And especially if that's the experience that they promote and advertise. Isn't that exactly what the Mac vs PC ads represent? But look at where quality control has been heading and all the bug fixes. Its reminding me more & more of Microsoft.
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
And especially if that's the experience that they promote and advertise. Isn't that exactly what the Mac vs PC ads represent? But look at where quality control has been heading and all the bug fixes. Its reminding me more & more of Microsoft.
Sorry I don't understand what you are saying. My point, quite simply, is that the market for a mid priced upgradable tower ... for consumers, is relatively small. And likely will get smaller.
Apple, rightly or wrongly, seems to think that addressing that market is not worth it.
Do you have research or figures to back that up?
There are people who would like to have the specs of an iMac in a headless desktop. It gives so many more options than the iMac. Such as, dual monitors that match.
I guess I missed the part where Psystar claimed to have created OS X. Maybe you can point it out for me.
I never said they claimed they created OSX, I just say that it's wrong and it's stealing when they take credit for the whole "Hackintosh" thing. OSX86 community made it possible not them. Netkas created the EFI emulator that was one of the vital components that made it possible to install Leopard on a PC and he stated that he has copyrights and it states that he prohibits his work to be used for profit. Psystar uses his EFI emulator claims that its theirs, they give no credit to him or the other developers that really made it happen. In comparison apple clearly states that their OS is based on Free BSD. Psystar claims they did it themselves. While in reality they probably just downloaded an ISO from bittorrent of Kalyway or iAtkos to install then pack up the machine with a Retail copy they purchase apart just to claim it's "legal".
How big are the All in One desktop (iMac), small form factor desktop (MacMini), ultra portable (MBA), or premium thin and light notebook (Macbook Pro)? Better yet how many of the people who bought the iMac bought it because they actually wanted an all in one or that they were pretty much forced into it by Apple making expandable towers more affordable. Apple isn't HP. They don't play in volume markets. What they do play in or at least did until Jobs let things get to his head are Prosumer and Professional markets where buyers are likely to spend a bit more and a fiercely loyal. However, even with these users there is a limit.
Nevermind that 60% of all Windows computers are STILL towers or mini-towers. I mean that's just a statistical fact. Don't let those get in the way of thinking that PCs in general just MIGHT be a good indicator of what a Mac user might want also. But given we don't have a mid-range tower for sale by Apple, it's hard to PROVE it definitively. But if your logic is true, then Apple shouldn't bother fighting Psystar since they won't sell more than a few machines anyway since less than 20% would even want one anyway according to you.
I guess I missed the part where Psystar claimed to have created OS X. Maybe you can point it out for me.
It IS for sale at my local Best Buy in full retail form. You simply choose to ignore the facts as usual.
No, they do not. When you buy something, a company has NO RIGHT to tell you how and what for you can use it. But with IP, it's different. These so-called Eulas bind the consumer into not being allowed to make their own decisions in how they use the software. In this case, it goes one step further. The Eula in question has NOTHING to do with "USE" but rather with what hardware you buy. You cannot argue that it's any of Apple's business what hardware I buy because their software has NOTHING TO DO with the hardware it runs on. If their hardware were special, it would not run on generic hardware, which it does quite easily.
If literally used as a backup, it has NO economic consequences except possibly to those who would profit by you NOT having a backup of whatever software product. For example, a movie company will make money if your child breaks your copy of Willy Wonka. If you had a backup, you could still watch it. You paid for the right to watch it, of course. But that company will not give you an "at cost" copy to replace your broken media when it fails. They expect you to buy another copy at full retail price. That's the duplicity of these Eulas. They only sell you a "license" to watch something, yet that license only applies to that particular physical copy. That way the consumer loses both ways. And if he tries to back it up, he's guilty of breaking the DMCA, so clearly the consumer just plain LOSES these days all the way around. He has no more rights. He's at the mercy of greedy corporations. The days of 'fair use' for software (such as with VCRs) are long gone thanks to people like you that have ruined this country and the world for that matter.
The only thing moronic around here is how you can dismiss any argument ever thrown your way as 'moronic' because you didn't write it. If you have to start calling names, you've lost the argument.
Your comparison makes no sense what-so-ever (should I be shocked?). Psystar didn't take OS X and it didn't take your car either. It purchased a copy of OS X. It didn't take any Macbooks or iMacs to go with the operating system it purchased. They provided their own hardware.
