Reseller's website offline following pledge of $400 Mac clone

[AppleInsider]

The website of a Miami-based networking and security solutions reseller became inaccessible Monday, shortly after the company began advertising an unauthorized Mac clone for a fraction of the cost of Apple's cheapest system.

Dubbed OpenMac, the $400 offering from Psystar Corporation is described as "a low-cost high-performance computing platform" based on the ongoing OSX86Project -- a hacker-based initiative aimed at maintaining a version of the Mac OS X operating system for everyday PCs.

The 'basic' OpenMac is capable of running Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard, Psystar says, and includes a 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo microprocessor, 2GB of DDR2 667 RAM, an integrated Intel GMA 950 Graphics card, 20x DVD+/-R drive, 4 USB ports, and a 250GB 7200RPM drive. However, the Psystar online store also lists several upgrade options, including FireWire ports, a 2.66GHz processor, and a nVidia GeForce 8600GT 512MB graphics card.

"When comparing base configurations, [Apple's] Mac Mini costs 150% of the price of the OpenMac while offering poorer performance, smaller storage space, and RAM," the company wrote. "Not only that but the Mac Mini doesn't have the option for an nVidia GeForce 8600 video card like the OpenMac does so playing games on it is a lost cause."

Unfortunately for Psystar, its offering is only likely to test the response time of Apple's legal department. The reseller told MacLife that while it has yet to receive a correspondence from the Cupertino-based Mac maker, it would be "ready" to respond.

At issue is Section 2A of the Mac OS X End User License Agreement (EULA), which stipulates that users are allowed "to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time." As such, the OpenMac (and any other Mac system based on non-Apple hardware) would appear to stand in direct violation of Apple's terms.

Although Apple ran an authorized Mac clone program for a stint of about two years in the mid-to-late 90's, its stance has remained that of disapproval ever since chief executive Steve Jobs put an end to Mac OS X licensing with the release of Mac OS 8.0.

Still, curiosity over Psystar's offering was enough to knock the reseller's website offline for most of the day. The company said its web traffic peaked at over 30,000 hits per second on Monday, causing an outage and prompting it to begin handling customer orders for the OpenMac via email.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=3955)

[Superbass]

Well, I know lots of folks here are going to say that Apple can't afford to offer OSX customer service to computers they don't build, or something like that, and that might be true - if they did, they might end up with similar, or worse, customer service and quality issues than Microsoft has.

That said, it would be great if it was possible to have an OSX desktop that sacrificed the pretty plastic form-factor of the existing Apple-built options for a super-cheap mid-tower option as this company was trying to do.


This model was basically the same specs as an iMac and much, much cheaper than even an old macmini. I wonder what it would cost them to build something closer to a Mac Pro?

[quinney]

Well, I know lots of folks here are going to say that Apple can't afford to offer OSX customer service to computers they don't build, or something like that, and that might be true - if they did, they might end up with similar, or worse, customer service and quality issues than Microsoft has.

That said, it would be great if it was possible to have an OSX desktop that sacrificed the pretty plastic form-factor of the existing Apple-built options for a super-cheap mid-tower option as this company was trying to do.


This model was basically the same specs as an iMac and much, much cheaper than even an old macmini. I wonder what it would cost them to build something closer to a Mac Pro?

I don't think the $400 included OS X or iLIfe, which are included in the price of a mini.
Their price comparison was a little deceptive in my opinion.

[solipsism]

You don't need Psystar to build you a Hackintosh. There is an entire community out there with rated HW and associated KEXTs so you know what you should buy before you buy it. And you can do it cheaper than Psystar. Of course, you can't run the store bought copy of OS X that they were offering. I'm not sure how they accomplished that.

[Superbass]

I don't think the $400 included OS X or iLIfe, which are included in the price of a mini.
Their price comparison was a little deceptive in my opinion.

Well, the article says it would be running OSX, but even if it doesn't come with it, adding both Leopard and iLife would bring the total to $630. The clone has the following specs : 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB of DDR2 memory, Integrated Intel GMA 950 Graphics, 20x DVD+/-R Drive, four USB ports and a 250GB 7200RPM drive, which is double the hard drive size, doube the memory, and a faster processor than the $800 Mini.

Still, a savings of at least $170 for double the memory and storage plus a faster processor, and maybe most importantly, the ability to upgrade, and all at the sacrifice of form factor means a pretty damn good deal, in my opinion for somebody looking at a budget-type computer that at some point might want to upgrade to something with a bit more juice.

Another cool thing about this system that hasn't been mentioned, is that in 3 years from now when Apple is only offering the latest 2011 Intel processor, it'll be possible to upgrade to a 2010 processor and increase power for what should be pretty low prices.

[zunx]

Apple, please make us a QUIET Mac miniTOWER with FireWire 800 and 7200 rpm disks inside.

[Tulkas]

You don't need Psystar to build you a Hackintosh. There is an entire community out there with rated HW and associated KEXTs so you know what you should buy before you buy it. And you can do it cheaper than Psystar. Of course, you can't run the store bought copy of OS X that they were offering. I'm not sure how they accomplished that.
I guess they are banking on people not wanting to muck with the hacks themselves and being willing to pay someone else to do it for them..and still be cheaper than a direct from Apple option.

I really wonder how they think Apple would let them get away with offering OSX pre-installed on these machines. That is a blatant violation of the EULA. Now, if they were to offer the box and detailed instructions on how to get OSX on there, maybe that would take the legal onus off of them and put it onto the consumer, whom Apple is unlikely to sue. On the other hand, I could imagine someone wanting to push this with Apple to force an anti-trust action. Apple is a monopoly player, within their market, on both hardware and OS, and is using this monopoly to limit customer choices within this market. I doubt an anti-trust suit would be successful and certain it would be beyond the financial abilities of a small company to follow through on, but it would be interesting.

[Tulkas]

Well, the article says it would be running OSX,
arstechnica article says they offered OSX preloaded.

[caliminius]

I don't think the $400 included OS X or iLIfe, which are included in the price of a mini.
Their price comparison was a little deceptive in my opinion.

It seems like it would almost have to come with OS X if they were expecting to sell them. Of course, maybe they were offering just the hardware with whatever software the OSX86 Project required to run OS 10.5. That would be one way for the company to avoid violating the EULA. Then it would up to the purchaser to supply the copy of the Mac OS (and in the process violate the EULA).

To try to reach the base model of the clone brings the Apple price to $949 ($100 for an extra GB of RAM and $50 to get to 160GB HD which is still 90GB short of the clone's HD size)...compare that to their $400 + $129 for the OS = $529...heck throw in iLife for another $79 still only brings you to $608...which still makes the Mac Mini cost over 50% more than the clone.

Which would I rather buy, the clone or the Mini? (If you guessed the Mini, try again)

[Superbass]

I really wonder how they think Apple would let them get away with offering OSX pre-installed on these machines. That is a blatant violation of the EULA. Now, if they were to offer the box and detailed instructions on how to get OSX on there, maybe that would take the legal onus off of them and put it onto the consumer, whom Apple is unlikely to sue. On the other hand, I could imagine someone wanting to push this with Apple to force an anti-trust action. Apple is a monopoly player, within their market, on both hardware and OS, and is using this monopoly to limit customer choices within this market. I doubt an anti-trust suit would be successful and certain it would be beyond the financial abilities of a small company to follow through on, but it would be interesting.

The End-User license agreement is just that - an agreement with the "End User", not the manufacturer or necessarily the installer. The only person who can violate is whoever buys it. Apple would have to take the company to court to get lists of purchasers, and then sue the individual users, which would be difficult and time consuming.

Does anyone know of any instances of a company actually suing for breach of EULA? I know that all of the recent piracy lawsuits have involved copyright law exclusively and not breach of EULA...

[caliminius]

Apple, please make us a QUIET Mac miniTOWER with FireWire 800 and 7200 rpm disks inside.

I think that you should add to the list that it should NOT use laptop parts (CPU, RAM, HD, etc. should be desktop components).

[dr_lha]

... brings you to $608...which still makes the Mac Mini cost over 50% more than the clone.
Yes, but with the mini you are not just paying for a low end machine, you're paying for the form factor. How much would a PC with the same form factor and specs as a $599 Mac mini cost?

[Tulkas]

The End-User license agreement is just that - an agreement with the "End User", not the manufacturer or necessarily the installer. The only person who can violate is whoever buys it. Apple would have to take the company to court to get lists of purchasers, and then sue the individual users, which would be difficult and time consuming.

Does anyone know of any instances of a company actually suing for breach of EULA? I know that all of the recent piracy lawsuits have involved copyright law exclusively and not breach of EULA...
Unless they have a license as a reseller from Apple, I would think that they would be considered the end user at the time they install OS X.

[skottichan]

Their site is still up.



I love how they say they can get you a Mac Pro at Mini prices...


Have these idiots priced the Quad Core Penryns?

[Clive At Five]

Man, I was wondering how long it would take AI to post this article... We've been talking about it all day on MacRumors.

You don't need Psystar to build you a Hackintosh. There is an entire community out there with rated HW and associated KEXTs so you know what you should buy before you buy it. And you can do it cheaper than Psystar. Of course, you can't run the store bought copy of OS X that they were offering. I'm not sure how they accomplished that.

Actually now you can use your store-bought copy of Leopard. You build the PC, patch your store-bought leopard, utilize some EFI-emulation, and viola.

If you looked at the OSx86 project long ago and decided it wasn't worth it, you should give it another look. There've been a lot of advancements in the last few months.

-Clive

[solipsism]

Man, I was wondering how long it would take AI to post this article... We've been talking about it all day on MacRumors.



Actually now you can use your store-bought copy of Leopard. You build the PC, patch your store-bought leopard, utilize some EFI-emulation, and viola.

If you looked at the OSx86 project long ago and decided it wasn't worth it, you should give it another look. There've been a lot of advancements in the last few months.

-Clive

SWIM has been using Hackintosh for quite awhile, though (s)he never updated to Leopard because things were working so well with 10.4.10. Though (s)he hasn't looked at the sites for about 4 months now. I'll let (s)he know, thanks. :D

[Wiggin]

Despite appearances, Apple is a hardware company. The purpose of the software is to add value to the hardware. Sure, they sell some software like Aperture, Final Cut, etc. But OSX and iLife are all about selling you the hardware. That's the reason they can sell you Leopard for $129 vs MS selling Vista for hundreds more. Apple makes their money on the hardware (that goes for computers, iPods, iPhones, etc).

If they let other companies sell the hardware, we'd start seeing OS upgrades costing more and there would start to be draconian activitation processes like Windows has to prevent piracy. As it is, Apple is pretty liberal with their OS. You never have to enter an license codes or anything to install (unlike their professional apps).

