Psystar Working on Mac OS X Netbook?

[BaldiMac]

Someone said i have a biased view (too lazy to look for it, lol). Yes, i am biased toward the idea that consumers are smarter at choosing what they need than corporations are.

Some consumers are. Some consumers are not.

You seem to be biased toward the idea that apple knows more than everyone else about what is best for their computing needs. You cant call me biased without recognizing your own bias, which in turn renders the point moot.

Apple isn't trying to tell anyone what they need. They are producing the computers that they want to produce and offering them for sale at a price that they feel comfortable with. Whether or not a consumer chooses to buy a Mac is based on their own free will.

This is why choice is a good thing. It allows a customer to get exactly what they need at a fair price. For a large amount of people, spending 1200 on the baseline macbook is overkill because they can sit in starbucks and type up a screenplay using a $700 lenovo and get the same results.

Choice is not always a good thing despite the popularity of that quote. Adding more options to a product lineup can decrease efficiency and quality. There are only so many quality engineers in the world.

If Apple were to add another product to their mix, it would spread their resources thinner than they are. Sure, they could hire more engineers. But would they be as good as the ones that they have?

 

[MikeTheC]

You know, when I posted my prior comments in this thread, I had no idea the controversy and mud-flinging it would create. No idea at all. It does go to prove the degree of "fanboi"-ism that's alive and well here, and frankly I'm saddened by that because I believe Apple really does produce a stellar product. However, I feel as though many of you are buying them for the wrong reasons.

I post here and also on UbuntuForums, and you'd be amazed -- that is, if you actually cared -- how useful each of you groups are in serving as a prism through which to view the other. I'm not saying there are no reasonable Mac-using MacRumors members any more than I'm saying there are no reasonable Ubuntu-using UbuntuForums members, but it takes stepping back a bit from each of you groups, overall, to really get a proper sense of it.

It's useful to gain perspective, and I'm absolutely appalled by the egotistical and almost blinders-wearing maniacal attitude in both places.

The simple fact of the matter is that Mac OS X would not suddenly "turn into Windows" simply because they chose to support more hardware. That's a bunch of b.s. and anyone here who earnestly believes that is an idiot. There's literally a ton of hardware out there that Linux supports which Mac OS X doesn't, and for goodness' sake, Linux is a free OS! The fact that I can't, on an x86-based system, stick in blah-blah-blah model of reasonably-recent, otherwise-powerful-enough nVidia or ATI (now AMD, of course) graphics card and have it supported -- just because I'm running Mac OS X -- even though other neighbors of such a card happen to be supported is not just laughable, it's inexcusable. Same thing goes for network cards, or sound cards, or SATA cards, and so on.

For crying out loud, there is so much source code out there for supporting such things as motherboard chipsets and the like you can't imagine it. Maybe that's the problem: you people can't imagine it, just like Windows users "can't imagine" there could be some other viable OS out there. And, whether Apple accepts GPL'd code directly (QA tested, of course) or simply uses it as a reference to write their own stuff, the fact of the matter is that supportability of much of what's out there is just NOT the issue so many of you want to believe that it is. Don't hold Microsoft up as an example of what it's like to support a plurality of hardware. They're NOT a good example. Linux in general and Debian in specific are excellent examples to use, since at least then you're looking at code being produced by individuals who actually take pride in what they do. Maybe it hasn't occurred to some of you folk, but perhaps the reason Apple can profitably get away with selling their products on the high side of what the market will bear is an indicator of just how bad Microsoft is at what they do, and why what they do should never, EVER be held up as a "good" example.

I've absolutely no objection to Apple charging for their OS, nor for making hardware and selling it at a profit. Apple is a business and a business' "food" is financial income. I don't object to Apple doing all the right things to not just "stay in business" but to "be very successful at staying in business". Lord knows Microsoft (and, frankly, even Linux too) need competition. I've also no objection to people buying their computer hardware from Apple along with their OS product. However, the asinine attitude that since that's what you want, that's what everybody "also has to want" is both offensive and intellectually wrong.

