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

[steadybootleggin]

on the psystar website it says that they are based in Florida..... this guy is gonna get the ''Sugar Honey Iced Tea'' suied out of him....... and he should not mention IM...if i buy a computer from a company i am not gonna want to hear '' go on the web for support'' or '' you may or may not be able to update'' so i think he(psystar)will weed out people who are not gonna assemble a rig ... anyone else either has a mac or has already got a hack rig.....i have already emailed psystar to ask if their openmac can sleep/wake.....this guy is gonna screw things up for us........he is a jerk off!!!

[trance4jim]

I think that Psystar has no right in hell 2 do this. Apple deserves credit for making a amazing OS.

Their systems are highly compatible but lack flexibility.

Yes they cost more but the benefitof having a rock solid computer for a video/music business should cost more.

Then to for Psystar to send their customers to us for help.

F them!

They ripped off this community and want to charge for things they don'town.

I hope netkas has some legal case against them for EFIv8.

Thankyou insanelymac.com and osxproject.org for info on buildingmy rock solid Hackintosh.

Runs as smooth as my iMac but 3x faster!

[DJ Loe Kee]

on the psystar website it says that they are based in Florida..... this guy is gonna get the ''Sugar Honey Iced Tea'' suied out of him....... and he should not mention IM...if i buy a computer from a company i am not gonna want to hear '' go on the web for support'' or '' you may or may not be able to update'' so i think he(psystar)will weed out people who are not gonna assemble a rig ... anyone else either has a mac or has already got a hack rig.....i have already emailed psystar to ask if their openmac can sleep/wake.....this guy is gonna screw things up for us........he is a jerk off!!! thumbsdown_anim.gif

 

i'll quote myself. apple would win ANY lawsuit against psystar...

 

 

edit:

 

good find. that the complete opposite rulin' in a lawsuit that i gave as an example and that's the only way that psystar can win its case. they just needs to tell the judge/jury about the previous case and its verdict and 90% of the time the judge/jury will make their rulin' based on previous case law.

i hate to contradict myself but according to this article there is a similiar lawsuit where apple sued another co. for puttin' its os on it's own brand of pc's.

http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2008/04/apple_psystar

some quotes

In a famous 1983 case, Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corp., Apple successfully convinced a California court that computer software in electronic form could be protected by copyright.

 

Engineers at Franklin Computer copied parts of Apple's operating system for the Apple II computer so it could also run on the Franklin Ace computer. Apple filed suit claiming copyright infringement and, while a judged initially sided with Franklin, in 1983 an appeals court overturned the ruling, saying that operating systems coded in computer hardware are subject to copyright.

 

While Apple could likely tie Psystar up in litigation by filing patent or copyright lawsuits, the better choice may be technical -- issuing OS X firmware updates.

 

"Apple issues regular updates to Leopard," Abhyanker says. "Future revisions might require massive changes to the way [Psystar] sells software in this virtual environment and usually these things don't last long unless there's some sort of agreement."

 

In the end, the clonemaker is always playing catch-up and it ends up being caught in a compatibility nightmare.

would you trust a company who's address changes every couple of hours???

Mac Clone Maker Psystar Examined: Who Are They And Why Are They So Shady?

 

 

 

 

The Guardian did a little research on this Psystar, the company that vows to continue selling their generic Mac OS X clones even if Apple decides to sue them. Turns out that not only has the Miami Chamber of Commerce and BBB never heard of them, there's essentially no trace of them on the internet at all. As if that wasn't enough to make Psystar seem more than a little questionable, their address on the contact page changed completely now and earlier today from a residential address to a business one.

 

 

The Guardian also finds it weird that Apple hasn't responded at all. Does Apple know that they're a fake company? Is Apple planning something behind the scenes? Either way, this whole situation smells worse than Benny Goldman in the tub.

http://gizmodo.com/380074/mac-clone-maker-...e-they-so-shady

 

I think that Psystar has no right in hell 2 do this. Apple deserves credit for making a amazing OS.

Their systems are highly compatible but lack flexibility.

Yes they cost more but the benefitof having a rock solid computer for a video/music business should cost more.

Then to for Psystar to send their customers to us for help.

F them!