Yeah right. It has EVERYTHING to do with GREED and that pretty much is the definition of corporations these days, not that I would expect you capable of comprehending that. Apple simply does not want to compete whether it be with Opera on the iPhone or Dell clone hardware. They want the whole market for all OS X related products to themselves. Even the Apple store will carry 3rd party products only until such time that Apple releases their own competing product at which point they dump or ban such products for sale for their systems. They don't like competition. But in a free society, that's too darn bad, which is why Apple is the guilty party here whether you believe it or not. Apple is actively trying to impede my choice of hardware. Buying software from them doesn't give them the right to tell me what hardware to buy. It would be like Ford telling me what brand of gasoline I have to put in their car after I purchase. It's NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS.
There you go with the name calling again. It belittles your entire so-called 'argument'. Apple chose to sell OS X in its entirety at Best Buy in full retail form. There are no checks for Apple hardware. There is no indication it's an upgrade even. Apple can choose to SELL what it wants. Where they break the law is when they pretend they are allowed to CONTROL what hardware you are allowed to buy. Apparently installing their OS on a Fujitsu drive is OK if Apple sells you the drive inside a computer they made, but if you install it on a Fujitsu drive in a computer you legally purchased, that's 'not allowed' because Apple missed out on selling it to you. How ANYONE can be so blind as to not see how that is anti-competitive behavior is simply beyond me. You must go around with blinders on.
He sold me the package containing the operating system. He has no right to tell me what I can do with it after I bought it. You clearly disagree, but then as I said, you support Dicator/Communist behavior too so be what you are, but don't tell me how to think, thank you very much.
Copyright has NOTHING to do with it since I'm not "copying" it! Get your facts straight. Installing something is not considered copying by law. The ONLY 'violation' is the Eula which is null and void by higher law which says I have a right to privacy in my own home. Want to prove I'm wrong? Get a court to rule on it because so far it has not been ruled on except by YOU and given your illogical arguments and name calling, I'd say your judgment is suspect at best.
And they have NO RIGHT to do that in a free society protected by the right to privacy as provided by the Constitution of the United States. Maybe you live in Cuba, but I do not. Like I said, let a court (preferably the Supreme one) rule on the case if you don't like it. Your word is meaningless.
Nope. You made that up. There's no copying involved.
So do mechanics providing service to cars. That doesn't make it unethical or illegal! Psystar is selling computer hardware made by someone other than Apple. They are purchasing a legal copy of OS X and reselling it with the computer. There is nothing illegal going on except in your head and the head of the Apple lawyer who thinks he has the right to tell consumers what hardware they can purchase.
They're contributing new OS X users that can buy other Apple software. Apparently, you cannot see that either. Don't tell me that's not significant when Microsoft makes all their money that way and is the largest most profitable software company on the planet.
Bologna. They try to protect a virtual monopoly on hardware for their software product by artificially "forbidding" you to buy hardware from another company in order to use their software. Not only are the markets unrelated, but that is blatant anti-competitive behavior and is in itself illegal in a free market system. Apple is knowingly behaving in anti-competitive behavior in order to monopolize all the hardware profits for their software operating system. That is easily proven. They just did it again by forbidding a competing browser to be installed on the iPhone and iPod Touch system. They have no rights to tell you what software you can put on their hardware! This is going to bite them in the butt sooner or later.
You have a VERY strange definition of "stealing". Maybe you should try looking the word up in the dictionary before you type it because there is no "stealing" happening here, only the breach of an illegal Eula agreement.
But that has nothing do with the land owner. That is a local ordinance. The free market economy is the ordinance here and Apple has no right to dictate to ANYONE what hardware they can and cannot buy. It would be like Ford telling me I can't park their car in a house made by Company X because they have a money making deal with company Y. Ford has no right to tell me how fast I can drive their car either. It's NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS. It might be the government's business, but it's not the government here telling me I have to buy Apple hardware if I buy OS X.
The problem here is that what you are actually suggesting is only selling a product to CERTAIN teachers, not others. That is quite illegal.
There you go with the insults again. Apparently, you should take your own advice. I mean it's quite obvious what you represent. I understand you are for big corporations and corporate greed and greed in general. But stop pretending that somehow validates your arguments or decides a court case that hasn't gone to court.
You did above.
