Psystar counter-sues Apple for anti-competitive business practices

wonder who will sue Psystar for making money from netkas and others work

I guess there is always someone even more stupid than psystar themselves.

yep i guess apple themselves ...

Steve wrong business to hook up osx "just for mac labeled machine" is stupid enough

np_ see my previous comment here - whereas Apple has a strong legal argument, and Psystar has some kind of legal argument, netkas & co have none.

I think this is bringing too much unwanted attention to this community. I'd prefer Apple stay in their corner, and I'll stay in mine.

 

Oh and F*** you Rudy.

 

-Stell

%100 correct , I couldn't agree more!

Btw stell, does that dfi mobo you have sleep/wake?

np_ see my previous comment here - whereas Apple has a strong legal argument, and Psystar has some kind of legal argument, netkas & co have none.

yes i seen , and you are right

the most psystar can do is make our live hard with them bul{censored} sue idea

if psystar win ( witch i doubt ) the result mostly will be like apple will get forced to come up with more hard to "fix" for hackingtosh version of osx

other think here is psystar does "fast buck" from whole osx86 community without ever to offer some "new" that we already know or some better that we build at home

all i hope is some non brain damage judge in US will deside to close psystar as company ( if they can be called company) and end of story

There is a great difference to do a competion with yours against mine and to do a competition with mine modified against mine overpriced that's a great difference, sir don't sleep please.

Sir remember that Psytar tried to sell us pre installed osx for 25 dollars more, what do you think about, is that correct?

You don't like to pay to Apple this price but you like that Psystars sells the same 25 dollars more, good very good!!!!!!!

I don't think anyone on this thread is saying that Psystar is the good guys for charging $25 more. People hate Psystar for stealing netkas' work. People hate Psystar for drawing unwanted attention to the Hackintosh community. People DON'T hate Psystar for telling Apple to stop being poopooheads with their software licensing.

People DON'T hate Psystar for telling Apple to stop being poopooheads with their software licensing.

that's the key ..is "their license" ....none can say nothing about it like it or not

I'm glad Psystar is counter-suing cause personally I think Apple has gotten away with over charging on there hardware for to long!

Lets See .. Apple a Company thats in this to make money as all coorprate america is so i cant blame them for doing this and i dont see antitrust bieng on something that is your product as a whole... meaning the software is thiers ... and before anyone points out open source stuff they used.. not all the OS is open source and they did have thier own openDarwin or darwinBSD or something of that sort at one point and time ... and released other stuff to open source so they have given thier changes back and i thikn thats all the GPL only requires that ... so there for the OS as it is .. is thiers and the hard ware is thier property just like any DELL is a dell trade mark ... they have a right to do that they will with it... and Apple is what made OSX great if thier OS is forced open that will hurt thier sales and stop thier funding doe OSX ... oh but this is what you want for OSX to disapear

if you like OSX support them some how and if they decide to lock it to thier hard ware thats thier right ...... if some one wants to try and tell them different it doesnt matter who in this case they could do the simplest of things and get outta the OS and hardware biz all together and make money some other ways .... cause thats what they are there to do companies make money nto please the masses.

ive not heard enough people complain that Vista is {censored} and can only install on pc with 3 + gigs of ram ... dont even wanna think of it running on 512mb like it states it requres

oh and you have to take out another loan on your home to buy a copy of it that has as many features as OSX

ive got nothing against OSx86 as a hobby and i dont really think apple could care much about it they dont wanna see it happening... but what developer does

But i own real mac's too and paid for ever copy of OSX semce like 10.2

but why are people whinning about apples biz practice ... when M$ is really so much worse ... ahh i i get it no one want winbloze no more so we get to act like children saying this should be this way just cause i want it now.

what apple couldl do is say we are producing no more OSX distrobutions and we will up date the OS through DRM for a charge and if you want your OWN OS that you can isntall on anything then go make your own...

I love it. Even on a pc. I love it.

Look guys... I'm a VERY long time Apple user; I grew up on an Apple IIgs at home, and a //e at kindergarten! I'm not an Apple "fan-Boy" either! As I type I'm on my main computer which is a Windows-XP system! Anyways the way I see it is apple has been grandfathered into modern computers Remember the Atari ST, or the Amiga? They all had their own OS which could only run on their own system. Apple was there too, along with IBM (IBM-DOS a.k.a. MS-DOS) They were all " Total Solutions Providers" They had the whole package, just go to whom you think would best suite your needs, and bang you've got the whole kit and kaboddle!

That's the way Apple always has been, and that's the way Apple will be. It's THEIR hardware it's THEIR right! If you don't like it, don't do business with them!