[akhomerun]

Well, the article says it would be running OSX, but even if it doesn't come with it, adding both Leopard and iLife would bring the total to $630. The clone has the following specs : 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB of DDR2 memory, Integrated Intel GMA 950 Graphics, 20x DVD+/-R Drive, four USB ports and a 250GB 7200RPM drive, which is double the hard drive size, doube the memory, and a faster processor than the $800 Mini.

Still, a savings of at least $170 for double the memory and storage plus a faster processor, and maybe most importantly, the ability to upgrade, and all at the sacrifice of form factor means a pretty damn good deal, in my opinion for somebody looking at a budget-type computer that at some point might want to upgrade to something with a bit more juice.

Another cool thing about this system that hasn't been mentioned, is that in 3 years from now when Apple is only offering the latest 2011 Intel processor, it'll be possible to upgrade to a 2010 processor and increase power for what should be pretty low prices.

yeah but with memory prices how they are right now that's a non-issue, the processor speed is a non-issue since they are both core 2 duos, and the $170 price difference doesn't take into account the lack of support from apple, lack of a 1 year warranty from apple, and likelihood of the whole system being broken by a single update.

it doesn't really beat the mac mini. but really a lot of apple fans want a midrange desktop tower.

i won't even say say apple needs to make one, though. desktops are dead to the consumer, and that's unfortunate because they are still the best choice for enthusiasts. so apple is perfectly happy selling gazillions of macbooks.

[skottichan]

LOL, they charge you an OSX install fee.


For the entry level model, it's $604.99

Base $399.99
Firewire + $50.00
OSX Installed +$155.00

Total $604.99



http://infectiousdesire.innocentaddictions.com/junk/Picture%201.png

[Clive At Five]

SWIM has been using Hackintosh for quite awhile, though SWIM never updated to Leopard because things were working so well with 10.4.10. Though SWIM hasn't looked at the sites for about 4 months now. I'll let SWIM know, thanks. :D

So can you ask SWIY how GarageBand and pro-app performance is on his/her hackintosh? I haven't - I mean, SWIM hasn't had an opportunity to get his/her PC prepped for his/her hackintosh implementation yet. (S)he'd really like to know. ;)

-Clive

[Superbass]

yeah but with memory prices how they are right now that's a non-issue, the processor speed is a non-issue since they are both core 2 duos

It'll still cost $100 bucks to upgrade the memory on a mini, and processor speed would be an issue to a lot of users.

it doesn't really beat the mac mini.

Maybe be not in terms of size, but in prices, individual components and upgrade ability it does

desktops are dead to the consumer

You're funny! :lol:

[penchanted]

I think this outfit may be on the wrong side of the law on several counts. First, by calling their product "OpenMac" they are likely already infringing on Apple's trademarks. Additionally, as previously mentioned, they likely need a reseller agreement of some type to avoid being considered the end-user. At any rate, Apple does have some say how there IP can be used.

The monopoly argument is really kind of a stretch. Sure, Apple has a monopoly within Macintosh systems just as Chevy has a monopoly on Corvettes, but does it make sense to define the market so narrowly? Put in the proper market context (PCs and cars), neither holds a monopoly. A more likely argument is that Apple has a monopoly in portable media players.

I really wonder what makes people feel that a company should be compelled to release their IP to its competitors. When Lexicon developed Logic 7 audio processing, it was offered exclusively in Lexicon products so Lexicon had a 100 percent monopoly on Logic 7 audio processing. When Harman International acquired Lexicon they offered Logic variants in products from some other Harman brands. As the owner of the technology, that is their right and they are free to do what they wish with the technology as long as they do not: a) have a monopoly in their market, and b) use that monopoly in an unfair anti-competitive manner.

[Superbass]

LOL, they charge you an OSX install fee.


For the entry level model, it's $604.99

Base $399.99
Firewire + $50.00
OSX Installed +$155.00

Total $604.99



http://infectiousdesire.innocentaddictions.com/junk/Picture%201.png

Well, it's still a lot cheaper than a comparably set up Mac Mini, and with that firewire upgrade, you get 3 firewire outputs, to the mini's single. Also, isn't just the idea of being able to upgrade the system, including adding a dedicated graphics card or 8 GB ram, a bit leap up from the Mini?

[lkrupp]

Apple, please make us a QUIET Mac miniTOWER with FireWire 800 and 7200 rpm disks inside.

Your ilk has been asking for this for over what, twenty years now? Haven't you gotten the message yet? :no:

[lkrupp]

Why are people so thick headed and ignorant? Apple sells hardware. That's the ONLY reason OS X, iTunes and the iPhone SDK exist. Turn OS X loose on crap PC hardware, iTunes loose crap MP3 players, and the iPhone SDK loose on crap cell phones, and Apple ceases to exist the next day. It's that simple. Don't you people know your Apple history? Apple turned Mac OS loose on third party hardware and damn near went out business in the 90's. Is the concept just too complicated for small minds to grasp?

[JimDreamworx]

Apple sells complete products.

While many of us like to tinker, there are many people out there who do not. That is who Apple is appealing to and it is only a matter of time before corporate America decides on adopting a similar stance (if Macs are to make inroads there). In a sense, they do with their MS-only attitude when it comes to rolling out desktops and having back-end servers; soon they will want working solutions!

I can't see any end-user wanting to buy this thing to save a few bucks. And I can't see anyone who tinkers thinking this thing is a great deal.

[Superbass]

I can't see any end-user wanting to buy this thing to save a few bucks.

There are many many people who bought hacked iPhones to avoid getting locked into paying 2 years of AT&T rates. They face the same updating issues as Hackintosh folks will, but that doesn't stop what is estimated to be a few million folks from doing it.

Speaking of which, is there anything in the iPhone EULA that says you can't run the iPhone software on a non-AT&T phone for the first 2 years?

[fraklinc]

I bet PC manufactures are listening closely at this

[suhail]

We need Apple to listen closely, we've been begging for a mid-tower Mac for ages!

[solipsism]

So can you ask SWIY how GarageBand and pro-app performance is on his/her hackintosh? I haven't - I mean, SWIM hasn't had an opportunity to get his/her PC prepped for his/her hackintosh implementation yet. (S)he'd really like to know. ;)

-Clive

Never tried Garageband or most Pro Apps, but Aperture, iTunes, and iPhoto work fine. They have even been successful with getting the latest updates via Software Updater.

Dell Optiplex w/ 2.66Ghz Pentium with SSE2 (and maybe SSE3, but not sure), 1.5GB DDR RAM, 2x80GB and 1x160GB internal HDDs, DVD±R. Start up time is 25 seconds.

Handbrake is very, very slow, DVD Player and Front Row do not work but SWIM never concerned with a solution to that. Sharing libraries with iTunes had issues, too. I'm pretty sure most of these issues, if not all have been worked out by now since SWIMs copy of OSx86 is a couple years old.

[caliminius]

Yes, but with the mini you are not just paying for a low end machine, you're paying for the form factor. How much would a PC with the same form factor and specs as a $599 Mac mini cost?

That would assume the end user actually cares about the form factor and isn't simply interested in a cheap Mac system. I doubt the majority of purchasers would really be upset if the Mini was in a Mini- or Midtower configuration (from the number of comments on Mac sites, there seems to be a large group that would be absolutely giddy about that prospect).

The only reason you're paying for the form factor with the Mac Mini is that Apple gives you no other choice if you want a (vaguely) budget priced Mac.

The fact that it can easily and cheaply be upgraded both at time of purchase and afterwards makes a non-Apple sanctioned OS X running computer highly attractive. Even if the actual package won't be as pretty to look as Apple's product.

[Marvin]

All those hits must be from the non-existent mid-range tower market. :lol:

If they get over here to the UK and come with some sort of warranty, I am buying one. To hell with the EULA and to hell with Apple. I've been waiting for a machine like this the entire time I've used a Mac and they've seen the demand often enough to make one.

I don't care about updates. I hardly ever update my system anyway and I'm sure someone will figure out how to get updates working anyway.

If this machine runs Leopard unmodified, I don't see how Apple can even have any say in this. They are only selling a box that runs Apple's system.

All I wanted was a machine I could use at home with good graphics. A 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo with an 8600 and 7200 rpm drives is ideal.

I'm not tied down to a single glossy display and I can replace my optical drives and hard drives however I like. 20x burner vs 8x in the iMac. For the first time in years, I'm excited about a Mac and it's not sold by Apple and as I suspected, there are a lot of people who feel the same way.

[flydoggie]

The End-User license agreement is just that - an agreement with the "End User", not the manufacturer or necessarily the installer. The only person who can violate is whoever buys it. Apple would have to take the company to court to get lists of purchasers, and then sue the individual users, which would be difficult and time consuming.

Does anyone know of any instances of a company actually suing for breach of EULA? I know that all of the recent piracy lawsuits have involved copyright law exclusively and not breach of EULA...

Before you start offering legal opinions you should make sure that you know what you are talking about because everything that you said is 100% false.

Software may be covered by patents, trademarks, and copyrights and with all three, inducement or contributory infringement are actionable against suppliers. Additionally, manufacturers are subject to a separate license, rather than the EULA (which as the name states applies to end users) and may only install the licensed software in accordance with the terms of that license.

In practice, end users are never sued for IP violations because it is easier to sue the contributory infringer who would be liable for each violation by his or her customers.

Piracy lawsuits are a different matter because the person who induces the infringement is often overseas and beyond the reach of American courts. Therefore, it is easier to sue end users. However, end users have been sued for EULA violations, most recently by Microsoft (end users who violated OEM licensing of Windows and Office products by installing on another machine).

[SpamSandwich]

There will always be cheapos out there unwilling to pay even a nickel for something, yet they will spend all of their waking hours to get something for nothing. This thread is evidence of that.

[Kolchak]

That would assume the end user actually cares about the form factor and isn't simply interested in a cheap Mac system. I doubt the majority of purchasers would really be upset if the Mini was in a Mini- or Midtower configuration (from the number of comments on Mac sites, there seems to be a large group that would be absolutely giddy about that prospect).

The only reason you're paying for the form factor with the Mac Mini is that Apple gives you no other choice if you want a (vaguely) budget priced Mac.
Agreed. I happen to have just finished helping a friend build a Hackintosh. Why? Because it was a fraction of the cost of a Mac Pro. The damage:

$100 Gigabyte P35-DS4 motherboard (open box) with 8 USB 2.0 and 2 Firewire ports
$60 aluminum case with 11 drive bays
$70 80-Plus rated 500w power supply
$65 4GB of DDR2 800 RAM
$40 GeForce 7600GT PCIe video card with both DVI and VGA outputs
$30 CPU cooler
$200 Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz CPU
$89 Leopard from Amazon
$25 Philips SATA 20x DVD burner
$115 Samsung 750GB 7200rpm 32MB cache hard drive

Total: just over $800 including shipping, and every spec is vastly superior to the Mac Mini, even the low-end video card. The only thing the Mini has that the Hackintosh doesn't is Bluetooth and Wifi, and we could add those for about $30 if he wanted it. The case isn't as elegant as the Mac Pro's, but you can't have everything. And if he decides to upgrade next year, it will again cost him less than selling a Mac Pro and buying a new one. I can't say I'm not sorely tempted to build one for myself.

