take that apple...

[BerticusPryme]

If no one has heard yet there is a company now selling "open computers". By doing them this way they can sell them preinstalled with mac osx. really intersting read. At this point I dont know if Apple will shut them down hard or if they may keep going and win hitting apple in the stomach and laughing. Here is the full story on it.
http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-9919432-37.html?tag=newsmap

[chaksq]

Go them, I'm fed up with Apple.

[tinker]

They will still never be able to compete with Apple.
There is no way.
It's not the cool thing to have, Apple is.

That being said though, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple took them to court and tried to shut them down. Now that they are enjoying more and more popularity they are beginning to become another hated "BIG company."

[OvRiDe]

I do believe that "pre-installed" OS X is going to be short lived. Per the Apple OS X Software License Agreement..


2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions.
A. Single Use. This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. You agree not to install, use
or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one
computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computers at the same time.

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

So even though its an called an "Open Computer" loading OS X on it.. is still illegal, and they are breaking the law.

Now don't get me wrong here.. I am no Apple fan boy.. and I think its awesome that someone finally showed the world that Apple doesn't have magical hardware, but I can understand why Apple would be pissed if someone was deliberately violating their SLA and profiting from it.

[noopypoop]

Well this will keep them from sueing NYC.

[Drum Thumper]

I love the quotes at the end of the article--There's a reason why Apple only has 8% of the market...

[crenn]

Finally, I love this, means that apple prices might go down because they now have to compete.

[tinker]

Finally, I love this, means that apple prices might go down because they now have to compete.


Sorry but I don't think they are really going to have to worry about competition. This company with be snuffed out soon and they will be back to creating popular products and software. Slowly increasing their hold on their not so niche market.

[crenn]

I don't think this will be snuffed out very quickly ;)

[halcyonforever]

Yeah they are betting that the exclusivity cause won't hold up to a court test... Apple is betting no one will want to challenge it...

I love the analogy one reporter made about that being like Honda selling a car with a caveat that you can only drive on Honda made roads to preserve the "Honda Driving Experience"

[NightrainSrt4]

It's not only Apple who is pissed with these people. The developers of the OSx86 Project and those who worked on portions of it are going after these people/pissed as well because apparently these people aren't supposed to use the software to make a profit.

But I would think they would have even less grounds as the dev kit for the project isn't legal anyway, so I guess they are just pissed at the company.

[Quakken]

From what I have read about this case, lawyers are saying that since a EULA is unsigned, apple is on pretty shaky legal ground about this when they sue them (hey- maybe they won't sue and this thing will really take off). BUT! It looks like that these guys are pretty shoddily trying to get their stuff out of their workshop (and the 100 dollar shipping kills the price difference between this and a real mac.)

They might make it past the apple EULA thing, and they might be able to keep making computers after they somehow get around the x86 guys only allowing their stuff to be noncommercial only, but the odds are far against them and being such a new company from what I have read here (http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-9920436-37.html), I don't think these guys are going to last very long.

[noopypoop]

I dont think a company could just start out new and do something stupid like that. They must have found a HUGE loophole in Apple's licence agreement.

[Quakken]

There is no loophole, but they're betting on being able to either get free publicity from being stupid or hope that the EULA doesn't hold up very well when apple sues them.

[noopypoop]

There is no loophole, but they're betting on being able to either get free publicity from being stupid or hope that the EULA doesn't hold up very well when apple sues them.

There is NO way in hell, that anyone on the planet earth would be stupid enough to challenge apple like that. Im sure they found a huge loophole.If they thought they could get away with it theyr wrong, apple is freaking suing new york city so theyd sue any one.

[Quakken]

you can SUE anyone. It's whether you WIN or not. They decided to take a gamble, start a small company and see the strength of apple's EULA in a real court. Just because you sue someone doesn't mean you automatically win. You can sue anybody over anything.

The EULA isn't exactly the most binding of legal documents, and the people who made psystar are going to see how well it does hold up in court. There is almost no question apple will sue these guys unless they think they aren't enough of a threat. The only question is what the courts decide wins in the end.

Edit- There have been previous EULA suits and sometimes the suer wins and sometimes they lose. Look here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license_agreement#Enforceability).

