Mac clone maker vows to test Apple on OS X licensing terms


Recommended Posts

Psystar Corporation, which this week began selling a series of Mac clone systems without Apple's blessing, is determined to challenge the Mac maker in court over the licensing terms for its Mac OS X operating system.

SOURCE: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/04...sing_terms.html

Big talk - wonder if they have the stones to really carry it through.

It would be an interesting case and would set a very interesting precedent in enforcement of EULA.

If Apple loses ... I can see more people building Apple clone systems ...

Apple would then have to lower there prices ...

Only time will tell ...

How would they lose though? A user agrees to a license when they buy the software--which they are clearly breaking.

That said though, hackintosh's have been around before this and it's quite hilarious what they offer as "support" for their own that they're selling:

Can I run updates on my OpenMac?

The answer is yes and no. No because there are some updates that are decidedly non-safe. Yes because most updates are not non-safe. It?s best to check on InsanelyMac for this information but when in doubt don?t update it. You may have to reinstall your OS X if it is a non-safe update.

Good luck to the:pinch:nch:

Apple would then have to lower there prices ...

And up the price of OS X. Remember that Apple subsidizes software R&D costs with hardware sales.

And don't think that Apple will make it easy for anyone to run OS X on non-Apple hardware.

I really don't see Apple losing this.

The argument about Apple price gouging doesn't really work. Nobody's stopping you from buying a Dell or HP or whatever... in fact, people actually willingly pay a premium to get a Mac.

And the antitrust thing... am I wrong, or are there other choices besides OS X? There's only an antitrust issue if OS X is the only operating system period, which isn't the case.

"What if Microsoft said you could only install Windows on Dell computers?," he said. "What if Honda said that, after you buy their car, you could only drive it on the roads they said you could?"

Um... (a) use a non-Microsoft operating system, and (b) buy a Toyota. This analogy only works if Microsoft is the only OS company and you could only buy cars made by Honda.

This whole thing is just dumb.

So these are commercial hackintoshes? lol.

basically yes, technically no.

hackintoshes use a modified kernel so you can run them off a pc.

psystar is emulating EFI on a pc, and installing an unmodified version of OSX.

I wish them luck.

I personally think EULAs like this are invalid due to the fact that you can't read the entire EULA at the moment of purchase AND if you disagree you can't return the software at the place of purchase (with some rare exceptions).

The fact that almost everyone refers to it as a purchase also has something to do with it. I don't say, 'hey I'm going to go to Best Buy to license some software', I say 'I'm going to go to Best Buy to buy some software'.

I think its about time. Apple's profit margins are exceedingly high given that most companies in the industry are lucky to make 1/2 that amount.

And don't forget Apple is simply repackaging the sum of all the parts in the computer without having to do all the research and development. Its a wonder why they can't sell the systems for less. I hardly think it all goes into OS X development. And if they're spending it all on making "nice" designer cases for the systems, then I question why they're spending so much money.

Let's sum Apple's R&D HW investments:

Processor? Intel R&D. Graphics Card? ATI or Nvidia or Intel. Sound card? Probably not Apple. Keyboard and mouse? I relinquish Apple develops that. Monitor? If not a 3rd party, Apple's panels are developed by another company. Hard drive? Nope. Motherboard? Apple has engineers for that but doesn't manufacture it. NIC? Nope. Bluetooth? Nope. Wireless? Nope. CD/DVD drive? Nope.

So basically, the only exclusive thing Apple really develops or has input on are the Motherboard, Monitor and the case. Oh, the keyboard and mouse can be bought retail so hardly exclusive.

When I look at buying another system, I'll really need to reconsider if buying another Mac is really worth it. There's really only one or two Mac-only apps that I'd have to do without and would not want to let go of.

I think its about time. Apple's profit margins are exceedingly high given that most companies in the industry are lucky to make 1/2 that amount.

And don't forget Apple is simply repackaging the sum of all the parts in the computer without having to do all the research and development. Its a wonder why they can't sell the systems for less. I hardly think it all goes into OS X development. And if they're spending it all on making "nice" designer cases for the systems, then I question why they're spending so much money.

Let's sum Apple's R&D HW investments:

Processor? Intel R&D. Graphics Card? ATI or Nvidia or Intel. Sound card? Probably not Apple. Keyboard and mouse? I relinquish Apple develops that. Monitor? If not a 3rd party, Apple's panels are developed by another company. Hard drive? Nope. Motherboard? Apple has engineers for that but doesn't manufacture it. NIC? Nope. Bluetooth? Nope. Wireless? Nope. CD/DVD drive? Nope.