EDIT: In short, Apple's relative lack of hardware support is neither incidental nor accidental, but willfully deliberate on their part and designed specifically to make Mac OS X a less viable option on hardware configurations other than what Apple is willing to put forth. Whether one likes or accepts this or not makes no fundamental difference, it is what it is. If you're buying Apple computer products while taking full cognizance of this fact, then I'd argue you're buying and acting in an informed manner. If you're buying otherwise, then you're buying in a highly misinformed manner.

 

[hiimamac]

Do you really think it would be better to rely on the device makers to do so??

That's a major part of MS' problems. Enter Vista.

No control over your OS and its drivers means others can dictate the experience on Lord knows how many combinations of hardware. Welcome to Microsoft.

I love osx but it does have problems See beachball, airport.
Wtb regard to drivers, when vista came out, microsoft still supported, 98,xp, vista, server 03/08, and vista still stinks. Now win 7 coming, IT excited, touch screen technology, lots of upgrades, and less drivers will be needed. Win 7 works out of the box, even my high end FireWire audio works flawlessly.

I still prefer mac osx but I think many will love win 7.

 

[hiimamac]

I don't think some of you understand the pain involved with installing "hackintosh" on a PC. First of all, unless your notebook has a supported graphic/sound/ethernet/wireless card etc. with OSX, you're paddling up stream. The hardware compatibility is ridiculous, and you're lucky if you have a perfectly working hackintosh setup on a notebook. What most people tell you is how they successfully installed it, but don't mention the fact that half of it's just to look at and rather useless. There's people out there devoted to developing homemade drivers for hardware that they don't even own, just to help other people out. A desktop is another story. After swapping my network and sound card on an old dimension desktop, I had Tiger running like the real thing.

Gone are days of editing next files. Now osx86 has a Efi script that allows you to install Apple updates. They have come a very long way. One little script and you can install any retail osx DVD.

 

[NoSmokingBandit]

Choice is not always a good thing despite the popularity of that quote. Adding more options to a product lineup can decrease efficiency and quality. There are only so many quality engineers in the world.

If Apple were to add another product to their mix, it would spread their resources thinner than they are. Sure, they could hire more engineers. But would they be as good as the ones that they have?

This would make sense if Apple's computers didnt have so many problems. Must i bring up the 4850 again? Perhaps they should just put a x1300 in the iMac, right? Less choice is better, even if the performance is lower, right?
How about the flaky wifi in the macbook (or is it the mbp, i cant remember)? They should probably take out the wifi because it will make their laptops more stable.

MikeTheC is correct though, fanboyism is the blood of this forum. Ubuntu's forums arent quite as bad as MR, though (they generally dont like windows, but they arent arrogant snobs about it).

I love OSX, i think its the best OS on the market. I also hate apple's hardware. I could go to Lenovo's site and pick out a laptop that is leaps and bounds faster than the macbook and still costs less (it would probably run OSX too). And, as mentioned before, Apple's QC isnt as good as everyone makes it out to be.

 

[*LTD*]

Someone said i have a biased view (too lazy to look for it, lol). Yes, i am biased toward the idea that consumers are smarter at choosing what they need than corporations are. You seem to be biased toward the idea that apple knows more than everyone else about what is best for their computing needs. You cant call me biased without recognizing your own bias, which in turn renders the point moot.

I choose to allow Apple to choose what I need.

For some reason they know exactly what I like.

I see no reason why this kind of relationship can't continue.

Put it this way:

I'd rather have OS X running on Apple's higher-priced hardware than have Microsoft's garbageware running on the absolute best PC money can buy.

 

[nplima]

[..]
Which actually makes 3 parties responsible for the end user experience: the gadget maker/driver writer, the computer maker, and Microsoft for the OS. I've personally experienced the ping-pong match that ensues with finger pointing and calls to multiple india-based tech support places to try to get an issue resolved. With Apple, there is one party responsible, and a short drive to the genius bar to get an issue resolved. Apple's strategy is all encompassing: hardware, software and support all working together for a superior user experience. I for one really appreciate that approach.