Who cares what's under the hood of an Apple? Does it really matter? It's the total system solution that you get from apple that matters!

Also Apple goes through extensive testing, research, and design for their hardware, to ensure longevity and reliability, so their specs may not be as impressive as you're top-notch gaming rig, sooooooooooo? That's the way apple has always been!

What we're doing with our hackintoshs is illegal! We justify in different ways! I own a G4 PowerMac, and I only use my hackintosh when I'm not using the G4… Not the best justification, but we all have our own…

If someone made an iPhone-clone, and ran the Apple iPhone software on it that would be illegal. Why? Because apple is a total systems provider, there is ZERO room for openness, and as such, they can do whatever the hell they want.

With OS like Windows, Linux, BeOS, and others you have your computer and it's your choice. If one of the software companies made it so you didn't have a choice, and forced you to use theirs (Microsoft) then you have a problem. With MacOS-X you have Apple's computer, running Apple's hardware. Don't like it? Don't buy a Mac! They aren't preventing you from having a computer, they aren't preventing you from choosing what OS to put on your computer, and they aren't preventing you from owning a Mac! They are preventing you from using their software on your hardware. And rightly they should be allowed to do that.

The worst case scenario is that Apple and Intel will get together and go bowling! They will make proprietary hardware, and close the system up again. It's their right!

Do you guys remember PowerComputing? Apple has the right to choose what markets to sell its software, Remember free market? Apple will not respond with kindness. They will devise (or maybe there is an underlying system already in place) to close the whole thing up tighter than a new inmate's behind on his first night in prison!

Either way I've got 10.5.4 on my G4, and if all goes south, I've still got leo running legit.

Love it or leave it!

That's 100% what I think. One's not just buying a piece of hardware of Apple, one's buying a complete solution which is working out of the box.

Further you can stretch that whole topic from cable TV receivers over mobile phones right to your favorite mp3 player, because each of these things has its own closed OS on it and nobody complains about that.

That's 100% what I think. One's not just buying a piece of hardware of Apple, one's buying a complete solution which is working out of the box.

 

Further you can stretch that whole topic from cable TV receivers over mobile phones right to your favorite mp3 player, because each of these things has its own closed OS on it and nobody complains about that.

Once you sell something to me you have no say over how I use it. If I buy a Ford and decide I want to put a Toyota motor in it, neither Ford nor Toyota has the right to dictate otherwise. If Psystar wants to buy a Ford and then re-sell it to somebody else, Ford has no right to tell them they can't do that.

There are centuries of legal doctrines about commerce that you fanboys can't magically change by waving around a eula. Eula = toilet paper.

And vidgameking... you are a fanboy whether you realize it or not. All your nonsensical arguments are exactly what fanboys think.

Just to ad my 50 cents, why don't we also sue nokia for not allowing us to run another os on their phones?

The problem here is that apple is limiting other companies from creating hardware for the mac by not releasing the information required to get the OS and the hardware to work together.

The operating system supports only the hardware which apple allows. Moreover, Apple even specifies how the hardware should be used. An example in this case is the ATI x1300 videocard which will only support resolution changes and QE/CE on an external monitor. This is because Apple only used this videocard in their servers which did not use an internal display.

The renowned problem that Windows XP had in it's early days was the lack of proper drivers for hardware. Where Microsoft pointed towards hardware manufacturers when customer came asking for support they also expected these manufacturors to pay a hefty price in order to make their hardware function correctly on windows. Microsoft was taken to court and lost this almost famous case, miserably I might add.

I believe the monopoly Apple is being sued for is very real. Yes, if you choose to sell lemonade for 50 bucks per glass it's your choice. But if you are the only one selling the lemonade by not alowing others to grow a lemon tree, cause hey, your god and you magically made the lemon tree. That's not correct.

People want to buy macs. Apple is popular. Think about apple like that popular guy in your class. If you where his friend you got to go to the parties, you got to talk to the girls (or guys, whichever you prefer) And you got to be popular too.

Apple tells it's "buddy" AMD. Sorry mate, you can't talk to the girls. This is limiting AMD's growth into 6.6% of the PC vendor market, (as per 1Q FY08).

"So, AMD should make better processors" I hear you think. Well, even though that might be true, it is and always will be an opinion. So the courts ruled, back in that famous miscrosoft case, that the opinion and the choice should be that of the consumer.

What I find strange is that this sort of thing only sees the daylight when a huge amount of money is involved. There are so many smaller, privately owned companies like coffee houses, fast food chains, funeral homes, etc dissapearing under the weight of giant corporations these days.

