Psystar sells Snow Leopard virtualization to third-parties

[AppleInsider]

In spite of an ongoing legal dispute with Apple, clone Mac maker Psystar Monday announced plans to license its virtualization technology for Mac OS X to third-party hardware vendors.

The new Psystar OEM Licensing Program will allow Intel machines to run Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard. The announcement is a bold move likely to catch the ire of Apple, which plans to start its trial against the Florida-based company in January 2010.

The new program will allow manufacturers to have hardware certified by Psystar, and allows use of the company's Darwin Universal Boot Loader. The software will allow manufacturers to install Snow Leopard by inserting the disc from Apple -- no additional steps would be necessary, the company said. The software supports up to six operating systems on one machine.

"Psystar's vision of open computing is to provide users with the freedom to choose which OS's they install on their hardware," the company said in a press release. "The Licensing Program will allow computer manufacturers the opportunity to ship the certified systems pre-configured with DUBL and OS of choice including Windows 7, Windows Vista and several flavors of Linux. These systems would also be compatible with Mac OS X Snow Leopard and receive normal software updates through the use of 'Safe Update" technology."

Details on the licensing program, including cost, were not immediately made available.

The company already offers non-sanctioned systems pre-installed with Snow Leopard. The company touts their hardware is "not a Mac, it's for everyone."



As Psystar and Apple prepare for their coming court date, the saga between the two companies has seen its share of twists and turns. Last week, a member of the Psystar defense team withdrew himself from the case.

Weeks ago, Apple requested that the court allow Snow Leopard to be included in the upcoming trial's relevant information. The motion was likely an effort by Apple to bring a separate suit, filed by Psystar against Apple in Florida over Snow Leopard. Apple's request, which would have re-opened the case's discovery period, was denied, and the trial remains on track for a January 2010 start date.

[mstone]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

The company already offers non-sanctioned systems pre-installed with Snow Leopard. The company touts their hardware is "not a Mac, it's for everyone."

We're sorry. An error has occurred while launching iTunes. Please contact your system administrator.

[Rot'nApple]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"Psystar's vision of open computing is to provide users with the freedom to choose which OS's they install on their hardware,"

I think I'll buy all of Psystar system's stock and pay them with "Condfederate" dollars (legal tender, albeit 1860 - 1865) or the well known "Monopoly" dollars, I haven't decided which. Afterall, it is MY vision of open monetary which is to provide consumers with the freedom to choose which currency they prefer in their wallet!

[charlituna]

who wants to be that by the end of the day Apple will have filed for an injunction prohibiting Psystar from moving forward with this brilliant plan until after both trials are over. Just in case anyone would be stupid enough to join up before then

[Maestro64]

man they will not stop, so either this guy is completely delusional or he knows something about the law that apple does not know.

In the end apple will probably prevail, and it will cost apple millions and they will get no money form this company.

[Lemon Bon Bon.]

Psystar are dead.

Lemon Bon Bon.

[Gazoobee]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

This ad is hilarious.

It's so funny how it *looks* like an Apple ad, yet is poorly executed and "cheap" with a lot of mistakes.
Wow, is that a perfect metaphor for Psystar itself or what?!

Why would I buy anything from a company that can't spell anything properly, and who's advertising "artist" doesn't even know how to make a drop shadow?
(don't even get me started on the box)

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by Maestro64

man they will not stop, so either this guy is completely delusional or he knows something about the law that apple does not know.

thinks he knows. as in he thinks he can pull off some 'EULAs are bogus so legally I can do what I want" trick and be a hero

but he's not. and by making money off this DCMA violation he's just digging himself in and bringing friends.

and the crazy part is that either his lawyers don't know what he's announced and will drop him, or they will stick by him and ruin themselves in the process

[ulfoaf]

Originally Posted by Maestro64

man they will not stop, so either this guy is completely delusional or he knows something about the law that apple does not know.

In the end apple will probably prevail, and it will cost apple millions and they will get no money form this company.

Truer words were never spoken. I can't believe they have a legal leg to stand on. They will lose, and you are right, they won't have any money! Apple will spend lots of money, but it is probably worth it to protect their brand.

[MyopiaRocks]

So if I take Psystar's program and resell it without giving them a cut, will Psystar sue me for breaking EULA?

[quinney]

I wish Apple could invent some non-spoofable hardware chip to build into their devices to thwart all the parasites enriching themselves on Apple's software.

[DJRumpy]

I have to wonder why they simply don't get an injunction against these folks. This has gotten the point where it's gone beyond ridiculous and entered just plain bizarre crazy.

[mcloki]

What is the difference between this and a Hackintosh?

Other than the DIY ethos of a Hackintosh and a "solution" like Pystars. These guys are just trying to monetize a "grassroots DIY movement out there".

This is going to get interesting. I don't really know where I stand on this one. I can see both sides of the argument.

Then again Apple can destroy the entire Hackintosh movement by lowering their prices. It's somewhat difficult. Technically speaking and is only woth the effort if you're building an i7 type machine. You don't build a mini competitor as a Hackintosh.

[Wiggin]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

The new program will allow manufacturers to have hardware certified by Psystar...

Anyone else see the irony here? The hardware has to be approved by Psystar before they will license their software to you. So they are in total control of what hardware their software gets installed on. Granted, they probably aren't offering their software retail, but isn't it one of their arguments that license agreements aren't enforceable and that Apple is using the license agreement to maintain their monopoly hold on a "market" (never mind that Mac hardware is not a "market" in and of itself)?

