Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Psystar to Challenge Mac OS X EULA?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Okay, so I haven't read this entire thread, so forgive me if what I say has already been said...
While in general, I'm all for competition. The issue that I see with this is that it's opening a can of worms that Apple isn't ready for. If Psystar wins this, then Apple has to support a hardware platform that they aren't in control of. This in itself is problematic, as it will eventually lead to Apple needing to support as much hardware as it possibly can, just as MS has to. This means that all the tight integration between hardware and software that we all love could get completely demolished. It also means that Apple will have to spend more money on their support department, and less on R&D and other things.
Now, I'm sure that we could argue that Apple could just say that this is not officially supported hardware, so they won't support it. This, however, I'm sure would backfire. Of course, all the consumers who are interested in trying out Mac OS would get a nice cheap system. Then they have a problem, only to find that Apple is telling that they're up a creek. Under the best circumstances, this would bring Psystar to their knees and only piss off a small handful of consumers. But I suspect that this would grow into a black mark against Apple from the perspective of a large number of end users. Thus, Apple really has to be in the position of, at the very least, unofficially supporting this hardware that they have no control over.
While in general, I'm all for competition. The issue that I see with this is that it's opening a can of worms that Apple isn't ready for. If Psystar wins this, then Apple has to support a hardware platform that they aren't in control of. This in itself is problematic, as it will eventually lead to Apple needing to support as much hardware as it possibly can, just as MS has to. This means that all the tight integration between hardware and software that we all love could get completely demolished. It also means that Apple will have to spend more money on their support department, and less on R&D and other things.
Now, I'm sure that we could argue that Apple could just say that this is not officially supported hardware, so they won't support it. This, however, I'm sure would backfire. Of course, all the consumers who are interested in trying out Mac OS would get a nice cheap system. Then they have a problem, only to find that Apple is telling that they're up a creek. Under the best circumstances, this would bring Psystar to their knees and only piss off a small handful of consumers. But I suspect that this would grow into a black mark against Apple from the perspective of a large number of end users. Thus, Apple really has to be in the position of, at the very least, unofficially supporting this hardware that they have no control over.
Just leave this matter to the adults ok?
I love apple and will always be. I dont go criticize
just because one day a company pop out and say they are cheaper and mac-compatibility. What's the matter with you guys?
However, without doubt, i does want to get one if psystar is just next to my house.
u better thank me for putting some reasons into your blank brain
I love apple and will always be. I dont go criticize
just because one day a company pop out and say they are cheaper and mac-compatibility. What's the matter with you guys?However, without doubt, i does want to get one if psystar is just next to my house.
u better thank me for putting some reasons into your blank brain
EULA is End User Licence Agreement... Psystar is not end user so in my point of view they have nothing to do with EULA and EULA has nothing to do with them...
Heh, good thing your point of view is pretty much completely meaningless in this case. Psystar is purchasing those copies of OS X (and then reselling them without permission, which I believe could be another major hurdle for them), so they are legally an End User. They are the ones seeing and agreeing to the EULA when they setup the computers at any rate, so they are the responsible party.
jW
I am not planning to buy from those guys by the way, and I still think those who like the design (build quality is not the same anymore, so it is just the design
Are you blind?
"not the same anymore" Sorry dude but the new macs are way better built quality than the old ones. Just look at the imacs!!! Glass + Aluminium what more do you want? (only one screw in site). just goes to show no matter how good something is people will always moan, the build quality is phenominal!!!Or Apple could sell a mid-range mac & sell its other computers at a fair price & the issue is over....No reason to buy a open mac when you can get the real thing from Apple...
Let's face some facts here: to anyone that likes Apple computers for what they are, these open machines aren't very appealing at all - and to those that want to experiment with a hackintosh you could do much better on your own - with full warranties on all your individual components.
This really affects the pc makers more than it does Apple. Dell has been saying forever that they want to license OS X. Now this company comes out of nowhere and tries this crap? It's all very filthy. And if it's so "open" why is there no Windows or Linux install option?
This really affects the pc makers more than it does Apple. Dell has been saying forever that they want to license OS X. Now this company comes out of nowhere and tries this crap? It's all very filthy. And if it's so "open" why is there no Windows or Linux install option?
I am not planning to buy from those guys by the way, and I still think those who like the design (build quality is not the same anymore, so it is just the design
Are you blind?
So you end up talking about "Design" and not "Build Quality"… thereby proving Bokser's point…
Oh dear.
The one-screw in sight, glass and aluminium… all that is down to design. Nothing to do with build quality.
Apple's build quality and QC has gone down hill recently.
Me personally IMO I think its a pretty cool thing since I dont feel like shelling uot 4 grand nor do i have 4 grand to get a computer that I want. I only personally have useage for osx because of Logic Studio. So for people like me who use it because of a program and don't really care if it's an apple product or not, though they are so much better the pc's i've had in the past, this is a good oppurtunity to get a great comp (spec wise) for a cheaper rate.
All of these car analogies suck.