[si-skyline]

well they could go to court for it and then when the judge turns round and says oh yeah you have to stop production and pay apple x ammount for every unit you sold.. then the cool guys go oki we'll settle on that.. but then you find out they played with the books and it looks like they sole none xD

there must be a hidden ace somewere. but then on second thought, if you look at the underground more and more people would be interested in getting a normal/some what normal computer to run os x because they now know its very possible and thus these unbranded machines will be poping up every where. of course thats just a theory what sounded good in my head xD

but this was apples own fault for switching the archi. they should of for-seen if the bloody os works on a intel mac, have a guess what.. its gonna do the same with a unbranded computer!! but i give hands to them with the anti normal computer counter measuers what kinda got shot down in flames when the new os was released.

apple is a shobby computer company and a clever one too.. it was a good idea to make 2 os's at the same time what one worked on the apples and the other on the intels. but it also shows that apple didnt have faith in the primary product plan.

apple computers are damn right extortion and companys and people like this will put them in there place.

[Quakken]

You could always build your own, in fact I would almost suggest it if you could get all of the apple updates for your PC without having to wait for OSx86 to come out with a fix.

[noopypoop]

Could it be possible the company is using refurbished macs and just putting it in a normal case? That would be perfectly legal to sell.

[NightrainSrt4]

Could it be possible the company is using refurbished macs and just putting it in a normal case? That would be perfectly legal to sell.

I don't think so. You can see their configurations HERE (http://www.psystar.com/shop/openmac.html).

The CPU's are upgradeable. I haven't ripped open a new mac to see what they are using but these are configurable with e4500's, e6750's, q6600's q9300's and q9450's, of the latter two I don't think are even in an apple computer yet, nonetheless a refurbished one.

Also, the 8800GT for macs was just recently released and it costs 279$, whereas their pc's are upgradeable to 8800GT's for 200$. Unless they are buying the mac 8800GT (not sure what the difference is anywho) and selling for a loss of 80$, I am thinking they are using regular pc hardware and buying regular 8800GT's.

[halcyonforever]

hmmm I wonder what the possibilities of taking older mac hardware and vamping it up and re-selling it.

Over-clock it, swap out some cards...

[Quakken]

Look into it, it could be a decent business.

[Drum Thumper]

Their store is temporarily down, their merchant gateway buckled under the pressure of Apple. Yeah, this is working out great.

[noopypoop]

Ok my last theory(i swear)


The company went back in time using their time traveling Ferrari,killed the person in charge of writing the EULA(just to bide time) At the same time, they started up their site making it before the rule that OSX cant be installed on anything besides a mac.They then made the site invisible to the public, until now.Since they made the site before the new rule, they can continue on happily with business.


Case solved, wheres my reward money?8)

[halcyonforever]

hmmm now I am stuck on the idea of the custom Mac... take some old mac hardware so it is legit.. build some sick cases around it...

[Quakken]

Well, the EULA says "apple BRANDED" computer. just reselling the computer wouldn't be against it but it could be interpreted as against the EULA if you change it too much.

[XcOM]

as far as im am aware, when you buy one of these "Open Computers" you have to accept the EULA upon first start, therefor it is the end user that will be liable not the company,

Thanks my thought anyway mainly because its a "End User Licence Agreement"

[FuzzyPlushroom]

This could get interesting.

I don't have much else to say, beyond "screw Apple" - they have a great OS, but their hardware's a joke for what you pay. I'm quite glad to see this happening.

[Drum Thumper]

This could get interesting.

I don't have much else to say, beyond "screw Apple" - they have a great OS, but their hardware's a joke for what you pay. I'm quite glad to see this happening.

It's either this month's issue Popular Mechanics or Popular Science that has a head to head competition of Gateway vs Apple, both desktop and laptops. And guess what? Gateway is a bit more expensive and a bit slower in their tests.

Now granted, Dell (in tests that I've seen anyways) beats Gateway in most tests, so I would like to see Dell (or even Acer for that matter) vs Apple.

[FuzzyPlushroom]

Yeah, Gateway's getting... well, let's just say I wouldn't touch 'em now, they're running on reputation alone. eMachine quality at higher-than-Dell pricing... bad, bad mixture.