They ripped off this community and want to charge for things they don'town.

I hope netkas has some legal case against them for EFIv8.

Thankyou insanelymac.com and osxproject.org for info on buildingmy rock solid Hackintosh.

Runs as smooth as my iMac but 3x faster! biggrin.gif

i agree. yea, the mac pro that i want will run me $3000-$4000 but the workstation (keyboard) that i want costs $2000-$3500, the synthesizer (keyboard) that i want costs $2000 and the professional speakers/monitors that i want costs $1000 per speaker. yes, per speaker, not a pair...

[borillion_star]

Psystar owner should be ashamed the freakin leech, the only reason he can do what he is is because of the good people on sites like this.

The fact that he is trying to make money off what so mahy people have freely donated their time to get working, is very disrespectful to all

of the OSx86 hobbyists/users on this forum and all you guys shouldn't stand for this. He may just well have ruined it for me and all you other

guys like me here on this site.

 

To the admin of this site: please kindly request that they do not link here !!!

 

I to say down with Psystar !!!!

[DP User]

i agree. yea, the mac pro that i want will run me $3000-$4000 but the workstation (keyboard) that i want costs $2000-$3500, the synthesizer (keyboard) that i want costs $2000 and the professional speakers/monitors that i want costs $1000 per speaker. yes, per speaker, not a pair...

 

Now you have spoken. LOL That is my reasoning for building a hackintosh. The Mac Pro i WANT is $2899. The Mac Pro I need ... Well they dont make one.....

 

SO Hack Pro Here I come. LOL.

 

I support Apple and Have supported Apple since the Apple IIe. I think I was 12 or 13. LOL.

 

I still support Apple. I have sent in complaint letters Begging for Express card/34 on imac or mini. It would be nice to see. I need PCI slots....

 

But what Psystar is(was?) doing is wrong. Sure, sell me a PC for cheap that will run any OS, but Pay Apple their due when you sell their OS. Plain and simple.

 

As we have all noticed, the heat is on. they keep changing the wording on their website.

 

From Apples MAJOR non-response to OSx86, I think they aren't too overly concerned about the Hobbyists. Their concern is someone making money off their efforts and not paying up.....

 

At least that would be my issue. If Apple should license the OS it would be a nightmare like Windows as others have indicated and as we have seen in this OSx86 world.. Apple offers a COMPLETE OOB working experience. They support it, fix errors and issues. All in all they GIVE you a complete experience. It's more than just an OS. It's the complete synergy between hardware and software.

 

Psystar isnt giving that. Nor do I see them ever doing so without raising the price of their equipment to cover the Tech support costs. Which in turn defeats the entire point of their CHEAP BOX alternative.....

 

Personally I haev no issue with someone being innovative, buying Leopard for $129 and getting it to work on whatever machine they desire. Just give Apple their due and dont bug them when your audio, Lan and Video dont work. LOL.

[Canis Lupus]

As mentioned above, they are no longer linking here.

Psystar owner should be ashamed the freakin leech, the only reason he can do what he is is because of the good people on sites like this.The fact that he is trying to make money off what so mahy people have freely donated their time to get working, is very disrespectful to all of the OSx86 hobbyists/users on this forum and all you guys shouldn't stand for this. He may just well have ruined it for me and all you otherguys like me here on this site.To the admin of this site: please kindly request that they do not link here !!! I to say down with Psystar !!!!

This is true, and yes - don't call Apple with your probs.

As we have all noticed, the heat is on. they keep changing the wording on their website.

[borillion_star]

Well there is the fact that Apple has prolly made money from this kinda stuff.

My first "Mac" was a hackintosh, but I now own a Mac Pro =).

 

On top of that I

own a seperate retain copy of OSX Leo.

