You know what they say about opinions.
Your argument is specious but I suspect you already knew that.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Filing Lawsuit Against Apple - Please Read
- Thread starter SilverTard
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
You know what they say about opinions.
Your argument is specious but I suspect you already knew that.
You'd have a case if Apple claimed that your MP would "support every future 64 bit operating system", but they didn't.
Popcorn is in the microwave. Can't wait to see how this turns out.
Popcorn is in the microwave. Can't wait to see how this turns out.
So now you're resorting to this? Where are the facts? Why is it so difficult to respond to an entire post instead of pieces?
Another point, when did apple state that the reason the macpro 1,1 can't run the latest version is because of the EFI? I think they simply stated which computers can run the software, but didn't state why others were excluded. (I do believe it is because of this issue, but I don't have any proof.)
Also, what damages occurred as a result of the "misrepresentation" that you can't run mountain lion? What software stopped working when mountain lion was released yesterday? Is it the value of a 6 year old computer? What feature was promised back then, but left out for six years, and only available now in Mountain Lion?
I am very skeptical that this lawsuit will get filed, much less actually heard in court. Of course, people can sue for pretty much anything, and apple may make a settlement because it is more cost effective than the cost of going to court. (Of course, these are the type of cases where consumers get $10 in company credit, and the lawyers get $1.7 mil in fees.....)
Fine then but let me ask you one more thing.
You said you use your MP to make money and refuse to turn it into Hackintosh by using Chameleon. But you said you have Radeon 6870.
Apple doesn't sell Radeon 6870, so obviously you used a PC card (generic or mod, I don't care).
If Apple removes 6870 from the driver, what are you gonna do? or is it just a typo.
Just my two cents.
I'm just going to add my two cents into this 64bit lawsuit thing and then be on my way.
When I first purchased my MacPro in 2006, I was tied into it that it was a fully functioning 64bit capable machine. Yes, during that time OSX was not fully capable of utilizing 64bit and it was till in a work in progress, so I thought of it as an investment that once OSX comes out with full 64bit that my machine will be fully capable to work with it. Come several years later, now that we have a fully working OSX with 64bit, now my machine isn't capable of using it? All because of of the lack of EFI64? What kind of an investment is that? Even Phil Schiller during the introduction of the new MacPro at WWDC touted that the machine was a true 64bit machine.
Thats my gripe, even if its more technical than just the lack of a EFI64, what did Apple engineers miss?
I give my full approval to anyone who follows through with the lawsuit. It may be dumb to file a lawsuit for a 6 year old computer, but when we all bought this machine it was an investment that we would be able to use a full 64bit OS in the future, and now that a full 64bit OS is available we can not use it because its not really a 64bit machine? That would be my argument with Apple.
Good luck to anyone who follows trough.
I'm just going to add my two cents into this 64bit lawsuit thing and then be on my way.
When I first purchased my MacPro in 2006, I was tied into it that it was a fully functioning 64bit capable machine. Yes, during that time OSX was not fully capable of utilizing 64bit and it was till in a work in progress, so I thought of it as an investment that once OSX comes out with full 64bit that my machine will be fully capable to work with it. Come several years later, now that we have a fully working OSX with 64bit, now my machine isn't capable of using it? All because of of the lack of EFI64? What kind of an investment is that? Even Phil Schiller during the introduction of the new MacPro at WWDC touted that the machine was a true 64bit machine.
Thats my gripe, even if its more technical than just the lack of a EFI64, what did Apple engineers miss?
I give my full approval to anyone who follows through with the lawsuit. It may be dumb to file a lawsuit for a 6 year old computer, but when we all bought this machine it was an investment that we would be able to use a full 64bit OS in the future, and now that a full 64bit OS is available we can not use it because its not really a 64bit machine? That would be my argument with Apple.
Good luck to anyone who follows trough.
So bottom line, I am in. I am ready to stand before a jury and please my frustration and expose Apple's business tactics and lies
But it's so strange that most people here kiss Apple's a$$.
But it's so strange that most people here kiss Apple's a$$.
Your brother isn't crappy, he's just a typical scumbag lawyer. You said it yourself your whole objective is to sue small and have apple settle out of court instead of spending more money fighting your ridiculous lawsuit.
I doubt it will ever make it that far. It seems many people are only interested in a free ride.
I'd like to see a statement from Apple on this.
Obviously, ML can run on the MP, people have it running right now, just not in an officially-sanctioned way.
I'm not a lawyer. I don't know how any lawsuit would pan out.
