Sidebar Sidebar
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"

P

pdjudd

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2007
4,037
65
Plymouth, MN
dukebound85 said:
how else can you explain psystar is STILL operating today?
Click to expand...

Apple sued Psystar. Lawsuits take time.

belvdr said:
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? ;)
Click to expand...

Its not legal for an individual eiother - The difference is that Apple isn;t suing individuals since there is little to gain from it.

Business and individuals are by definition different entities. EULA's have been tested and upheld when business have been sued. The courts set higher expections for business on things like trademarks since they are supposed to know them.
 
hogfaninga

hogfaninga

macrumors 65816
Aug 16, 2008
1,305
0
Chestnut Tree Cafe
That fake Ferrari looked damn fine to me. The guy had some talent.

Go Psystar and to every little company being bullied by these multinational corps.. Competition is good for the consumer.
 
840quadra

840quadra

Moderator
Staff member
Feb 1, 2005
9,489
6,386
Twin Cities Minnesota
Just my opinion, nothing more so take it as that.

Sadly companies like this, and the explosion of Hacintosh systems will likely push Apple to include some sort of DRM, or Microsoftesque software activation in future releases of OS X.

image.php
 
E

editguy

macrumors 6502
Oct 14, 2008
280
0
Markleshark said:
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.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Wow, you need new friends. Friends that care about you instead of what you own. And the "chicks" comment speaks for itself.
 
corinhorn

corinhorn

macrumors 6502a
Apr 27, 2008
713
17
USA
hogfaninga said:
Go Psystar and to every little company being bullied by these multinational corps.. Competition is good for the consumer.
Click to expand...
Psystar is not an Apple competitor. Psystar is a guy in his basement building noisy and cheap computers and then putting Mac OS X on them. Psystar is mooching off of Apple's work. Nothing that Psystar produces will ever make Apple change its computer lineup or its business model.

If what Psystar is doing is legal, why hasn't Dell, HP, or ASUS ever sold a machine with OS X on it?
 
poundsmack

poundsmack

macrumors 6502
Apr 28, 2005
287
0
for those who just don't know how long to wait...

while telling anyone flat out is usualy a way to get in trouble with apple, hinting is acceptible (to an extent). so without me divulging any possibly known information I will throw this out for speculation.

Apple will inevitibly (likely soon after, or even before, general avalibility) release Intel i7 based Mac Pro's. These systems will likely be cutting edge to show things like offloading of tasks (to an extent, pre snow leapord) to the GPU and and hardware .264

With these high def power houses Apple would likely include Blue Ray drives in them as another power house selling point. then the technology intorduced into the Mac Pro's will trickle into the rest of the product line over time, as it offten has.

So again this is all speculation, and i am not saying that there are any lines to read between so to say, but think about it.
 
N

nplima

macrumors 6502a
Apr 26, 2006
606
0
UK
corinhorn said:
If what Psystar is doing is legal, why hasn't Dell, HP, or ASUS ever sold a machine with OS X on it?
Click to expand...

a) it's not 100% legal
b) Apple may decide not to create a distributor price list for its software products, pricing OEMs out of the market
c) MS would be really upset and change the pricing for their formerly-exclusive MS Windows resellers. It took Dell some effort to be able to offer Linux on a limited range of products and the Netbooks only have Linux because XP won't run on all of them.
 
belvdr

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
corinhorn said:
Psystar is not an Apple competitor. Psystar is a guy in his basement building noisy and cheap computers and then putting Mac OS X on them. Psystar is mooching off of Apple's work.
Click to expand...

Have any info on the noisy and cheap part? If not, I don't think it's right to start making claims without warrant.

At any rate, they are mooching off of OS X, but no way are they mooching off the hardware. If the hardware is cheap, then Apple's must be too, as they are parts you can get anywhere.
 
P

pdjudd

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2007
4,037
65
Plymouth, MN
nplima said:
a) it's not 100% legal.
Click to expand...
What percent legal is it? Why would this be different from Psystar that they could argue that legally Dell or HP could not without getting MS involved in another anti trust suit (that would happen is MS tried to abuse its monopoly just like what happened in 1994)?
 
P

pdjudd

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2007
4,037
65
Plymouth, MN
belvdr said:
If the hardware is cheap, then Apple's must be too, as they are parts you can get anywhere.
Click to expand...


Since when is selling hardware at a premium not legal to do? Apple can distribute their computers with any price point. It doesn't change the nature of their OS licensing though?
 
belvdr

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
pdjudd said:
Since when is selling hardware at a premium not legal to do? Apple can distribute their computers with any price point. It doesn't change the nature of their OS licensing though?
Click to expand...

What are you on? Drop the legal part already. I said nothing about the legal aspect of the hardware. :rolleyes:

What I did say is that if the same parts used in a "cheap" system are found in an Apple system, then those same parts are "cheap". Thus, if someone finds disgrace in those cheap parts, they find disgrace in Apple too.
 
corinhorn

corinhorn

macrumors 6502a
Apr 27, 2008
713
17
USA
belvdr said:
Have any info on the noisy and cheap part? If not, I don't think it's right to start making claims without warrant.

At any rate, they are mooching off of OS X, but no way are they mooching off the hardware. If the hardware is cheap, then Apple's must be too, as they are parts you can get anywhere.
Click to expand...
Yeah, just watch youtube videos of people demonstrating the Psystar machines. They are loud. And the price of machine is cheap—it's a cheap computer.

It makes no difference whether Psystar is mooching off of the software or the hardware—it's mooching and they are not a competitor.
 
belvdr

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
corinhorn said:
Yeah, just watch youtube videos of people demonstrating the Psystar machines. They are loud. And the price of machine is cheap—it's a cheap computer.

It makes no difference whether Psystar is mooching off of the software or the hardware—it's mooching and they are not a competitor.
Click to expand...

I'll have to look for those videos. Didn't even think to check there.

What I was trying to point out, is it's impossible to mooch off the hardware. Yeah, it's still mooching the software though.
 
P

pdjudd

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2007
4,037
65
Plymouth, MN
belvdr said:
What are you on? Drop the legal part already. I said nothing about the legal aspect of the hardware. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was trying to point out that using the "its the same hardware" argument is not relevant. I was not trying to make a comment on the legality of hardware at all.
 
belvdr

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
pdjudd said:
Sorry, I was trying to point out that using the "its the same hardware" argument is not relevant. I was not trying to make a comment on the legality of hardware at all.
Click to expand...

Legally speaking, I believe that's correct. The hardware is common, and is not Apple's IP. Sorry, didn't read that in the previous post. Either way, I'm no lawyer, and sometimes the court system's decisions make no sense, so I'll just standby and watch on that one.
 
P

pdjudd

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2007
4,037
65
Plymouth, MN
belvdr said:
Legally speaking, correct. The hardware is common, and is not Apple's IP. Sorry, didn't read that in the previous post.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This case is really a legal metter. People can argue ethics, should have's and such until they are blue in the face. They are red herrings as far as legality of IP trademarks is involved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom