Psystar to countersue Apple for antitrust violations

[milo]

The Mac OS has a market share of <10% so calling Apple a monopolist is absurd. I've been a Mac user since the market share was south of 2% and I've always believed that their will be an OPTIMAL market share figure and it's not 90+%.

Exactly. Any talk of "apple is a monopoly!" is completely ridiculous. Only offering software for their own hardware is perfectly legal and not "tying". Tying is only a problem when it's two unrelated products (and there's no question that a computer and its OS are related), or when it's being done by a company that has a monopoly, as happened in the MS case.

With such small market share, apple simply isn't in a position to do anything monopolistic or anti-competitive. Anything they do, consumers have the option of going with the other 90% of the population and just buying a PC instead.

The hardware isn't made by Apple any more, now it is made by Intel who also make the same hardware for Dell.

Do you really think Apple made G5 chips? Apple has NEVER made that much of the hardware, mostly just assembled stock parts. The difference with intel is that the parts are just more common. Apple makes the cases and the motherboards, same as they always have.

So, let's say that Joe's Burger Place decides to sue Burger King...

Food is a terrible analogy for this. You can't copyright a recipe like you can copyright software or patent hardware.

I think that you are mistaken and you can run the standard disk on a version with a BIOS, providing that the hardware is supported by the Kernel.

Nope, you can't install OSX on generic hardware without some sort of hacking.

 

[ajthomason]

Thats my point. The hardware configuration was (designed by apple) in such a way to benefit the OS (made by apple). Who cares who makes the chips. Its just a chip.

Wow this thread is getting out of control - so many people posting at once!

The processor in my laptop (MBP) is exactly the same processor found in a Dell laptop, they were designed for Windows, not Mac, they have just been used by Apple.

 

[MaynardJames]

Psystar isn't selling a computer called the 'Mac Pro' here, with a huge Apple logo slapped on the side. They are selling their own version which doesn't even resemble one of Apple's products.

How does the Mac OSX that Pystar sells with their computers not resemble Apple's Mac OSX?

 

[exothermic]

I am praying that Pystar wins! Apple hardware is just too niche and expensive. This could open things up own the road for real clones.

Yes, that has worked out so well for PC users, hasn't it? I mean, who doesn't enjoy getting a new beige box PC from a local computer store and having to find drivers for on-board audio or video cards among 10 different web sites in Taiwan and hoping you've found the correct manufacturer and the correct chipset.

Precedence exists in Apple's favor; there have been "Right to Use" licenses for various operating systems for years. Buying their hardware granted you a right to use it, and that right was not extended to other hardware not made by that vendor.

There is no way that Apple will lose on the monopoly argument. Pystar is trying to profit off someone else's research and development. Apple refusing to license or otherwise make available the OS so Pystar can continue their business operations is not being anti-competitive. This is like Burger King asking the court to require McDonald's to license and make available the special sauce in Big Macs so Burger King can clone the Big Mac. The argument is ridiculous. OS X is the property of Apple, just like the special sauce is the property of McDonald's.

Yes, Macs are expensive. Do you think you're going to get a BMW experience by buying something off the Ford lot? Maybe that's why BMW autos cost a bit more.

 

[commander.data]

The hardware isn't made by Apple any more, now it is made by Intel who also make the same hardware for Dell.

The raw processors and chipsets may be from Intel, but the firmware is Apple specific. And some things are custom, the chipset and processors on the current iMac which were specifically made to run the Santa Rosa platform with a 1066MHz FSB and DDR2 800 even though the platform only officially supports 800Mhz FSB and DDR2 667. Again custom firmware and custom drivers.

 

[iLunar]

I buy things with the intent on not having someone tell me where I can and cannot place it in my own home.

But sure why not, let's let furniture manufacturers stipulate where you can place your sofas. Or how about whether or not you can stick certain brands of pots and pans in your dishwasher.