[bobertoq]

dang.... i was about to buy my first Mac from there... for just $400 dollars. I'm sure if Apple released something similar to that it would be a hit. I'd buy it.

[solipsism]

Agreed. I happen to have just finished helping a friend build a Hackintosh. Why? Because it was a fraction of the cost of a Mac Pro. The damage:

$100 Gigabyte P35-DS4 motherboard (open box) with 8 USB 2.0 and 2 Firewire ports
$60 aluminum case with 11 drive bays
$70 80-Plus rated 500w power supply
$65 4GB of DDR2 800 RAM
$40 GeForce 7600GT PCIe video card with both DVI and VGA outputs
$30 CPU cooler
$200 Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz CPU
$89 Leopard from Amazon
$25 Philips SATA 20x DVD burner
$115 Samsung 750GB 7200rpm 32MB cache hard drive

Total: just over $800 including shipping, and every spec is vastly superior to the Mac Mini, even the low-end video card. The only thing the Mini has that the Hackintosh doesn't is Bluetooth and Wifi, and we could add those for about $30 if he wanted it. The case isn't as elegant as the Mac Pro's, but you can't have everything. And if he decides to upgrade next year, it will again cost him less than selling a Mac Pro and buying a new one. I can't say I'm not sorely tempted to build one for myself.

1) Have you verified the HW will work (and are optimized) with the hacked copy of Leopard?
2) Once you have this store bought version of Leopard, how are you going to get it to install? The usual way is to just DL the pre-edited x86 install disc, from what I'm told.

[Superbass]

Before you start offering legal opinions you should make sure that you know what you are talking about because everything that you said is 100% false.

... manufacturers are subject to a separate license, rather than the EULA (which as the name states applies to end users) and may only install the licensed software in accordance with the terms of that license.



Wow, so everything I wrote is 100% false, but then you repeated what I wrote about EULA's as though it's true. Hmm, did i forget that it's opposite day today? :err:

Or are you, sir, a conundrum?

[Kolchak]

1) Have you verified the HW will work (and are optimized) with the hacked copy of Leopard?
2) Once you have this store bought version of Leopard, how are you going to get it to install? The usual way is to just DL the pre-edited x86 install disc, from what I'm told.
Most of the hardware doesn't care what OS is running. Only the motherboard and the video card may have problems. The P35 series from Gigabyte are known to be some of the most compatible with OS X (along with Intel's Bad Axe 2 and Asus' P5 series, but those use older chipsets and will not work with Yorkfield), with almost all features working out of the box and only a few patches required, if any. There are plenty of options for making Geforce cards work properly with OS X. The retail copy of Leopard was mainly to salve his conscience, not for installation.

[bsenka]

We need Apple to listen closely, we've been begging for a mid-tower Mac for ages!

Bingo. That would be the reason that this product would be successful; Apple does not sell the product that a large number of Mac users want to buy. If someone else comes along as does so, Apple's losses are entirely of their own doing.

I just bought a new iMac, but I'll give it to my son and buy an OpenMac in a heartbeat if it actually comes to fruition, for no other reason than it's the Mac I wanted to buy from Apple in the first place.

[bobertoq]

The website isn't down anymore, now it's called Open Computer instead of OpenMac.

[yvo84]

Despite appearances, Apple is a hardware company. The purpose of the software is to add value to the hardware. Sure, they sell some software like Aperture, Final Cut, etc. But OSX and iLife are all about selling you the hardware. That's the reason they can sell you Leopard for $129 vs MS selling Vista for hundreds more. Apple makes their money on the hardware (that goes for computers, iPods, iPhones, etc).

If they let other companies sell the hardware, we'd start seeing OS upgrades costing more and there would start to be draconian activitation processes like Windows has to prevent piracy. As it is, Apple is pretty liberal with their OS. You never have to enter an license codes or anything to install (unlike their professional apps).

Agreed 100%.
I think though.. Apple may actually be in for a little battle if this goes to courts, because the argument the other way invites competition -- which is what a Capitalist society is based on. Our society.

[solipsism]

The website isn't down anymore, now it's called Open Computer instead of OpenMac.

Either they heard from Apple legal or this was as clever method of getting free press for their Hackintosh capable machine.

[ros3ntan]

The End-User license agreement is just that - an agreement with the "End User", not the manufacturer or necessarily the installer. The only person who can violate is whoever buys it. Apple would have to take the company to court to get lists of purchasers, and then sue the individual users, which would be difficult and time consuming.

Does anyone know of any instances of a company actually suing for breach of EULA? I know that all of the recent piracy lawsuits have involved copyright law exclusively and not breach of EULA...

the reason no one is suing is because its time consuming and costly. But, if you can win millions of dollars in profit after lawyers and stuff, they might pursue.

As for UELA agreement, psystar has to buy those OS X from somewhere, and that would be Apple. They used it to install in a computer that is not approve by Apple and violates the agreement, Apple has a case here.

[VinitaBoy]

bsenka, you are going to get precisely what you pay for with this knock-off. That, and definitely no more. This is a hacked together wanna-be that's living on the edge legally, has absolutely NO track record for functionality and/or reliability, and comes from a company with absolutely NO record for service/warranty after the sale. NONE! And THIS is what you want as a replacement for your iMac?

Man (or woman), you REALLY deserve this machine. Gawd help you and your heartbeat--you're truly going to need it.

[Lancaster]

Good. Maybe this will kick Apple in the pants and lead them to plug that goatse-sized hole in their lineup.

[NasserAE]

Agreed 100%.
I think though.. Apple may actually be in for a little battle if this goes to courts, because the argument the other way invites competition -- which is what a Capitalist society is based on. Our society.

I really doubt that a 7~8% market share is considered a monopoly!

I always thought that people who want cheap PC are better off buying a Windows or Linux machine. It is true that there are many free program available for Mac OS X but still Windows have more variety in price. The reason I switched to Mac is for the peace of mind. I don't have to worry about driver/OS update problems and I don't have to pay money if the computer breaks (yes I bought Apple Care). I got my iMac logic board replaced on warranty few months ago ($400 value for the parts).

Just like those who jailbreak their iPhones. those who buy Hacked Mac computers are missing the most important features of any Apple product. Sure you can save $100 or $200, but is it worth the trouble and headache if you have problem?!

Upgrades?! My iMac is 18 months old and I really don't see a need for any upgrade. Nothing really new except the aluminum case and a small increase in processors speed. I think I can go another year at least without worrying about an upgrade.

That's what I think.

[gmon750]

There will always be cheapos out there unwilling to pay even a nickel for something, yet they will spend all of their waking hours to get something for nothing. This thread is evidence of that.

Very much agree. For whatever reason, individuals have a false-sense of entitlement of wanting anything of value for next to nothing. They can complain about OSX being too expensive a price-point for entry. Well you know what? Too bad! A lot of things out there in the world are too expensive for me. If I can't afford it, I don't buy it.

Apple machines work well because everything is designed to work well together. OSX in the wild would have the same problems as the windows environment. Unstable software components wreaking havoc and ruining the user-experience. Apple does not want to be in the business of supporting someone elses' hardware. If a regular user buys this guy's OSX-Clone to save a few bucks and it doesn't work right, they are going to blame Apple. But there are users out there that display a "screw-you" attitude.

This manufacturer will most likely get a major licking from Apple's legal department and be thrown out of business.

I will be buying my first Apple computer sometime this year. There is no way I would ever consider buying some chop-shop PC with a hacked OSX just to save a few bucks. And to refuse to deny Apple revenue for their machines simply because of your twisted sense to "Stick it to Jobs" or Apple-is-evil mentality just makes no sense.

Why is Apple being teated different than any other closed-system company? If you can break a product (i.e. Toaster, PC, whatever) and get it to work for you, more power to you. If you do it illegally and expect it to work exactly the way the manufacturer of said product designed it, then you only have your own ignorance to blame for it.

[tomkarl]

Very much agree. For whatever reason, individuals have a false-sense of entitlement of wanting anything of value for next to nothing. They can complain about OSX being too expensive a price-point for entry. Well you know what? Too bad! A lot of things out there in the world are too expensive for me. If I can't afford it, I don't buy it.

Apple machines work well because everything is designed to work well together. OSX in the wild would have the same problems as the windows environment. Unstable software components wreaking havoc and ruining the user-experience. Apple does not want to be in the business of supporting someone elses' hardware. If a regular user buys this guy's OSX-Clone to save a few bucks and it doesn't work right, they are going to blame Apple. But there are users out there that display a "screw-you" attitude.

This manufacturer will most likely get a major licking from Apple's legal department and be thrown out of business.

I will be buying my first Apple computer sometime this year. There is no way I would ever consider buying some chop-shop PC with a hacked OSX just to save a few bucks. And to refuse to deny Apple revenue for their machines simply because of your twisted sense to "Stick it to Jobs" or Apple-is-evil mentality just makes no sense.

Why is Apple being teated different than any other closed-system company? If you can break a product (i.e. Toaster, PC, whatever) and get it to work for you, more power to you. If you do it illegally and expect it to work exactly the way the manufacturer of said product designed it, then you only have your own ignorance to blame for it.

Agree completely on all points. I GLADLY pay a bit of a premium to have the Apple experience. Hardware and Software both.

[bsenka]

bsenka, you are going to get precisely what you pay for with this knock-off. That, and definitely no more. This is a hacked together wanna-be that's living on the edge legally, has absolutely NO track record for functionality and/or reliability, and comes from a company with absolutely NO record for service/warranty after the sale. NONE! And THIS is what you want as a replacement for your iMac?

Man (or woman), you REALLY deserve this machine. Gawd help you and your heartbeat--you're truly going to need it.

No track record works both ways, they have no negative experiences yet either. When I said "if it comes to fruition" I guess I should have added "if it really works as a Mac". IMO, they don't even have to discount it. The form factor alone will drive sales. They could charge $1500 and they'll still get it if it works.

Like I said in the first post, I want to buy a Mac from Apple, but Apple doesn't make the Mac I and millions of other Mac users need. If Apple gave me a choice, I'd go with them. Since they don't, I'll take my chances with the guy who actually gives me what I ask for instead of telling me what I should take. As it is, I bought a machine I hate, only because it was the only option that Apple gave me.

[inkswamp]

Why are people so thick headed and ignorant? Apple sells hardware. That's the ONLY reason OS X, iTunes and the iPhone SDK exist. Turn OS X loose on crap PC hardware, iTunes loose crap MP3 players, and the iPhone SDK loose on crap cell phones, and Apple ceases to exist the next day. It's that simple. Don't you people know your Apple history? Apple turned Mac OS loose on third party hardware and damn near went out business in the 90's. Is the concept just too complicated for small minds to grasp?

