Filing Lawsuit Against Apple - Please Read

[SilverTard]

I guess you are in America. The land of suing.

In the real world. We spend an afternoon getting the Mac Pro all ready for running Mountain Lion through searching via google.

I have a Mac Pro 2,1 3ghz running Mountain Lion via Chameleon on another drive.

Such a sad a waste of time venture when you CAN run mountain lion seamlessly on Mac Pro 2007 2,1 at 11000 scoring on geek bench.

THE EVIDENCE!!! Not get the hell out of this suing mentality and get mountain lion running!
Image

So I should just take it in the backside from Apple and then be forced to hack up my machine and buy hardware to find a solution?

I should not have to do that as a purchased a FULLY OPERATIONAL 64-BIT SYSTEM or at least that is how it was represented to me, which turned out to not be true.

They need to address this problem.

 

[benwiggy]

So if your MacPro had a 64-bit EFI, but was excluded from Mountain Lion because of its graphics card or other reason, you wouldn't sue them? It's the deception that's the principle?

A famous English barrister once said "I advise all my clients not to institute civil law suits. I drive a Rolls Royce because some of my clients don't take my advice."

Maybe Apple will hand you a new MacPro as the cheaper option. Or maybe they'll make you "hole", rather than "whole".

 

[ElderBrE]

I'm with you Silver, I don't know what's up with the people blaming us for being mad about something which should be completely logical to the eyes of anyone, but okay, fanboys will be fanboys. I had hoped fanboys were not part of the professional part of the platform though.

In fact, they most likely have a firmware update for 1,1s to make them EFI64, they just don't want to release it, hoping to land more sales of a MacPro 2012 which is almost the same thing as a MacPro 2010!!

 

[SilverTard]

Sounds like this small matter of just a few thousand dollars is going to be a waste of his time then.

Well he would do it for anyone that would want to pay his fee. I sure wouldn't want to for something like this which is low dollar as you would spend more filing the suit and initial suit documents then just buying another Mac. Actually after he figures out the angle I am sure he would give to to one of the interns or junior litigators to handle and he would just oversee it.

You are correct but since he is my brother he will help me out, plus he kind of hates stuff like this happening to people. He is a good person.

 

[Baytriple]

So I should just take it in the backside from Apple and then be forced to hack up my machine and buy hardware to find a solution?

I should not have to do that as a purchased a FULLY OPERATIONAL 64-BIT SYSTEM or at least that is how it was represented to me, which turned out to not be true.

They need to address this problem.

All you have to do is buy a new video card? Is that such an effort, you bought a Mac Pro so you COULD interchange things like X4 Hard drives which can be swapped out to SD drives. You can upgrade video cards as the cards you have in the machine are probably outdated.

Do you want Mountain Lion to work on your machine? I can tell and show you how to do it, or are you just being a prick for the sake of it.

 

[mobilehaathi]

He is a good person.

I though you said he was a lawyer?

 

[chromafile]

In fact, they most likely have a firmware update for 1,1s to make them EFI64

You're assuming too much. Prove it if you can.

 

[SilverTard]

So if your MacPro had a 64-bit EFI, but was excluded from Mountain Lion because of its graphics card or other reason, you wouldn't sue them? It's the deception that's the principle?

A famous English barrister once said "I advise all my clients not to institute civil law suits. I drive a Rolls Royce because some of my clients don't take my advice."

Maybe Apple will hand you a new MacPro as the cheaper option. Or maybe they'll make you "hole", rather than "whole".

LOL, have to love those typos. Hole.... lol.

Yes, it is the fact that it does not have a 64 bit EFI which would have made it a 64-Bit system top to bottom. I don't even have an issue with the graphics card as that can be changed. I have already purchased a new graphics card as the dual port one that came with the original system had a grossly poor cooling system that was known to jam with dust and fail over time. It took mine out just like thousands of other peoples.

I just want to possess what was advertised to me. The limitation was not really exposed to me until I decided to upgrade the OS to the latest version (who wouldn't want to stay current) and learn that Apple DECIDED to leave me in the dust with what was supposed to be a system that would be everything I would need for a long time. I paid over $8000.00 for this system direct to Apple and I want what I paid for a 64-Bit system that can run a 64-Bit OS. Period. I don't think it is asking for much.

 

[quagmire]

I'm with you Silver, I don't know what's up with the people blaming us for being mad about something which should be completely logical to the eyes of anyone, but okay, fanboys will be fanboys. I had hoped fanboys were not part of the professional part of the platform though.

In fact, they most likely have a firmware update for 1,1s to make them EFI64, they just don't want to release it, hoping to land more sales of a MacPro 2012 which is almost the same thing as a MacPro 2010!!