 

The hackintosh is really just a big toy

other than the fact it has windows on it because there is no mac version of 3D

Max, there is Maya but I dont have the time to relearn the entire interface and

the expected diffrences. I can have both running at the same time and have the

power of a system thats not running as a vmware windows machine

[Conroe Mac]

I would definitely pay for a custom-built PC which runs OS X flawlessly. I have spent hundreds of hours getting there. I tend to side against Apple's EULA because I believe it is unfair to disallow lawful purchasers of software not to use it on any hardware they wish. Unfortunately, buying software is not "owning" software but rather "leasing" it and I don't think that Psystar will have a case against Apple. If you want to do what you want with your software, support linux. Until then, you're a slave to whoever you pay to lease software from. I disagree ethically with Apple's software EULA, but I think it will hold up legally in the USA where this case will be tried. In the EU, I think it might not hold water. At any rate, kudos to Psystar for challenging Apple and shame on Psystar for treating the OS X86 community as its personal unpaid employees. I'm not sure whether to cheer or boo, but I am certainly entertained.

[Redliner]

1st off... Netkas, Jas, iAtkos, Kallyway, eddie, and the countless others...You are true hackers...and that is a high compliment... you have allowed tens of thousands to build their own Mac systems...and to run smoothly.

 

One point overlooked commonly is that if apple were to sell a "PC compatible version" at say $200 a license...say 10,000 people buy it...that's $2 million...so they are losing money to us...but at the same time their philosophy of "knowing their platform" is very wise...especially for high-end professionals. And Apple's got the highest consumer rating for everything, especially service. something like 98% of apple care calls are resolved %100.

 

Apple's hardware arguably (in the US anyway) is not terribly over priced until you get to the mid range area...they need something expandable that priors to the Mac Pro and follows the Mac mini...say starting at $800 with a single processor only option... anyway...I run OS X86...I am not patient enough to use Brazil Macs method...so I am one of those tens of thousands that is literally stealing from apple...don't try to sugar coat it either...cause you'll get stuck eating it when no one's around.

 

Honestly, Apple knows full and well about OS X86...Geekbench, Lifehacker, and other various means are clear evidence that there is a huge mass of us. Maybe the fact that many (if not most) of us own a legitimate mac as well (I do...24" intel Imac)...maybe they think they can sit back and watch...and as it's been re-hashed:

 

"They can see what we think about things...see the work arounds we come up with...see our innovations...etc"

-Maybe they really are working on a PC version...maybe we have helped...and maybe apple feels we are vital and that we (as power users...not the average joe) have a different view of things...maybe we help them in some way that makes up for their losses?

 

one thing's for sure:

Apple will keep tabs on this thread. And they will likely go to court...and win. either way...OS X is about to get a huge publicity boost...whether we like it or not...

 

I want to hear Steve Jobs make a statement. On one hand he's likely to get mocked just like anyone else...but at least he'd be doing something manly: Walking up to the microphone, and confidently telling it like it is. Confidence is the quality that will either make or break Apple...and right now they've been ignoring us*...well news flash Apple: you're going to start going through menopause in the next couple years...and well, frankly you're not going to be able to hide it.

 

*Do we really want apple to ignore us? no, but we want them to allow us our freedom...think "apple supremacy"...only apple's really are a bit supreme!

 

*edit*

 

if you check their forums...well just check to see what the admin has posted...

http://www.psystar.com/_fireboard/showcat/4.html

 

also, their Q&A pissed me off...

http://www.psystar.com/index.php?&opti...egory&id=38

[jpabferreira]

Boycott these scumbags. End of story.

[jamsd]

Here let's sell you this computer and make a decent amount of money off someone (JaS, Kalyway, etc.)'s work. And when you have a problem you can go bug insanelymac for help because we won't support our s hit.

 

 

Yeah that's exactly the kind of thing this forum needs.

[Redliner]

*edit* screw it they beat me to it...here's the skinny:

 

taken from:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php...522#post5319522

 

I’ve been reading this thread with interest. Most of the replies are not based on legal facts. In spite of what you may think, Apple is in a weak position here. Apple will probably prevail but that won’t be because they have the law on their side. They will prevail because they will make the cost of litigation so expensive for PsyStar that PsyStar will settle with Apple.

 

First, I would venture to guess that the majority of the posters here have not read Apple’s EULA for OSX. Here’s the link to it so you can read the terms for yourself:

 

http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf

 

 

Lots of posts here state that it’s ‘illegal’ for PsyStar to do this or that. Please note PsyStar is located in Florida. Quote the Florida statute that is being violated if you believe that they are doing something ‘illegal’. PsyStar will have to have violated some Florida or Federal law for its actions to be ‘illegal’. What laws has PsyStar broken? Simply doing something that is contrary to a document published by Apple doesn’t make it ‘illegal’. It may be a breach of contract, allowing Apple to assert a civil cause of action against the user. There is no criminal component to it. A court will have to decide that a breech of contract has occurred and decide what remedies, if any, Apple is entitled to.