Yes, I bought a limited version of OS X that only installs on Apple hardware. That's why it installs on anyone's hardware. It has a Eula? The fact I cannot read the Eula without opening the box invalidates it since they will not take back open software where I bought it. My loss? No. It was Apple's loss when they decided to offer hardware I have no interest in for prices I will not consider. If OS X is undervalued, then let them sell it for a higher price. But that gives them NO RIGHT to tell me what hardware I'm allowed to purchase. Maybe that would fly in Russia, but not here.
Absolutely right on all counts! Thank you.
Let's hope Microsoft bans Safari for Windows... what will the fanboys have to say then?
Sadly for most of us in the end the market and the end users support this scenario. The simple solution for change is that people stop buying apple products and they will quickly change their strategy. And believe it or not apple doesn't make a mid-range tower because they don't see a profitable market. You may call bull on this but first consider the factors that markets in every region are different but at least I can assume that the numbers I see over here in P.R. are more or less the same in the rest of America. The fact is that retailers over here rarely sell desktops anymore everybody's moving towards laptops, a slow week in office max, best buy or compusa over averages on 350 laptops a week, and only 3 desktops in that same week. General managers in these stores then see that no one wants these machines and they proceed in filling out their orders and occupying warehouse space with as much laptops as possible. Keep in mind these are all brands mixed in HP's, Acers, Macs etc.
Normally from my experience (at least in office max and bestbuy) of those three in the week 1 is an iMac. Customers wanting to buy a midrange tower 90% of the time go with an HP the moment they arrive at the store to buy a mid-range tower guess what, it's out of stock. That customer leaves angry claiming that they should have that product in stock because most people have that type of computer while in reality the trend is not supporting that view. If the market was the opposite from what I have seen, apple would update the iMacs and Mac Pro's and mini's because they sell more, but the fact is the laptops are getting updates more often. The general managers of those retailers will also not order more volume of desktops just because of 1 customer a week when 350 others will come for laptops, the sad reality is that the market, the end users and retailers that sell apple products.
At least here in the U.S. the fact is that apple's margins have been the closest with PC's more than ever. Remember macs back in the day when they went for like 5k when you could get a packard bell or compaq for 2k? Yes you can get a HP dv6000 for like $600 and a white macbook will cost you $999. But guess what the HP brings a hell of a lot more ports, lightscribe and more ram, more HD. So yeah your right it's a lot cheaper.
I used my macbook that cost me $1,099 mainly for the reason that 6 months time my HP died and it took a month for HP to send me the machine back because of a bad motherboard. A year and a half and my combo macbook has not failed once. Perhaps according to many users posting here I have been very lucky. Extremely when you consider my ibook and Bondi blue imac are still kicking. Apple will never make a sub 1k machine despite that it may seem like a lack of features I though I was gonna use my HP more because of that. The fact is I used it less it was slower with 4 gigs thanks to crapware than a a macbook with 1GB of ram.
Which now gets me thinking, how much crapware will they have to install to make more profit if a mac clone if it becomes reality? And yes they will add crapware if they license the OS so it will get as crippled as Windows is right out of the box of a $450 acer laptop and you couldn't possibly be serious as to even say that they might not put crapware on a licensed Mac OS. Yes you can go on a 2 hour uninstalling Bong Quest but again most end users don't want to do it and guess what they will pay for a technician to remove it already an additional cost.
Apple wants to be seen as a luxury item they will not sell a mid range system. Mercedes and Jaguar sell almost nothing compared to Toyota but they're still around. Apple will not change any time soon, in my case that doesn't really affect me because I have seen that in my case for what I will use a laptop for macbook is just a better choice midrange tower I dont need one for my other hobbies, a Clone with a Striker Extreme, 8gigs of ram 3x 750GB HD's and 2x 8800gt's and a Q6600 is hardly midrange and it was only $1400 with OSX installed, 10 times better that what psystar had to offer. Every case is unique and Im not saying anyone is wrong but sadly majority of the market is supporting apple's so called monopolistic tendencies. I disagree with this last view but I can understand why many see it like this.
Ladies and gentlemen my rant had ended I have wrote enough for me not to post in this thread or any other in any forum in the internet for whats left of the year. GOODNIGHT!!
Normally from my experience (at least in office max and bestbuy) of those three in the week 1 is an iMac. Customers wanting to buy a midrange tower 90% of the time go with an HP the moment they arrive at the store to buy a mid-range tower guess what, it's out of stock. That customer leaves angry claiming that they should have that product in stock because most people have that type of computer while in reality the trend is not supporting that view. If the market was the opposite from what I have seen, apple would update the iMacs and Mac Pro's and mini's because they sell more, but the fact is the laptops are getting updates more often. The general managers of those retailers will also not order more volume of desktops just because of 1 customer a week when 350 others will come for laptops, the sad reality is that the market, the end users and retailers that sell apple products.