Sorry, that can only be an annecdote, not a proper account of what happens when something goes wrong with a computer. The proper way to get tech support for any product on this side of the planet is to have it taken back to the retailer. If it's the Seagate HDD, the Asus board or the Samsung DVD that is at fault, you (the consumer) only find out when you read the repair report (if under warranty) or the repair quote (if outside warranty).
This is not to say I don't value the Apple retail shop and services, but saying that other suppliers don't have a comparable solution can't be right. I shopped at Dixons.co.uk , called Compaq (HP) for help and they had a courier pick up/deliver the machine for free. That was the service I had as standard warranty with my £190 Compaq from Dixons refurbished/clearance area.

As for driver issues, let's be clear about this: not all hardware is the same and there are companies who perform better than others in the development of drivers, regardless of the OS they develop for. I bet that testing before taking gadgets to market plays an important role in this, and it's certainly not an exclusive to Apple, especially when they are hiring the same OEMs as everyone else to make Intel based computers.

 

[Macmel]

You buy (hopefully) software, modify it here and there, and then resell it at a profit.

It doesn't take a scientist to understand that that's a problem.

Just two comments for you:

First: they don't sell the OS at a profit. They charge the same $129 they paid for it. The make their profit from the computer. Apple make the profit from the software.

Second: legality of the EULAs is at least arguable. Actually, Apple is not suing Psystar on EULA issues but because they have MODIFIED copyrighted material to make it run on another computer. They could have said: "our EULA states that Mac OS X can only be run on Apple computers", but they did not. Actually in some countries, like Germany (it has been discussed before), you can not agree to a contract that you still don't know when you purchase the product (you have to open it to read the EULA but you can only open it after purchase), so EULAs are not exactly legal. In the US, Apple did not want to put it to the test in front of a jury.

 

[r.j.s]

Actually in some countries, like Germany (it has been discussed before), you can not agree to a contract that you still don't know when you purchase the product (you have to open it to read the EULA but you can only open it after purchase), so EULAs are not exactly legal. In the US, Apple did not want to put it to the test in front of a jury.

You do know that if you do not agree to the SLA/EULA, you can return the software for a full refund, definitely in the US, probably in all of those other countries you refer to.

 

[gnasher729]

Actually in some countries, like Germany (it has been discussed before), you can not agree to a contract that you still don't know when you purchase the product (you have to open it to read the EULA but you can only open it after purchase), so EULAs are not exactly legal. In the US, Apple did not want to put it to the test in front of a jury.

The situation in Germany has been discussed before, but usually with not a lot of actual knowledge. Germany, like many European countries, has rather strong consumer protection laws which may very well modify how a EULA applies to a consumer. Psystar, however, is not a consumer. Psystar is a company, and for a company a contract is a a contract. If you run a company, like Psystar, than the law assumes that you are completely responsible for everything you do, and if there are any traps in your way, then you either avoid them or you fall into them, but that is your problem and no court will help you.

If, as a German company, you can't easily find out the terms under which something is sold, then you either don't buy it, or you contact the seller and find out the terms, or you accept whatever terms the seller applies (which may be stupid on your part). If a company, not a consumer, buys copies of MacOS X in Germany, then the terms of the license are absolutely one hundred percent binding. Any court in Germany would say that Psystar might possibly have the right to ask Apple for a refund for the first box containing MacOS X that they bought, but that they should have certainly opened the first box, read the license, and from then on had no right at all to complain if the license didn't allow them to do what they intended to do.

Actually, Apple is not suing Psystar on EULA issues but because they have MODIFIED copyrighted material to make it run on another computer. They could have said: "our EULA states that Mac OS X can only be run on Apple computers", but they did not.

