Explain how buying an OS and installing it is, in any way, 'stealing'. By any definition of 'theft' - you're wrong.
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.
"Psystar slaps Apple around, releases Mac clones with Blu-ray / GeForce 9800GT"
- Thread starter tuosfan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Explain how buying an OS and installing it is, in any way, 'stealing'. By any definition of 'theft' - you're wrong.
Psystar has to hack Apples IP (OSX)in order for it to work. That is infringing on Apples IP. That is what I am talking about. The theft is Apple's copyright. Psystar has no right to modify Apple's proprietary code ans make a business from it.
psystar isnt the one that modified osx first of all
and like i said, i can install osx via a retail dvd that i paid for....
As a business they cannot do it at all. It doesn't matter if they invented the concept or not. They are a business, not an end user.
Hah! Look at my signature. I did vote with my wallet, and bought only their OS and not a complete solution from them as I feel their complete solutions are woefully inadequate. The OS is worth what I paid for it and I'll pay for the next upgrade when the time comes.
While competition does help to drive down prices, it also creates the problems like we now have with Microsoft. Competition means Apple may have to become a software only company, and will have to spend more time developing support for variations of hardware configurations with less time make their software work properly (i.e. Vista).
... or, the lawyers in the case will make sure it is dragged out as long as possible in a trial and cost Apple way more money in the end defending themselves.
Good thing Macs hold their resale value, because I could sell my Mac Pro and get a Open Pro with a Dell 30" 2560 x 1600 pixel display and still make some money.
They can release it with whatever they want. I'll take my "over priced" Mac any day.
It's just not the same.
It's just not the same.
Maybe it will, maybe it won't. The point is Apple is not going to gamble and develop support for the technology until it is settled. They are a cash based company and will operate as such (which means you don't gamble).
Bid deal. Your an individual, have fun. Its not legal, but you did it as an individual. The point of all this is that Psystar is doing this as a business model. Its very different legally.
So, if he did it as an individual and it's illegal, and Psystar is doing it as a business and it's illegal, how that's different?
So, if he did it as an individual and it's illegal, and Psystar is doing it as a business and it's illegal, how that's different?
um its not illegal if the individual does it or in this case the buis. how else can you explain psystar is STILL operating today? think about it. psystar sells a license to osx with their computers. apple does not like this obviously but even then, apple hasnt shut them down yet
i mean i bought osx and put it on a computer. did i steal anything? no. break the eula? yes but guess what, the eula is not "law" and has been proven not to hold up in court as you cant agree to it before you buy it. apple does not write the law. the law comes down to whether eulas are enforeable and they have been shown not to be in many instances
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EULA
if apple doesnt like it, they should stop selling the os seperate and instead make you prove you have a mac to get a new os lol. or simply go back to ppc in a sense (or someting along those lines) if they really want to prevent it
I agree with you. I'm just asking pdjudd a specific question about the difference, since he claims it is illegal for both parties, but different.
Real easy for Apple to solve this once and for, and I really hope they dont do it, as will ruin for everyone.
Follow the Nokia model for there Firewall Appliances.
You sell the Apple MAC with the OSX DVD, make updates for OSX available from the site. ie you get 10.5, they make 10.5.1, 10.5.whatever available to fix bugs.
You make the supply of the Snow Leopard only available to holders of an AppleCare product for a Mac. You then have to login and download the SnowLeopard. No AppleCare for a Mac, no download.
As you never sell the OS but make available upgrades as part of the AppleCare plan, then noone can buy OSX.
To get a legal copy of OSX you have to buy a Mac and to maintain the updates to OSX ie Leopard to SnowLeopard you have to have an AppleCare product. You don't have to get AppleCare to get the bug fixes ie 10.5.x but you won't get 10.6 by a legal route unless you do. As 10.6 is new features not bug fix then this is legal to do so as you aren't forcing people to buy the AppleCare to get fixes only features.
This is all perfectly legal and is how Nokia protect the IPSO OS, which is based on BSD Unix.