You sorta have no idea what you're talking about. It's not about restriction, but liability. If you buy a sofa with wooden trim and place it 2 inches from a fireplace in YOUR home, and subsequently burn down your house and your neighbors house, then you are LIABLE for the damages. It doesn't matter that you are allowed to place a sofa wherever you want in your home, but that your actions have caused damages.

The sofa manufactures thus stipulate NOT to put near open flames in your home. They aren't telling you this because of decorative decisions, they are telling you this so they won't be liable and thus can't seek damages from them.

Both lawsuits are based on damages, Apple suing Pystar, and vice-versa.

 

[ataylor]

If we're going to use ridiculous analogies...

I can't believe that the Porsche dealership won't install a 911 engine into my Ford Focus!

 

[ajthomason]

How does the Mac OSX that Pystar sells with their computers not resemble Apple's Mac OSX?

I was continuing the burger analogy, I was referring to the computer, not the operating system.

 

[ajthomason]

If we're going to use ridiculous analogies...

I can't believe that the Porsche dealership won't install a 911 engine into my Ford Focus!

They won't, but I wouldn't expect Apple to install it for me.

You can go and buy a 911 engine and install it yourself into the Focus.

 

[MaynardJames]

I was continuing the burger analogy, I was referring to the computer, not the operating system.

I never said you were. If you are referring to Pystar, you are referring to the package that they sell, which includes a modified version of Mac OSX. There is no referring to simply the machine and not the operating system, as that is not what this is about.

 

[ajthomason]

Nope, you can't install OSX on generic hardware without some sort of hacking.

Sorry, I mis-read a post on another forum, you are correct.

 

[ataylor]

They won't, but I wouldn't expect Apple to install it for me.

You can go and buy a 911 engine and install it yourself into the Focus.

Okay, now let's say I install 911 engines into a bunch of Fords and sell them as Porsche Focuses.

 

[snberk103]

no obligation...

Yep. Let's face it, apple has been gouging us with high prices for years. Every computer manufacturer out there makes a cheap expandable tower except apple and its all because of the OS.

No one is gouging.... they are charging what the market will bear.... basic economics. No one makes you buy an Apple computer.

A cheap tower would not give the user the same experience that other Apple systems do. Apple is selling a "look and feel" they are not selling a commodity.

 

[ajthomason]

Okay, now let's say I install 911 engines into a bunch of Fords and sell them as Porsche Focuses.

This analogy now works for the Psystar problem. I've all along been fighting for the ability for us to do it ourselves legally, in one of my first posts in this thread I said that I didn't want Dell to sell their PCs with OS X, just for the ability to buy a Dell and install it myself and for the hardware manufacturers to be able to produce drivers for me (e.g., Shell selling you Porsche Focus specific engine oil)

 

[kntgsp]

You sorta have no idea what you're talking about. It's not about restriction, but liability. If you buy a sofa with wooden trim and place it 2 inches from a fireplace in YOUR home, and subsequently burn down your house and your neighbors house, then you are LIABLE for the damages. It doesn't matter that you are allowed to place a sofa wherever you want in your home, but that your actions have caused damages.

The sofa manufactures thus stipulate NOT to put near open flames in your home. They aren't telling you this because of decorative decisions, they are telling you this so they won't be liable and thus can't seek damages from them.

Both lawsuits are based on damages, Apple suing Pystar, and vice-versa.

And yet I didn't sign a EULA for my last sofa I bought. And if I tried to sue the sofa manufacturer in court if I burned down my house, the judge would laugh me out of the court room.

Otherwise you'd read about sofa manufacturers going bankrupt every day because of all the rednecks who burned down their trailers.

A EULA isn't needed in a case like that. It's excessive. It goes beyond common sense. The same goes for operating systems. By installing OSX on a machine with identical components, you are not going to create SkyNet that will subsequently destroy your neighborhood in a nuclear holocaust. Your computer may not work flawlessly with the operating system. Oh no, the sky is falling, the sky is falling. If only it worked perfectly like every other piece of software that's had a EULA and therefore was problem free.