My hope: Apple loses, OSX is supported on all hardware, HW manufacturers are responsible for creating the kexts.

My hope: Apple loses, OSX is supported on all hardware, HW manufacturers are responsible for creating the kexts.

Let's be realistic. Now we have our own hackintosh which runs perfectly 10.5.4 at this time. But let's face the next round of Apple's update releases with 10.5.5 and all the following threads here on this site about ruined installations, non-functional hardware, lost QE/CI and what ever.

Do we really believe that Apple would support all these with upcoming updates even if they lose this case? That's why a XP SP3 takes more than a year to release where we have the fifth minor OSX update in one year upcoming these days.

I like my hacks very much, but they are and always will be hacks, not real Macs. And if Apple ever sells an update which will not be compatible to my hardware anymore, I am considering of buying Mac minis instead.

Note: This "making Apple's incompatible to normal PC's" is not so easy as it looks like. As Apple has sold millions of Intel MacBook&Co with compatible hardware, they have to support them in the future - even with Snow Leopard. Of course they can use dongle chips - but this would only affect new hardware. Their usual politics was to support older hardware a minimum of 3 years (current example are older PPCs). So we don't have to think about an early end of OSX86.

Another Note: Here in Germany most EULA's are effectless becausy you can't read them before buying the software. Seems our hacks are completely legal here...

JL

just in THIS case (and not for stealing netkas/others work) - pedraza for f*ckin president - apple´s licensing sucks and its all about the deal with bill.

Hello Everybody!

Yes I am one that would like to have Apple but I find them expensive too!

But we can't blaim Apple or support Psystar for that reason.

OSX is the result of the whole Apple strategy. ipod, iphone, everything...

If you like it, you have to pay the price.

If you don't, then find whatever excuse you want for you to install it.

Personally I believe that Apple will definitely win.

What monopoly??? everybody can set up a company, build hardware and OS for it and sell it.

And everybody can create apps for OSX!

If he makes it stable, easy, handy, shiny like Apple, then congrats, you are millionaire!

Just feel happy that there are many guys out there that made OSX available to PC users, but don't try to make it look legal because it is not!

Additionally, most possibly it was Microsoft's decision to support wide variety of hardware. We cannot expect every company to follow the same strategy as Microsoft did. Microsoft wanted to sell more software, they didn't care about the hardware; they support almost every hardware because they just want to sell software! and this is the reason why windows has never been that stable as other OSes. Apple wants to provide to the clients something that works flawlessly.

And finally, yes I believe that all this will make the life of Hackintosh community much more difficult. Apple will try to protect more its software and bind it more to specific hardware.

Cheers,

tsoukkis

p.s. I bought a new PC just to install and use OSX! I must be crazy!!!

Because the OS isn't sold separately. I love 12 year-olds and their legal theories. Hard to beat for entertainment value.

 

Once you sell something to me you have no say over how I use it. If I buy a Ford and decide I want to put a Toyota motor in it, neither Ford nor Toyota has the right to dictate otherwise. If Psystar wants to buy a Ford and then re-sell it to somebody else, Ford has no right to tell them they can't do that.

 

There are centuries of legal doctrines about commerce that you fanboys can't magically change by waving around a eula. Eula = toilet paper.

 

And vidgameking... you are a fanboy whether you realize it or not. All your nonsensical arguments are exactly what fanboys think.

The one thing you are forgetting is the fact that when you buy a Ford or Toyota you actually own the vehicle to do so as you wish. When you buy OSX at a store you don't own the software. You own the right to use the software. Psystar's counter lawsuit is ridiculous and stands absolutely no chance of even heading to trial. The eula=toilet paper comment was pretty funny though... not very accurate but definitely funny, :-)

Another Note: Here in Germany most EULA's are effectless becausy you can't read them before buying the software. Seems our hacks are completely legal here...

But you can read the EULA before installing the software.

Another Note: Here in Germany most EULA's are effectless becausy you can't read them before buying the software. Seems our hacks are completely legal here...

But you can read the EULA before installing the software.

This is the case in most of Europe, additionally some countries have legislation that allows reverse-engineering for increased interoperability (see the cases regarding deCSS & iTunes)

The point is not whether you have *read* the EULA before purchase, but whether you have *agreed to* it. In these countries, once the sale has taken place, no further conditions can be added to the contract. The sale is considered to have taken place when payment and product have changed hands, and software is considered to be sold, not licenced, with laws of "reasonable use" protecting the vendor from piracy by saying that a single copy is for a single use unless otherwise specified, allowing also for a further copy to be made for backup purposes only. So *in theory* hacks are legal in these places.. But who'd want to be the one to test it?