We're not blaming anyone. He is just sore that he can't upgrade to Mountain Lion. If he actually cared about the whole 64-bit issue, my tone at least would be different. But since it is a ruse to vent his frustration that his system isn't supported anymore for the latest OS, we are calling him out on how silly the lawsuit is.

Even if the EFI was 64 bit and Apple decided not to support the MacPro 1,1 on Mountain Lion still, he would be here still complaining and finding a way to file a lawsuit.

Apple has no obligation to keep supporting a 6 year old machine. Unlike MS, Apple's business model relies on sales of hardware. They are not a software company. The software simply helps to sell the hardware. That is why Apple doesn't support legacy machines for long and why MS does. Different business models. It's why the original iPhone didn't have the same features iOS 3 gave the iPhone 3G despite having the same hardware basically.

 

[SilverTard]

I though you said he was a lawyer?

ahhahahahaha. Well done. I tell him lawyer jokes all the time and he thinks they are funny.

He really is a good person. I mean, his firm does stuff like donate $250,000 to charities every year. He doesn't HAVE to do that you know, he does it because he likes to help others.

He really is a good soul.

 

[Rog210]

Why all the negativity? People who can't admit Apple screwed up here?

 

[SilverTard]

We're not blaming anyone. He is just sore that he can't upgrade to Mountain Lion. If he actually cared about the whole 64-bit issue, my tone at least would be different. But since it is a ruse to vent his frustration that his system isn't supported anymore for the latest OS, we are calling him out on how silly the lawsuit is.

Did you actually read your post? The entire reason I learned about this LIMITATION was it was EXPOSED when I went to UPGRADE my OS.

That is how I came to find out about what Apple did and that was to LIE about the insides of this computer. It is NOT a FULLY FUNCTIONAL 64-BIT SYSTEM as they ADVERTISED it to be when the SOLD IT TO ME.

It was not a problem until now when THEY DECIDED to SCREW US OVER and not support the platform anymore.

This was a DECISION they made and are very well aware of it. They KNEW exactly what they were going to do to us.

I bought a MAC PRO with Dual 30" displays for OVER $8,000 because I wanted a solid 64-Bit powerful machine that I would be using for YEARS. What did I get? I got MISREPRESENTATION BY APPLE.

It is a real simple thing here:

Is it a 64 Bit machine or not?

ONLY PARTS OF IT ARE.... therefore they didn't sell me a GD 64-Bit computer did they!?!??!?!?!?!!?

 

[Rog210]

I guess you are in America. The land of suing.

In the real world. We spend an afternoon getting the Mac Pro all ready for running Mountain Lion through searching via google.

I have a Mac Pro 2,1 3ghz running Mountain Lion via Chameleon on another drive.

Such a sad a waste of time venture when you CAN run mountain lion seamlessly on Mac Pro 2007 2,1 at 11000 scoring on geek bench.

It's a Mac Pro, I use it professionally, to make money. I'm not turning it into a Hackintosh that could break at every software update. That's crazy.

 

[quagmire]

Did you actually read your post? The entire reason I learned about this LIMITATION was it was EXPOSED when I went to UPGRADE my OS.

That is how I came to find out about what Apple did and that was to LIE about the insides of this computer. It is NOT a FULLY FUNCTIONAL 64-BIT SYSTEM as they ADVERTISED it to be when the SOLD IT TO ME.

It was not a problem until now when THEY DECIDED to SCREW US OVER and not support the platform anymore.

This was a DECISION they made and are very well aware of it. They KNEW exactly what they were going to do to us.

I bought a MAC PRO with Dual 30" displays for OVER $8,000 because I wanted a solid 64-Bit powerful machine that I would be using for YEARS. What did I get? I got MISREPRESENTATION BY APPLE.

It is a real simple thing here:

Is it a 64 Bit machine or not?

ONLY PARTS OF IT ARE.... therefore they didn't sell me a GD 64-Bit computer did they!?!??!?!?!?!!?

Then stop complaining about not being able to upgrade to Mountain Lion as that fact is irrelevant. Apple could still have left your machine out even if it had a 64-bit EFI.

 

[ElderBrE]

It's a Mac Pro, I use it professionally, to make money. I'm not turning it into a Hackintosh that could break at every software update. That's crazy.

This. And people who seem to have Mac Pros only for gaming don't seem to understand or care enough.

 

[Rog210]

This. And people who seem to have Mac Pros only for gaming don't seem to understand or care enough.

Well, I do that too but I use Bootcamp. Shame I get better performance from my 6870 in Win 7 than I do in Lion.

 

[dukebound85]

Why respond with the same rubbish then?

Apple lied, they stated that the 1,1 was a fully 64bit capable computer. Nowhere does it mention in Apples material that it has a 32bit EFI.

The 1,1 is a 64 bit computer

It runs 64 bit apps just fine...

 

[phrehdd]

Just some more peanuts from the gallery.

The Mac Pro 1,1 for all purposes is capable for running a 64 bit operating system. There seems to be confusion here.