At least here in the U.S. the fact is that apple's margins have been the closest with PC's more than ever. Remember macs back in the day when they went for like 5k when you could get a packard bell or compaq for 2k? Yes you can get a HP dv6000 for like $600 and a white macbook will cost you $999. But guess what the HP brings a hell of a lot more ports, lightscribe and more ram, more HD. So yeah your right it's a lot cheaper.
I used my macbook that cost me $1,099 mainly for the reason that 6 months time my HP died and it took a month for HP to send me the machine back because of a bad motherboard. A year and a half and my combo macbook has not failed once. Perhaps according to many users posting here I have been very lucky. Extremely when you consider my ibook and Bondi blue imac are still kicking. Apple will never make a sub 1k machine despite that it may seem like a lack of features I though I was gonna use my HP more because of that. The fact is I used it less it was slower with 4 gigs thanks to crapware than a a macbook with 1GB of ram.
Which now gets me thinking, how much crapware will they have to install to make more profit if a mac clone if it becomes reality? And yes they will add crapware if they license the OS so it will get as crippled as Windows is right out of the box of a $450 acer laptop and you couldn't possibly be serious as to even say that they might not put crapware on a licensed Mac OS. Yes you can go on a 2 hour uninstalling Bong Quest but again most end users don't want to do it and guess what they will pay for a technician to remove it already an additional cost.
Apple wants to be seen as a luxury item they will not sell a mid range system. Mercedes and Jaguar sell almost nothing compared to Toyota but they're still around. Apple will not change any time soon, in my case that doesn't really affect me because I have seen that in my case for what I will use a laptop for macbook is just a better choice midrange tower I dont need one for my other hobbies, a Clone with a Striker Extreme, 8gigs of ram 3x 750GB HD's and 2x 8800gt's and a Q6600 is hardly midrange and it was only $1400 with OSX installed, 10 times better that what psystar had to offer. Every case is unique and Im not saying anyone is wrong but sadly majority of the market is supporting apple's so called monopolistic tendencies. I disagree with this last view but I can understand why many see it like this.
Ladies and gentlemen my rant had ended I have wrote enough for me not to post in this thread or any other in any forum in the internet for whats left of the year. GOODNIGHT!!
KítscheñÇinqµe
macrumors regular
either free or $40 or $50 or???
http://digg.com/hardware/Sony_gives_option_to_build_your_laptop_crapware_free
..or http://pcdecrapifier.com/
.. or buy a retail install cd, and do a clean install. .. or copying the "rescue" cd to hd, then deleting the crap setups, then nlite adding patches, then reburning might work, too.
i removed a mcafee trial once (the usual uninstall method), but otherwise haven't run into the problem.
jags and mbzs are bought by people who like going to the auto repair more often. if you like rwd, buy a lexus. (or a tacoma
)don't know about laptops, cuz they aren't very usable to me. why would a q6600 be $1400? is it goldplated? somewhere around $500-750 (more ram, better vid card) is closer.
KítscheñÇinqµe
macrumors regular
hey don't give them ideas. they'll begin blackmailing isp's to ban all non-vista connections.
either free or $40 or $50 or???
http://digg.com/hardware/Sony_gives_option_to_build_your_laptop_crapware_free
..or http://pcdecrapifier.com/
.. or buy a retail install cd, and do a clean install. .. or copying the "rescue" cd to hd, then deleting the crap setups, then nlite adding patches, then reburning might work, too.
i removed a mcafee trial once (the usual uninstall method), but otherwise haven't run into the problem.
jags and mbzs are bought by people who like going to the auto repair more often. if you like rwd, buy a lexus. (or a tacoma
don't know about laptops, cuz they aren't very usable to me. why would a q6600 be $1400? is it goldplated? somewhere around $500-750 (more ram, better vid card) is closer.
Ok I'll bite
$1400 I meant the whole system I mentioned not just the q6600, q6600 was like what $200 when I bought it at newegg? and like I said you can uninstall it, but again most "end users" (end users being the majority of the people that aren't savvy with computers) just hate that hassle and don't do it and complain they're system is slow and end up paying technicians.
If that is true, then Apple has nothing to worry about with Psystar because almost no one will buy one because everyone apparently hates desktops.