Where do you get the idea that I, as a consumer, must support Apple? If they don't have a product I want, then maybe a competitor should be allowed to step in to provide it.

The OpenMac looks pretty damn good to me. Then again, I think the iMac and its Las Vegas glossy display sucks and the Mini is a freakin' overpriced box of circa-2006 leftovers. I've been using Macs for 15+ years and Apple, for the first time since I've been using Macs, has nothing that fits my needs and budget. And Apple apparently cannot hear the numerous calls from both consumers and high profile tech commentators for them to release a mid-range tower.

Somewhere along the way, it appears that Apple lost their passion for making decent computers and are too infatuated with selling music and making cell phones. Look at the buyer's guide on MacRumors and explain why Apple is taking almost a year between updates on the iMac and the Mac Mini now? It wasn't like that three years ago. We could count on regular price drops or spec bumps every 4-5 months. But now Apple is showing a surprising lack of interest in their consumer machines.

So you think I should support Apple? How about if Apple gets with the program and gets out of this 1998 all-in-one mentality and start making the products that people really want?

[RexTraverse]

We need Apple to listen closely, we've been begging for a mid-tower Mac for ages!

Exactly. Even if Apple Legal successfully sues these guys, if this is the kick in the pants Apple needed to realize the incredible demand for a mid-level headless Mac and actually build one, it's still a win.

[wilco]

Very much agree. For whatever reason, individuals have a false-sense of entitlement of wanting anything of value for next to nothing. They can complain about OSX being too expensive a price-point for entry. Well you know what? Too bad! A lot of things out there in the world are too expensive for me. If I can't afford it, I don't buy it.

Apple machines work well because everything is designed to work well together. OSX in the wild would have the same problems as the windows environment. Unstable software components wreaking havoc and ruining the user-experience. Apple does not want to be in the business of supporting someone elses' hardware. If a regular user buys this guy's OSX-Clone to save a few bucks and it doesn't work right, they are going to blame Apple. But there are users out there that display a "screw-you" attitude.

This manufacturer will most likely get a major licking from Apple's legal department and be thrown out of business.

I will be buying my first Apple computer sometime this year. There is no way I would ever consider buying some chop-shop PC with a hacked OSX just to save a few bucks. And to refuse to deny Apple revenue for their machines simply because of your twisted sense to "Stick it to Jobs" or Apple-is-evil mentality just makes no sense.

Why is Apple being teated different than any other closed-system company? If you can break a product (i.e. Toaster, PC, whatever) and get it to work for you, more power to you. If you do it illegally and expect it to work exactly the way the manufacturer of said product designed it, then you only have your own ignorance to blame for it.

The main point of your little speech seems to be that people who purchase this clone will expect Apple to support it. Even though no one on this thread -- or on any of the other boards I've read today on the subject-- has stated this expectation. I think it's a fair to make the assumption that anyone who would purchase a clone would be aware that they can't turn to Apple for support.,

Your secondary point is that people who would choose to purchase a clone would be doing so out of spite (or because they're cheap), rather than to fill their need for a mid-range, expandable desktop. Again, you seem to be addressing comments/people that don't exist.

In short, you talk a lot for someone who "will be buying my first Apple computer sometime this year".

[hillstones]

For $399 you get a piece of junk PC box with no software. They charge you $155 so they can install OS X for you. Add the software, FireWire, etc, and you are getting close to the price of an iMac without a display. Not only that, it will probably be a noisy piece of junk just like all the other PC's since the hardware won't be controlled by the software and the fans will run full speed all the time. Yeah, that is what people want. Since Apple's hardware is already flying off store shelves, people are willing to spend money for quality. They aren't looking for a cheap piece of junk. That is what Windows users want.

Apple already had a mid-tower, the Power Mac G3 and G4. If you really want a tower, buy a Mac Pro. Apple isn't losing any money over not offering a cheap tower. Laptops already outsell desktops, and the iMac is very successful. So I think your market for a cheap mid-tower is pretty small. Small enough where Apple doesn't need one, which is why they phased out the smaller G3/G4 tower box and left the Mac Pro for the Pros.

I much prefer my whisper quiet iMac over a noisy tower anyday.

[solipsism]

I much prefer my whisper quiet iMac over a noisy tower anyday.

Me too, but there are plenty of people that prefer an expandable machine that doesn't start at $2,500. I can't tell you how big the market is for a midrange, headless Mac, but if this forum is any indication there are a more than a few.

[city]

Apple could charge $1,000 per copy for OSX without updates and discount it if it's being installed on an Apple upon registering the upgrade.

[inkswamp]

Me too, but there are plenty of people that prefer an expandable machine that doesn't start at $2,500. I can't tell you how big the market is for a midrange, headless Mac, but if this forum is any indication there are a more than a few.

I personally know three people IRL who were interested in buying Macs but went back to a Windows PC when they found out that the most affordable tower was not really affordable at all and didn't even come with a display. The iMac filled a need in its day, but it's time for Apple to let the all-in-one concept die.

[Splinemodel]

My typical response to people who whine about there not being a commodity desktop mac is, "go build one if you think there's such demand." Finally, a taker.

If Apple Legal gives them trouble, they should open-source the HW design and all the FW.

[inkswamp]

My typical response to people who whine about there not being a commodity desktop mac is, "go build one if you think there's such demand." Finally, a taker.

If Apple Legal gives them trouble, they should open-source the HW design and all the FW.

I don't hear people whining about Apple not making a commodity desktop Mac. What people really want is a reasonably priced tower Mac. That's not an unthinkable thought unless you're Apple and have fully entrenched yourself in the idea that the consumer level offerings should be all-in-one or scaled back in some unnecessary ways.

If Apple made a couple mid-range towers for around $900-1200, I would buy (and I know others who would too) but that not because I'm cheap. It's because the Mac Mini is underpowered for my needs and the iMac is unacceptable with its glossy, low-quality screen. I think this kind of machine appeals to a wide range of people, not just people looking for OS X on commodity hardware.

[solipsism]

• http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/04/mac_clone_maker.html

[piot]

How about if Apple gets with the program and gets out of this 1998 all-in-one mentality and start making the products that people really want?

but it's time for Apple to let the all-in-one concept die



It's funny how Apple's Mac sales are growing between two and three times the rest of the PC industry by selling systems that nobody wants.

Also funny that while Apple should kill of it's AIO desktop all the big PC players have just been introducing theirs.

Kind of amusing that while sales of desktops (especially to consumers) are falling, the 'mid range Mac tower' brigade all justify their needs by saying "I want one." My three friends want one" "millions of other Mac users want one too" Finally they come up with the old "Apple is stupid... shooting themselves in the foot" routine.

Look, it's a shame that Apple doesn't make the perfect system for you, but stop trying to say that it's a glaring error on Apple's part and that they are losing out on millions of dollars in sales. I suspect Apple takes a different view.

[quinney]

This manufacturer will most likely get a major licking from Apple's legal department and be thrown out of business.


The thing is, Apple does not even have to win in court. Their pockets are so much
deeper than this little company that they can probably force bankruptcy by just
dragging things out for a while.

[penchanted]

The iMac filled a need in its day, but it's time for Apple to let the all-in-one concept die.

Why? iMac sales were a huge contributor to the product mix last quarter and appear to be strong again this quarter.

[VinitaBoy]

This Miami company is going to need pockets as deep as the Mariana Trench if they think they will EVER bring one machine to market running OS X. If anyone truly believes that purchasing a copy of Leopard (with its "onerous" EULA) gives him the right to do with it whatever he pleases, let him run, not walk, to the nearest coterie of attorneys specializing in copyright law. I realize that most of the posters on this site and others like it want (demand?) a cost + 1% tower from Apple with a 10 year full-replacement warranty, free OS software upgrades for life, open-srouce productivity suites, and the like . . . but it just ain't gonna happen.

bsenka, buying something you absolutely loathe is the mark of an unsettled mind. PC makers can--and should--provide you with all that you need and more. Why not support DELL, GATEWAY, HP, ACER, ALIENWARE, et al., and be happy about it, rather than sleeping with what has very clearly become your enemy?

Apple and its products are truly not for you; but then again, neither is a Lexus or a Benz. PC/XP is more your style. Enjoy the savings, live long, and prosper.

[wheelhot]

Very much agree. For whatever reason, individuals have a false-sense of entitlement of wanting anything of value for next to nothing. They can complain about OSX being too expensive a price-point for entry. Well you know what? Too bad! A lot of things out there in the world are too expensive for me. If I can't afford it, I don't buy it.

Apple machines work well because everything is designed to work well together. OSX in the wild would have the same problems as the windows environment. Unstable software components wreaking havoc and ruining the user-experience. Apple does not want to be in the business of supporting someone elses' hardware. If a regular user buys this guy's OSX-Clone to save a few bucks and it doesn't work right, they are going to blame Apple. But there are users out there that display a "screw-you" attitude.

This manufacturer will most likely get a major licking from Apple's legal department and be thrown out of business.

I will be buying my first Apple computer sometime this year. There is no way I would ever consider buying some chop-shop PC with a hacked OSX just to save a few bucks. And to refuse to deny Apple revenue for their machines simply because of your twisted sense to "Stick it to Jobs" or Apple-is-evil mentality just makes no sense.

Why is Apple being teated different than any other closed-system company? If you can break a product (i.e. Toaster, PC, whatever) and get it to work for you, more power to you. If you do it illegally and expect it to work exactly the way the manufacturer of said product designed it, then you only have your own ignorance to blame for it.

You got that right :D.

Anyway, what would you feel if Apple offer a mid range desktop computer that is not upgradeable? Would you still want it? Its obvious that Apple will never release a fully upgradeable computer cause they must then invest in hardwares support. Apple could sell Leopard OS without having packages like MSoft because they sell both Hardware and Software. Would you want Apple to bundle features like Vista? Maybe OS X Leopard Home Premium, Leopard Business, Leopard Ultimate? I sure dont.

Anyway from my opinion, this method of making people buy their product while in truth you can do exactly the same thing on your own 3 years old PC is bad. the Hackintosh community never sell their solution for running OS X on normal PC, all the .kext are offered free and what Psystar is doing is bad. There are actually a pretty detailed guide for installing Hackintosh and there are great support for your problems in the forum.

I have read the person statement in the website some poster give but from my opinion its just a poor excuse, its clearly they want to make money from giving false advertising because any PC regardless its a Dell XPS, HP, Acer or whatever can run Mac OS X in their PC. Psystar is just cheating the public to make easy money.

What would you feel if something you offered for free and someone took it and named it theirs?.