 

Apple will have to sue PsyStar in Florida and Florida law will prevail. Apple may try to get the case heard in Federal Court but that is not likely unless Apple can meet the requirements for a federal case. The Apple EULA paragraph 12 states that California law will be used but that most likely would be found unenforceable. California courts have no jurisdiction over Florida business with no California presence unless they agree to be bound by the foreign court. Apple will have to prove that PsyStar is bound by the EULA which isn’t as easy as it may seem. Most likely Apple will forgo the venue clause in its EULA and would file suite in Florida. Apple has a presence in Florida and a jurisdictional fight in California would most likely result in the case being sent to Florida for litigation anyway.

 

Now if PsyStar wanted to sue Apple over OSX software they would have to sue Apple in California and the forum selection clause would apply. Buy PsyStar isn’t suing anyone.

 

In order to sue, Apple has to have suffered some damages. How has Apple been damaged? PsyStar is paying full retail price for the copies of OSX. Apple got their pound of flesh for their OSX sale. Now if PsyStar is making illegal copies of OSX then Apple would have suffered damages but for now we will assume that PsyStar is buying legitimate copies of OSX. Apple can not sue just because they don’t like what another company is doing; they have to have a legal basis for their claim. They could ask for relief in the form of an injunction against PsyStar from loading OSX on to non-Apple branded machines but that is a poor strategy for Apple. They would have to go to court every time a computer integrator started loading OSX on a non-Apple branded computer for a customer. This would be vey expensive for Apple.

 

Some posters have stated that Apple will now have to support these users. Nonsense. Every Apple computer sold has an Apple serial number on it. Apple could easily refuse to support callers who don’t own an Apple computer. In fact, when I bought OSX for my B&W G3 last year, I called Apple for support. The first thing that Apple asked me for was the serial number of my Apple computer. If the computer doesn’t meet Apples published requirements they will not support it, even if it is an Apple branded computer. So Apple has no damages for support issues. In fact, Apple assumes no responsibly for it’s OS. Read paragraph 7 of the ELU. Apple assumes no responsibility for their OS on their own computers! It is left up to the end users to determine fitness of use. So how does the OS running on someone else’s computer cause Apple to now be responsible for support?

 

Some have argued that Apple sells a complete computer package and the OS is free. The problem with that argument is that Apple sells copies of OSX to anyone who walks into one of their stores and plops down $129. The cost of the OS may be subsidized by the hardware sales but no one forces Apple to charge $129 for OSX. Apple is free to raise the price to $299 if they want. Since they sell OSX as a retail product, a court would find that OSX is not free, it is simply bundled into the price of the Apple branded computer system. So no damages here either.

 

What are Apple’s damages?

 

With no damages, what is the course of action that Apple can bring against PsyStar? As far as we know, there is no written contract between Apple and PsyStar. So they can’t sue PsyStar for breech of contract. I am assuming that PsyStar is buying legal copies of OSX from an Apple dealer and re-selling them. That is NOT illegal under Florida law (if you think it is, please quote the statute). It doesn’t violate any written contract between PsyStar and Apple (there is none). The only possible contract breach that Apple can claim is the EULA. It is a shrink wrap license meaning that the terms are not mutual. The user has no ability to negotiate the terms of the agreement. A Florida court will have to decide if the EULA applies to PsyStar.

 

If your read the EULA you will see that kernel can be changed since it is based on open source software. It’s UNIX. So claims that it can’t be modified are bunk.

 

PsyStar is a legitimate business that sells computers and other operating systems. Apple will have a hard time convincing a court that PsyStar is the end-used and the terms of the Apple shrink wrapped license applies to PsyStar. Since PsyStar is a system integrator, Apple will likely loose that claim.

 

So, where is the contractual breach?

 

Consider these analogies.