There is of course nothing to stop you buying you Mac and AppleCare then installing onto a PC, but are you going to do so with the expense of having to buy and maintain the contract. Giving Apple the money so will they care, I don't believe that they will.
Steve set a precedent for this sort of behaviour with the Apple Clones. The license was to build MacOS7 machines and then didn't sella license for MacOS8. or was it 8 to 9.
Change the way that the Mac is sold with SnowLeopard and Psystar are left holding machines that they can't get OSX for legally anymore. Even the threat of doing it would make a lot of people think twice about getting the Psystar as not going to be able to get Snow Leopard for the machine legally.
Won't stop the software pirates but they wouldn't be buying anyway.
I think the problem with Psystar is that trying to make a business undercutting Apple, thus taking sales from Apple. People that build OSX86 machines would be unlikely to be buying an Apple anyway, some will but the majority aren't.
Follow the Nokia model for there Firewall Appliances.
You sell the Apple MAC with the OSX DVD, make updates for OSX available from the site. ie you get 10.5, they make 10.5.1, 10.5.whatever available to fix bugs.
You make the supply of the Snow Leopard only available to holders of an AppleCare product for a Mac. You then have to login and download the SnowLeopard. No AppleCare for a Mac, no download.
As you never sell the OS but make available upgrades as part of the AppleCare plan, then noone can buy OSX.
To get a legal copy of OSX you have to buy a Mac and to maintain the updates to OSX ie Leopard to SnowLeopard you have to have an AppleCare product. You don't have to get AppleCare to get the bug fixes ie 10.5.x but you won't get 10.6 by a legal route unless you do. As 10.6 is new features not bug fix then this is legal to do so as you aren't forcing people to buy the AppleCare to get fixes only features.
This is all perfectly legal and is how Nokia protect the IPSO OS, which is based on BSD Unix.
There is of course nothing to stop you buying you Mac and AppleCare then installing onto a PC, but are you going to do so with the expense of having to buy and maintain the contract. Giving Apple the money so will they care, I don't believe that they will.
Steve set a precedent for this sort of behaviour with the Apple Clones. The license was to build MacOS7 machines and then didn't sella license for MacOS8. or was it 8 to 9.
Change the way that the Mac is sold with SnowLeopard and Psystar are left holding machines that they can't get OSX for legally anymore. Even the threat of doing it would make a lot of people think twice about getting the Psystar as not going to be able to get Snow Leopard for the machine legally.
Won't stop the software pirates but they wouldn't be buying anyway.
I think the problem with Psystar is that trying to make a business undercutting Apple, thus taking sales from Apple. People that build OSX86 machines would be unlikely to be buying an Apple anyway, some will but the majority aren't.
Did you hear they were selling that business? That's a shame, as their appliances are slick.
Depends how you look at it. My iPhone has a wifi antenna, storage, screen, bluetooth, cellular antenna... But it's hardly a Nokia...
But those two manufacturers may choose two different vendors for their parts.
For example, it's not an Apple CPU that's only theirs; it's an Intel CPU that can be put in a non-Apple system.
Which of course I don't have a problem with. Infact, I don't have a problem with Mac clones at all... I just don't want one. I'd rather have a Mac, not a rip off.
Worst analogy ever.
Infact - it's the exact opposite. To use your dreadfull analogy, a hackintosh is the same engine, same chassis, same suspension....but without the body-kit and half the price.
You may enjoy paying far far over the odds for hardware. I don't. I don't like being taken advantage of by having to pay £90 to attach a laptop to external screens. I don't like being stuck with a range of what I now think are under-specified, badly designed (well built and sturdy) and VERY over priced laptops.
But I do like OSX.
Doug
but they do use the same parts.... i mean same intel chips, same hd's same graphics cards, etc
only apple uses a very small segment of each of those companies offerings for their products
so to correct your analogy, apple say builds only a 355 whereas a hackintosh can be any one of the cars in ferrari's lineup
I do. What does that matter to anyone other than me? Infact, my friends think I'm cooler and chicks dig Macs. So in the end... I win.