[TBell]

That may be true, however, one company cannot distribute another companies product without its permission. Amongst other legal theories, that is a blatant violation of Trademark law. Consequently, this company could never legally distribute OSX without Apple's permission.

Arguably, the company could sell a Mac capable clone under a Fair-use theory. I, however, think that is sketchy at best. A key component to any Fair-use argument is not interfering with the copyright holder's key market. Here, Apple's product is being reversed engineered to interfere with Apple's market.

This company will not stay in business very long. If Apple's letters don't scare the company, I suspect Apple will be in court before the end of the month.

ThaThe End-User license agreement is just that - an agreement with the "End User", not the manufacturer or necessarily the installer. The only person who can violate is whoever buys it. Apple would have to take the company to court to get lists of purchasers, and then sue the individual users, which would be difficult and time consuming.

Does anyone know of any instances of a company actually suing for breach of EULA? I know that all of the recent piracy lawsuits have involved copyright law exclusively and not breach of EULA...

[solipsism]

This company will not stay in business very long. If Apple's letters don't scare the company, I suspect Apple will be in court before the end of the month.

My previous link indicates that they are taking Apple to court over antitrust violations with the EULA.

[inkswamp]

Why? iMac sales were a huge contributor to the product mix last quarter and appear to be strong again this quarter.

The logical error in the thinking behind your post and piot's is that it assumes Apple wouldn't have done as well or better without the iMac. We have no way of knowing that so pointing to Apple's sales and saying that sticking with the all-in-one iMac design was a winning approach is kind of meaningless.

The fact that Psystar put themselves on the map overnight by offering a Mac mid-range tower speaks volumes, as far as I'm concerned. Who heard of these guys two days ago?

[TBell]

There is an important distinction to be made here. I think an end user can legally buy a copy of OSX and install it on a PC. That is non commercial use, and just because an end user license prohibits such use, it doesn't mean the restriction is legally enforceable. Companies can put anything they want in an end user agreement. This doesn't mean a court will enforce it. Fair use would allow a user to modify the OS to use on another product provided the use isn't commerical in nature.

However, a company cannot benefit commercially from hacking Apple's copyrighted software. The end user license has nothing to do with this.

This Miami company is going to need pockets as deep as the Mariana Trench if they think they will EVER bring one machine to market running OS X. If anyone truly believes that purchasing a copy of Leopard (with its "onerous" EULA) gives him the right to do with it whatever he pleases, let him run, not walk, to the nearest coterie of attorneys specializing in copyright law. I realize that most of the posters on this site and others like it want (demand?) a cost + 1% tower from Apple with a 10 year full-replacement warranty, free OS software upgrades for life, open-srouce productivity suites, and the like . . . but it just ain't gonna happen.

bsenka, buying something you absolutely loathe is the mark of an unsettled mind. PC makers can--and should--provide you with all that you need and more. Why not support DELL, GATEWAY, HP, ACER, ALIENWARE, et al., and be happy about it, rather than sleeping with what has very clearly become your enemy?

Apple and its products are truly not for you; but then again, neither is a Lexus or a Benz. PC/XP is more your style. Enjoy the savings, live long, and prosper.

[inkswamp]

Anyway, what would you feel if Apple offer a mid range desktop computer that is not upgradeable? Would you still want it?

I would, if it were reasonably priced. My concern isn't the ability to upgrade, but rather the ability to avoid buying the iMac's demonstrably lousy display (to which Apple offers no build-to-order alternatives) as well as not wasting my money on that box of leftovers from 2006 called the Mac Mini. Repackage the iMac's components in a headless tower for $1000 and I'm there.

What you and others appear to miss is the fact that there are *many* reasons people want a mid-range tower, not just one.

[vinea]

My previous link indicates that they are taking Apple to court over antitrust violations with the EULA.

Too bad Apple isn't a monopoly and these people are idiots. IANAL of course but they are still idiots.

[TBell]

The problem with this line of thought is it forgets Apple writes software to sell hardware. It is a hardware company first. All it's software initiative are designed to sell hardware, including iTunes. For the most part, Microsoft writes software to sell software. If a company allows Leopard to run on generic boxes, it is undermining Apple's core business of selling hardware. It legally cannot do that.

Just because people have a need for something, doesn't mean the company who owns the rights to the property you want to utilize in another way has the obligation to provide what you want.

The main point of your little speech seems to be that people who purchase this clone will expect Apple to support it. Even though no one on this thread -- or on any of the other boards I've read today on the subject-- has stated this expectation. I think it's a fair to make the assumption that anyone who would purchase a clone would be aware that they can't turn to Apple for support.,

Your secondary point is that people who would choose to purchase a clone would be doing so out of spite (or because they're cheap), rather than to fill their need for a mid-range, expandable desktop. Again, you seem to be addressing comments/people that don't exist.

In short, you talk a lot for someone who "will be buying my first Apple computer sometime this year".

[bobertoq]

I personally know three people IRL who were interested in buying Macs but went back to a Windows PC when they found out that the most affordable tower was not really affordable at all and didn't even come with a display. The iMac filled a need in its day, but it's time for Apple to let the all-in-one concept die.I agree, but the iMac does have a beautiful display (aimed towards you other post) so hopefully Apple will make some new (cheaper) cinema displays (20", 24", 30", 36") with high-quality iSight camera and mic, with an optional matte or glossy display.

If they made a $400 mid-range tower (just like the OpenMac -- now know as Open Computer -- or even better then the OpenMac) with a great design (not super mini-ized and filled with laptop parts - with the aluminum case), I would buy one IMMEDIATELY. Not only that, it would be my first Mac. 8-)

[Tulkas]

Too bad Apple isn't a monopoly and these people are idiots. IANAL of course but they are still idiots.
Apple could certainly be considered a monopoly.
"A situation in which a single company owns all or nearly all of the market for a given type of product or service"
By any definition, Apple has a monopoly within the Macintosh market. Meaning, they have 100% control over the hardware and software. Are they a monopoly within the over all PC market? No, but then MS is not considered a monopoly with the entire computer industtry is you broaden the definition of the market enough. MS considered a monopoly in the computer market if you narrow it down to just PC's. Apple is a monopoly position within the Macintosh ecosystem/market.

This has been a good thing for end users, in many respects. Tight integration is a result of their absolute control. Are they an illegal monopoly? Probably not. But, enforcing their monopoly position through their EULA could certainly bring anti-trust interest. Banning installation of their software on a competitor's systems is certainly, only done to protect their monopoly position on their hardware.

[Superbass]

That may be true, however, one company cannot distribute another companies product without its permission. Amongst other legal theories, that is a blatant violation of Trademark law. Consequently, this company could never legally distribute OSX without Apple's permission.


If that were true, eBay wouldn't be nearly as good as it is, now, would it?

[vinea]

Apple could certainly be considered a monopoly.
"A situation in which a single company owns all or nearly all of the market for a given type of product or service"
By any definition, Apple has a monopoly within the Macintosh market.


That's like saying Honda has a monopoly on Accords.

Are they a monopoly within the over all PC market? No, but then MS is not considered a monopoly with the entire computer industtry is you broaden the definition of the market enough.


Yes, it's called a market segment of which the Macintosh belongs...and Windows still holds what? 90+% share?


This has been a good thing for end users, in many respects. Tight integration is a result of their absolute control. Are they an illegal monopoly? Probably not. But, enforcing their monopoly position through their EULA could certainly bring anti-trust interest. Banning installation of their software on a competitor's systems is certainly, only done to protect their monopoly position on their hardware.

The only place Apple needs to worry about a monopoly position is iTunes and iPods.

Even Microsoft is allowed to restrict the use of Windows in certain ways. For example, the restriction on using the Vista Home on VMs until they finally changed thier minds. Probably because Vista isn't selling well anyways and letting folks run it on a Mac if they wanted was better than nothing.

But clearly it was to restrict running Vista Home from inside competitor OS's (Linux and OSX) hosting VMs.

[vinea]

Are you 12 years old? Where did you learn about law - the schoolyard?

Is that where you learned namecalling?

[gmon750]

Where do you get the idea that I, as a consumer, must support Apple? If they don't have a product I want, then maybe a competitor should be allowed to step in to provide it.

The OpenMac looks pretty damn good to me. Then again, I think the iMac and its Las Vegas glossy display sucks and the Mini is a freakin' overpriced box of circa-2006 leftovers. I've been using Macs for 15+ years and Apple, for the first time since I've been using Macs, has nothing that fits my needs and budget. And Apple apparently cannot hear the numerous calls from both consumers and high profile tech commentators for them to release a mid-range tower.

Somewhere along the way, it appears that Apple lost their passion for making decent computers and are too infatuated with selling music and making cell phones. Look at the buyer's guide on MacRumors and explain why Apple is taking almost a year between updates on the iMac and the Mac Mini now? It wasn't like that three years ago. We could count on regular price drops or spec bumps every 4-5 months. But now Apple is showing a surprising lack of interest in their consumer machines.

So you think I should support Apple? How about if Apple gets with the program and gets out of this 1998 all-in-one mentality and start making the products that people really want?

If you don't like what Apple has to offer, then go somewhere else. No other OSX options? Well, that is just too bad! Apple has every right to safeguard their systems to prevent chop-shops like these guys from diluting and tarnishing OSX. Apple having complete control over hardware and software is why they work so well. What part of that equation do you not understand? You are in such a ridiculously low minority of people who think that the iMac hardware is inferior. You're just more vocal. They may not use the most current components out there but they definitely work more in harmony with the OS than Windows. Stick with Windows or Linux. It's obvious that OSX is not for you. If Apple does not come out with a low-end Mac Pro, then they don't. Move on with your life.

[inkswamp]

If you don't like what Apple has to offer, then go somewhere else. No other OSX options? Well, that is just too bad! Apple has every right to safeguard their systems to prevent chop-shops like these guys from diluting and tarnishing OSX. Apple having complete control over hardware and software is why they work so well. What part of that equation do you not understand? You are in such a ridiculously low minority of people who think that the iMac hardware is inferior. You're just more vocal. They may not use the most current components out there but they definitely work more in harmony with the OS than Windows. Stick with Windows or Linux. It's obvious that OSX is not for you. If Apple does not come out with a low-end Mac Pro, then they don't. Move on with your life.

I'm sorry, did you get lost on your way to the MacRumors forums? :rolleyes:

[bobertoq]

Are you 12 years old? Where did you learn about law - the schoolyard?

Is that where you learned namecalling?ohh hahaha :lol:
I kind of agree... fighting is totally useless, and childish, and will get us nowhere.

[gmon750]

The main point of your little speech seems to be that people who purchase this clone will expect Apple to support it. Even though no one on this thread -- or on any of the other boards I've read today on the subject-- has stated this expectation. I think it's a fair to make the assumption that anyone who would purchase a clone would be aware that they can't turn to Apple for support.,

Your secondary point is that people who would choose to purchase a clone would be doing so out of spite (or because they're cheap), rather than to fill their need for a mid-range, expandable desktop. Again, you seem to be addressing comments/people that don't exist.

