Right and if that happens, it should also open the floodgates for me to use iphone's OS on my blackberry, or use the Xbox OS on my PS3, or use Nintendo's DS software on my PS3.
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
How are any of your examples built on entirely compatible hardware platforms? In this case x86/64.Right and if that happens, it should also open the floodgates for me to use iphone's OS on my blackberry, or use the Xbox OS on my PS3, or use Nintendo's DS software on my PS3.
Don't double post. Multiquote!
Right and I guess the computers from Psystar are the ones that are supposed to take advantage of the OS, I mean the same dudes who can't get my blu-ray disk to work on the computers they are selling, what contributions have they made to the development of OSX, I feel sorry for anybody buying these computers, looks like you might end up with a brick when they go bankrupt.
I think something similar will happen, but it will involve buying Psystar's assets. I think the fact that no temporary injunction is telling. 90% of the time in a case like this, Pystar would have to stop selling Mac OS X to new customers until the case would be resolved.
I think you have a completely overblown idea of what a computer company does. They make computers for people to sue, the Operating system developer handles the OS. Psystar cannot get Blu-Ray to work because Apple has not written support into the OS. Dell doesn't introduce code into Windows.
Do I think Psystar is the answer no I don't and if you would actually bother to listen to anyone, that would have been obvious several posts ago. They are selling more more or less makeshift Macs with a virtualization layer running on top of BIOS. It is far from the best solution out there and it has a performance penalty. But what do you get it return? Let's do a little comparison with my little iMac here.
CPU:
iMac: mobile dual core CPU
Psytar: Available quad core CPU that takes better advantage of Mac OS X's multi-core support.
GPU:
iMac Radeon Mobility 2600xt with no chance of upgrade
Psystar: Use of virtually any Geforce 8 or 9 series CPU using Mac OS X's existing Nvidia drivers. Video card suits the needs of the user, not the designer.
Chipset:
iMac: 945M or 965M mobile platforms.
Psystar: Support for Intel 945, 965, 3, and 4 series in both mobile and desktop versions using existing Mac OS X drive.
Ports: iMac, 3 USB 2.0, 1 FW400, 1 FW800 all on back of machine. That's either using your extra devices on the single port that your keyboard and printer don't take up or buying a HUB.
Psystar: Front: 2 USB 2.0, 1 FW400. Back: 8 USB2.0, 1 FW400, 1 FW400 4-pin.
Memory:
iMac: 2 notebook DDR2 DIMMS. 4GB max
Pystar: 4 desktop DDR2 DIMMS 8GB max
Optical drive:
iMac: 8x slot loading notebook that is note compatible with mini CD's or DVDs. Full speed DVD burner or Blu-Ray burner (data only due to OS limitation) requires external drive.
Psystar: Industry standard full size optical drive for 20x DVD burners or Blu-Ray burnets (data only due to OS limitation). Compatible with all media.
Hard drive:
iMac. Single desktop hard drive that is not user accessible because the back is basically glued on. You can either buy another external device hogging space on your desktop and surge protector or just buy a new computer.
Psystar: multiple internal hard drives that are user accessible.
Card reader:
iMac: you can just connect a reader or the camera to that one USB port you have left. Of course you have to plug your ipod/iphone or what ever else you have plugged in.
Psystar: located in 3.5" external bay in tower. No unplugging or external devices needed.
TV tuner:
iMac External. Another device competing for that lone USB2.0 port.
Psystar: Also USB because of software limitations, but since you have 10 ports instead of 3, its not like you're hurting for space.
expansion
iMac: None at all. If something new comes along, you have to buy a new machine.
Pystar: PCI/PCI-E slots for a large array of Mac compatible devices.
Lastly, display.
iMac. You take the one apple bolts on whether you like it or not. When the all too short lifespan is over, the display has to go with the notebook parts inside it.
Psystar. You're choice of any display you want...unless its the new 24" LED model which is only compatible with Apple's three newest notebooks.
Of course you can have most of that if you spend $1000 more than your PowerMac and get a Mac Pro. Its not like its a major recession or anything and you could actually use that money.
Hey guys, the PsyStar topic is highly complex. I've read a lot of the posts here and am trying to get a sense on the major points of contention. Here is what I came up with in terms of the key issues involved.
Apple vs. PsyStar: 1. legality, 2. consumer interests vs. corporate world, 3. technology, 4. ethics, 5. pop culture, 6. freedom and the pursuit of happiness
Here's where I stand:
1. Legality: I need more info, but so far it seems Apple is careful not to risk losing an anti-trust battle and PsyStar (and other "Hackintochers") may be violating Apple patents. Personally, I'd like to have the choice to legally install any os on any machine that I deem worthy.