So basically, the only exclusive thing Apple really develops or has input on are the Motherboard, Monitor and the case. Oh, the keyboard and mouse can be bought retail so hardly exclusive.

When I look at buying another system, I'll really need to reconsider if buying another Mac is really worth it. There's really only one or two Mac-only apps that I'd have to do without and would not want to let go of.

What company does sell systems that are 100% exclusive?

As for the OpenComputer, the update issue alone is a joke and deal-killer. Asking people to reinstall their OS for updates is suicide. People want to buy computer, turn on computer, use computer, and not worry about anything else.

People should have tried the anti-trust argument back when mac's couldn't boot anything other than MacOS, Apple have since changed it to make macs able to boot just about anything (with the New World PPC macs, then emulating the BIOS in the Intel Macs)

Edit: Oh yeah, they're going to lose.

I think its about time. Apple's profit margins are exceedingly high given that most companies in the industry are lucky to make 1/2 that amount.

And don't forget Apple is simply repackaging the sum of all the parts in the computer without having to do all the research and development. Its a wonder why they can't sell the systems for less. I hardly think it all goes into OS X development. And if they're spending it all on making "nice" designer cases for the systems, then I question why they're spending so much money.

Let's sum Apple's R&D HW investments:

Processor? Intel R&D. Graphics Card? ATI or Nvidia or Intel. Sound card? Probably not Apple. Keyboard and mouse? I relinquish Apple develops that. Monitor? If not a 3rd party, Apple's panels are developed by another company. Hard drive? Nope. Motherboard? Apple has engineers for that but doesn't manufacture it. NIC? Nope. Bluetooth? Nope. Wireless? Nope. CD/DVD drive? Nope.

So basically, the only exclusive thing Apple really develops or has input on are the Motherboard, Monitor and the case. Oh, the keyboard and mouse can be bought retail so hardly exclusive.

When I look at buying another system, I'll really need to reconsider if buying another Mac is really worth it. There's really only one or two Mac-only apps that I'd have to do without and would not want to let go of.

To be honest, the Macbook, Mac Pro, iMac, Airport Extreme/Time Capsule, and ACDs are similarly priced compared to other vendors for what you get. (ACDs are S-IPS panels, so don't tell me they're twice the price of competitors. The XPS One = iMac competitor. Mac Pro = Xeon.).

The other items are really niche products and thus are priced more (mac mini, macbook air) Though I do perfectly agree with the company that the mac mini is grossly overpriced.

And I definitely hope that they don't spend less on design and development--it's the main reason that macs sell in the first place. (both hardware and software)

Note: I'm basing my comparisons on US prices and vendors.

I don't see how Apple could lose. The copy protection is a key in the TPM chip. They can't legally copy it.