Are there operating systems that run on the 1,1 MP that are 64 bit? Yes
OSX and MS Windows and Linux.

Are there limitations to the 1,1 MP - YES
The 1,1 uses hardware designed for mother board bus which is limited to PCI 1.2. Later MP's run on a different PCI bus - 2.0.

Later hardware and operating systems may or may not be backward compatible. For the MP most hardware that is meant for PCI 2.0 or later will not run on the earlier Mac Pro systems. Case and point - various video cards.
Is this limitation addressable - in most cases YES. Does Apple or 3rd party have an obligation to make these items backwards compatible - NO.

As someone who owned a Mac Pro 1,1 I sure felt screwed but then again, I also know that lots of newer software and hardware would not run on any of my older PC's though they were capable of handling and addressing 16, 32 and 64 bit operating systems.

As for the EFI - I have used in the past DOS based PC's meant to run 16 bit DOS and yet, was able to run 32 bit Farlap extended DOS that ran 32 bit programs. Also it is not a secret that early 32 bit Windows ran on top of DOS that was 16 bit. The hardware handled this fine and was a "fully functional 32 bit" system.

My Mac Pro 1,1 was maxed out when I sold it. It was a fully functional 64 bit systems that ran a PCI 1.2 bus, with PCI cards that worked on that particular bus and an OS that supported PCI 1.2.

As for the EFI, there is no reason that OSX should move forward and add an abstract layer to handle older designed EFI. It is up to the manufacturer to decide. Apple could at any time elect NOT to support other operating systems as well and yet remain a "fully functional 64 bit OS."

Apple only need demonstrate that specific operating systems run on their machine to show it is a "fully functional 64 bit" computer. Apple doesn't have to show it handles multiple operating systems or upgrades to operating systems.

Like others, I felt a bit cheated when newer stuff came out and my Mac Pro 1,1 was not fully able to use newer devices/hardware and later operating systems. - It had clear limitations with the biggest being PCI 1.2 bus standard.

 

[AdrianK]

All you have to do is buy a new video card?

You can shove Apple's overpriced 5870 in an Mac Pro 1,1 if you want, still wont run Mountain Lion without using an alternative bootloader.

 

[SilverTard]

The 1,1 is a 64 bit computer

It runs 64 bit apps just fine...

Yup... too bad they decided to screw us 1,1 owners by excluding us from being able to run the now 64 bit ONLY OS. Our machines are now officially crap, thank Apple.

So does Apple plan to keep providing patches and updates to Lion users forever?

Apple has totally screwed us over. Period.

Funny... Lion is not for sale anymore... go figure. So if someone owns a 1,1 machine and is running Snow Leopard for example how do they upgrade their OS?

Boy oh boy did Apple SCREW US COLD.

 

[chrono1081]

Expect to be laughed out of court. Your machine was not misrepresented, and you are not being defrauded. Just because they have additional requirements for Mountain Lion (which came out 6 years after that computer and all of it's marketing documentation was created) beyond a 64-bit processor, does not entitle you to damages from that lack, nor does it mean that there was any misrepresentation on Apple's part. If you attempted to purchase and install Mountain Lion and found that it wouldn't work, the most you could possibly expect is a refund of your $20.

jW

This.

Your computer works as expected when you bought it. No fraud there. If your brother thinks you have a case I'd be worried about hiring him as a lawyer.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

You are in for a long a hard fight.

 

[SilverTard]

This.

Your computer works as expected when you bought it. No fraud there. If your brother thinks you have a case I'd be worried about hiring him as a lawyer.

Kiss Apples ass much?

 

[Rog210]

This.

Your computer works as expected when you bought it. No fraud there. If your brother thinks you have a case I'd be worried about hiring him as a lawyer.

The machine was sold as a 64 bit machine. Apple didn't say at the time, 'This part is 64 bit, this bit over here isn't".

If they had, you might have a point but they didn't. Now they're saying that we can't run ML because the machine isn't 64 bit. The computer didn't change, Apple's story did.

 

[quagmire]

Yup... too bad they decided to screw us 1,1 owners by excluding us from being able to run the now 64 bit ONLY OS. Our machines are now officially crap, thank Apple.

So does Apple plan to keep providing patches and updates to Lion users forever?

Apple has totally screwed us over. Period.

Funny... Lion is not for sale anymore... go figure. So if someone owns a 1,1 machine and is running Snow Leopard for example how do they upgrade their OS?

Boy oh boy did Apple SCREW US COLD.

Still complaining about not being able to upgrade to Mountain Lion? And it's a wonder why I say it is just you being mad about not being able to upgrade to the latest OS vs actually caring about how Apple lied about your machine being a fully 64-bit machine?

Would you be complaining and suing Apple if your Mac Pro was able to upgrade to Mountain Lion?