Psystar Offers Non-Apple PC, with Leopard pre-installed.

[erron]

Um, heres my opinion and like everyone elses..its useless.

 

1. Maybe apple bought a processor company for reasons like this? To protect it's future? http://www.macworld.com/article/133131/2008/04/semi.html

 

I am sure most of you have read the article.

 

2. If and when they stop using intel, dont worry. The community here will still be able to get the updates working on hackintosh machines. They wont simply stop supporting intelmacs thereby alienating all of the people who may have switched over just because they started using intel. It's thier own fault they used it as a selling point.

 

3. To some of you ppl worried, cool it. Saying someone selling fake macs could ruin this forum or stop it from happening is like saying microsofts updates and vista stopped the community of people who steal windows.

 

4. Some of you other people crack me up with your *little guy* mentality. Don't sit here on the forums and say you like the small user community of macs because it keeps it safer and blah blah. I get so tired of people walking around with macbooks and acting all caddy. Everyone knows about macs. Everyone knows its not windows and people are so stupif these days they are too scared to switch.

 

Dont sit in here or anywhere else and think for a second apples shareholders and execs dont wish every night they had 80% of the marketshare. They want nothing more. Check thier ads.

 

5. Lets just all sit back and laugh at the fact there are not a ton of people who want this. People who want macs are people who know they want one. They wont just be like...oh i can get amac now for $550, lets do it! Many of you, like myself, are smart enough to buy actual macs and have a hackintosh for fun or whatever. I built mine and it works perfectly and it cost me $280. All new parts, and almost the same as thier crappy sale computer.

 

so everyone, calm down, and just wait a year for this company to fold one way or the other. If you think until now apple was kinda in the dark about people stealing thier os, you just need to pay more attention.

[JustinTD]

Well said. Although, I do think that more attention to the x86 Hackintosh's might incline Apple to try and develop ways (as MS did) to try to prevent OS theft. Are they aware of us? Sure. Are we a concern, not really ... BUT ... if the technology we develop here helps lead to companies selling Mac clones, you can bet they will want to shut it down to slow its propgation. You can't stop OS theft, MS is a perfect example of that ... but you can slow it down and make certain aspects of it harder. Me, I own a legit mac so I am not concerned. One day, if I can get up the dough, I will buy a REAL Mac Pro and make the other machine a Windows box again ... but at this point, I can barely pay my car payments and mortgage, let alone buy a new mac.

[Soliber]

Um, heres my opinion and like everyone elses..its useless.

 

1. Maybe apple bought a processor company for reasons like this? To protect it's future? http://www.macworld.com/article/133131/2008/04/semi.html

 

I am sure most of you have read the article.

 

2. If and when they stop using intel, dont worry. The community here will still be able to get the updates working on hackintosh machines. They wont simply stop supporting intelmacs thereby alienating all of the people who may have switched over just because they started using intel. It's thier own fault they used it as a selling point.

That'll be a very long way off "when" if you ask me. Computercompanies don't jump ship every few years as to the processor architecture. When Apple made the switch from ppc to x86, they and the entire industry that supports mac's had to adapt. That's not something you want to go through as a company unless you have absolutely no choice.

[JustinTD]

That'll be a very long way off "when" if you ask me. Computercompanies don't jump ship every few years as to the processor architecture. When Apple made the switch from ppc to x86, they and the entire industry that supports mac's had to adapt. That's not something you want to go through as a company unless you have absolutely no choice.

 

I disagree, the new architecture would be similar to PPC and presumably the same command set, so there would be no major tweaking needed. BUT, I do agree that it's a long way off ... they have to develop the new hardware systems for it and their rate of deployment, you're talking 1-3 years most likely at the earliest since they have not exhausted the intel chips yet. I think they are preplanning for the time when they hit the limit between performance and reliability with the intel chips, and by that time thye will be well into the setup of the new chips

[macmaniac]

Apple might be tolerating this Psystar nonsense for now because an OSX license is sold with every computer and withno support from Apple. Better to make $129 then nothing at all (cost of disk and package ~$0.10). My .02

 

Also in this thread, it was mentioned that only the EULA was being violated. Not that anybody here is a lawyer, so I'm not sure about any of the "offered" legal opinions. But......