If you bothered to read Apple's actual complaint, you will find about forty pages with dozens of individual items that Apple complains about. Some things that Psystar has done are more egregious, and therefore some of Apple's complaints are stronger than others. You will find that Apple complains about:

1. Making copies of MacOS X without a license.
2. Making modified copies of MacOS X without a license.
3. Circumventing technical methods designed to prevent (1) and (2) (DMCA)
4. Trademark infringement.
5. Interference with Apple's business
6. Inciting others to infringe on Apple's copyrights

and whatever I forgot. (2) and (3) are probably the strongest points; easiest to prove and most harmful to Apple. (5) and (6) would have easily and very quickly closed down Psystar's operations in Germany.

 

[BaldiMac]

This would make sense if Apple's computers didnt have so many problems. Must i bring up the 4850 again? Perhaps they should just put a x1300 in the iMac, right? Less choice is better, even if the performance is lower, right?
How about the flaky wifi in the macbook (or is it the mbp, i cant remember)? They should probably take out the wifi because it will make their laptops more stable.

MikeTheC is correct though, fanboyism is the blood of this forum. Ubuntu's forums arent quite as bad as MR, though (they generally dont like windows, but they arent arrogant snobs about it).

I love OSX, i think its the best OS on the market. I also hate apple's hardware. I could go to Lenovo's site and pick out a laptop that is leaps and bounds faster than the macbook and still costs less (it would probably run OSX too). And, as mentioned before, Apple's QC isnt as good as everyone makes it out to be.

You can bring up the 4850 or any other isolated problem that you want. Apple does make mistakes. And they do have to work with third parties who also make mistakes. It doesn't change the fact that they have the highest customer satisfaction in the industry. And they lead Consumer Reports laptop ratings.

Calling people a fanboy because they disagree with you does not help your argument.

 

[charlituna]

He is a sweater wearing pin head that treats his employees bad, craps in the retail staff, pays them minium wage and nothing for them if they sell millions of dollars in product with no apple care and caters to iPhone mommies, chinese I need fiii I phone crowd, while nine of the trainers now now pro apps, it's all iLife and mobile loser me.

so exactly when, where and for how long did you work for the company. you must be an ex employee if you know how much the staff makes, how they are treated.

as for some of the rest of what you said. sounds to me like a lot of bitter talking. and a lot of racism with that chinese comment. i'm sure they just love when you walk into the store. you are just the kind of customer that retail workers live to serve -- Not

 

[Macminiintel]

Psystar are doing something illegal!!!

Has anyone not even noticed what it shows on Psystar online store.

Its quite obvious they are not going to be going out and buying genuine copies of OS X Leopard and hack it. They'll be using something like iDeneb installer and get compatible hardware, or if they did hack it themselves buy one leopard disk and copy it multiple times. Thats illegal pirating software, so maybe they can get sued and shut down for piracy. However they are also offering iLife & iWork for like $59 extra so its kinda obvious they are not going to be selling the genuine products. I'm sure if a store like Amazon was selling hacked and pirated versions of Microsoft windows or xbox 360 games, Microsoft would want to sue them and make them close down. This is the same principle here, piracy and the EULA.

 

[Macmel]

The situation in Germany has been discussed before, but usually with not a lot of actual knowledge. Germany, like many European countries, has rather strong consumer protection laws which may very well modify how a EULA applies to a consumer. Psystar, however, is not a consumer. Psystar is a company, and for a company a contract is a a contract. If you run a company, like Psystar, than the law assumes that you are completely responsible for everything you do, and if there are any traps in your way, then you either avoid them or you fall into them, but that is your problem and no court will help you.

If, as a German company, you can't easily find out the terms under which something is sold, then you either don't buy it, or you contact the seller and find out the terms, or you accept whatever terms the seller applies (which may be stupid on your part). If a company, not a consumer, buys copies of MacOS X in Germany, then the terms of the license are absolutely one hundred percent binding. Any court in Germany would say that Psystar might possibly have the right to ask Apple for a refund for the first box containing MacOS X that they bought, but that they should have certainly opened the first box, read the license, and from then on had no right at all to complain if the license didn't allow them to do what they intended to do.