 

If I buy a Ford 5.0L engine and put it in a Chevy, can Ford sue me? Can Ford prevent me from putting their engines in anything other than a Ford vehicle?

 

Since software is licensed and engines are bought, here’s a better analogy. If I buy a copy of Sony Pictures’ film “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”, can Sony’s EULA require me to play the movie ONLY on a Sony DVD player? I don’t own the movie; I simply have a license to watch it. Do you think a court would enforce such a EULA?

 

As long as PsyStar doesn’t infringe on Apple’s trademarks or copyrights, there is very little that Apple can do other than sue and make it very expensive for PsyStar. I’m sure that PsyStar changed the name of their computer based on legal advise about trademarks.

 

So let’s assume that Apple prevails. What are their remedies? Apple will not get their legal fess from PsyStar. They really have no damages so they won’t get much in compensation. The best they can hope for is that the court will order PsyStar to stop loading OSX on to computers that they sell. PsyStar will be able to continue to sell their computers and just leave it up to the end-user to load OSX.

 

So that leaves Apple suing the end-user. Apple has to start the litigation process over again. Do you think that Apple would win in court assuming that the copy of OSX in question was legitimately purchased from Apple? What kind of publicity would they get? Can Apple afford to sue each individual that buys OSX and loads it on a non-Apple branded machine?

 

Apple may have already let the cat out of the bag. XPostFacto lets you load OSX onto unauthorized computers i.e. unsupported Apple Computers.

 

http://eshop.macsales.com/OSXCenter/...PostFacto.html

 

Why hasn’t Apple stopped the sale of 3rd party software that violates Apple’s EULA? Could it be that Apple knows that portions of their EULA are unenforceable?

 

So for all the lawyers here, what are Apple’s damages? What claim would you make if you were to sue PsyStar?

 

There’s a good chance that Apple will ignore PsyStar and do nothing. They may decide that the risk of loosing is greater than the hardware sales they loose to PsyStar. Apple will have to face a Florida jury which is risky for an out-of-state company. Image if a Florida court invalidated Apple’s EULA. That would be huge loss for Apple.

 

The ball is now in Apple’s court. Let’s see what they do. I for one will buy a PsyStar computer when I get back from Iraq – if they are still in business. If I get sued the most Apple can do to me is refund my $129 for my copy of OSX and make me use Windows or Linux. Is that a victory for Apple? Think about it. Does Apple want to tell users NOT to use their software? Microsoft would love it.

[DJ Loe Kee]

^that sounds all good but...

 

there have ALREADY been lawsuits that have upheld eula's.

^if i remember correctly from a college business class (from class so i don't have any sources as proof), the courts have general sided with software companies when it comes to eulas.

 

the case was about if a consumer can try to say if they really didn't read the eula so that they didn't agree to the eula in the first place... but that they were forced to accept the eula in order to install the software. the software company won, not the consumer.

 

my source: "West's Business Law, Text and Cases, Legal, Ethical, International, and E-Commerce Environment Ninth Edition" by Kenneth W. Clarkson, Roger LeRoy Miller, Gaylord A. Jentz and Frank B. Cross, pages 334-337, with Cases "i.LAN systems, Inc. v. Netscout Service Level Corp." and "Specht v. Netscape Communications Corp." given as real lawsuits when the courts sides with the software company.

 

so if the courts follows previous court rulings than psystar stands no chance of winnin' a lawsuit against apple. (yea, i finally found my source, damn 1084 page business law book not makin' it easy to find it by not listing it under "software" or "eula" in the back of the book...).

 

In a famous 1983 case, Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corp., Apple successfully convinced a California court that computer software in electronic form could be protected by copyright.

 

Engineers at Franklin Computer copied parts of Apple's operating system for the Apple II computer so it could also run on the Franklin Ace computer. Apple filed suit claiming copyright infringement and, while a judged initially sided with Franklin, in 1983 an appeals court overturned the ruling, saying that operating systems coded in computer hardware are subject to copyright.

 

While Apple could likely tie Psystar up in litigation by filing patent or copyright lawsuits, the better choice may be technical -- issuing OS X firmware updates.

 

"Apple issues regular updates to Leopard," Abhyanker says. "Future revisions might require massive changes to the way [Psystar] sells software in this virtual environment and usually these things don't last long unless there's some sort of agreement."