 

Psystar is selling a computer with an OS, not "using" it. They are not the end user, and therefore not violating the EULA. Crazy? Sure, but Apple hasn't flinched.

 

I'm wondering how many Psystars with OSX need to be sold before Apple "releases" the (legal) hounds.

[Maxintosh]

Sure, but Apple hasn't flinched. I'm wondering how many Psystars with OSX need to be sold before Apple "releases" the (legal) hounds.

There is no evidence of this. Just because nothing 'publicly' has been released does NOT mean that Apple is not pursuing this matter legally.

[Spol]

There are two things apple should do immediately, first to bring a new mid range desktop line with quad cores and PCI/PCI-E slots which does not use any laptop parts and the base model doesn't cost more than $1300, second to take legal action against PsyStar.

[macmaniac]

There is no evidence of this. Just because nothing 'publicly' has been released does NOT mean that Apple is not pursuing this matter legally.

 

What? So Apple's team has already sent a "strongly worded" letter to Psystar? Certainly no evidence of that either.

 

Lets face it. Apple is not doing anything right now. No court documents filed. No nothing. At some point they might/will/whatever. Lets agree to wait and see.

[Maxintosh]

So Apple's team has already sent a "strongly worded" letter to Psystar? Certainly no evidence of that either.

If you've ever (legally) dealt with Apple then there is

 

Typically council from one side privately meets with council from Apple in San Francisco well before anything is 'officially' decided or filed.

[DiGiCiD@L]

There are two things apple should do immediately, first to bring a new mid range desktop line with quad cores and PCI/PCI-E slots which does not use any laptop parts and the base model doesn't cost more than $1300, second to take legal action against PsyStar.

Yeah I don't know about others here, but if they had done that in the beginning... essentially released a 'mac-pro-lite' - but they could call it just plain 'Mac' (I know, crazy talking now...) - then I wouldn't even have bothered making either of my hackintoshes. I actually just purchased the hardware that I wanted for the leopard compatibility, because it makes one hell of a PC when I boot to Windows or Linux too. If they offered everything a Mac Pro offers, but with Core2 rather than Xeon processors, and standard un-buffered RAM, with 3-4 PCI/PCIe slots and 4-6 SATA ports - I'd have gladly paid apple an extra $100-200 over the cost of my DIY workstations just to have a nice brushed aluminum case and Apple support.

 

I paid for Leopard anyway so they got that money from me regardless.However, there is one advantage (albeit one that paystar has almost completely eliminated with their crappy hardware). In my 'HackPro' I have a Q6600 O/C'd to 3GHz, 8GB DDR2 @ 1066MHz, and a GTS8800512 - when I boot into Leopard the system kicks ass - basically when I compare it to my friend's Mac Pro, it seems as fast in almost everything and only in HD video/3D is slightly slower. However, when he boots (via Boot Camp) into XP to play some games... my system leaves his in the dust... it's not even remotely even. I get between 40-90 FPS more in almost everything, and there are a few games that he still can't run even in a pure boot of XP. Which isn't that surprising since it's like playing games on a Server.

 

All things being equal - I've been working with PC and Mac hardware (and DEC/Alpha, etc..) for almost 20 years now... so I don't mind losing support for my main system if it gives me what's truly the best of both worlds. After all, the PC is a tool and so is the OS - Windows/OSX/Linux - they're all imperfect and all require knowledge in order to properly support... at least until there's a 'genius bar' in every 7-Eleven and Starbucks in the country.

 

I think releasing OS X for every X86 machine would be its downfall. I think OS X is protected by its small percentage on the market. If everyone can install OS X officially, without the "crack" and "stolen" hassle, every freak would start hacking the {censored} out of it.