I think Dell, being the largest PC supplier (and offering similar, equally proprietary, equally reliable systems), would be the best comparison to Apple. Though, Acer would be interesting as well.

Dell's got some real fine looking hardware out now, too - the only way they're inferior to Apple, in my opinion, is their warranty service (or at least its reputation).

[luciusad2004]

There was a big post up about this on Gizmodo. The company seems really shady. They are difficult to get in contact w/ and they posted up 3 or 4 wrong addresses on their website in a day or so. I haven't been following it since that one post, so i don't know whats up at the moment but i wouldn't trust these guys.

[chaksq]

It would be interesting if the EULA got overturned by courts allowing others to legally use OSX on different hardware. I doubt this actually company would last beyond the courtroom, although they may have a chance at beating it. But regardless of what happens to the company in question if the EULA was overturned it would have some interesting impacts on the market. Apple could actually gain a market share from fanboys installing OSX on their parents Dells then a lot of people falling in love with OSX because "it's pretty" and "easy to use".

Quite frankly OSX should not become a mainstream OS due to it's limitations and inability for modification. However since most end users just want easy not advanced features it could take a large share of the market if it were to be sold with budget machines. This would then allow Apple to continue it's takeover of pop culture. Not to mention I would never personally consider OSX for anything other than graphics editing. Server type usage is pretty much out of the question, yes I know it's possible but I still think it is too bloated.

[Quakken]

It's either this month's issue Popular Mechanics or Popular Science that has a head to head competition of Gateway vs Apple, both desktop and laptops. And guess what? Gateway is a bit more expensive and a bit slower in their tests.

Now granted, Dell (in tests that I've seen anyways) beats Gateway in most tests, so I would like to see Dell (or even Acer for that matter) vs Apple.

I read that test, it was more of a test of computer software rather than hardware anyway.

Of course the gateway was more expensive and slower, it's the gateway All in one (http://www.gateway.com/systems/product/529667523.php) PC. Fitting hardware into a chassis like that isn't cheap, and having to balance the parts you do put into to it with the fact that vista is a resource-whore, you're going to have to have a computer that is expensive and weak. If you put a similiar operating system on both the apple and the PC, I'm certain that the apple hardware advantage wouldn't be much if any greater.

Of course, one would be hard pressed to beat an apple laptop. Those things are very well built and almost worth the money.

I would also like to see a decent computer company go up against a mac, but they had to go with a computer with the similiar form factor to the mac they put it up against. If form factor didn't matter and it did go up against an HP or Dell, the results may have been a bit different.

[noopypoop]

Lets start a TBCS OS and take Apple down!:fight:

[Quakken]

My OS-

/boot
/run program
/not get virus
/shutdown
.

I'll put the source code up on youtube when I get the chance.

[OvRiDe]

An interesting twist from their original statement...

http://gizmodo.com/384302/psystar-wont-let-you-reinstall-leopard-by-yourself

[Drum Thumper]

I read that test, it was more of a test of computer software rather than hardware anyway.


Isn't it then, in effect, a benchmarking battery of tests?

And I still wish to see some true benchmarks--lets put an Apple up against anything any one of us could build.

[Quakken]

they could just as easily have had a homemade windows box that was exactly the same in hardware as the apple one, it would have been a more fair test, although it's obvious that osx is superior to vista.

[crenn]

I'm sorry, until you prove other wise, OSX is not superior to Vista. They're for different people. I will never be a OSX user as I don't need it.

[Quakken]

Resource usage-wise. It uses the stuff you put into your computer more efficiently, and that's what I meant.

I'm rife with misunderstandings.

Edit- I actually can't find any real apples-to-apples (figuratively) benchmarks with a Mac OSX leopard computer versus a vista SP1 computer that have very close hardware configurations. I don't know where I got the idea that OSX uses stuff more efficiently, although I am going to Hypothesize that it does. Someone needs to do a benchmark (and not popular science, with their not-the-same hardware "benchmarks").

[crenn]

The only way you can pit the 2 OSes against each other is if you both install them on a mac.

EDIT: Then again, there aren't many Mac/Windows benchmarks.

[luciusad2004]

Guys, really, neither OS is better than the other. Almost anything XP can do OSX can do and vice versa. They may be different under the hood, and maybe a true power user would be able to find the differences between the two, but i think for most people they do the same thing and the only real difference is the interface and thats all preference.

