Psystar counter-sues Apple for anti-competitive business practices

Apple has always been a closed system apart from the few years when they licensed clones to be made after Steve Jobs left to go do Next. I didn't see a huge upswing in the market share of computers running Mac OS during the clone years of 95 through 97. In fact the market share and sales actually dropped during those years when it had been opened up to other manufacturers. 95 was 8%, 96 was 7.2%, some reports show as low as 5.4% so despite making the system open to anyone that wanted to license Mac OS7 market share still fell. To be fair it had be slowing for years before hand so wasn't anything new, but was why Apple tried the licensing route. So despite being made open to people who wanted to license build mac clones sales still fell. OPENED UP the system and sales FELL! This was down from the 20% Apple had in 1985. 16% with the Apple 2 and 4% with the Mac. It may just be that Win95 seemed to be a good alternative at last to a lot of potential mac buyers. Windows machines were more attractive then MacOS machines. I remember in 95 or 96 using a MacOS computer preferring Win95. Yet I prefer OSX to XP/Vista.

Apple started there comeback in 98 with the iMac whilst still a closed system and sales of Mac's are continuing to grow despite being a closed system and not licensing clones to be made.

 

Current figures seem to be showing that Apple Laptops in the US are around 20% of the market, 10% worldwide and this is just the official Apple machines, not counting hackintoshes.

 

Being a closed system doesn't seem to have had a negative impact or positive impact on sales. Although it can be shown that since 97 the sales have improved despite going back to a closed system. That and the iPod factor. Apple are simply making better products then they used too, products that people want. Why pay the premium for an Apple if you are only interested in running Windows on it.

 

The Apple clones of the 90's are irrelevant to what's going on now. Mac OS was still tied to non-Intel/AMD architecture, so it wasn't "mainstream". It's only options were to be installed on systems that were already less popular than the Macintosh lineup, so it was idiotic and pointless. Had they released it for Intel and AMD systems it may have been a different story.

you have to "Kwlyaay" it [Love the speek]

 

Yeh, rsceearh sowhs taht teh mnid can raed enilsgh jsut fnie wehn teh ltteers of teh wdors are jmblued arnuod. Pivroded you keep teh frist and lsat ltteers in palce on lnog wrods, it deosn't mttaer wehre you put teh ohetr ltteers. You can rdanmolg jggule tehm aournd. You shluodn't be albe to raed gerlbed txet, but you can. Pettry wried, but fun.

 

Yeh, research shows that the mind can read english just fine when the letters of the words are jumbled around. Provided you keep the first and last letters in place on long words, it doesn't matter where you put the other letters. You can randomly juggle them around. You shouldn't be able to read garbled text, but you can. Pretty wierd, but fun.

As to where me and Maxintosh are just Shocked you can read at all

As to where me and Maxintosh are just Shocked you can read at all

 

Slacker25, I'm shocked. You typed that without any errors at all.

 

Is it you, or did Max help?

Apple is an harware project, illegal or not retail or hack it will never be a mac on pc, don't worry.

So Psystar is loosing time in stupid deal with stupid ideas, without the hardware project to have a real mac just buy it and you will touch the difference with your hands.

research shows that the mind can read english just fine when the letters of the words are jumbled around. Provided you keep the first and last letters in place on long words

Doesn't work for Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious

@ jaez nope he didnt .. but i can type rather well if needed ... maybe we should change it from jaez to spaz

<br />@ jaez nope he didnt .. but i can type rather well if needed ... maybe we should change it from jaez to spaz

 

I'm an atiirciallfy ieenglltit praogrm dseiegnd by nsaa to saecrh for intllieegnt lfie aoomng teh web fuorms. So far, nnoe fuond.

Teh proeblm is taht Pssyatr ins't aracttting teh bset mnids out terhe to dbaete teh reeavlnt iusses.

Everyone's opinion was very clear many posts ago, and now it's simply degenerating.

Then I think that this one is already a bizantine discussion, while out there both Apple and Psystar are the only real contenders.