I'm typing on an aged, but upgraded 1.8GHz/9800Pro PowerMac desktop right now. It's on 24/7. My brand new MBP is sitting in a case turned off right now. I'm at home far more than I'm on the road. I just bought another desk, 24" flat monitor, keyboard and mouse to connect to that laptop so I can 'use' it as a pseudo-desktop instead of letting it waste away in a bag somewhere. The PowerMac will STILL be on 24/7, serving my whole house audio/video system. A laptop is not a substitute since if I do go mobile, my home audio/video system would be down. That might be fine if I live alone, but if not, it's buggered.
I have bought many Apple computers in the past, but not anymore. I do not want an iMac, a Mini or a Pro. I have 3 laptops that I rarely use. I built a Hackintosh, because I wanted to have a current Apple desktop running Leopard. If anything should happen to go wrong with it, I can fix hardware or software problems.
Those folks who buy Psystar will be in a jam if their computer has a problem after Psystar is out of business unless they are savvy enough to fix it themselves. And if they are, they would be better served to build their own.
That's sarcasm on Magnus' part in response to the excuse that the desktop market is just too small for Apple to play in.
I think all the information used to justify Apple's lack of product offerings is very misleading. Ultimately Apple has been unable to break into the enterprise market due to its lack of viable corporate products, such as a minitower.
Despite stellar revenue Apple's stock tends to tank after its flashy "consumer" product announcements, even the just announced record revenue quarter in these troubled economy. Analysts often comment of the lack of enterprise products, at times specifically on the lack of a viable minitower. Macworld's site editors have also commented often on the need for such a product(s). The just announced (with much fanfare) Mac Books + Pros was received by many with a "nice but...meh", observers were looking for a viable enterprise sub $1k laptop.
After introducing a great enterprise product such as the Xserve, Apple got sidetracked and distracted by the iPhone. For 2 years it has consumed all news of "all things Apple". Even their great consumer software has suffered, iLife has failed to keep up (wth is '09 Steve?), iWork is just sad.
Maybe some of us have grown up along with the industry, and require the right tools to make a living. I have no time to stare at a fancy looking tower sitting under my desk. The iMac and Mac mini are great consumer products, not corporate. Maybe Apple is only capable of producing "high end gadgets" as some here state. If that is the case, Apple will remain a niche product, not a viable enterprise option. Maybe Windows 7 will be a solid alternative, making Apple's current "gadget" focus the right choice for its future.
You make some good points. Apple could easily release some mid-range products like a mini-tower without going for all the consumer-orientated ads and glitz. I hadn't really thought about the business option, but frankly, if they'd just update the Mac-Mini to the new Nvidia graphics the new Macbook has and keep the price low with a bit faster hard drives, they could probably move some machines. But the idea that a mini-tower would somehow "hurt" Apple sales in general seems ridiculous to me. They should be pushing the business and gaming markets more. They don't need a lot of investment to produce something that is essentially using all off-the-shelf parts. If Psystar can do it, then it should be a total breeze for Apple. I don't buy arguments about cutting into sales. How do you cut into sales of your own products? What people mean is their profit margins are lower on the cheaper Apple products than the insanely high priced ones, but that's just too bad. The economy is down and not everyone can afford a $2400 Mac Pro just to get a replaceable GPU.
I've owned 2 PCs (one is now in parts after getting almost 7 years use with several upgrades along the way including a CPU upgrade, 3 GPU changes and 3 sound cards). The other is sitting off to my right and cost me about $800 and can play nearly any modern PC game. It also runs Mandriva Linux and has two monitors and a G25 steering wheel setup.
I now own two Macs. One is a used PowerMac dual 533 digital audio I got for $200 about two years ago and upgraded it to 1.8GHz 7448, 1.5GB of ram, Sonnet USB 2.0, Sonnet Sata with two internal 500GB drives with an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro and an 18x DVD-RW drive and runs my whole house audio/video system 24/7 and does most of my web browsing and shopping besides. Since I'm not running games on it (well I do have Halo and a few older games), it doesn't have to be state-of-the-art. The point is that it's a TOWER and I don't have tons of junky external expansion all over my desk.