HOWEVER....

This case is taking place in the USA, where EULA's have been upheld as valid in the courts before now....

But you can read the EULA before installing the software.

This does not count in German Law. You must be able to read a contract before buying the software. In this case Apple would have to print the EULA on the outside of the package.

JL

Edit: In the meantime Hagar explained it much better than me. Thank you :-)

Before I start I'd like to say I am not revolted, sad, pro apple, pro psystar or anything else...

Let's be realistic. Now we have our own hackintosh which runs perfectly 10.5.4 at this time. But let's face the next round of Apple's update releases with 10.5.5 and all the following threads here on this site about ruined installations, non-functional hardware, lost QE/CI and what ever.

 

Do we really believe that Apple would support all these with upcoming updates even if they lose this case? That's why a XP SP3 takes more than a year to release where we have the fifth minor OSX update in one year upcoming these days.

Apple changes their operating system with every update to counteract us. When we change something vital in their operating system like enabling speed step with a hacked kernel, or enabling audio by patching a kext, a new revision of this kext would break our system.

In this utopia situation though, where Apple's OS is legally installable and a third party hardware developer like AMD is able to create and maintain drivers for there hardware. Apple's updates would not overwrite or change these. They would exist separately from the operating system. Apple takes care of the hardware they put in their systems like they always have. The manufacturer of your complete hackintosh (Psystar), or of the individual components if you build the system yourself, would keep their drivers up to date.

Windows XP service pack 3, Vista service pack 1, or even Vista itself took a long time to make not due to hardware incompatibility. Why would there be such a huge list of incompatible hardware after the initial release? Many people found their older printer, scanner or camera's didn't work after updating. But Microsoft, or in the case I'm proposing Apple would not be responsible for this. Third party manufacturers are running to keep up with the changes Microsoft makes to the operating system so that their hardware stays compatible.

To answer the question you ask. No I really don't believe Apple will support their operating system on any other hardware then their own. They don't have to. This is something easily defined in a support contract. But this only refers to hardware. If someone buys Leopard and then has a problem with iCal. A problem which is not hardware related, then yes, Apple should support this as it is their problem. Within the boundaries of the support contract off course.

I think it's important to raise more awareness of how big companies work together:

If I have a problem with Office 2008. I call Microsoft. When the problem turns out to be related to my Epson scanner, they send me to Epson. When Epson finds out the problem lies within the Apple operating system, they get to escalate the problem to Apple through the Business Software Alliance. The business software alliance is, as they put it themselves: The voice of the world's leading software developers before governments and with consumers in the international marketplace.

They follow strict rules and guidelines to determine where the issue lays, and whom is to solve the issue. If cooperation between companies is required this is also possible. But an individual company determines their area of support. Acer, being a hardware manufacturer, supports their hardware. Microsoft, a software manufacturer, supports their operating system. Acer can ask Microsoft for help with their OEM versions. But they have agreements on how the OS can be sold so cheap (compare retail to OEM prices and you'll see) by placing the support with the hardware manufacturer, or removing it completely.

Now lets look at this example but replace Acer with Psystar, and Microsoft with Apple.

Psystar doesn't deliver an OEM version. (Hell, there is no OEM version of Leopard ) They deliver retail Leopard on the system. In this situation Apple has to support the software. Not doing so as is stated in their EULA is illegal and I think Psystar makes a good chance if they pursue that. However, Apple does not have to provide support on the hardware, not to the consumer, or to psystar if they don't want to.

One point I would like to point out is that if Apple has to sell their OS, retail, to anyone for use on any compatible system. You will see a huge microsoftian (ghehe, had to use that srry) price increase to cover the support expenses Apple will make.

Sorry for the long post. I hope I made some things clear.

Hi,

I agree with you if it is really possible to seperate third-party hardware from the one Apple installs. In my previous understanding this seemed to be a mixture - e.g. in 10.5.2 Apple replaced the GMA950 driver which led to a "1024by768only" and an older version with artefacts. If we can seperate these as you describe this means I would have installed a hardware-specific verson of that GMA950 driver and would never have used the Apple one. That might work. We know that from Windows where you only get a generic driver from the XP instalation disk. But on the other hand it means that Apple must deliver at least a basic system so that one can install the third-party drivers. Even this does not work currently - we have to patch different MoBo-BIOSes.

JL

@BigPimpin .. So by your train of logic lets see ... you would stop complaining if they didnt sell it seperatly only made you buy a complete new mac to use the new os to keep it that locked down...

I love it when they get off the short Bus and try to use reason