Psystar Continues to Battle Despite Apple Lawsuit

Adding another blow to the lawsuit brought on by Apple, Psystar has started making Leopard restore disks available at no extra cost to customers who purchase Mac Clones from the company.

Psystar has received several comments and questions asking if they are still selling Mac clones - their answer: "Definitely". Mac "Clones" sold by the company are a fraction of the price of Apple's machines, some as low as a quarter of the price of an equivilent "authentic" Mac. The company claims the difference is caused by Apple marking the cost of Mac hardware up by 80%.

Will Apple be able to beat Psystar? At the moment, it's looking fairly unlikely (they are still pulling the copyright card - which an Antitrust ruling (which, coincidentally, Apple are attempting to challenge) voided). Either way, it looks like it's going to be a very long game of cat and mouse.

News source: InformationWeek

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Fujistu Siemens launches zero watt monitor

Next Story

Official Windows 7 blog goes live

32 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I really dont think some of you understand Apples software hardware policy. Its not antitrust, what apple do is perfectly legal. The make a computer & OS what work together, thats all. They do not have to allow the OS to be installed on other computers, nor do they have to allow others to sell their OS for use on non apple hardware.

This is not antitrust, they can limit their OS however they like, they are not stopping competition, competition can make an OS, hardware etc... and sell computers. By not allowing other companies to the OSX apple is protecting their IP, not limiting competition. Competition is not limited by others not selling OSX.

Forget it. Not worth the explanation.

People want to see Apple de-railed more for emotional reasons (and some sort of vague, nebulous ethical gripes) than anything else.

Something to do with "smugness" or some other ridiculous reason which has nothing to do with how well the OS performs on the hardware it was meant to run on (and it performs extremely well, as we all know.)

And if it's this childlike clamouring for cheaper Apple software that isn't tied to specific hardware - this fantasy that we're all entitled to everything on the cheap (sense of entitlement, typical!), then we're all in big trouble. Hope you're not a business owner, shadowmatt, because it seems people don't care to pay for quality. They're first in line to deny it if it can possibly mean they'll save a few cents, not even realizing that they'll get a degraded product in return if the manufacturer's intent is ignored.

This case, I believe, is already setting a troubling, dangerous precedent (if not a legal one.) You no longer have complete control over your product - you can no no longer decide how to limit its use to ensure that the user experience is what it is meant to be.

Pretty scary.

(LTD said @ #18.1)
Forget it. Not worth the explanation.
This case, I believe, is already setting a troubling, dangerous precedent (if not a legal one.) You no longer have complete control over your product - you can no no longer decide how to limit its use to ensure that the user experience is what it is meant to be.

Pretty scary.

Wow...Your total devotion to Apple is scary! If I buy a product, I would expect a certain degree of freedom in its use...After all, I PAID FOR IT! Companies that require complete control of their product, are few and far between, and show an underlying fear. Consumers are not kids! If I buy something, I dont need the company that sold me the product to babysit me in its use! There should just be warranty clauses, and thats it! If I open the case and it breaks, etc, I should be lose the guarantee. The company should not limit my use of their product to what they perceive the "user experience" to be.

If you need someone to hold your hand and tell you what you must experience, or how to experience something, then I feel sorry for you. I am not bashing Apple, all I am saying is that a thinking for yourself once in a while is a good thing.

does anyone, actually, know if these mac "PC's" are stable? has anyone bought one and if so, are they available in canada? they also don't seem to come with iLife.

I'n glad more people are standing up to Apple, there trying to build a monopoly bigger than Microsofts, Microsoft only had software but Apple wants to dominate Software and hardware.

(thealexweb said @ #15)
I'n glad more people are standing up to Apple, there trying to build a monopoly bigger than Microsofts, Microsoft only had software but Apple wants to dominate Software and hardware.

apple dont want to dominate nothing, whats the problem with them not wanting THEIR OS to run on nothing more than THEIR hardware? thats how apple sells hardware, because theyve got a great OS, and if the people want to use the great os that mac os is, they have to buy apple hardware.

microsoft is another thing, because they dont sell nor make computers.

what apple does is far from being a monopoly, as oposed to microsoft.

i personally think apple its in all its rights to sue that company, that in fact is modifying the os to work on their hardware, they are not giving you the os to install by yourself, check their webpage, systems come with os preinstalled, or at least they were.

im no apple fanboy, and im no mac owner, but i hope apple f*** that company, what they are doing is ilegal.

lol, this is what apple gets for doing the intel switch, if they were still with ppc, this would have never happened.

Whats really wrong here? All they are doing is buying legal licenses from Apple and distributing them on there own computers...? - hope they win!

What's really wrong here is that in order for Psystar to distribute OS X, they are modifying it, which is the case Apple is brining against them. They are modifying Apple's intellectual property without consent.

Why aren't people up in arms that you can only run PalmOS on Palm hardware? What about every other vendor that ties their OS to their hardware?

Either way i want to see Psystar win this, just because apple makes a good OS does not mean they get to pigeonhole people in to paying more for your hardware just to use it. if Microsoft decided to only sell windows on their own branded PC's and went after people that sold "clones" there would be a witch hunt for Gates and Balmers heads. (although more people would switch to linux )

More people are willing to purchase a new computer to use OS X than there are those that are willing to use Linux for free. That should tell you something...especially about a product you can't even give away...