My newest Mac is a brand new "old generation" MBP I got for $1444 with rebate (with a nice MATTE screen). I just bought a new corner desk to dock it with a 24" monitor, keyboard, mouse, and USB/Firewire Hub and I plan to use it with a firewire adapter as a portable recording studio (I play piano/keyboard and guitar). So it'll be moving around the house, traveling and maybe even the back porch and docking for mix-downs. I wouldn't have paid $2000 for it. I was hoping for a better more reasonable Macbook, but found that deal too good to pass up and the new Macbooks overpriced and missing firewire.
Apple just seems to be going the wrong direction. They are going for more and more consumer sales and ignoring the professional and business user markets all while trying to push the iPhone into those markets. Well, what good is one without the other? They're trying to get Windows users to use iPhones? How about attracting the Windows users with the iPhone and using that to get them interested in a Mac while they're at it?
Heck, they could make a new Mac-Mini larger VERTICALLY and still be much smaller than a mini-tower (think Lan Box type size) and it could then hold the items needed to make a plausible business and mid-range machine (namely, the ability to hold two internal good speed hard drives, use the new Nvidia integrated graphics and have a reasonable ram and processor selection. For about 2x the vertical height, the machine could be a worthy desktop replacement. But people might not buy an iMac. So what. Sell them a cinema display instead! Offer TWO cinema displays even. Imagine Time Machine without the need for an external box. With 2x the height, they could even make room for a GPU slot. 3x and it could have a PCI-E slot at which point 85% or more of the people crying for a mid-range tower would be satisfied. Make it clear and call it the Cube Part Deux. I mean that Cube was slick looking. Today's CPUs are cool enought to pull of an unhampered cube and that cube looked just like a mini-Apple store so I think it'd sell again. But it has to be a reasonable price (say $900 with 1 hard drive and integrated graphics, maybe $1500 with a top notch GPU and two large hard drives and 4GB of ram).
Frankly, though, I think Steve is way into his own ego to consider anything 'reasonable'. He seems to obsessed with 'thin' for some reason (both personally and professionally), even though a cube makes more sense than a pancake for a desktop. He seemed to get "cubes" back in his NeXT Step days, though.
re: viable corporate products?
I don't quite agree. I think Apple has been unable to break into the enterprise market for two reasons:
1. Management and those in charge of I.T. are resistant to change. They invested heavily in a Windows PC infrastructure, and for better or for worse, it's what their company successfully runs on each and every day. Right now, the company I work for uses generic ("Nobilis" branded) PC clone mini-towers coupled with 17" to 22" LCD monitors. The outside consulting/solutions group we work with sells these to us for prices very comparable to new iMac 17" or 20" systems. The problem is, how do you go about "switching" a whole business to Mac? How much "pain" does the conversion process cause your I.T. staff, vs. rewards it would really bring them?
You have to remember, too, our budget is designed to include the need to swap a few dying/dead PCs every year - but not a wholesale switchover to a new platform. So like many people, I'd be "on the spot" to cost-justify the big initial expense of going all Mac, even if the iMac was CHEAPER than the Windows PC, on an individual basis!
2. Apple isn't set up to really support "enterprise" customers the way they expect to be supported. I really don't think the hardware is much of an issue. I can't see why MOST businesses wouldn't be just as well served by an iMac as by any other PC clone? It'd have less cabling mess, among other benefits - and the lack of "expandability"? Just not an issue for most office/business PCs? You store your data on the SERVER, not the workstation - so even the smallest hard drive is sufficient, and even the worst "integrated graphics" Apple ever supplied would be fine for business app use. The PROBLEM is with everything else. Say your business requires Windows for a few apps, and the decision is made to use iMacs running "Bootcamp". Good luck even BUYING any of those new iMacs pre-loaded with that configuration! Apple leaves it up to YOU to redo their default config. to work that way, and they won't even sell you the copy of Windows bundled with the purchase! Big businesses want to write ONE purchase order for the *whole* project, and expect *one* vendor to support the whole package afterwards!
As yet another example, Mac software developers are very much "on their own" getting assistance with issues they encounter while coding for OS X, vs. the amount of "hand-holding" and help available from Microsoft for their platform. At the end of the day, MOST Mac developers do it as kind of a "labor of love", and out of a stubborn belief that they're developing for the "better system" despite the extra hassles. That doesn't fly in the corporate world. If your developer can't figure out how to get something processing parallel in a "farm" of machines via xgrid in Leopard, and Apple's documentation is scattered and outdated on the subject - that's not acceptable, period!