Once every position has been set, there's the time of waiting for the judges to speak, not us. Let's pay attention to them.

I think this thread could be closed without causing any damage.

 

Ricardo.

If Apple is learning anything about this and the hacintosh community, I hope its that we (hacintosh users) are among the brightest mac users out there, and it would do them well to listen to us and make an afordable, buildable, desktop system that is void of all its case overengeneering and stylish design.

 

I use a hackintosh because I love the Mac OS, but at this point in my life, I can't afford a Mac Pro for my needs and the iMac and MacBooks don't have enough upgrade options. I also can't afford to take them into the field as a performer, they are just too hard to fix if things go wrong with hardware. So, I bought MacOSX retail DVD, built a quad core system for about 1k, followed an easy set of instructions found here and I have a system that will run anything. It might not be Apple, but it is 100% OSX and I am 110% satisfied.

@jaez ... first thing we can agree on ... there is no intelligent life on earth so why is there so many alien phreaks out there there is nothing here i say there is no bright beings on other planets either

 

 

@Coloro ... yeah isnt it just great i would have very limited entertainment if not for this

there is no intelligent life on earth

So maybe when the Borg say "you will be assimilated, resistance is futile" they are really talking about using a Mac

@ Maxintosh there is no doubt about it .. us lovers of the grey silver and shinney will make them all our biotches

Geez, you guys still at this? I just checked back here because the latest news say Psystar is surging ahead with new products. But, you folks aren't even discussing Psystar anymore.

 

Review: Psystar's OpenPro continues to stick it to Apple October 13, 2008 9:48 AM PDT

 

Following our review of Psystar's Apple-annoying Open Computer, we took a look at the higher-end model last week, the OpenPro. Our OpenPro review unit came with both OS X and 64-bit Windows Vista Ultimate, and a $2,659 price tag (starts at $999 with Linux). In brief, it works, and it's a better deal than similar hardware from Apple, but not as attractive, and not as price-competitive compared with certain Windows PCs.

 

By "it works," we're referring to Psystar's EULA-violating, lawsuit-embroiled installation of Apple's OS X on this non-Apple product. Apple, as you may know, has frowned on Psystar's offering. But where last time we had some qualms about the stability and reliability of Psystar's OS X implementation, this time out we got to look at Psystar's new restore disc and also test the veracity of Psystar's claim that this system will handle all of Apple's current OS X software updates.

 

Psystar is clearly not perturbed by Apple's suit, they're making money and until a court tells them to stop, they believe they have the right to continue to make money, invest in new products, and increase sales.

 

Oh well, I thought that would be the case.

Umm pystar will be made to stop they are just prolonging this and will soon be getting rapped in prison for doing so.

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.

 

Totally wrong. EULAs are enforceable contracts and are enforced frequently.

 

See here:

http://madisonian.net/archives/2005/09/02/eula-developments/

 

Software isn't sold to consumers. It's licensed. As long as you have access to the terms of the EULA before paying for the license, the EULA is

enforceable. Breaking the EULA is not a criminal act, however. It's a breach of contract and, as such, it's a civil matter. The centuries of

legal doctrines are on the side of EULAs. No one is forcing you to agree to the EULA. Your hardware analogy of buying an reselling a car (or any

real goods) is not applicable to software licensing.

 

Tom Lake

Totally wrong. EULAs are enforceable contracts and are enforced frequently.

 

See here:

http://madisonian.net/archives/2005/09/02/eula-developments/

That's the best you can come up with? An article that's 3 years old? If something is happening "frequently" I would think one could find some examples a little more recent than 3 years ago.

 

Software isn't sold to consumers. It's licensed. As long as you have access to the terms of the EULA before paying for the license, the EULA is

enforceable. Breaking the EULA is not a criminal act, however. It's a breach of contract and, as such, it's a civil matter.