If you bothered to read Apple's actual complaint, you will find about forty pages with dozens of individual items that Apple complains about. Some things that Psystar has done are more egregious, and therefore some of Apple's complaints are stronger than others. You will find that Apple complains about:

1. Making copies of MacOS X without a license.
2. Making modified copies of MacOS X without a license.
3. Circumventing technical methods designed to prevent (1) and (2) (DMCA)
4. Trademark infringement.
5. Interference with Apple's business
6. Inciting others to infringe on Apple's copyrights

and whatever I forgot. (2) and (3) are probably the strongest points; easiest to prove and most harmful to Apple. (5) and (6) would have easily and very quickly closed down Psystar's operations in Germany.

I said Germany as an example, first of all.
And second, none of the points (1-6) you mention, actually involve the EULA, but copyright infringement. I mean, the basic point everybody discussed about when Psystar appeared was: "according to the EULA, you cannot install Mac OS on computers that are not Apple".
That's not even mentioned in Apple's complaint. Why? probably because they don't want to put the EULA to the test...
I'm not saying Psystar is legal. I'm saying that the EULA is not the reason for Psystar to be illegal as some people claim.

 

[gnasher729]

I said Germany as an example, first of all.
And second, none of the points (1-6) you mention, actually involve the EULA, but copyright infringement. I mean, the basic point everybody discussed about when Psystar appeared was: "according to the EULA, you cannot install Mac OS on computers that are not Apple".
That's not even mentioned in Apple's complaint. Why? probably because they don't want to put the EULA to the test...
I'm not saying Psystar is legal. I'm saying that the EULA is not the reason for Psystar to be illegal as some people claim.

The word "EULA" is not mentioned because Apple doesn't actually have a EULA, they have a "Software License Agreement for Mac OS X". The Software License Agreement _is_ added as an exhibit to Apple's complaint.

And the point that you are missing is that copying is not forbidden because the license forbids it, it is forbidden because copyright law says you need permission to make copies, and nothing gives that permission. The Software License Agreement is only added to show the court "yes, we give some people permission to make copies in some circumstances, but if you read the license, you see that license doesn't give Psystar permission to make copies". It's the same as with the GPL: If the license that you have doesn't allow copying, then you have no right to copy. Attacking the license won't help you, because if the license is invalid, then you still have no right to make copies.

Psystar would need to come up with something that gives them permission to install MacOS X on their computer (which they can't) or to come up with an argument why the should be allowed to do this without Apple's permission (which they still can't) or to come up with an argument why Apple should be required to give them permission (which they can't either).

And just as you can't be convicted for violating the GPL, only for copyright infringement, you can't be convicted for violating Apple's license, only for copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is of course bad enough (one jury has stated that copying 24 songs which you could have bought for less than 24 dollars is worth damages of more than $200,000).

 

[jbernie]

Has anyone not even noticed what it shows on Psystar online store.

Its quite obvious they are not going to be going out and buying genuine copies of OS X Leopard and hack it. They'll be using something like iDeneb installer and get compatible hardware, or if they did hack it themselves buy one leopard disk and copy it multiple times. Thats illegal pirating software, so maybe they can get sued and shut down for piracy. However they are also offering iLife & iWork for like $59 extra so its kinda obvious they are not going to be selling the genuine products. I'm sure if a store like Amazon was selling hacked and pirated versions of Microsoft windows or xbox 360 games, Microsoft would want to sue them and make them close down. This is the same principle here, piracy and the EULA.

From their website "The price includes a retail copy of Leopard in its original package. We preinstall OS X on your machine so that you may be able to begin using your Open(3) Computer right out of the box."

So they do in fact provide buy a retail copy of OSX and provide that to you, but they install it using an image they have created, which will be no different than any other manfacturer as I am sure they all have a few thousand people employed only for manually installing the OS on the machines they sell.

As to the iLife & iWork, I am assuming they are buying the "Mac Box Set" which is on the Apple store for $169.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB997?mco=NDI3MzM1Ng

I am not making any claims regarding the validity of how they do things but Apple isn't exactly not making money from the Psystar operation, and if as you suggested they were pirating the software they would have been closed down or sued heavily a long time ago.