[Quakken]

I just get so caught up in these things. It's probably because I have yet to find true operating system bliss (never tried linux... maybe my answers lie in emulation and having to type out commands)

[luciusad2004]

I just get so caught up in these things. It's probably because I have yet to find true operating system bliss (never tried linux... maybe my answers lie in emulation and having to type out commands)

Because thats the direction computing technology needs to go. lol

Not that i'm against command line interface. Just never saw it as Operating System bliss.

[Quakken]

Hey, it's a possibility. Who knows? Maybe I would love it.

[crenn]

Apple Sues Mac Clone Maker Psystar (http://www.vrforums.com/showthread.php?t=301772)

[Drum Thumper]

Apple Sues Mac Clone Maker Psystar (http://www.vrforums.com/showthread.php?t=301772)

Like many others, I have to ask what the holdup was. April to July?!?

[crenn]

iPhone 3G?

[crenn]

Sorry to bring this thread up, but:

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11945&Itemid=1

[DaveW]

I'm not sure Apple can win this case. EULA's are, to my understanding, not fully legally binding. Companies use them to try and cover their ass, but in most cases you can't see the EULA till you've already bought/installed the software, so most cases of 'EULA Breach' are tossed out of court. There's been a lot of controversy in the UK over EULA's recently. A number of top lawyers here have grouped together and claimed that there is no way for one to hold up in court; users who are taken to court find themselves facing other charges such as IP infringement. In fact, I've never heard of someone taken to court over breaching an EULA-although I'm sure it has happened somewhere.

It seems to me that some courts-I'm pretty sure the European court-would see Apple as a monopoly in this situation, trying to destroy a fair competitor. If both machines are capable of running a product that's for sale (separately), why should the product only be installed on a Mac branded machines? If Microsoft suddenly adopted this policy, people would jump all over them for it.

The difference here is that Mac has always required you to have Apple hardware, as it sold complete products. However, they changed their policies and it was only a matter of time before a competitor started selling machines that came with their product. They don't like this at all.

My guess? Settled out of court. Apple has a history of making bad business decisions, and I can see this becoming one of them.

-Dave

[crenn]

If Mac makes it so you can buy a copy of their OS and install it on ANY machine (within reason), then I think I'd start liking apple again.

[luciusad2004]

If Mac makes it so you can buy a copy of their OS and install it on ANY machine (within reason), then I think I'd start liking apple again.

I would jump to OS X in a heart beat. I'd even pay for it. I've always loved using OS X but hated that i lost control over my computer. This would combine, in my opinion, the best things of both the Mac and PC worlds. You still lose a bit of control software wise but i feel they really do a good job of pulling it all together.

[XcOM]

mac osx is only BSD with englightened WM E17 and some mods added, there are plenty of links to programs for BSD that effecetly make it osx

[DaveW]

mac osx is only BSD with englightened WM E17 and some mods added, there are plenty of links to programs for BSD that effecetly make it osx

While this is true, there's a world of difference between (a) Getting FreeBSD, installing it, finding these modifications, installing them, learning how to use them, etc. and (b) getting it all in a neat little bundle in a shiny box that is (to an extent) guaranteed to work out the box.

That being said, I'm not a fan of MacOS. Using colours to represent actions like closing a window? Thanks, I'll stick with Windows and Linux. At least with these, when I press 'delete' something happens. Mac users, give it a try, let me know if they've added that basic functionality yet so I can move on to the next flaw on my list.

-Dave

[luciusad2004]

The thing i find that i like about OS X, other than the simplicity (which i admit can be annoying), I like that all of the built in applications work together so well. I like the consistent themeing and if i recall correctly the menu system is also pretty consistent. While i recognize and admit that OS X is just BSD w/ a nice GUI, I feel it just has more of a polish than any of the Linux systems I've tried. (I can admit i have no experience w/ Unix)

OS X is what it is because of the applications apple put on it, and the refinement of the interface. It's also nice that it includes some of the standard Unix tools. I might not agree w/ apple on a lot of levels but i can admit their operating system is one of my guilty pleasures.

I appreciate everything the open source community does but i just think its on a different level. There is something to come from a billion dollar budget to make an operating system and i think it shows in OS X.