 

...Not to mention all the companies that would start writing software for OSX... we sure wouldn't want to see an OSX software section as large as the one for Windows at the local computer/electronics store! That would be absolute mayhem... imagine all the indecision!

 

Much better to just have one tiny aisle to browse rather than 5 -6 of them... yes you would have to be concerned about security - but I hope you don't think that by running OSX you can just turn a blind eye to your network security settings and blindly open any file or email attachment that strikes your fancy... :glare:

[DP User]

If they offered everything a Mac Pro offers, but with Core2 rather than Xeon processors, and standard un-buffered RAM, with 3-4 PCI/PCIe slots and 4-6 SATA ports - I'd have gladly paid apple an extra $100-200 over the cost of my DIY workstations just to have a nice brushed aluminum case and Apple support. I paid for Leopard anyway so they got that money from me regardless.

<br /><br /><br />

 

Agreed!!!!! This is why I just built mine.... And it works GREAT!!! I have been mixing in Logic and Digital Performer with my UAD cards flawlessly. :glare:

 

An Overclocked Q6600 works like a beaut when mixing. I finished a drum track using Waves SSL plugins that would cripple my G5 after getting the 1st 7 tracks done, I barely moved past 13% processor useage with 48 tracks running.

 

Now if apple built this machine... I'd be in love!!! LOL.

[jaez]

Why Psystar is right. Hoax, fake, or real. It's the idea of providing a computer that can run OS X.

 

Psystar is selling hardware.

 

It's a computer that happens to have components that are most compatible with OS X.

 

You don't have to put OS X on it. You could install Windows, Linux, etc...

 

Is Psyatar ripping of the OSx86 community?

 

Of course not. They are just learning from the community, just like we learn from school.

 

They read, and learn from others mistakes, what works, what doesn't. So, they pick out

the best components that enable them to build a cheap Mac compatible computer. And then

they sell this hardware to people who don't want to fiddle with various hardware components

themselves, find out what works on their own.

 

They are selling a computer that can run any open operating system, or windows, or OS X.

 

Then, they install Leopard for you, provided you buy Leopard.

 

According to Law, Apple cannot prevent anyone from using OS X on different hardware, even

though their EULA says it's only Licensed for Apple Logo'ed hardware. That's because it's illegal

to "tie" two separately sold products "A" and "B" together, and require the purchaser of "A" to

also buy "B" in order to use either "A" or "B". That's the law. Microsoft fought the battle and lost.

They wanted to tie "IE" to "Windows". They even wrote Windows so that you could'nt take out

IE easily. The court made them separate the products. Apple's EULA is unenforceable for

that purpose, i.e. for "tying", i.e. if they try to make people buy their hardware to use their OS.

 

If Apple tries to make OS X incompatible with other hardware, buy writing specific "protection" type

code fragments into OSX, that are not demonstrated to be essential to the working of the OS, then the courts

will require Apple to remove these "protective code" fragments. The prescedence is Microsoft, who tried

to write the code to force the link between IE and Windows. It was true that Windows required IE, but

it was also true that Windows could run just as well without IE, and Microsoft's code links were a

"protection scheme" to force people to use IE on Windows. Apple cannot legally write "protection code" to

link OSX to Apple Hardware, anymore than Microsoft could. And if there are any such code fragments

in OSX, Apple must remove them. If Apple doesn't, and the OSx86 community removes these fragments,

then Apple cannot sue OSx86 members, because the OSx86 project is simply implementing the law,

as it is currently understood to be, just as it was decided in that Microsoft case.

 

It is therefore legal to modify OSX to enable it to run on any hardware.

 

And Apple cannot sue anyone for this.