 

[pdjudd]

So they do in fact provide buy a retail copy of OSX and provide that to you, but they install it using an image they have created, which will be no different than any other manfacturer as I am sure they all have a few thousand people employed only for manually installing the OS on the machines they sell..

Except:
1) They have yet to prove that they purchased anything - they may claim to have purchased a license but they cannot provide evidence that they have done so despite requests from Apple. Remember that even thieves lie.
2) It doesn't change anything at the end of the day since psystar is not a licensed oem vendor. That's merely academic

 

[gnasher729]

From their website "The price includes a retail copy of Leopard in its original package. We preinstall OS X on your machine so that you may be able to begin using your Open(3) Computer right out of the box."

So they do in fact provide buy a retail copy of OSX and provide that to you, but they install it using an image they have created, which will be no different than any other manfacturer as I am sure they all have a few thousand people employed only for manually installing the OS on the machines they sell.

As to the iLife & iWork, I am assuming they are buying the "Mac Box Set" which is on the Apple store for $169.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB997?mco=NDI3MzM1Ng

I am not making any claims regarding the validity of how they do things but Apple isn't exactly not making money from the Psystar operation, and if as you suggested they were pirating the software they would have been closed down or sued heavily a long time ago.

Making one copy of a DVD and installing it on multiple computers is again copyright infringement, and a rather clear case. Forget about the license: If what you say is true, then they are making multiple copies of the same DVD. It doesn't matter one bit if they also buy another box and don't copy its contents. I am sure someone from Psystar will be questioned under oath how the installation actually happens. And if that was you being questioned, would you rather help your employer or would you rather stay out of jail?

The difference to "any other manufacturer" is that these manufacturers have a license to do exactly that.

 

[jbernie]

Except:
1) They have yet to prove that they purchased anything - they may claim to have purchased a license but they cannot provide evidence that they have done so despite requests from Apple. Remember that even thieves lie.

Yup they go out at night and steal the boxes from the local Apple stores, didn't you see the news reports?

2) It doesn't change anything at the end of the day since psystar is not a licensed oem vendor. That's merely academic

Which then raises the question, if it was so open & shut as suggested so often on here, why has Apple not stopped them already? Surely they would have had a court in place to prevent Psystar from selling anything with OSX on it or included in the packaging?

 

[erikistired]

I choose to allow Apple to choose what I need.

For some reason they know exactly what I like.

I see no reason why this kind of relationship can't continue.

Put it this way:

I'd rather have OS X running on Apple's higher-priced hardware than have Microsoft's garbageware running on the absolute best PC money can buy.

that's great for you. you aren't everyone, not even close. i used to dislike the clone companies for what they were doing, until i realized that choice ISN'T a bad thing. i want a headless mac that's affordable, and i also want a netbook. if apple won't make them, why should i hate on someone who will?

anyway, with windows 7 it might be a moot point anyway, because it has really caught my eye and my fancy. and considering the hardware problems apple has been having with their notebooks, i might just shop elsewhere when it's time to get a new laptop.

However they are also offering iLife & iWork for like $59 extra so its kinda obvious they are not going to be selling the genuine products.

this is kinda ridiculous, since you can buy osx/ilife/iwork for an extra 40 bucks over the cost of osx by itself.

 

[Melrose]

that's great for you. you aren't everyone, not even close. i used to dislike the clone companies for what they were doing, until i realized that choice ISN'T a bad thing. i want a headless mac that's affordable, and i also want a netbook. if apple won't make them, why should i hate on someone who will?

That's great for you - I like choice too, but I'd rather own legal, above-board software... but that's just me. The bottom line really isn't about what I like or you like, it's about what's legal. Psystar is breaking the law - they should face serious consequences. If someone decided to start selling their own CD-Rs, people would be all up in arms. Once a precedent is set, it will be easier to stop the actions of these questionable companies in the future.

 

[pdjudd]

Yup they go out at night and steal the boxes from the local Apple stores, didn't you see the news reports?

Until psystar can show proof that they purchased osx boxes (they havent't and should be elementary to do so), they could have pirated a hacked copy from bit torrent and duplicated it. Even if that wasn't the case, as Gnasher said before, it still is copywrite infringement.