 

In the end, the clonemaker is always playing catch-up and it ends up being caught in a compatibility nightmare.

do you know the easiest way to win a lawsuit?????? find a similiar case, tell the judge/jury about the case and the judge will go and look and see what rulin' the previous judge/jury made on the case. 99% of the time the judge/jury will NOT overturn the previous rulin'.

 

that is how u.s. laws works, the courts will follow whatever rulin' has been made in the past. this is called PRECEDENTS and COMMON LAW. the u.s. and the u.k. are two countried that use common law and precedents when it comes to cases and lawsuits. the u.s. borrowed it from the u.k. a long, long time ago.

 

they very seldom will make an opposite rulin' of the previous case. brown v. board of education overturned the ruling of plessy v. ferguson. but lawsuits that overturn a previous case's decision are rare.

 

i did not major in business law but i still know the basics of how the u.s. court system works. google "i.LAN systems, Inc. v. Netscout Service Level Corp.", "Specht v. Netscape Communications Corp." and "Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corp." and see what the judge's decision was.

 

all of my posts are based on legal facts and i have given the cases involved so that you can research them on your own. it is not just me "spittin' nonsense" on a forum.

[compu-tor]

I can't help but think that the days of OSX86 are numbered - Apple will be looking to close this down permanently. Has anyone else wondered why Intel Macs all received an EFI firmware update in the last few weeks?

 

Not entirely accurate, one of my newer Macs took an EFI update, while my Macbook (Late 2006) did not. So while Apple may be burning the midnight oil, I don't think much changes in the near term. This whole Open Computer idea sucks, I agree. Lots of people did lots of work to get us to this point in OSX86 history.

 

But there is no outrage when Dell sells a machine with Linux, profiting by selling machines with an OS that was developed by open source devs, who also do not get compensation. And while it sucks, it is what it is. Lets see how far Open gets before Apple Legal figures a way to shut them down without having the EULA too closely looked at.

 

On the assumption these guys are in the US, DMCA has all sorts of little goodies that companies are going to start using to their advantage in the coming years. Apple can argue with a straight face that pc_efi was developed to circumvent Apple's QC check during installation, thus a violation

without ever having a court look closely at the EULA.

[bofors]

What claim would you make if you were to sue PsyStar?

 

I would make two claims against Psystar:

 

(1) An "Unfair Competition" tort: http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/Unfair_competition

 

(2) A DMCA violation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA#Anti-cir...tion_exemptions

 

"Unfair Competition" is a fairly broad and vague concept that certainly could be shoehorned into covering Apple's case of EULA violation against Psystar. The DMCA contains anti-circumvention clauses that Psystar violates if they distribute OSx86. Claiming a DMCA violation also lets Apple sue in Federal Court as the DMCA is Federal law.

 

There’s a good chance that Apple will ignore PsyStar and do nothing.

 

There is no way that Apple is going to let Psystar sell computers installed with OSx86.

 

OSx86 would go viral, Steve Jobs' ideal of tight integration would be destroyed and Microsoft's Windows monopoly would be threatened.

[guttertrash]

this project needs to distance itself from these guys.

 

Its one thing for us to tinker around, and install leopard for personal use on our own hardware, apple would prefer we paid for hardware from them, but in effect most users here end up buying apple hardware as well...

 

This guy is trying to make a profit from all the hard work that has gone on here, and he has no right to.

 

Apple will come down on him like a ton of bricks, and will likely as a result take action against the osx86 project as a whole, and more than likely implement much tougher measures as they identify a commercial threat.

 

We need to publicly denounce this guy as the money grubbing dirt bag that he is, attempting to profit on other peoples efforts.

[BlackCH]

They include the retail install disk, so are they implying that it doesn't require patching or something? I know that can't be the case. I bet a lot of people who order this are going to try to reinstall OSX straight from the disk and be really angry when it doesn't work.

 

Someone pointed out it could be done with some sort of bootloader implementation that loads EFI before the DVD boots; Honestly I dont think this 'Hardware Company' has the resources to do that. To me sound like a couple of guys building clones in their garage (I wouldnt be surprise that they come straight from this forum), and I hope Apple bust their asses off.

