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

    • Can you read? I've said I'm willing to pay more for a notchless (no notch) 3:2 screen.
    • Not even an OLED display on the laptops. Also it seems that the laptop design isn't the same as the Surface Ultra model. Looks like bargain bin at high prices.
    • make your own notch - it's not that hard
    • VirtualBox 7.2.10 by Razvan Serea VirtualBox is a powerful x86 and AMD64/Intel64 virtualization product for enterprise as well as home use. Targeted at server, desktop and embedded use, it is now the only professional-quality virtualization solution that is also Open Source Software. Presently, VirtualBox runs on Windows, Linux, macOS, and Solaris hosts and supports a large number of guest operating systems including but not limited to Windows (NT 4.0, 2000, XP, Server 2003, Vista, 7, 8, Windows 10 and Windows 11), DOS/Windows 3.x, Linux (2.4, 2.6, 3.x, 4.x, 5.x and 6.x), Solaris and OpenSolaris, OS/2, OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD. Some of the features of VirtualBox are: Modularity. VirtualBox has an extremely modular design with well-defined internal programming interfaces and a client/server design. This makes it easy to control it from several interfaces at once: for example, you can start a virtual machine in a typical virtual machine GUI and then control that machine from the command line, or possibly remotely. VirtualBox also comes with a full Software Development Kit: even though it is Open Source Software, you don't have to hack the source to write a new interface for VirtualBox. Virtual machine descriptions in XML. The configuration settings of virtual machines are stored entirely in XML and are independent of the local machines. Virtual machine definitions can therefore easily be ported to other computers. VirtualBox 7.2.10 changelog: VMM: Fixed issue when CentOS 10 VM was not booting due to the message "Fatal glibc error: CPU does not support x86-64-v3" (​github:gh-642) Devices/EFI: Fixed booting issue when ARM VM had less than 1024 MiB of RAM assigned (​github:gh-679) USB: Fixed issue when it was not possible to attach USB device to headless VM on Apple Silicon/macOS 26.4.1 (​github:gh-631) Storage: Fixed issue when VIRTIO-SCSI device was not recognized as SSD device by guest system (​github:gh-634) Network: Fixed issue in E1000 emulation code which triggered debug log creation (​github:gh-645) Network: Fixed issue in E1000 emulation code which prevented OS/2 guest from booting (​github:gh-683) Linux Host: Fixed issue when VMs could not be started due to kernel oops (​github:gh-639) Linux Host and Guest: Fixed issue when kernel modules were failing to build with openSUSE 16.0 kernel Linux Host and Guest: Added initial support for kernel 7.1 Linux Host and Guest: Added extra fixes for RHEL 9.8 kernel (​github:gh-676) Linux Host and Guest: Added possibility to build source code using NASM instead of YASM as the assembler (​github:gh-520) Linux Guest Additions: Added initial support for Extended Data Control Protocol for clipboard sharing with Plasma on Wayland guests (​github:gh-33) Linux Guest Additions: Added extra fixes for preventing vboxvideo kernel module build with kernel version 7.0 and newer (​github:gh-655) OS/2 Guest Additions: Fixed issue when Shared Folders automount and clipboard sharing stopped working (​github:gh-551) Download: VirtualBox 7.2.10 | 170.0 MB (Open Source) Download: VirtualBox 7.2.10 Extension Pack | 19.1 MB View: VirtualBox Home Page | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • OK, now ask yourself how are they going to enforce that law? By requiring every single adult to prove their age and provide their legal identity documents to an UNREGULATED 3rd party company that already has a long track record of multiple data breaches. Not to mention, parliament have voted AGAINST this ban, twice, and Starmer is going ahead anyway. So, where's the democracy here, because that looks like dictatorship to me. The solution here is parental responsibility, not government control. Run some public service announcements on TV and UK social media teaching parents how to setup parental controls. That's already been proven to actually work. But the, this is not and has NEVER been about keeping kids safe. It's about control and monitoring. Watching what you're doing online and controlling what you can see and what you can say.
  • 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
      525
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      180
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      105
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      89
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!