts who build their own machine and install Windows. 4. Hackers and enthusiasts who build their own machine and install MacOS X - mostly for the challenge. Now group 4 is already small.

Group 5- people who walk into PCWorld and buy a Dell running OSX. 'Aint that the worry?