Once it was shown that ML can be made to run fine, Apple should've done the right thing and put in the extra work to extend compatibility, they didn't.
Sure, they don't have to. I don't have to spend any more money with Apple either.
Apple may not care about that, they're not short of cash. Still, I will only do business with companies that make the extra effort to treat their customers right. Up until now, I thought Apple were one of those companies.
But Apple doesn't state why your computer isn't able to upgrade to ML. Sure it might be the EFI64, but then again, they didn't claim that every 64 bit OS released would be compatible with you computer
How long have you been buying Apple products and been following them? This isn't new for Apple to stop supporting legacy machines at some point.
If you seriously had a problem with this, you would have left a long time ago.
I bought a G3 ibook when the shortly after the transition from OS9.
Here's where I'm at:
I don't expect my G4 powerbook to run ML, it's an old computer with an incompatible processor.
I don't expect my 1st gen iPhone to run iOS6, it doesn't have the processor and RAM to pull it off.
Here's the thing, people ARE running ML on the same MP as I have, it works fine. Apple are refusing to support this though. it's forced obsolescence at a time when the new MPs aren't worth the upgrade.
So because Apple doesn't support it, yet other people have hacked their machines to run it, this gives people the idea that they need to sue?
So you know Apple practices planned obsolescence despite the hardware still capable of running the latest OS( see the original iPad and iOS 6, or the original iPhone with iOS 4, or the original iPhone lacking features the 3G gained in iOS 3, etc). So why is it all of a sudden an issue for you now?
Maybe I should sue Google and Motorola.... People hacked ICS onto their phones despite those phones are not officially supported to run ICS.....
Last edited:
I'm not so sure I don't disagree with the OP.
I was a bit surprised when Mountain Lion was announced when 64-bit computers were left off the list.
I don't remember there being an asterisk by the 64-bit announcing that EFI was 32-bit and this was a non-upgradable feature.
In law all an attorney has to do is find an inconsistency. This creates the crack in the damn that can be exploited.
I'm sure he's poring over as much data as can be found about how Apple marketed the 1.1 Mac pro. Where they forthcoming about the potential limitations of the computer? If so what are acceptable damages?
I wouldn't be so quick to write this off. Surely know one expects upgrades forever but that they "do" expect is that they are limited by something they were never informed about.
I was a bit surprised when Mountain Lion was announced when 64-bit computers were left off the list.
I don't remember there being an asterisk by the 64-bit announcing that EFI was 32-bit and this was a non-upgradable feature.
In law all an attorney has to do is find an inconsistency. This creates the crack in the damn that can be exploited.
I'm sure he's poring over as much data as can be found about how Apple marketed the 1.1 Mac pro. Where they forthcoming about the potential limitations of the computer? If so what are acceptable damages?
I wouldn't be so quick to write this off. Surely know one expects upgrades forever but that they "do" expect is that they are limited by something they were never informed about.
You got the system you paid for.... and had the right to return it if it wasn't what you expected. You were not paying for the right/entitlement to have future upgrades. Good luck wasting everyones time and money.
As a consumer I am disgusted at you doing this because all it does is make products cost more for me because Apple and other companies have to spend $$ defending frivolous lawsuits like yours.... and that expense gets passed on to the pool of consumers.
As a consumer I am disgusted at you doing this because all it does is make products cost more for me because Apple and other companies have to spend $$ defending frivolous lawsuits like yours.... and that expense gets passed on to the pool of consumers.
This. What damages beyond being bummed out that he can't run ML can the OP claim?
By this logic.... Chevy should be informing all consumers that the vehicles they are buying today will not be eligible for the "Floating Cars" package of the future models.
Don't be ridiculous.
If I buy a Cheeseburger today, and tomorrow Burger King offers Bacon upgrade... I don't get to sue Burger King with the argument "I didn't know I wouldn't be able to get bacon on the cheeseburger I already ate."
No. Apple sold a 64 bit system. Now they say it isn't compatible because it isn't 64 bit. I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand.
----------
LOL.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess you're not a lawyer.
Computers get support and software upgrades. Burgers do not.
But they aren't. That might be the reason, but that's not what they are saying. At least nowhere that I could find.
Glad you were able to figure that out...... it is what us common people call an ANALOGY.
The point of the ANALOGY was that upgrades are not guaranteed. When you purchase something, it is based on what it currently contains.
You would have the case if it said "You will be able to upgrade to Mountain Lion in the future". But it did not say that.
Do you have a source? You keep saying this as fact yet I'm unable to find any information about it.
- Status