A Mac is like a Cell Phone, DVD Player, TV, Cable Box, DVR, Satellite Receiver, Playstation, XBox, Wii, MP3 Players (including iPod), or any other electronic device. Each of these is just an assembly of hardware. None of these will run with out some sort of operating system that the manufacturer loads on it. The software is specifically designed for their hardware just as much as the hardware is designed for the software. Apple designed the Macintosh to work in the same fashion. Its the whole widget.
The public has no desire do buy a satellite receiver and then have to shop for software to run it. All of these devices are ready to go and updates, support, and patches come from them. If a cable box, the cable provider pushes the software to you.
If Apple's arrangement is some sort of "monopoly" (which it is clearly not), or something you think should be illegal. So is EVERY other device that operates with any sort of electronics.
A Mac is like a Cell Phone, DVD Player, TV, Cable Box, DVR, Satellite Receiver, Playstation, XBox, Wii, MP3 Players (including iPod), or any other electronic device. Each of these is just an assembly of hardware. None of these will run with out some sort of operating system that the manufacturer loads on it. The software is specifically designed for their hardware just as much as the hardware is designed for the software. Apple designed the Macintosh to work in the same fashion. Its the whole widget.
The public has no desire do buy a satellite receiver and then have to shop for software to run it. All of these devices are ready to go and updates, support, and patches come from them. If a cable box, the cable provider pushes the software to you.
If Apple's arrangement is some sort of "monopoly" (which it is clearly not), or something you think should be illegal. So is EVERY other device that operates with any sort of electronics.
I think the only reason Dell does not try this is they need Apple continued support since Apple makes the os, Dell is not going to put themselves in a position where Apple breaks the software on the Dell pc with osx. That would be a big issue for Dell....
Maybe they will also start implementing serial numbers and hardware tests before updates and during installations / upgrades. I prefer the normal way but it may come to this.
Yes Apple is not about to loose 25-40% of their revenue without a fight. I am sure Apple has played this scenario and has plans on how to deal with this type of issue. It was just a mater of time.
It looks like you have to get the OpenPro model to get a choice. The cheap model has no choice. Not sure what to say about that...
They may not be able to tell you not to read it after 10PM, but they can tell you not to stand on a corner in downtown and read the story aloud. They can also tell you that you cannot include a copy of their book in a bundled package with other products. (The odds are that they wouldn't tell you either of these things unless certain other conditions were met. For example, if you advertised a public reading of LOTR, they might have a problem with that. Or, if you represented the inclusion of LOTR with your package of other products as implying that there is some official association between these products.) Both of these examples are much closer to what Psystar is doing, and why I suspect that Apple does have good ground to stand on to stop them from doing it.
While I certainly agree that there are grey areas, companies like Apple would be foolish to put things into their EULAs that were not defendable, as people who know contract law would quickly challenge the EULAs and Apple would face either backing down or dealing with the legal fees. So, I expect that Apple Legal has kept things in the EULAs toward the "white" end of the grey scale. That's not to say that they aren't grey, it's just to say that they will be harder to challenge, and it really will depend on having a legal team with some real prowess.
Actually, the rights are similar, and in both cases the fundamental legal foundation is the principle of intellectual property. If I write a book, then it is my intellectual property. If I publish it and you buy it, you're buying the right to do certain things with it. The exact same thing applies to software. If I write a piece of software, then it is my intellectual property. If I publish it and you buy it, you're buying the right to do certain things with it. In the case of the book, what you're allowed to do is governed by copyright law and whatever copyright disclaimer is stated in the front cover of the book ("All rights reserved"). In the case of the software, what your allowed to do is governed by copyright law and the EULA.
This is not the same as leasing it. Leasing implies that at some point you lose your rights to use the software. Under most EULAs that doesn't happen. Now, there are some pieces of software out there that are licensed under a lease not a sale model. Personally, I'm not a fan of these. But, at this point, neither Windows nor OS X are licensed this way.
Lets see your License to practice law.
People are discussing what "If", and they are having fun at it, they are working thru the logic and the possibilities.
You are so smart and know it all, show us your license to practice law and tell us what is right, or are you afraid that we will tear your "truth" apart?
I doubt they would go back to PPC. What they might do (hypothetically) is add some type of system that ties OSX to you particular macs serial number (or something similar; a kind of activation).
With all of this talk about EULA's not being binding, I assume that this also means that I could legally buy a Windows Upgrade to install on a new PC? I know it's not intended to be used w/o a prior version of windows, but if I bought it I should be able to do what I want with it...
I only see this as bad if the vendor pre-installs OS X. It needs to be clear to the customer that they are buying a Hacked machine and the experience may not represent Apple.
The problem is people WILL have trouble and blame it on OS X. Apple's image is consequentially tarnished.
I only see this as bad if the vendor pre-installs OS X. It needs to be clear to the customer that they are buying a Hacked machine and the experience may not represent Apple.
The problem is people WILL have trouble and blame it on OS X. Apple's image is consequentially tarnished.
As far as I can see, he didn't make any legal claims himself. Just because he isn't a lawyer doesn't suddenly make your uninformed legal opinions any more valid.