2. Consumer Interests vs. Corporate World:
Choices often benefit consumers, yet if a company feels that their style, R&D, hardwork will be undercompensated by increasing competition, they may start striving for mediocrity and mass production, not excellence. As a consumer (prosumer), I want more choices than what Apple offers. It's possible that once OSX is cloned by OEM's such as HP, Gateway and the like, we'll end up with mediocre Apple products in no time. But I doubt that would happen, as the global economy is moving from the "bell curved" shape to "M" shape. In an "M" economy, the have-nots will go for crappy clones/generics and the have's will drive their BMW's and work on Mac's in style. I am for more choices, though I am conscious that more choices may not mean better products.
3. Technology:
There are remedies that can ensure certified OSX clones are using specific standard or even Apple proprietary parts. Because PsyStar is running without Apple's blessings, we simply don't have quality assurance at present. If or when Apple gives the green light to free OSX, I think the tech side will be taken care of in no time. It's like the bottle of generic Claritin that I tried Costco, which works at a small fraction of the cost. It works, but in the back of my mind, I think the brand name stuff works better, so I don't mind paying 4X the price to stay allergy-free. I haven't tried a single PsyStar or hackintosh, but I opine that OSX will eventually work fine on PC's if Apple wants to sell more software and even proprietary parts. And I know that most of the time I will go for brand name for its perceived superior quality, reputation, and service. (Well, when I can afford it!)
4. Ethics:
I don't feel it's wrong for PsyStar to directly compete with Apple any more than I think it's unethical for Apple to compete with Adobe's pro apps with many astonishingly similar features (wink, wink). At the current price, though, I think it's lame for PsyStar to overcharge, when it still benefit from the $129 OSX package. If I bought a discounted Porsche engine and managed to put it in a Chevy Nova and now want to charge a ridiculous price for a Chevy Nova's worth, I'd admit being awfully greedy. I feel that Apple should get more $ for each copy of OSX installed on a non-Mac.
5. Pop Culture
If you go into any uni library or campus cafe, MB's and MBP's are still a status symbol of "cool". But it's hard to describe what's cool, for if I knew cool, I'm probably cool; but if I were cool, I wouldn't be talking about or looking out for what's cool. What makes Apple cool right now seems to be its alignment with the prevalent mobile lifestyle. On the other hand, geeks and pros, those who are more likely to buy Mac Pros and the hoped "mini-towers", are vain in a different way. If a PsyStar sitting on your desktop can command the same respect from others and self-respect as a genuine Apple product would, then it's cool. But it won't, so long as Apple keeps OSX in its own exclusive gene pool, undermining hacks' performance and stability.
Here is the dilemma for the Apple pro users though: with Apple increasingly ignoring the Mac Pros and giving no hope of a "mini-tower", how much longer will Apple pro products be cool when Microsoft/Linux and Dell/Sony get their gears together? (Already, CS4 can run 64bit on a PC, albeit on Vista!!)
6. Freedom and the Pursuit of Happiness
In the Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers had the wisdom that even though it's awful to have to tolerate tyranny, revolution can mean more suffering. Once you switched to an operating system, you also switch to a certain way of being, of working, and of relating to those around you, not to mention having to switch a whole set of costly apps and tools. After I switched to Apple, I find myself missing being able to build legal working machines to suit my needs and whims. With my growing pro needs, I am feeling utterly restricted by Apple's pro options. Yet switching to PsyStar or Vista 64bit might be just as bad. When did Apple become a trap for pro users!?
What about you? Where do you stand on these issues?
Apple vs. PsyStar: 1. legality, 2. consumer interests vs. corporate world, 3. technology, 4. ethics, 5. pop culture, 6. freedom and the pursuit of happiness
Here's where I stand:
1. Legality: I need more info, but so far it seems Apple is careful not to risk losing an anti-trust battle and PsyStar (and other "Hackintochers") may be violating Apple patents. Personally, I'd like to have the choice to legally install any os on any machine that I deem worthy.
2. Consumer Interests vs. Corporate World:
Choices often benefit consumers, yet if a company feels that their style, R&D, hardwork will be undercompensated by increasing competition, they may start striving for mediocrity and mass production, not excellence. As a consumer (prosumer), I want more choices than what Apple offers. It's possible that once OSX is cloned by OEM's such as HP, Gateway and the like, we'll end up with mediocre Apple products in no time. But I doubt that would happen, as the global economy is moving from the "bell curved" shape to "M" shape. In an "M" economy, the have-nots will go for crappy clones/generics and the have's will drive their BMW's and work on Mac's in style. I am for more choices, though I am conscious that more choices may not mean better products.
