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

    • I think you meant the "ntfs3" driver, but yes there have been a lot of fixes for it in this release and previous releases, not 100% sure if the issue you mentioned is fixed though. In any case, the new "ntfs" driver in 7.1 doesn't have that issue (at least, no reports of such have come thru), but your kernel needs to explicitly enable support for the new driver first (like how CachyOS kernel has it), and you need to edit your mount points in /etc/fstab to use "ntfs" instead of the other drivers.
    • Epic Games says Unreal Engine 6 will help developers "build content faster" using AI models by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe Epic Games is rolling out the latest major update to Unreal Engine 5 today, and at the same time, the company also dropped some information on the next-generation version of the product, Unreal Engine 6. This was already revealed a few weeks ago alongside the new Rocket League upgrade reveal. The company says it is combining the features of Unreal Engine and Unreal Editor for Fortnite to create this new version of its popular media creation tool. On top of creating entire games, the new engine will also focus on letting developers operate large-scale live service titles more easily, whether by shipping content into their own ecosystems or into Fortnite. The use of large language models is also mentioned here, with Epic saying it will be a core part of the engine. "We see LLMs, generative AI models, and tools like Claude and Codex playing a central role in helping you build content faster while maintaining the creative control you need," adds the company. Here is the rundown of what's new about version 6 of Unreal Engine: With all these changes to the programming model, portability upgrades, and generative AI integration, Epic says the new version of the engine will "change a lot about how games are made." The company aims to ship Unreal Engine 6 into early access in late 2027, with a full release planned for 12-18 months later. Epic Games also dropped a lengthy blog post about the new Unreal Engine 5.8 update for game developers over here. The release is focused on delivering better performance, customization, and streamlined workflows for development teams. This will be the final major update for this version of the engine before Epic switches to focus fully on Unreal Engine 6's early access launch.
    • Watch Louis Rossmann's recent experience on YouTube about trying to get a warranty replacement from Samsung. It's crazy.
    • That is the thing, how many of these people don't realise they are using AI? If they use Google Search they have no choice but to use AI. So yes, maybe half of American adults do use and I expect a lot of Uk adults do to, but I bet most of them don't realise it. Myself, i avoid the rubbish.
    • They use FREE AI. They aren't paying for this meme-generating slopware...
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Vincian earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • First Post
      Jocimo earned a badge
      First Post
    • 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
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      500
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      88
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!