I don't quite agree. I think Apple has been unable to break into the enterprise market for two reasons:
1. Management and those in charge of I.T. are resistant to change. They invested heavily in a Windows PC infrastructure, and for better or for worse, it's what their company successfully runs on each and every day. Right now, the company I work for uses generic ("Nobilis" branded) PC clone mini-towers coupled with 17" to 22" LCD monitors. The outside consulting/solutions group we work with sells these to us for prices very comparable to new iMac 17" or 20" systems. The problem is, how do you go about "switching" a whole business to Mac? How much "pain" does the conversion process cause your I.T. staff, vs. rewards it would really bring them?
You have to remember, too, our budget is designed to include the need to swap a few dying/dead PCs every year - but not a wholesale switchover to a new platform. So like many people, I'd be "on the spot" to cost-justify the big initial expense of going all Mac, even if the iMac was CHEAPER than the Windows PC, on an individual basis!
2. Apple isn't set up to really support "enterprise" customers the way they expect to be supported. I really don't think the hardware is much of an issue. I can't see why MOST businesses wouldn't be just as well served by an iMac as by any other PC clone? It'd have less cabling mess, among other benefits - and the lack of "expandability"? Just not an issue for most office/business PCs? You store your data on the SERVER, not the workstation - so even the smallest hard drive is sufficient, and even the worst "integrated graphics" Apple ever supplied would be fine for business app use. The PROBLEM is with everything else. Say your business requires Windows for a few apps, and the decision is made to use iMacs running "Bootcamp". Good luck even BUYING any of those new iMacs pre-loaded with that configuration! Apple leaves it up to YOU to redo their default config. to work that way, and they won't even sell you the copy of Windows bundled with the purchase! Big businesses want to write ONE purchase order for the *whole* project, and expect *one* vendor to support the whole package afterwards!
As yet another example, Mac software developers are very much "on their own" getting assistance with issues they encounter while coding for OS X, vs. the amount of "hand-holding" and help available from Microsoft for their platform. At the end of the day, MOST Mac developers do it as kind of a "labor of love", and out of a stubborn belief that they're developing for the "better system" despite the extra hassles. That doesn't fly in the corporate world. If your developer can't figure out how to get something processing parallel in a "farm" of machines via xgrid in Leopard, and Apple's documentation is scattered and outdated on the subject - that's not acceptable, period!
You make some good points indeed. However, Microsoft's repeated blunders (i.e. Software licensing fees and Vista) opened a huge door for Apple. This opportunity is being wasted in a big way by the excessive resource drain of the iPhone and the lack of viable enterprise products at competitive prices.
Their potential loss of revenue margins would be more than made up with market share growth and software sales. You can't expect the market to change its needs to suit your products, you must provide it with the right products.
Until Apple can give the bulk buyers of the Dell/HP/Lenovo desktops something for £300 including a 19" tft - they will never, I promise you, never, gain bulk acceptance in enterprise office environments.
For the price of a cheap iMac - they can equip two and a half cubicles. You can't escape that reality of the situation.
For the price of a cheap iMac - they can equip two and a half cubicles. You can't escape that reality of the situation.
Hidden Dimensions - When Licensing Mac OS X Wouldn't be Crazy
Yet another view on the issue from a different angle:
http://www.macobserver.com/columns/hiddendimensions/2008/11/04.1.shtml
Yet another view on the issue from a different angle:
http://www.macobserver.com/columns/hiddendimensions/2008/11/04.1.shtml
Call me when they ship four million a quarter and make a billion in profit doing it.
I've been volunteering for election legal teams, and apparently missed this gem while I was away.
Nowhere for sale at your local Best Buy is an unlimited right to reproduce, nor is there anything for sale that gives you an ownership interest in the work of OS X.
You're not going to shame your way to victory.
On the other hand: "thanks to people like you that have ruined this country and the world for that matter" pretty much sums up your approach to everything.
Pretty basic stuff. Stealing is not limited to theft.
What gives you the right to demand someone else's product on terms they don't wish to sell it? Maybe that would fly in Russia, but not here.
It's not ignoring the facts when you simply make them up.
Nowhere for sale at your local Best Buy is an unlimited right to reproduce, nor is there anything for sale that gives you an ownership interest in the work of OS X.
Yeah, and when you buy a complete reproduction right for OS X, then your argument will make sense. It will still be incorrect, as there are all kinds of situations in which sellers can dictate terms--and in fact, any setup is permissible through contract. But nothing will stop you.