In short, you talk a lot for someone who "will be buying my first Apple computer sometime this year".

Yes, I will buy my own personal Apple "sometime this year". It's not just talk since I work in corporate environment administering both PC's and Macs. My corporate workstation is a Mac Pro. Mac's are slowly replacing our windows machines because we have pretty much had it with the instabilities of Windows. Apple's OSX has been hugely successful for our users and requires virtually no assistance from us outside of very small training issues when coming from a Windows environment. VMWare Fusion and Windows XP works quite well when we need those specific apps that are only available for Windows. The integration between hardware and software was a huge selling point for us and management. We don't care that they don't use the most absolute-current technology because Apple makes certain (and certifies) that all the components will work as advertised. That is what makes Apple so good. Crapware companies trying to hitch a ride on Apple's success by producing a lousy product deserves the legal kicking they are going to receive.

I haven't purchased my own personal Mac yet only because I'm waiting for the June announcement. My old home computer is finally showing its age and after using Macs for many years at work, I'm a true believer in their machines.

[ros3ntan]

Bingo. That would be the reason that this product would be successful; Apple does not sell the product that a large number of Mac users want to buy. If someone else comes along as does so, Apple's losses are entirely of their own doing.

I just bought a new iMac, but I'll give it to my son and buy an OpenMac in a heartbeat if it actually comes to fruition, for no other reason than it's the Mac I wanted to buy from Apple in the first place.

assuming they did not break any laws.. Secondly, you have to be careful with software being installed in a machine that is not designed to work. You might find a lot more headache then you think. For example, Vista's compatibility problem with its drivers might occur with this type of installation. There is a reason why people still buy Apple despite higher price than other computer manufacturer.

there is also a reason why Mac OS X "just work". Because it is designed for Apple's machine. In addition, according to the article Appleinsider, Mac sales have gone up despite economic downturn and keep increasing its market share. So this means that Mac computers are not over price. It doesnt make much sense if people think Apple is expensive and sales has increased. So, most people probably think its worth it to buy it.

[gmon750]

You got that right :D.

Anyway, what would you feel if Apple offer a mid range desktop computer that is not upgradeable? Would you still want it?

Yes, I would want it. Even though all my prior PC's were all fully expandable, I never upgraded them. I just build a new PC every 2 or three years because the technology was just so much better that it made no sense to upgrade a PC. It was just a viscous cycle that would not end.


Anyway from my opinion, this method of making people buy their product while in truth you can do exactly the same thing on your own 3 years old PC is bad.

True to a point. However, you can't expect Apple to help you when OSX doesn't work on that three-year-old video card. In my experience and to all the users I help as well as friends, they rarely have any machines older than three years. Where money is an issue, obviously they wait longer.

[Kolchak]

The reason I switched to Mac is for the peace of mind. I don't have to worry about driver/OS update problems and I don't have to pay money if the computer breaks (yes I bought Apple Care). I got my iMac logic board replaced on warranty few months ago ($400 value for the parts).
So you bought an extended replacement warranty and used it. I suppose such things don't exist on other PCs? As much as I like OS X, it's hardly perfect. Especially Leopard, which many consider to be an awful upgrade that has caused an enormous number of problems. It hasn't been called Apple's version of Vista for nothing.

Just like those who jailbreak their iPhones. those who buy Hacked Mac computers are missing the most important features of any Apple product. Sure you can save $100 or $200, but is it worth the trouble and headache if you have problem?!

Upgrades?! My iMac is 18 months old and I really don't see a need for any upgrade. Nothing really new except the aluminum case and a small increase in processors speed. I think I can go another year at least without worrying about an upgrade.
That's great for you, but quite a few people aren't satisfied with the relatively low performance of an iMac and can't see paying more than $2k for the base-model Mac Pro. The Hackintosh I helped build is nearly 1/3 the price of a Mac Pro, not $100 or $200 less. It's almost as fast and has a lot more RAM and disk space than the base model.

Not only that, it will probably be a noisy piece of junk just like all the other PC's since the hardware won't be controlled by the software and the fans will run full speed all the time. Yeah, that is what people want. Since Apple's hardware is already flying off store shelves, people are willing to spend money for quality. They aren't looking for a cheap piece of junk. That is what Windows users want.

Apple already had a mid-tower, the Power Mac G3 and G4. If you really want a tower, buy a Mac Pro. Apple isn't losing any money over not offering a cheap tower. Laptops already outsell desktops, and the iMac is very successful. So I think your market for a cheap mid-tower is pretty small. Small enough where Apple doesn't need one, which is why they phased out the smaller G3/G4 tower box and left the Mac Pro for the Pros.
Those were not midrange mid-towers. Those were Apple's top of the line pro machines at the time. The Mac Pro did not magically replace the G3/G4 because Apple needed more internal space. The PowerMac G5 came before the Mac Pro, and that had only two hard drive bays for the same "full size tower" design. Do get your facts straight.

As for your fan statement, boy are you behind the times. Every modern motherboard I've seen has PWM speed control for all fans, just like Apple, so they hardly "run full speed all the time." Like it or not, today's Intel-based Apple motherboards are nothing more than slightly tweaked versions of mainstream motherboards. There's nothing special about them. More than just Windows users want less expensive machines. If every Mac user were willing to pay more, why isn't the Mac Pro the best selling maching in Apple's lineup?

hopefully Apple will make some new (cheaper) cinema displays (20", 24", 30", 36") with high-quality iSight camera and mic, with an optional matte or glossy display.
A "cheaper" display from Apple would still be up to twice the price of its competition. And there's no excuse about it costing more because Apple needs to make it high quality to work with OS X.

Apple machines work well because everything is designed to work well together. OSX in the wild would have the same problems as the windows environment. Unstable software components wreaking havoc and ruining the user-experience.
You're really out of the Hackintosh loop. Everyone there understands that any problems they may encounter are because they're trying to run OS X on unsupported machines. They don't blame Apple, except when it really is Apple's fault. I've used genuine Macs for more years than any of these Johnny-come-latelies (especially the ones who say they're just about to buy their first Mac), but I'm willing to admit when Apple screws up. There are so many ways Leopard doesn't work as well as Tiger did (despite the new features), and you can't blame anyone but Apple for that.

Apple having complete control over hardware and software is why they work so well.
Except when they don't work so well. How about that AI article today about yet another problem with their hardware (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/04/14/apple_acknowledges_graphics_glitch_with_latest_not ebooks.html)? This is not the first time, either. There have been numerous battery recalls, problems with discoloration on notebooks, other display problems with both laptop and Cinema Displays, etc.

[ros3ntan]

If that were true, eBay wouldn't be nearly as good as it is, now, would it?

First of all, it is nothing like Ebay. Because when you sell something on Ebay, you did not alter the Mac products usage. When you knowingly or not altered its use, you have violated the agreement.

[ros3ntan]

So you bought an extended replacement warranty and used it. I suppose such things don't exist on other PCs? As much as I like OS X, it's hardly perfect. Especially Leopard, which many consider to be an awful upgrade that has caused an enormous number of problems. It hasn't been called Apple's version of Vista for nothing.

I used Sony Vaio before, and the service is no where as good as the macs. Sorry pc people, Mac's warranty is worth every penny. Because they replace everything for free and its fast. Sony's warranty.. not as fast and their service is ok at best. so its not worth to pay $400.

secondly, no operating system is perfect. What makes leopard different then vista is that the drivers works and it boots a lot faster than vista. If you want to be picky, OS X makes computing easier than vista. And also, no one in the mac community cries "save the old OS" like windows "save XP". despite being called apple's version of vista, i can honestly say it is still better than vista, in that most users still find it an upgrade from the old OS. and dont forget the most obvious reason, Mac doesnt have a lot of virus (yet).

[piot]

The logical error in the thinking behind your post and piot's is that it assumes Apple wouldn't have done as well or better without the iMac.

Actually Ink that's not very logical. Pointing out that Apple's Mac sales (without your desired system) are ACTUALLY growing much much faster than the rest of the PC market (with a hundred different versions of your miditower) has a bit more weight than just saying "I want one, so everyone else wants one too".


The fact that Psystar put themselves on the map overnight by offering a Mac mid-range tower speaks volumes, as far as I'm concerned. Who heard of these guys two days ago?

Oh Ink! Why is it always about you? Psytar is on the map because they are offering a non-Apple Mac. Period. Do you think that they would just be ignored if they were offering a $500 MacBook clone? Sigh.

[ros3ntan]

Where do you get the idea that I, as a consumer, must support Apple? If they don't have a product I want, then maybe a competitor should be allowed to step in to provide it.

The OpenMac looks pretty damn good to me. Then again, I think the iMac and its Las Vegas glossy display sucks and the Mini is a freakin' overpriced box of circa-2006 leftovers. I've been using Macs for 15+ years and Apple, for the first time since I've been using Macs, has nothing that fits my needs and budget. And Apple apparently cannot hear the numerous calls from both consumers and high profile tech commentators for them to release a mid-range tower.

Somewhere along the way, it appears that Apple lost their passion for making decent computers and are too infatuated with selling music and making cell phones. Look at the buyer's guide on MacRumors and explain why Apple is taking almost a year between updates on the iMac and the Mac Mini now? It wasn't like that three years ago. We could count on regular price drops or spec bumps every 4-5 months. But now Apple is showing a surprising lack of interest in their consumer machines.

So you think I should support Apple? How about if Apple gets with the program and gets out of this 1998 all-in-one mentality and start making the products that people really want?

the answer is simple, Apple simply not interested in the market you are describing. If its big big enough and Apple has the resource, why wouldnt they do it? I dont think they are that stupid to ignore a "large market" if they think its a large market.

[wheelhot]

If you don't like what Apple has to offer, then go somewhere else. No other OSX options? Well, that is just too bad! Apple has every right to safeguard their systems to prevent chop-shops like these guys from diluting and tarnishing OSX. Apple having complete control over hardware and software is why they work so well. What part of that equation do you not understand? You are in such a ridiculously low minority of people who think that the iMac hardware is inferior. You're just more vocal. They may not use the most current components out there but they definitely work more in harmony with the OS than Windows. Stick with Windows or Linux. It's obvious that OSX is not for you. If Apple does not come out with a low-end Mac Pro, then they don't. Move on with your life.

Some people agree with you (I'm one of them) but sadly, there are a majority of people who dont get the message.

So you bought an extended replacement warranty and used it. I suppose such things don't exist on other PCs? As much as I like OS X, it's hardly perfect. Especially Leopard, which many consider to be an awful upgrade that has caused an enormous number of problems. It hasn't been called Apple's version of Vista for nothing.