Most of us are here 'cause the fun of it; and in the worst of the cases because we cant afford an Apple's computer (which I would definitely buy if I would have the money). I repeat what I said before: This guys are trying to make money out of the work of others; either the hacker community or Apple. This shouldnt stand.

[olofd]

Hi!

My opinion is that this company is not in the likings of us on Insanelymacs intrests.

I don't think they should be making money of this project.

This project was never ment to hur Apple.

 

And I don't want to stand behind something I whink could hurt Apple.

That's why I don't like that this company now has adds on Insanelymac

 

 

 

I don't like this AT ALL!

even though I know the add is provided by Google!

[germandog]

I'm surprised that no one has spotted the irony of the situation.

A long time ago, Micro$oft got insanely rich by getting their inferior product bundled onto virtually every computer made. IBM thought they ruled the roost, but learned the hard way that the real money was in the software.

Fast forward to today, and the very company that IBM was trying to destroy, is making up market share with attractive, easy to use, and all around superior software products. And what do they do when customers *God Forbid* are seazing this kind of opportunity to get their hands on their legally purchased product? They wine, moan, complain, and probably real soon...litigate! This looks to me like another Apple boondoggle. They're being dragged into a marketplace with a superior product, and they're kicking and screaming all the way. This is at a time when the competition is on their A$$ because their latest offering (Vista) isn't selling very well. Oh, and by the way, Google is coming.

We'll see what happens in the coming days, but as far as I can tell, Apple is every bit as pig-headed and self-rightous as IBM ever was. If you're going to be a software company, sell software. If you're going to be a hardware company, then sell hardware. But the way they're running things now...they make appliances. Call yourself Apple Computer Appliance Co. and be done with it.

It's time that Steve Jobs pulled his head out of ass, and found a way to accelerate the growth of his market share. He could start off by lowering prices. He could also look at establishing some strict standards for third party hardware, and endorsing the best hardware manufacturers in the market. There's no reason why we shouldn't be able to go to the "Apple Certified" section of the store and select from third party components to build or upgade with confidence. If they had been paying attention, they would know that the lack of confidence is what plagues PC owners. PC owners don't care who makes the box, they just want it to work.

Just because Microsoft has failed to produce a better product, doesn't mean that Google will fail as well. Market share is everything, and it's best not to miss an opportunity.

 

Hey, someone smack Steve up side the head!

[Alfred_E_Neumann]

I agree with most of the post against Psystar. IM should really distance itself from this company. This is a non-profit project or isn´t it?

If (Psystar) was selling just the hardware with the hint "OSX compatible" or something like that I wouldn´t have a problem. But they claim it 100% OSx86 Project compatible and sell it with patched and preinstalled OSX.

This is just as illegal as we all do (or did) even if you bought a license. But selling this is like selling warez.

It was said many times before but I must say it again: All that geniuses (Kaly,Jas, Zeph, Netkas and many many others) around the world brought us 0sx to the average pc. Thanks here for your great work.

And each of them said also: Buy the official OSX License!

These guys aren´t pirates in my eyes. But Psystar is. They take profit of a non-profit work. Of course you can say, stealing a stolen thing can´t be illegal.

 

I´m writing this on a Powerbook G3 (400MHZ), which is almost TEN years old and still runs like hell with Tiger. 10.4.11.

Try this on a windows pc

 

I like Apple, but their hardware is absolute overprized (outside US) and I´m not a fanboy. Quality and stability of Soft -and Hardware is great. Design is outstanding.

But what about hardware upgrades? Impossible or overprized. Apple tries to tie it´s customizers worse than MS. Why can´t I load free games on my Ipod? Apples TV Box? Forget it. Applestore, Applestore.

 

Apple must and will take action against Psystar. Otherwise we´ll have many clones out there from many companies.

 

I hope Apple will change their product managment. And I´m sure OSX will be released sometime for PC´s.

The Question is when, not if. I want fair prizes and an upgradeble system.

Apple itself is not in danger. Quality sells. But they will have to adjust their prizes.

 

On the other hand Psystar is not a real threat to Apple. People who buy Mac´s usually work with it and can afford it. That´s about 99 %. But maybe Psystar puts some pressure on Apple.