(39 Thieves said @ #6.1)
More people are willing to purchase a new computer to use OS X than there are those that are willing to use Linux for free. That should tell you something...especially about a product you can't even give away...

So where does MS and it's total domination of the market come into play?

(39 Thieves said @ #6.1)
More people are willing to purchase a new computer to use OS X than there are those that are willing to use Linux for free. That should tell you something...especially about a product you can't even give away...
Zing! How clever you are! You are quite the antagonist, aren't you?

Lets see. . People do what they are told, even if they do not realize it. Both Microsoft and Apple spend hundreds of millions of dollars advertising their wares, telling them to use their product. There are legions of Mac users out there that believe the "I'm a Mac" advertisements and accept them as fact. Some even idolize Steve Jobs as if he was some kind of supreme being. On the other hand, you have Microsoft. Even if they're not throwing dirt around, they still maintain a very nice lead over Apple, and surprisingly maintain their own fan base even though they eat "underdogs" every day.

Now, combine this with the fact that the only Linux advertisements you're likely to see are ads from Novell and IBM, promoting Linux servers. The only information people are likely to get about Linux on the desktop will come from Apple and Microsoft fanboys. . who either tried Linux 10 years ago, are spouting off garbage they heard from someone else, or are just idiots who would have just as much trouble switching between Windows and MacOS as they would trying out Linux. With that in mind, would anyone like to take a guess as to how a description of Linux will sound coming from someone who has already chosen another platform?

Interestingly enough, Vista is in the same predicament Linux is in. All people hear about Vista is bad. Not surprisingly, many of those people have never even used it. The same goes for Linux, for all the same reasons. Linux has no marketing team. No advertising budget. Its free for you to use, take it or leave it. If you like it, great! If not? That's OK too, but try not to be such an ass.

Back on topic. . personally I would much rather buy a Psystar than a Mac. If the company wins this legal battle, I may be buying a Psystar next. Personally I wonder what the install routine is like. . trying to install MacOS on a Psystar. Does it just install, or do I have to muck around with cracks to get the thing to install without checking for official Apple hardware?

On another note.. now that Gates is slowly leaving Microsoft, I wonder how Windows, Linux, and MacOS will do once each leader of each platform retires or passes away. I don't see Ballmer keeping Microsoft going at the same pace Bill did. Linus and Steve, they won't live for ever either. It should be interesting to see what happens once each of these charismatic leaders passes away. Can you imagine each platform without their figureheads?

DISCLAIMER: 3 Linux boxes (not counting my Linksys AP) and 3 Windows Vista Home Premium boxes (With legit licenses! :eek: ).

(Divide Overflow said @ #6.3)
DISCLAIMER: 3 Linux boxes (not counting my Linksys AP) and 3 Windows Vista Home Premium boxes (With legit licenses! ).

You shoud try Vista Ultimate once. Don't Portage, XFCE etc on Vista sound interesting?

At the moment, it's looking fairly unlikely (they are still pulling the copyright card - which an Antitrust ruling (which, coincidentally, Apple are attempting to challenge) voided).

Where is this nonsense coming from? There has been no "antitrust ruling". It remains Apple's copyright suit and Psystar hopes to defend themselves with an antitrust defense (which most consider unlikely). Nothing has been voided. Unless you have some mystery secret court documents from a mystery secret trial that's already happened. Of course, since Psystar won't even submit their initial response to the case until the 18th, I doubt you have this "antitrust ruling" document.

(alex1990 said @ #4)
hopefully psystar win this.

Same here, I cant believe how long apple has been able to prevent marketable cloning... GO PSYSTAR!

Are Psystar actually buying the licenses/copies of OSX they're installing? If they are hopefully they'll win this case. If not it is of course copyright infringement and they should lose.

Even if they buy the licenses, they are not allowed to resell (especially modify and repackage) OSX.

Repackaging Microsoft Service Packs and updates is also copyright infringement. Pystar can buy 100 licenses for OSX, but it gives them zero modification & redistribution rights.

(markjensen said @ #2)
Even if they buy the licenses, they are not allowed to resell (especially modify and repackage) OSX.

Repackaging Microsoft Service Packs and updates is also copyright infringement. Pystar can buy 100 licenses for OSX, but it gives them zero modification & redistribution rights.


That's why they aren't installing OSX but only provide the disks use can use to install OSX (from Apple) on PsyStar PC.

No, but they were initially. They were modifying the EFI and installing OS X. Now they are providing a restore disk that allows you to boot the OS X install DVD (which normally won't even boot on a non-Mac).

However, claiming they aren't ("No, no, that's not what we're doing -- we're just selling a computer and just happen to be putting a boxed license of an OS X upgrade in the box for the user's Macs at home...") when they say they are on their site (while disparaging Apple at every opportunity), developing a boot loader for the install DVD, and packaging it all together is still illegal. You might want to nitpick, or think you are weaseling out of reality, or wish it were so -- but no judge is going to agree with you once you're in a courtroom. Not with their own boot loader/restore CD and copy on their site saying they are selling you a computer that runs a license of Mac OS X.

There are plenty of hackintosh options out there that do what you say (by making the owner do much of the work), that don't use Apple trademarks, that don't disparage the brand and attempt to get press -- coincidentally, Apple hasn't sued them.

Related, all packaged version of Mac OS X are merely upgrade licenses for existing Apple computers. So even if they were smarter about their practices Apple would still have grounds to go after them if they could prove there is an intent to load the OS on non-Apple hardware.