Since when Leopard is known as Apples Vista? Bugs? Every OS in the world has bugs, that doesnt make it sucky. You want to know why Leopard is not Vista, cause it works. It has a lot of new features that works unlike Vista which features are only for looks and Ooooosssss. and your old 3 years old Printer + Scanner + Fax machine works with Leopard unlike Vista, so LEOPARD is NOT Vista, get your facts right. And you dont hear people yelling or posting in YouTube or forums about save Tiger dont upgrade to Leopard cause in truth you are downgrading!!!. I never heard of that before, I know I heard it from users who use Vista

That's great for you, but quite a few people aren't satisfied with the relatively low performance of an iMac but can't see paying more than $2k for the base-model Mac Pro. The Hackintosh I helped build is nearly 1/3 the price of a Mac Pro, not $100 or $200 less. It's almost as fast and has a lot more RAM and disk space than the base model.

I want you to think hard why Leopard doesn't need to have suites like Vista (HB, HP, B, U). Let me help you, its cause they are using the money they get from their hardwares to support the development of OS X, do you think if Apple only sell software they can offer Leopard at the price you are paying now?

You're really out of the Hackintosh loop. Everyone there understands that any problems they may encounter are because they're trying to run OS X on unsupported machines. They don't blame Apple, except when it really is Apple's fault. I've used genuine Macs for more years than any of these Johnny-come-latelies (especially the ones who say they're just about to buy their first Mac), but I'm willing to admit when Apple screws up. There are so many ways Leopard doesn't work as well as Tiger did (despite the new features), and you can't blame anyone but Apple for that.

You are correct about this, but once a company like this OpenMac start offering it for the public, the public dont understand the true situation and when something goes wrong, they will start blaming Apple where in truth, Apple never supported the Hackintosh project. I myself run Hackintosh but sometime I just wish Im getting an Apple (this May).

Besides, I consider mid tower worthless if its not upgradeable (GPU, Processor and etc) cause people who upgrade their computers are usually gamers. Besides, your Mac now would last another 5 years and by that time, softwares would finally not work on your Mac cause its slow and its time to upgrade, 5 years is good investment and by that time technology would be advanced and naturally you would want to upgrade.

[ros3ntan]

OK people, if you have a problem with the way Apple market their product, why dont you make your own Mac like OS. Seriously, you can do it with linux. And its free. Whats stopping you? dont waste your time arguing on what Apple should do.

Apple do not have an obligation to make a product you want. they have rights to their products. its the same thing as all of us have the right to vote. I will give the three magical words: "We can choose."

[Benton]

Filing Information
Document Number P07000077580
FEI Number NONE
Date Filed 07/06/2007
State FL
Status ACTIVE
Effective Date 07/01/2007
Principal Address
10645 SW 112 ST
MIAMI FL 33176
Mailing Address
10645 SW 112 ST
MIAMI FL 33176
Registered Agent Name & Address
PEDRAZA, RODOLFO
10645 SW 112 ST
MIAMI FL 33176 US
Officer/Director Detail
Name & Address
Title D
PEDRAZA, RODOLFO
10645 SW 112 ST
MIAMI FL 33176
Title D
PEDRAZA, ROBERTO
10645 SW 112 ST
MIAMI FL 33176
Annual Reports
No Annual Reports Filed

[Superbass]

First of all, it is nothing like Ebay. Because when you sell something on Ebay, you did not alter the Mac products usage. When you knowingly or not altered its use, you have violated the agreement.

Are you saying that the 1723 unlocked iphones currently for sale on ebay haven't been altered in any way?:rolleyes:

[ros3ntan]

Are you saying that the 1723 unlocked iphones currently for sale on ebay haven't been altered in any way?:rolleyes:

Did i say mac product or Apple product? hm.. i think there is a difference... Macs are the computers.

Didnt Apple brick those phones with their update? or are you saying apple should sue them one by one? Apple is not that stupid man. Why would they sue their customer. There is no point because its too many and besides, the most they can get out of them is probably $5000.. its the same thing as illegal windows xp copies being sold in other countries. Why dont microsoft sue them?

And yes, those phones are illegally altered, so it violates the agreement. and still, that has nothing to do with ebay. If ebay were selling those products, then that might be a lawsuit worth pursuing for Apple.

and please stop comparing ebay with psystar. Ebay is just a mean. They dont personally sell the items. Psystar is personnaly selling the product

[solipsism]

Are you saying that the 1723 unlocked iphones currently for sale on ebay haven't been altered in any way?:rolleyes:
Unlocked phones do go against the agreement, unless they are factory unlocked like the ones being sold in France in Germany. One shouldn't expect Apple to bend over backwards to help you with software issues that are caused by a software jailbreak or unlock.

Didnt Apple brick those phones with their update?
Some iPhones were bricked by stupid users that tried to put Apple's iPhone software on their jailbroken device. They should have reverted to factory settings and then installed it, or waited 5 minutes for the hacker community to create a solution. There is no evidence that Apple added code to brick the devices. The logical answer is that Apple didn't take the jailbroken devices into consideration when creating their update. Though, the last update does have some evidence that Apple may be taking that into consideration now. We'll see with the next update.

[Superbass]

Didnt Apple brick those phones with their update? or are you saying apple should sue them one by one? Apple is not that stupid man. Why would they sue their customer. There is no point because its too many and besides, the most they can get out of them is probably $5000.. its the same thing as illegal windows xp copies being sold in other countries. Why dont microsoft sue them?

And yes, those phones are illegally altered. and still, that has nothing to do with ebay.

You're taking my comments out of context. I was originally replyiing to:

Originally Posted by TBell View Post
That may be true, however, one company cannot distribute another companies product without its permission. Amongst other legal theories, that is a blatant violation of Trademark law. Consequently, this company could never legally distribute OSX without Apple's permission.

I was using eBay as an example of redistributing another company's product without permission. I could also have used newspaper classified ads as an example. There's nothing against the law in the western world with reselling something you've bought, and if you want to paint a chair or unlock an iPhone or circuit bend a Speak and Spell or install OSX on a Dell computer, the worst the manufacturer can do is void the warranty.

[ros3ntan]

You're taking my comments out of context. I was originally replyiing to:



I was using eBay as an example of redistributing another company's product without permission. I could also have used newspaper classified ads as an example. There's nothing against the law in the western world with reselling something you've bought, and if you want to paint a chair or unlock an iPhone or circuit bend a Speak and Spell or install OSX on a Dell computer, the worst the manufacturer can do is void the warranty.

ohh ok i get it.

I think Tbell is missing the point. The violation is not in the distribution part. its in the installation of the product. UELA: one cannot install Leopard on a non-apple machine.

[ros3ntan]

You're taking my comments out of context. I was originally replyiing to:



I was using eBay as an example of redistributing another company's product without permission. I could also have used newspaper classified ads as an example. There's nothing against the law in the western world with reselling something you've bought, and if you want to paint a chair or unlock an iPhone or circuit bend a Speak and Spell or install OSX on a Dell computer, the worst the manufacturer can do is void the warranty.

but didnt they have a law where you cannot distribute a new product or something?? cause most of the stuff in ebay is technically second hand. Regardless of what the user say about them. because they bought from Apple first. Thats why companies need permission for distributing Apple's new product.

[sflorida]

Didn't any of you (except Benton) bother to check just who "Psystar" is?

Being from the area, I instantly recognized that this address is smack dab in the middle of a residential neighborhood in Kendall, complete with swimming pool in his backyard. There is not a commercial piece of property with a mile.

Indeed, the company was just incorporated in July of 2007, does not even have an FEI number, has never filed a corporate report with the State of Florida-- this really looks like a top notch corporate operation, doesn't it?

You all send in your money and let us know how things work out, okay?

Hey-- but he only charges $45.00 for one hour of on-site computer service: what a deal.....

But remember, if it looks like a duck, has web feet, walks like a duck, and quacks-- it probably is a duck! I believe that this is exactly what it looks like... be sure to look yourself before getting all excited.

The days of a guy in his garage making mainstream computers is long gone people!

[ros3ntan]

Didn't any of you (except Benton) bother to check just who "Psystar" is?

Being from the area, I instantly recognized that this address is smack dab in the middle of a residential neighborhood in Kendall, complete with swimming pool in his backyard. There is not a commercial piece of property with a mile.

Indeed, the company was just incorporated in July of 2007, does not even have an FEI number, has never filed a corporate report with the State of Florida-- this really looks like a top notch corporate operation, doesn't it?

You all send in your money and let us know how things work out, okay?

Hey-- but he only charges $45.00 for one hour of on-site computer service: what a deal.....

But remember, if it looks like a duck, has web feet, walks like a duck, and quacks-- it probably is a duck! I believe that this is exactly what it looks like... be sure to look yourself before getting all excited.

The days of a guy in his garage making mainstream computers is long gone people!

i did. on the site, it says 2008 copyright. So they are pretty new. And im guessing they do not have the experience to handle lawsuits.. and if what you are saying is true, then this is a very new company with no credibility. So better not trust what they said in regard with the lawsuit.

[mdriftmeyer]

OK people, if you have a problem with the way Apple market their product, why dont you make your own Mac like OS. Seriously, you can do it with linux. And its free. Whats stopping you? dont waste your time arguing on what Apple should do.

Apple do not have an obligation to make a product you want. they have rights to their products. its the same thing as all of us have the right to vote. I will give the three magical words: "We can choose."

I don't use OS X because I just want to run a Mac version of a PC equivalent piece of software.

I want to develop with ObjC/Cocoa. I want to leverage the functionality that is seemlessly integrated within OS X.

I use Linux daily--Debian Sid. I have used it daily for over 6 years.

It's not OS X and it's Development Environment for ObjC -- GNUstep is 5 or more years away from being equivalent--in short, it will always be behind Apple as it depends on Apple to keep Openstep compliance and Cocoa conformance rudimentary similar.

I'll stop there. I could reference the many Apple Applications that aren't on Linux to expound upon why I want to us OS X.

[ros3ntan]

I don't use OS X because I just want to run a Mac version of a PC equivalent piece of software.

I want to develop with ObjC/Cocoa. I want to leverage the functionality that is seemlessly integrated within OS X.

I use Linux daily--Debian Sid. I have used it daily for over 6 years.

It's not OS X and it's Development Environment for ObjC -- GNUstep is 5 or more years away from being equivalent--in short, it will always be behind Apple as it depends on Apple to keep Openstep compliance and Cocoa conformance rudimentary similar.

I'll stop there. I could reference the many Apple Applications that aren't on Linux to expound upon why I want to us OS X.

i said that to target normal users not heavy users.. hahhaa... if you want to develop cocoa.. then yeah you have no choice...

but wouldnt you want to develop it on a mac system, which is more stable?