Despite what you may have heard, OSX doesn't use a TPM, and never did. The first generation Intel macs had a TPM chip, but they were unused. Current Macs (like my MBP) don't have a TPM.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Google Chrome 149.0.7827.156 (offline installer) by Razvan Serea The web browser is arguably the most important piece of software on your computer. You spend much of your time online inside a browser: when you search, chat, email, shop, bank, read the news, and watch videos online, you often do all this using a browser. Google Chrome is a browser that combines a minimal design with sophisticated technology to make the web faster, safer, and easier. Use one box for everything--type in the address bar and get suggestions for both search and Web pages. Thumbnails of your top sites let you access your favorite pages instantly with lightning speed from any new tab. Desktop shortcuts allow you to launch your favorite Web apps straight from your desktop. Chrome has many useful features built in, including automatic full-page translation and access to thousands of apps, extensions, and themes from the Chrome Web Store. Google Chrome is one of the best solutions for Internet browsing giving you high level of security, speed and great features. This update includes 33 security fixes. [N/A][516496659] Critical CVE-2026-12437: Use after free in WebShare. Reported by Google on 2026-05-25 [N/A][516947912] Critical CVE-2026-12438: Inappropriate implementation in WebView. Reported by Google on 2026-05-27 [N/A][519728275] Critical CVE-2026-12439: Use after free in Digital Credentials. Reported by Google on 2026-06-03 [N/A][519731619] Critical CVE-2026-12440: Use after free in DigitalCredentials. Reported by Google on 2026-06-03 [N/A][520157118] Critical CVE-2026-12441: Use after free in File Input. Reported by Google on 2026-06-05 [N/A][521950423] Critical CVE-2026-12442: Use after free in Passwords. Reported by Google on 2026-06-09 [N/A][522566295] Critical CVE-2026-12443: Use after free in Web Authentication. Reported by Google on 2026-06-11 [N/A][513160088] High CVE-2026-12444: Out of bounds read in Chromoting. Reported by Google on 2026-05-14 [N/A][513199795] High CVE-2026-12445: Use after free in Extensions. Reported by Google on 2026-05-14 [N/A][513313107] High CVE-2026-12446: Insufficient data validation in Passwords. Reported by Google on 2026-05-14 [N/A][513405023] High CVE-2026-12447: Heap buffer overflow in WebRTC. Reported by Google on 2026-05-15 [N/A][513458233] High CVE-2026-12448: Inappropriate implementation in WebView. Reported by Google on 2026-05-15 [N/A][513480539] High CVE-2026-12449: Use after free in Chromoting. Reported by Google on 2026-05-15 [N/A][514531776] High CVE-2026-12450: Inappropriate implementation in Media. Reported by Zhixin Tu on 2026-05-19 [N/A][514741076] High CVE-2026-12451: Use after free in DigitalCredentials. Reported by Google on 2026-05-19 [N/A][515462244] High CVE-2026-12452: Use after free in Downloads. Reported by Google on 2026-05-21 [N/A][516448843] High CVE-2026-12453: Insufficient validation of untrusted input in Input. Reported by Google on 2026-05-25 [N/A][516926968] High CVE-2026-12454: Race in Safe Browsing. Reported by Google on 2026-05-27 [N/A][517069848] High CVE-2026-12455: Use after free in Tab Strip. Reported by Google on 2026-05-27 [N/A][517124587] High CVE-2026-12456: Insufficient validation of untrusted input in Extensions. Reported by Google on 2026-05-27 [N/A][517153117] High CVE-2026-12457: Insufficient data validation in Extensions. Reported by Google on 2026-05-27 [N/A][517258337] High CVE-2026-12458: Incorrect security UI in Passwords. Reported by Google on 2026-05-27 [N/A][517406035] High CVE-2026-12459: Inappropriate implementation in Serial. Reported by Google on 2026-05-28 [N/A][517484284] High CVE-2026-12460: Insufficient policy enforcement in File System Access. Reported by Google on 2026-05-28 [N/A][517727318] High CVE-2026-12461: Out of bounds read in WebRTC. Reported by Google on 2026-05-29 [N/A][517916024] High CVE-2026-12462: Use after free in Media. Reported by Google on 2026-05-29 [N/A][518042749] High CVE-2026-12463: Inappropriate implementation in Views. Reported by Google on 2026-05-30 [N/A][519358344] High CVE-2026-12464: Use after free in Browser. Reported by Google on 2026-06-03 [N/A][520189702] High CVE-2026-12465: Insufficient validation of untrusted input in Metrics. Reported by Google on 2026-06-05 [N/A][520199394] High CVE-2026-12466: Heap buffer overflow in WebRTC. Reported by Google on 2026-06-05 [N/A][520202726] High CVE-2026-12467: Use after free in Extensions. Reported by Google on 2026-06-05 [N/A][521485244] High CVE-2026-12468: Inappropriate implementation in Updater. Reported by Google on 2026-06-08 [N/A][521618871] High CVE-2026-12469: Uninitialized Use in GPU. Reported by Google on 2026-06-09 Important to know! The offline installer links do not include the automatic update feature. Download web installer: Google Chrome Web 32-bit | Google Chrome 64-bit | Freeware Download: Google Chrome Offline Installer 64-bit | Direct Link | 131.0 MB Download: Google Chrome Offline Installer 32-bit | Direct Link | 119.0 MB Download page: Google Chrome Portable Download: Chrome ARM64 | Direct Link View: Chrome Website | Release Notes Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • they couldnt do W11 LTSC so the support lasts longer....
    • The fact that the pref is not enabled by default tells you that what you see is what you get...for now. Hopefully the final version will have all the quirks ironed out.
    • It's enterprise, not consumer. And "...affected scenarios involve third-party software..." Would be good to know that in headline, not way down in the article. Instead, you lead with Windows update, which is not very helpful and misleading, IMHO. Just saying.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      suprememobiles48 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Prasann earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Prasann earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      Dys Topia earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      173
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      97
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      85
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!