3. Technology:
There are remedies that can ensure certified OSX clones are using specific standard or even Apple proprietary parts. Because PsyStar is running without Apple's blessings, we simply don't have quality assurance at present. If or when Apple gives the green light to free OSX, I think the tech side will be taken care of in no time. It's like the bottle of generic Claritin that I tried Costco, which works at a small fraction of the cost. It works, but in the back of my mind, I think the brand name stuff works better, so I don't mind paying 4X the price to stay allergy-free. I haven't tried a single PsyStar or hackintosh, but I opine that OSX will eventually work fine on PC's if Apple wants to sell more software and even proprietary parts. And I know that most of the time I will go for brand name for its perceived superior quality, reputation, and service. (Well, when I can afford it!)
4. Ethics:
I don't feel it's wrong for PsyStar to directly compete with Apple any more than I think it's unethical for Apple to compete with Adobe's pro apps with many astonishingly similar features (wink, wink
). At the current price, though, I think it's lame for PsyStar to overcharge, when it still benefit from the $129 OSX package. If I bought a discounted Porsche engine and managed to put it in a Chevy Nova and now want to charge a ridiculous price for a Chevy Nova's worth, I'd admit being awfully greedy. I feel that Apple should get more $ for each copy of OSX installed on a non-Mac.5. Pop Culture
If you go into any uni library or campus cafe, MB's and MBP's are still a status symbol of "cool". But it's hard to describe what's cool, for if I knew cool, I'm probably cool; but if I were cool, I wouldn't be talking about or looking out for what's cool. What makes Apple cool right now seems to be its alignment with the prevalent mobile lifestyle. On the other hand, geeks and pros, those who are more likely to buy Mac Pros and the hoped "mini-towers", are vain in a different way. If a PsyStar sitting on your desktop can command the same respect from others and self-respect as a genuine Apple product would, then it's cool. But it won't, so long as Apple keeps OSX in its own exclusive gene pool, undermining hacks' performance and stability.
Here is the dilemma for the Apple pro users though: with Apple increasingly ignoring the Mac Pros and giving no hope of a "mini-tower", how much longer will Apple pro products be cool when Microsoft/Linux and Dell/Sony get their gears together? (Already, CS4 can run 64bit on a PC, albeit on Vista!!)
6. Freedom and the Pursuit of Happiness
In the Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers had the wisdom that even though it's awful to have to tolerate tyranny, revolution can mean more suffering. Once you switched to an operating system, you also switch to a certain way of being, of working, and of relating to those around you, not to mention having to switch a whole set of costly apps and tools. After I switched to Apple, I find myself missing being able to build legal working machines to suit my needs and whims. With my growing pro needs, I am feeling utterly restricted by Apple's pro options. Yet switching to PsyStar or Vista 64bit might be just as bad. When did Apple become a trap for pro users!?
What about you? Where do you stand on these issues?
Mediocracy is a subjective term. The Mac used to be the power user machine of choice. For a person like myself, with how I use a computer, the iMac I own now is far from optimal for my uses. Does that make it a bad computer? No. For a family or individual I would recommend nothing less. It offers excellent consumer performance while taking up minimal room. On a flip side, not every tower is a cheap Dell. In fact every Dell isn't a cheap Dell. I found their XPS630 to be a very well built system.
The issue here is that there is a major disconnect between a major user base and Apple. The company as it exists now caters to a more artistic nature. While it makes beautiful computers, they have to give up practicality for that beauty. Apple is so focused on this that they can't comprehend that there are users outside this. As the neglect of the pro apps also shows, Jobs has trouble focusing on more than one idea. I have no problem with Apple doing this if they offered options to go elsewhere without giving up a substantial investment in the Mac platform. For a company that once had think different as a slogan, they seem to now want to herd everyone into a one size fits all box.
That part is agreed.
4. Ethics:
I don't feel it's wrong for PsyStar to directly compete with Apple any more than I think it's unethical for Apple to compete with Adobe's pro apps with many astonishingly similar features (wink, wink
?
Smaller companies are usually more pricey regardless. They don't get volume discounts, have higher overhead, and I would bet they're also paying retail prices for the hardware given the "greyness" of their business.
Update
Maybe we will know something in a couple of weeks:
http://www.macworld.com/article/136635/2008/11/apple_psystar.html
Maybe we will know something in a couple of weeks:
http://www.macworld.com/article/136635/2008/11/apple_psystar.html
After reading that article, and I'm guessing Psystar's existence is tangent on its claims of antitrust.
What I'm wondering is how the courts would rule in the factor of Psystar having a recall on EVERY single clone they've sold.
Not necessarily. The judge could have different rulings on the issues of copyright infringement and anti-trust.. The ruling could be that Pystar infringed on Apple's copyrights by modifying the OS, but the tying of Mac OS X to only Apple's own hardware is a violation of the Sherman and Clayton acts. In other words, this is a rare case that both parties could potentially lose.