[Superbass]

Hey, Psystar has just updated their site, and they now have an "OpenPro" option that starts at $999. Check these specs out:


Memory: 8GB DDR2 RAM (+ $225.00)
Processor: Core2Quad/2.6GHz (+ $400.00)
Hard Drive: 1 TB 7200RPM SATA (+ $150.00)
Video Card: GeForce 8600GT 512MB
Case: Silver
Installed OS: OS X 10.5 Leopard (+ $155.00)
All in a very nice silver case with firewire, and high-end cooling system

for a total of $1929.

Configuring a MacPro with the same options runs the total to $4399, so the OpenPro costs just 44% of what a Mac would.

Perhaps more interesting is that you can also have the computer pre - installed with Linux (for free) or Windows XP or Vista!

I know there's been tons of disagreement on this thread, but at least Psystar has shown us just how cheap Apple computers COULD be, if Apple didn't lock us into buying their hardware and paying for their advertising, product placement and 5th Avenue flagship stores...

I hope tons of people buy from Psystar and forces Apple to lower prices and give more options for Desktop computers. Now all we need is a company to make an altered iPod exterior to accommodate a user-replaceable battery!

[inkswamp]

Actually Ink that's not very logical. Pointing out that Apple's Mac sales (without your desired system) are ACTUALLY growing much much faster than the rest of the PC market (with a hundred different versions of your miditower) has a bit more weight than just saying "I want one, so everyone else wants one too".

I've argued against using market share as a popularity metric in computers for a very long time and I'm not about to change that because Apple is finally gaining some ground. Market share is simply the percentage of a given market total sales revenue that one company takes in a given period of time. The computing market has taken a downward turn lately and Apple, historically, tends to move units more consistently even during market downturns. Therefore, I think you can see how much Apple's recent "gains" have been exaggerated. I don't deny that Apple is getting more popular, but if there are less people buying, it's easier for a company to have larger slice of the pie, relatively speaking. It doesn't mean Apple has doubled or tripled their sales.

Oh Ink! Why is it always about you? Psytar is on the map because they are offering a non-Apple Mac. Period. Do you think that they would just be ignored if they were offering a $500 MacBook clone? Sigh.

I try to avoid pointing out the obvious, but you either need it pointed out or are simply refusing to acknowledge it, perhaps realizing that it simply blows your argument away. Here's a fact: the tower computer is the single biggest selling type of computer on the market. Period. I think this mid-range Mac clone has generated a lot of interest because it's something Apple, bizarrely enough, lacks. They don't lack laptops so I think a $500 MacBook clone would generate interest, but not the kind of buzz we're seeing here.

[irnchriz]

So, Mr Joe Public hears about this from a friend and orders one of these thinking that its a cheap way into getting a Mac. Apple release a point update and you download it (because your not so mac savvy) and it screws your install. He calls Apple (well, he has a Leopard License with his computer) and they laugh their ass off at him down the phone. He then calls Psystar who will probably have been shut down by Apple by then. He is now the proud owner of an expensive PC.

[murphyweb]

Agree completely on all points. I GLADLY pay a bit of a premium to have the Apple experience. Hardware and Software both.

Comments like the above really make me laugh sometimes.

I was a PC user for years and of course had issues from time to time, usually driver issues and conflicts with windows. The best PC i ever owned however is the one I built myself, this had no warranty or support but lasted me years - of course easy to upgrade and swap graphics cards, memory and processors etc.. Buying a tower with no warranty does not mean an inferior product.

I started my Mac life three years ago when I bought a MacMini to act as my media server for my home theatre set-up (the only reason why I went Apple was form factor and lack of noise). Last year I bought an Apple TV, Airport Extreme, 2x Airport Express's a Mac Book and a Mac Book Pro.

In the last year I have suffered more wireless related issues than I ever have, constantly dropping connections, My Airport Express just stopped working, dead. My wives Mac Book crashes sometimes and has to be rebooted and she spent quite a while after the leopard upgrade not being able to type!! - Apple why release software that you have not tested on all hardware?

But best of all is my Mac Book Pro, It overheats far too much and freezes, only a reboot gets it working. My delete key no longer works (hardware issue as external keyboard works). And sometimes it crashes when I unplug the power cord. Forget the standard issues such as the warped lid that means it does not close properly (this is not a fault according to Apple) and the nice silver plastic wrist rest that rubs off with time.


Don't get me wrong, I doubt I will go back, I love using OSX and the Mac's do look great but please please please stop going on about this "it just works" rubbish and this "Apple experience". This may well have been the case 5 years ago (and I believe it was) but it certainly is not the case today. Now that Apple are a toy company instead of a computer company I think this will always be the case.

I am not saying they are worse than any other PC manufacturer but the way people talk on here they are some kind of computer god! Just not the case I am afraid.

[wheelhot]

I know there's been tons of disagreement on this thread, but at least Psystar has shown us just how cheap Apple computers COULD be, if Apple didn't lock us into buying their hardware and paying for their advertising, product placement and 5th Avenue flagship stores...

You dont understand, Apple is a HARDWARE company, the sell softwares also but they originated as a hardware company.

Seriously, would you think Apple could survive if they are selling Leopard right now at the price you are paying for? If Apple never sell hardwares, Leopard would be like Vista (with different packages and stuffs).

For you info, a user posted that Psycrap uses cheap materials for its casing. Yeah, the whole world know that Apple is overpricing their hardwares but part of the income they get from their hardwares goes to the development of OS X.

Seriously, people need to understand about they are paying premium for Mac because its to develop the next OS X R&D.

FYI, Google for hackintosh and you will find that Psystar is evil by selling other peoples work!. And they are to the public by giving false info. You cant really expand or upgrade your hackintosh unless there are drivers or (.kext) developed for it.

[Tulkas]

That's like saying Honda has a monopoly on Accords.

No, it is not. Accords are not unique enough of a line to be considered a separate market on their own. But, even if they were, would you accept an edict from Honda saying you could not buy a Honda engine and stick it in your Kia? Sure, there is a thriving after market for Honda owners. And if Honda tried to block sales of third party parts on their cars through some sort of EULA, that would not stand up in court.



Yes, it's called a market segment of which the Macintosh belongs...and Windows still holds what? 90+% share?

And MS has what percent within the overall, worldwide computer market, including mainframes, PDAs, Smart phones, embedded systems etc. Clearly, if you take a segment of this overall market, let's say desktop PC's, they are the monopoly player.

And within the Macintosh ecosystem, which is clearly a distinct and separate segment within the overall PC market, Apple owns the entire market.

Additional:
Actually, just saw a quote from a guy at Psystar
"What if Honda said that, after you buy their car, you could only drive it on the roads they said you could?"

[Dunks]

I don't know.

I get the feeling that apple would have produced a tower form factor by now if they wanted to. There must be a specific reason why they haven't.

Maybe they are afraid that people would only ever buy the cheapest mac that was user modifiable. I know that I probably would even though I really like the neatness and minimal design of the current iMac.

Maybe they are trying the make computing more about what happens on the screen and less about what happens inside the case.

Steve makes alot of good calls. It would be hard to think this is simply something he has not considered.

[lundy]

the answer is simple, Apple simply not interested in the market you are describing. If its big big enough and Apple has the resource, why wouldnt they do it? I dont think they are that stupid to ignore a "large market" if they think its a large market.

QFT.

iMac is cheaper and comes with a display.
Vast majority of customers do not care about "upgrades."
Vast majority do not want to futz with cables.
Vast majority do not even know what a video card IS.

The "$999 xMac" wouldn't sell as it does not come with a display.

The "$1500 xMac" wouldn't sell as the iMac is cheaper and DOES come with a display.

Put them side-by-side in the Apple Stores and the customer will buy the iMac the vast majority of the time. A big heavy tower, connecting cables, increased footprint, and no display far outweigh the "advantage" of "upgrading the video card" to the customer.

[piot]

Market share is simply the percentage of a given market total sales revenue that one company takes in a given period of time. The computing market has taken a downward turn lately and Apple, historically, tends to move units more consistently even during market downturns.

I have never mentioned market share. I am simply talking about sales... and the growth in sales. The computing market has NOT taken a downturn recently. Sales GROWTH has slowed.

The PC market has been growing for 30 years! I see no evidence of any previous downturn nor any of Apple sales remaining consistent during a ... 'downturn'.

Therefore, I think you can see how much Apple's recent "gains" have been exaggerated. I don't deny that Apple is getting more popular, but if there are less people buying, it's easier for a company to have larger slice of the pie, relatively speaking.

Nobody is exaggerating anything. There are not "less people buying". The whole pie is still getting LARGER. There is nothing "easier" in obtaining a larger slice.

Wow! I understand why you don't like bringing market share into the conversation. You don't seem to understand the basics behind it.

It doesn't mean Apple has doubled or tripled their sales.

Actually that is exactly what it does mean. Apple sales have increased by 122% in the last three years. For comparison... the PC has grown around 46%

I think this mid-range Mac clone has generated a lot of interest because it's something Apple, bizarrely enough, lacks.

A quick scan of the tech web tells me that the main topics of conversation are that this is an un-sanctioned clone and the possible legal implications.

I try to avoid pointing out the obvious, but you either need it pointed out or are simply refusing to acknowledge it, perhaps realizing that it simply blows your argument away. Here's a fact: the tower computer is the single biggest selling type of computer on the market. Period.

I feel that what you are pointing out is far from obvious. In the USA and the other mature PC markets laptops are expected to outsell desktops sometime this year. Look Ink let's get one thing straight .... I agree with you ..... in the sense that between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro there is a a big gap for a desktop Mac... without a screen. However I agree with "ros3ntan" that Apple has decided not to fill that void for business reasons and not through some glaring omission on their part.

I am pretty sure that the guys at Apple have access to a whole lot more industry figures than anyone here has. My guess is that, even though there is a market for your midi- tower, it is smaller than you think and (despite an overall growth in PC sales) is the one area that really is getting smaller.

Many people (business, education and consumers) are choosing laptops over desktops.
Apple has the tower 'workstation' market covered
The millions of midi-towers sitting in corporate cubicles is a market that Apple doesn't play in.
The iMac AIO is selling well.
So well that HP, Dell, Gateway and Sony sell similar systems.
The Mac Mini covers the low end user. (ie with less requirements than you)
If Apple built and sold the computer that you want how much would that cannibalise it's other systems?

Back to the pies! You are wrong. The whole PC pie is getting larger.... however the midi-tower slice of the pie is not.... in fact most of the evidence points to it shrinking.

This is making me rather hungry!

[wheelhot]

iMac is cheaper and comes with a display.
Vast majority of customers do not care about "upgrades."
Vast majority do not want to futz with cables.
Vast majority do not even know what a video card IS.

The "$999 xMac" wouldn't sell as it does not come with a display.

The "$1500 xMac" wouldn't sell as the iMac is cheaper and DOES come with a display.

Put them side-by-side in the Apple Stores and the customer will buy the iMac the vast majority of