It's not gonna happen.

The case they're arguing, quite literally, is analogous to this:

I sell hammers.

You can only use nails I sell with my hammers, despite the fact that someone else sells identical nails for less money.

I require the legal system to bail me out due to someone having a better business model. Crush the opposition because consumers like them more.

Yaaay dictatorial capitalism.

 

[mm1250]

Man, some of you people are so OFF!

Anyways, Psystar is obviously going to seek classifying PC operating systems in a special way where Apple can't prevent it to be installed on other brands. It's success is based on how well their attorneys can convince the Judge how PC Oses shouldn't be tied to a certain brand. This case will be a little interesting to read. Hopefully Psytar can fight it through, if so you might see Dells and HP all of a sudden selling Mac OS options.

Don't be surprised if Psystar all of a sudden gets massive money from new slient investors who will help aid in fighting Apple. Other PC manufactures perhaps???

 

[ataylor]

It comes down to this: Apple hardware + Apple software = One product. If you like the software, pony up the money and buy the hardware. You can get the job done with other hardware and software combinations if that's too much to ask.

 

[chadabshier]

Okay, now let's say I install 911 engines into a bunch of Fords and sell them as Porsche Focuses.

Besides using the names "Porsche" and "Focus" ... I would think that you could sell a custom car, that you built.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

OK, my thread was misleading - OS X will need to be modified, but ONLY to remove the stuff that Apple added to prevent people installing it on 3rd party machines. Not to add things or re-write the operating system, only to remove the 'locks'

They also need to add drivers as well. But that is not the that much work they mainly need to have drivers for all of the new intel chipsets, the new ati and nvidia ones. Amd cpu drivers / remove intel only locks. Drivers for the amd / nvidia gups / remove pci id locks. ATI can make there own apple drivers like they did in the past and they should add cross fire to them as well.

apple also can remove the EFI only locks as well.

You don't need to have the older drivers for chipsets and video just the ones from the past 2-3 years.

 

[paric]

Damn that Apple for making so much money, and investing that money into the research and development needed to make new cool products that I want but don't want to pay for.

If only they didn't make so much money on their products... then their new products wouldn't be nearly as cool, and I wouldn't want them at all! All my problems would be solved.

 

[ataylor]

Besides using the names "Porsche" and "Focus" ... I would think that you could sell a custom car, that you built.

Right. Psystar did not develop the operating system. We're not talking about custom cars. It's as if I tried to sell Ford cars with Porsche engines as Porsche Focuses or Ford 911s.

 

[ajthomason]

Besides using the names "Porsche" and "Focus" ... I would think that you could sell a custom car, that you built.

Call it what you like, you could even write "With the body of a Ford and the engine of a Porsche" and no one could stop you - you are only telling the truth. I'm actually starting to like this analogy...

 

[Consultant]

Wow this thread is getting out of control - so many people posting at once!

The processor in my laptop (MBP) is exactly the same processor found in a Dell laptop, they were designed for Windows, not Mac, they have just been used by Apple.

LOL, do you know that OSX > Windows on the same hardware.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/08/26/road_to_mac_os_x_10_6_snow_leopard_64_bits.html&page=1

Why don't these shysters actually BUILD their own OS if they want to "compete"? No one is stopping them.

 

[r.j.s]

Call it what you like, you could even write "With the body of a Ford and the engine of a Porsche" and no one could stop you - you are only telling the truth. I'm actually starting to like this analogy...

Except, if the companies don't want you selling their product, they will sue you for Trademark infringement. Which, BTW, Apple is also suing Psystar for.

 

[MaynardJames]

Call it what you like, you could even write "With the body of a Ford and the engine of a Porsche" and no one could stop you - you are only telling the truth. I'm actually starting to like this analogy...

If you wanted to sell them commercially, no, you couldn't.