 

However, what they

can do, is not provide support for using OS X on a Psystar or any other non-apple hardware. That

is the limit of the power the law gives to their EULA. If you "buy" Leopard, you can run it on any machine,

by law, but cannot make any claims against Apple for non-functioning operation except when the OS is

used on Apple Hardware. Even in the latter case, there's usually a clause in most software that states

that the software is not being provided with any purpose expressed or implied, use at your own risk,

sofware developer not being held liable for any particular use. Software developers try to cover themselves

by including this type of clause, denying that they ever implied you could use their software for the purpose

you actually used it for. They limit their liability to the cost of the software itself.

 

The only copy protection scheme the law allows Apple, is that which prevents copying OSX without paying for it.

 

If you buy OSX, you can use it on any machine. You can also fix it to work on other machines, by removing or including drivers and other auxiliary software patches that might be needed to tune the software to your hardware. Anything that overcomes "tying" is allowed by law. you still can only install it on one machine, etc..just like the EULA requires..

 

so...Psystar like co.s are inevitable...

[Redliner]

I highly Recommend that anyone reading my post g back and read the post above me. I think you go t it right on.

[badeavasile]

So, they pick out the best components that enable them to build a cheap Mac compatible computer.

 

Duuude... You gotta see one of my Hackintoshes first...

[DJ Loe Kee]

Why Psystar is right. Hoax, fake, or real. It's the idea of providing a computer that can run OS X.

 

Psystar is selling hardware.

 

It's a computer that happens to have components that are most compatible with OS X.

 

You don't have to put OS X on it. You could install Windows, Linux, etc...

 

Is Psyatar ripping of the OSx86 community?

 

Of course not. They are just learning from the community, just like we learn from school.

 

They read, and learn from others mistakes, what works, what doesn't. So, they pick out

the best components that enable them to build a cheap Mac compatible computer. And then

they sell this hardware to people who don't want to fiddle with various hardware components

themselves, find out what works on their own.

 

They are selling a computer that can run any open operating system, or windows, or OS X.

 

Then, they install Leopard for you, provided you buy Leopard.

 

According to Law, Apple cannot prevent anyone from using OS X on different hardware, even

though their EULA says it's only Licensed for Apple Logo'ed hardware. That's because it's illegal

to "tie" two separately sold products "A" and "B" together, and require the purchaser of "A" to

also buy "B" in order to use either "A" or "B". That's the law. Microsoft fought the battle and lost.

They wanted to tie "IE" to "Windows". They even wrote Windows so that you could'nt take out

IE easily. The court made them separate the products. Apple's EULA is unenforceable for

that purpose, i.e. for "tying", i.e. if they try to make people buy their hardware to use their OS.

 

If Apple tries to make OS X incompatible with other hardware, buy writing specific "protection" type

code fragments into OSX, that are not demonstrated to be essential to the working of the OS, then the courts

will require Apple to remove these "protective code" fragments. The prescedence is Microsoft, who tried

to write the code to force the link between IE and Windows. It was true that Windows required IE, but

it was also true that Windows could run just as well without IE, and Microsoft's code links were a

"protection scheme" to force people to use IE on Windows. Apple cannot legally write "protection code" to

link OSX to Apple Hardware, anymore than Microsoft could. And if there are any such code fragments

in OSX, Apple must remove them. If Apple doesn't, and the OSx86 community removes these fragments,

then Apple cannot sue OSx86 members, because the OSx86 project is simply implementing the law,

as it is currently understood to be, just as it was decided in that Microsoft case.

 

It is therefore legal to modify OSX to enable it to run on any hardware.

 

And Apple cannot sue anyone for this.

 

However, what they

can do, is not provide support for using OS X on a Psystar or any other non-apple hardware. That

is the limit of the power the law gives to their EULA. If you "buy" Leopard, you can run it on any machine,

by law, but cannot make any claims against Apple for non-functioning operation except when the OS is

used on Apple Hardware. Even in the latter case, there's usually a clause in most software that states

that the software is not being provided with any purpose expressed or implied, use at your own risk,

sofware developer not being held liable for any particular use. Software developers try to cover themselves

by including this type of clause, denying that they ever implied you could use their software for the purpose

you actually used it for. They limit their liability to the cost of the software itself.