False. Software makers CLAIM they license their software. That doesn't make it automatically true. Especially when you pay BEFORE being shown the EULA and you pay SALES tax on it, and usually cannot return it to the place of purchase for a refund. I agree that breaking a EULA is not a criminal act. In most cases it's not a breach of contract, either, because the way the sale is handled do not bring into force any contractual relationship whatsoever. If you were shown the EULA beforehand - and told you had to agree with it ahead of time before they would sell it to you - then you could make a case for a contractual agreement. That's done a lot at websites where you have to read something and agree to it BEFORE you can download some software.

 

The centuries of legal doctrines are on the side of EULAs. No one is forcing you to agree to the EULA.

Not. That's the key issue - they DO force you agree to the EULA. That's the exact thing that makes them invalid in a retail transaction. You cannot impose additional terms on someone AFTER they have upheld their end of the bargain. I dare anyone to find centuries of legal doctrines where one party can turn to the other - after the contract has been made - and tell them, "Oh, by the way, you also agree to 10 other things we didn't discuss. Here's the list. See ya'."

 

I don't like most car analogies, either but they always spring to mind. Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion, Tom, but not your own facts. At least you tried to make a coherent argument.

That's the key issue - they DO force you agree to the EULA.

LOL. Care to share those hallucinogens with the rest of the group?

 

What did Apple do, send over some guy in a long black trench coat and hold a gun to your head?

It's kinda like driving. By using the roads you agree to be bound to the agreement between the state and you. Provisions, because the road does not belong to you, you simply use it. You agree to those provisions before you use the road, because if you didn't then you weren't obligated to get your license in the first place. No one forced you to pay the state for your license. Although, while Apple will refund you if you disagree with the license, the state will not.

 

You'll notice both are called a license, and they are both revokable by those parties who issued them. There's a better car analogy everyone here can use.

@ toml_12953 and john the geek .. .both good points

 

i believe even virbal contracts have held up will search for references to those at a later point

 

@BigPimpin ... 3 years old or not he development of EULA still applies today.

It's surely time that this thread is locked so that it may sink to the bottom of InsanelyMac for all time. Never has such a load of drivel been kept floating to the top of what is normally an educational and useful website.

 

Let it go people. I'm sick of seeing its putrescent corpse appearing in what is normally a crystal pool of knowledge.

 

Who gives a {censored} about what you think of Psystar. If you never bought one and don't intend to ever buy one, why are you obsessing so? Furchrissakes let it go.

 

Thanks.

 

(And I'm so darned ashamed that I actually posted in this stinking thread. Yuck!!! )

this is pure speculation but i think psystar gona run out of business pretty soon dfe 132 bootloader lets u install retail osx on your laptop so i dont get the point why all the fuss is about psystar if anyone can install osx on his computer psystar doesnt really have much to offer lol i hope they run out of business too i hate seeing too much bullies in the play ground when im still playing in my sandbox

@AndrewNZ .... you posted here once youll be back the thread beckons it...lol

Let it go people. I'm sick of seeing its putrescent corpse appearing in what is normally a crystal pool of knowledge.

...and yet you also continue to read and post in this thread If it bothers you so much then simply click on the next thread instead. No one is forcing you participate in this obviously popular thread. When the judge decides this case they'll have a place to go over his verdict.

Right on! Steve is nothing more than a thief who stole XEROX research development and built a Mac from it.

Bully Gates Pacman is nothing more than a thief who stole Apple's stolen Idea and developed Windows, then claim

Microsoft really stole from Xerox instead, then proceeded to grab all the little guys ideas and pacman it into Win.

 

All computer programmers are thieves who use other people's development work and ideas to build their

own code. I never met a programmer who wrote any code from scratch off the top of his head without taking

a computer course, reading other people's code, and incorporating previously existing ideas "developed by others"

to produce his own work.

 

AMD stole INTEL's microprocessor ideas for a long time, until they forged ahead, and Intel had to borrow AMD's

64/32 design to include in their own EMT64 cpus. So it goes...

 

When will people stop stealing from each other and making a profit from other peoples works? .... damm!

 

 

Steve paid Xerox for the rights to their development.