 

I curios how this story ends...

 

And thank you all for this great work here!

[cartri]

And I don't want to stand behind something I whink could hurt Apple.

That's why I don't like that this company now has adds on Insanelymac

 

It's a google adsense. IM did not chose this ad

[mac.nub]

Something I just thought of, that should really have been in my first post.

 

Even with the EFI emulator installed (which err, has questionable legality in the first place...) the fact is, that any Mac OS X installed on a generic PC will require dsmos.kext, r3d3.kext or an equivalent decryption kext... and no matter how you try to put it in words, there is no way what so ever that those kexts are legal - as it's completely obvious that it's reverse engineered from Don't Steal Mac OS X.kext. Thus at least breaking the DCMA.

 

Unless of course they managed to get their hands on AppleDecrypt.kext source - which was made by Apple for the old IDK and they [Psystar] modified it so that it would work with Leopard - but with the exception of them having an insider in Apple that has source access though, there's no way they'd have this (most people have probably never even heard of this Kext... unless they used to work for Apple or something).

 

~mac.nub

 

Edit: Fixed typos/grammar/hopefully made it a bit easier to understand.

[germandog]

I bet Bill Gates lies awake at night wishing that people would actually pay for his software before using it in ways he hadn't intended.

[Geeze]

My two cents:

 

EULAs are enforceable. Get on Google and do the research. Another poster has already given some case law. The only real gray area is that we are individuals. Apple is in all likelihood not going to try to track down individuals. I myself went out and purchased a retail copy of Leopard. That was for my own peace of mind. Apple makes a great OS, I feel I should support their efforts.

 

Another point was something about only Florida law has claim here. That goes right out the window as soon as the dealer engages in commerce that crosses state lines.

 

Now I don't have any problem with someone putting together systems that are geared towards OSX86. Hell, I wish Tigerdirect or someone like that would put together a desktop and a laptop that would require minimal tweaks and somehow give us the nudge nudge wink wink about whats up. That would be great. Until then, we move forward thanks to the likes of Jas, Netkas, and the Kalyway teams.

 

Peace.

[ Mysticus C*]

well said! mac.nub, would not be more agreed

 

but i still hope that (wheter these clowns doing some right or wrong things) the case would bring pressure/force on apple that it would start reducing the prices... no doubt about beauty of apple's designs, but do they worth the extra double price? some may argue for yes and no... i will not... is osx much superior to windows? in safety stability? this is arguable as well, bcoz these kind of issues come with interests/popularity in particular softwares, and complexity of the software... apple started their ads with windows {censored}ting campaings, but is osx so much better? then normal PCs... again some focus minds will say different than objective people! bcoz all of you know virus writing/hacking is kind of interest and parallel to popularity... if osx is questioned, it can be hackable easy and viruses can be made as well... apple was misleading in many of their ads, and by marketing stragety of, high price better quality mindset? if you look at apple's hardware specs, they are all you can buy if you go out to a store, and can be done half the price in worst case...

so wheter these clowns are doing good or bad thing for the community, the case was long waited already to challange apple for its business practisess under Steve's vision... it is good to watch how it will end... my heart wishes that apple will/should be forced to end their unfair charges and remove their misleading ads... it wouldnt be very hard to make an extra identifier on the chips and certify their 3rd party hardwares and lets user to be able to choose their mixes... they can still control the market, make money out of it, but gives more flexibility to users, more hardware would bring nice compatition if apple would let that happen unlike iphone strategy....

 

lets see what happens...

 

Something I just thought of, that should really have been in my first post.

 

Even with the EFI emulator installed (which is err, has questionable legality in the first place...) the fact is, that any Mac OS X installed on a generic PC will require dsmos.kext, r3d3.kext or an equivalent decryption kext... now there's no way of saying that that part of it is possibly legal - as it's completely obvious that it's reverse engineered from Don't Steal Mac OS X.kext. Thus at least breaking the DCMA.

 

Unless if course they managed to get their hands on AppleDecrypt.kext source - which was made by Apple for the old IDK and they modified it... but with the exception of them having an insider in Apple that has source access though, there's no way they'd have this.

 

~mac.nub