 

The only copy protection scheme the law allows Apple, is that which prevents copying OSX without paying for it.

 

If you buy OSX, you can use it on any machine. You can also fix it to work on other machines, by removing or including drivers and other auxiliary software patches that might be needed to tune the software to your hardware. Anything that overcomes "tying" is allowed by law. you still can only install it on one machine, etc..just like the EULA requires..

 

so...Psystar like co.s are inevitable...

i agree with you. i see psystar as any other person or company that buys parts off of newegg, builds a pc and then sells it on ebay or craigslist for a profit. they won't make the same profit margins as dell or hp 'cause dell and hp buys their parts at wholesale prices (in other words, cheaper than newegg prices... but i "betcha" that if you ordered 1,000-10,000+ of the same part from newegg, newegg would sell it to you for "wholesale prices" too...). for the buyer, it is buyer beware because the majority of the "custom builder pc" sellers offer no warranty and you never know how long the pc will last with no problems (especially is you are usin' windows xp or vista).

 

i've actually thought about this (sellin' custom pc's) but by the time i build a pc with the BEST, not cheapest parts (to ensure a long shelf life) and buy windows xp pro (just to avoid a piracy lawsuit from microsoft, i could preload my college's faculty/staff aka corporate version of xp pro for them and give them a cd-r of my cd), the pc will cost more than a dell or hp (i could build it for cheaper but cheap parts will just cause you problems in the long run) (at least it will be cheaper than other gamin' pc's similarly equipped like alienware). the only market for this pc would be a pc gamer wouldn doesn't mind buyin' a pc for over $500. but then, most pc gamers will build their own pc. plus, this person would call me for tech support everytime the pc has problems and i wouldn't be able to fix it for them. when my custom pc malfunctions and i can't find a solution on google, i take it to the pc repairman (i'm all hardware, not software).

 

on the apple eula and the windows/ie argument, i'm not sure if a court would let a company use that as a precedent. i'd rather let somebody use that in a court of law and see what the judge says before i render my opinion.

 

Duuude... You gotta see one of my Hackintoshes first...

yep, i agree with badeavasile. psystar is usin' the cheapest parts available and that will lead to a short shelf life of the pc. i'm not sure rather to blame psystar for usin' the cheapest parts or on the customers who want to buy the cheapest pc available. i "betcha" that a short shelf life will 'cause many of psystar's customers to avoid buyin' from psystar a 2nd time. remember, you get what you pay for.

[Kane Adams]

Well they will buy it , all you have to do is look at Emachine and all the computers they sell.

[assew]

Well, i think that it will soon end,

as a true Apple Hard & Soft fan & fan of osx86 community

i hav called apple and they were very surprised by that psystar thing, of course i didn't mention anything about osx86.

[Kane Adams]

lol sure they were.

[joe75]

i hav called apple and they were very surprised by that psystar thing, of course i didn't mention anything about osx86.

 

[Redliner]

[mifki]

*looks to the handgun lying on the table*

[Redliner]

kiko, I like your new avatar.

[DJ Loe Kee]

Well they will buy it , all you have to do is look at Emachine and all the computers they sell.

the heads of apple probably didn't give out that memo to all of their employees. but i'm sure that the media has tried contactin' apple's top management for a quote for their psystar articles... so somebody up there has to know about it.

 

but then again, i'd wouldn't be surprised if apple never has heard about psystar. i made some threads on other forums that i go askin' who has a hackintosh and those threads have had very few responses. i think if you don't care about osx's and apple, then those psystar articles and digg submissions were probably ignored by the majority of the net.

 

or, maybe apple doesn't consider them a threat unless they make into cnn, msnbc, foxnews...

[mifki]

ty about the avatar, my old one got deleted for some reason.....

[Redliner]

good thing/////

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i keed