Oh: and in regards to the 'delete comment' It's been a while since i've used my mac (to old to use so i replaced it) but if i recall correctly to delete a file i just had to select it and use command - Delete, yeah its silly that i can't just use delete but the functionality is still there.

[chaksq]

I am not taking their side but one of the reasons OSX runs so smoothly is it is optimized for their hardware. The OS only runs on specific machines, meaning the drivers for the OS and all built in hardware to run correctly can be setup for the exact hardware which is in a very limited number of configurations.

[DaveW]

Oh: and in regards to the 'delete comment' It's been a while since i've used my mac (to old to use so i replaced it) but if i recall correctly to delete a file i just had to select it and use command - Delete, yeah its silly that i can't just use delete but the functionality is still there.

If you try using the delete key in text, it should delete whatever is in front of the cursor (as opposed to backspace, which deletes whatever is behind it). To my knowledge this simple thing has been broken in MacOS for years, and they consider it too trivial a thing to fix. In fact, this absurd bug was on the list PCPro's list of reasons not to buy a Mac, which also had an ajoined reasons not to buy windows to keep things fair. I tried to find the article online, but no luck.


I am not taking their side but one of the reasons OSX runs so smoothly is it is optimized for their hardware. The OS only runs on specific machines, meaning the drivers for the OS and all built in hardware to run correctly can be setup for the exact hardware which is in a very limited number of configurations.

While this was true before, the OS now runs on standard PC architectures. It's perfectly feasible for you to build a computer just as well as the apple boys do.

I should assert that I'm not anti-apple, or anti-windows, or anti-linux. Different folks like different things, and to be honest, out the the 3 breeds of OS I just mentioned I wouldn't be able to declare a clear winner. In my opinion, what it boils down to is what you actually do with the computer. A lot of people here us MacBooks for presentations, but I only know a select few who are willing to program on one. Almost everyone here has Linux on their machine, and XP at home. Laptops are currently 50/50 between Windows and Mac, likely due to a discount that apple offered a year ago to students here.

-Dave

[luciusad2004]

Oh, I didn't know that was what you meant by delete. I've honestly never used that functionality. Hell i just tried it and didn't even know my keyboard could do that. I always wondered what the point was in having a del and a backspace.

[LiTHiUM0XiD3]

http://osxbook.com/book/bonus/ancient/whatismacosx//arch.html mac isnt even all mac software... and being a person who has run a hackintosh... pffft.. its pretty.. its good for simple users... and mac should smarten up and beat the game by releasin a version of OS X that u can install on any system.. hell even for tablets.. u name it.. they would rake in huge amounts of cash from ppl who want a OS full of pretty colors.. and stupidly simple to use

[luciusad2004]

http://osxbook.com/book/bonus/ancient/whatismacosx//arch.html mac isnt even all mac software... and being a person who has run a hackintosh... pffft.. its pretty.. its good for simple users... and mac should smarten up and beat the game by releasin a version of OS X that u can install on any system.. hell even for tablets.. u name it.. they would rake in huge amounts of cash from ppl who want a OS full of pretty colors.. and stupidly simple to use

Thats what i mean, they would probably make a killing. I think they wont do it because thats not were they make their money. Their OS is relatively cheap (compared to windows) and they bring in their money on their hardware. I think if they released OS X for PC it would go up in price (and probably open the eyes of the OS X fanboys who claim windows is overpriced.)

[DaveW]

they would rake in huge amounts of cash from ppl who want a OS full of pretty colors.. and stupidly simple to use

If apple were in it for the cash, they wouldn't have fired Steve Jobs in the 1980's, only to let him take a huge amount of assets, start a competing company, and then buy it out in one of the biggest net losses a company has ever made. Apple do this stuff all the time; they can do shiny, they can do marketing, hell, they even have good products (although I say it grudgingly, and they're still overpriced). However, they just cannot figure out this whole business thing. They have consistently missed every single open market that has come their way, and if it wasn't for clever advertising and the multicoloured iMac series, the company would have went down the drain a long time ago.


Their OS is relatively cheap (compared to windows) and they bring in their money on their hardware.

That's not true, you have to pay for service packs and things that bumps up the price tremendously quickly.

-Dave