Which then raises the question, if it was so open & shut as suggested so often on here, why has Apple not stopped them already? Surely they would have had a court in place to prevent Psystar from selling anything with OSX on it or included in the packaging?

Apple is doing just that, engaging in a civil lawsuit that has not been tried yet to shut psystar down. They are in the discovery process right now. Even if evidence is clear, it still takes time in the legal system.

Apple could have won arready if Psystar was not delaying thngs (which is their right to do so). Apple can't just order them shut down outright, they can get a juge to order Psystar to pay Apple a fine large enough that would render them unable to do business financially. That takes time.

 

[applecultvictim]

I choose to allow Apple to choose what I need.

For some reason they know exactly what I like.

I see no reason why this kind of relationship can't continue.

Put it this way:

I'd rather have OS X running on Apple's higher-priced hardware than have Microsoft's garbageware running on the absolute best PC money can buy.

Same here. Excellent post btw. For all of you with your beloved windows garbageware, excuse me but why aren't you in some m$ forum preaching on how good you got it with an os that's not even been released yet (oh the irony in that) and instead you are here moaning? Some of you as you well know are proffesional moaners.

And btw what apple hardware problems? The nvidia cards that affect pretty much every other pc laptop? According surveys by top analysts at forrester research amongst others apple have DOUBLE the customer satisfaction than dell and top by far everyone else. So your points about hardware issues are just drivel. Pure and utter drivel. You are actually getting apple products way too cheap for the innovation and built quality they provide. Moreso the others DOnt even have comparable features to begin with!!! Even if you pay $1,000,000 you won't find a pc with unibody, just a mess of layers and screws, or thin aluminum like the air, or glass trackpads, or multitouch, and tons of other innovations that are software related.

Just do yourself a favour and buy apple and thank me later.

 

[Digital Skunk]

You know, when I posted my prior comments in this thread, I had no idea the controversy and mud-flinging it would create. No idea at all. It does go to prove the degree of "fanboi"-ism that's alive and well here, and frankly I'm saddened by that because I believe Apple really does produce a stellar product. However, I feel as though many of you are buying them for the wrong reasons.

I post here and also on UbuntuForums, and you'd be amazed -- that is, if you actually cared -- how useful each of you groups are in serving as a prism through which to view the other. I'm not saying there are no reasonable Mac-using MacRumors members any more than I'm saying there are no reasonable Ubuntu-using UbuntuForums members, but it takes stepping back a bit from each of you groups, overall, to really get a proper sense of it.

No, you are correct, you don't find many of the level headed posters chiming in because it's simply a mad house when the fanboy/girls show up. Good conversation roll out the door and the the ones that are level headed get so frustrated that they either turn into the f*&$wads they are arguing with or they simply pack up and leave for a few hours or days only to return and see the same people bickering in the same manner.

This is the same thing you'll find in ANY hardware or software or product "X" forum as you know with Ubuntu. Some people (many on this forum) just need to believe that there's only one decision to make when buying products and if you don't take the Apple route you obviously have something wrong with you.

It's okay to stand by your choice with personal preferences but many here take it WAY too far.

EDIT: In short, Apple's relative lack of hardware support is neither incidental nor accidental, but willfully deliberate on their part and designed specifically to make Mac OS X a less viable option on hardware configurations other than what Apple is willing to put forth. Whether one likes or accepts this or not makes no fundamental difference, it is what it is. If you're buying Apple computer products while taking full cognizance of this fact, then I'd argue you're buying and acting in an informed manner. If you're buying otherwise, then you're buying in a highly misinformed manner.

This is true, and the biggest issue you'll have with some is their lack of understanding that it's okay to buy a Mac knowing Apple does this but has a really rock solid OS. Or if it's just your preference. But to deny outright what Apple is doing is blind devotion.

 

[czachorski]

But to deny outright what Apple is doing is blind devotion.

Funny, because it seem to me that to deny outright that what Apple does enables their innovation is the real blindness.