Of course it is their business. They have a right to use whatever business model they choose, and to recoup their investments in whatever manner they choose. If they want to offer a product at a particular price only to their own customers, that's their right. Your inability to see that, and need to paint the truth as "pro-corporation" when it in fact has nothing to do with corporations at all, but the basic rights of a creator, corporation or not, wealthy or not, simply depicts a person completely detached from reality.
You're not going to shame your way to victory.
What fair use right "such as with VCRs" has disappeared? The "fair use" in Sony was timeshifting, and it was a stretch because the United States has not yet codified personal use, which is not fair use.
Calling an argument moronic because of its plain, ignorant, and baseless distortion is not namecalling. You can try to explain how a basic tenet of American jurisprudence, which applies equally to all creators, rich, small, large, corporate, and everything in between is magically transformed into "you're for rich corporations".
On the other hand: "thanks to people like you that have ruined this country and the world for that matter" pretty much sums up your approach to everything.
Shocking that you wouldn't understand. Paying money for something you're not authorized to buy or use doesn't make it right. If someone refuses to sell you a chair and you take the chair and throw some money on the table, you're still in the wrong. Unlawful acquisition is not just taking without paying.
Blah blah blah corporations blah. Irrelevant.
There is no such thing as competition with your own works. Another OS company can compete with them fully in a "free society". In no country on earth does an artist or intellectual labor need to have competition among his own works. The two are mutually incompatible.
No. No software at Best Buy is sold in its entirety, because your $60 doesn't make it Magnus Spore.
There is no need. The failure to take preventative action does not change the wrong committed. Whether the door is locked or what the label says is irrelevant.
Bingo. They're selling you a platform-limited copy, giving you a limited set of rights in the work that they continue to own. It has sold you no more than that, and this entire rambling tirade sails right past that basic fact, every time.
What law? Specific citation.
Copyright is not limited to copying, and installing something is absolutely copying by law, because copying by law is reproduction in a fixed medium. An installation essential for the lawful use is not an infringement; it most certainly is still copying. Facts straight, indeed.
A privacy right has nothing to do with the limits and terms of a purchase. You're completely off the rails. It sounds good, but it has no basis in fact. There is no privacy violation in an agreement between parties or in a retail purchase. What's meaningless is your baseless, self-composed, completely indefensible proclamations and your humorous retort that my word, long and deeply established in this, Groklaw, and the legal community, is meaningless.
Stealing. Unlawful acquisition. Dishonestly pass off as one's own. To take, get, or gain surreptitiously or through deceit. To appropriate without right or acknowledgement.
Pretty basic stuff. Stealing is not limited to theft.
It's not an ordinance at all. It's a term of sale, and it has everything to do with the land owner.
Well, no, it's not to "certain" teachers, and no, it's not necessarily illegal even if one were to specify.
And your understanding, faulty in this as with all things, gets you nowhere.
Citation needed.
False on both counts. Not only do you have multiple opportunities to review the terms beforehand, but an Apple store absolutely will take the software back as long as the disc seal is still in place. If you have a problem returning software to a retail establishment, you need to take it up with them.
You're allowed to buy whatever you want. But if you want OS X, be prepared to buy a Mac, because Apple only offers OS X to its own customers.
What gives you the right to demand someone else's product on terms they don't wish to sell it? Maybe that would fly in Russia, but not here.
Psystar a bunch of cheap ripoffs who can't develop their own OS, wake me up when they get blu ray discs to play in Mac OSX.
Psystar a bunch of cheap ripoffs who can't develop their own OS, wake me up when they get blu ray discs to play in Mac OSX.
Develop their own OS? We're talking computers here, not embedded devices. Why develop what already exists and add complexity? What we need is computers that take full advantage of Mac OS X, which Apple's own computers do not.
I find it more ironic and interesting that he's willing to consider a 'cheap ripoff' IF they are able to play Blu-Ray movies in the future. I'm more disappointed that they are going to go to an arbitrator instead of court because it's clear to me that Apple would lose on anti-competitive grounds (their entire Eula exists only to tell other hardware vendors they aren't allowed to compete with Apple products). I'm guessing Psystar will reach some kind of agreement to allow them to keep making compatible hardware, but have the user install OS X in the future. That would keep Apple and Psystar happy and Apple will avoid having a judge rule against them, which would open the floodgates for Dell, Lenovo and others to sell OS X with any of their driver compatible hardware. Despite what some self-proclaimed legal experts keep ranting on here, Apple wouldn't have a prayer.