Can we not argue that Psytar has a monopoly in non-Apple branded computers that run Mac OS and sue them for illegally leveraging their monopoly by not selling their software to me so I can install it on any computer I want to?

[Wiggin]

Originally Posted by mcloki

What is the difference between this and a Hackintosh?

Other than the DIY ethos of a Hackintosh and a "solution" like Pystars. These guys are just trying to monetize a "grassroots DIY movement out there".

This is going to get interesting. I don't really know where I stand on this one. I can see both sides of the argument.

Then again Apple can destroy the entire Hackintosh movement by lowering their prices. It's somewhat difficult. Technically speaking and is only woth the effort if you're building an i7 type machine. You don't build a mini competitor as a Hackintosh.

Legally, probably not much difference. Financially, Apple isn't going to go after someone making one or two Hackintoshes. But has soon as you scale up the operation as a for-profit business, then you'll get their attention.

And if Apple wanted to destroy the Hackintosh movement, they wouldn't do it by lowering prices, they do it my explicitly locking the OS to the hardware. So if you support Hackintoshes, you should (in my opinion) be very much against Psystar. Because if Psystart wins, Apple will make it all but impossible for a hobbiest to create a Hackintosh.

[city]

I have the same problem. My building has vehicle parking free for its customers, which is basically a subsidy that's built into the tenant's rent. People visiting my neighbors can't understand why they can't also park there and park there for free. Even though there's a posted "Parking for this Building Only" policy, there's a posted price for "others" too. That's needed to establish the value and forewarn. Apple $30 price is really an upgrade price. I think they need a full version price that about the same as an iMac so has to clearly establish its value. Otherwise, how do you determine damages?

[webpoet73]

Originally Posted by mcloki

What is the difference between this and a Hackintosh?

Other than the DIY ethos of a Hackintosh and a "solution" like Pystars. These guys are just trying to monetize a "grassroots DIY movement out there".

This is going to get interesting. I don't really know where I stand on this one. I can see both sides of the argument.

Then again Apple can destroy the entire Hackintosh movement by lowering their prices. It's somewhat difficult. Technically speaking and is only woth the effort if you're building an i7 type machine. You don't build a mini competitor as a Hackintosh.

Apple does not have an "OEM" version of their OS, whereas Microsoft does that allows the OS to be installed on a machine for re-sale. There is a big difference in licensing of these different OSes. If Pysstar sold the computer with the OS not pre-installed, then they might have a better chance surviving the lawsuit.

[rbonner]

Originally Posted by Wiggin

Anyone else see the irony here? The hardware has to be approved by Psystar before they will license their software to you. So they are in total control of what hardware their software gets installed on.

I wonder if they would sue anyone who releases their patch bios for sale?

[mcloki]

Originally Posted by webpoet73

Apple does not have an "OEM" version of their OS, whereas Microsoft does that allows the OS to be installed on a machine for re-sale. There is a big difference in licensing of these different OSes. If Pysstar sold the computer with the OS not pre-installed, then they might have a better chance surviving the lawsuit.

My read of the Press release was exactly that. They are "validating your hardware" so that it will run OSX, but not selling you OSX installed. You have to do that yourself.

Apple tying their OS directly to hardware would be a logistical nightmare for Apple. As soon as there was a hardware dongle/ROM to take advantage of. Someone would clone it, making it even easier to create a hackintosh.

It's an interesting dilemma. Only a constantly connected, verifying OS would work, but I'm not sure too many people would like that. A bit too Big Brother.

[Foo2]

"Its not a Mac. Its for everyone."

Psystar thinkin' differ'nt!

[souliisoul]

I have watched this with mixed emotions, since I love when the little man takes on the BIG dog, but at the same time, I DO not want Apple to become like MS.

For MS when you have operating system issues, you do not know who to contact, since you will get the running around in a loop from software to hardware vendor.

Apple's model has shown to work very effectively and I for one do not want it to change.

For Psystar, i see behavior that is more emotional, then rational and this will probably cause them more harm, then good. You can fight a good fight, but remember what you are fighting for and is it worth it.

[tawilson]

Originally Posted by Gazoobee

This ad is hilarious.

It's so funny how it *looks* like an Apple ad, yet is poorly executed and "cheap" with a lot of mistakes.
Wow, is that a perfect metaphor for Psystar itself or what?!

Why would I buy anything from a company that can't spell anything properly, and who's advertising "artist" doesn't even know how to make a drop shadow?
(don't even get me started on the box)

Haven't Psystar broken copyright law by taking and modifying Apple's advertising copy and using it for their own commercial purposes.

Psystar really need to just die, what they are doing is deplorable. They have the strange ideal that does not fit into the real legal world within which they operate.

[justflybob]

Soon, when you look in any dictionary, you will be able to find "Psystar" as an appropriate definition of the word "insanity."

[teckstud]

Apple has no time persuing such frivolous lawsuits as this or Palm.
Needs to go after the SuperFresh Apple sign instead.

[piot]

Originally Posted by souliisoul

I have watched this with mixed emotions, since I love when the little man takes on the BIG dog, but at the same time, I DO not want Apple to become like MS.

I appreciate your sentiments and think that is one of the main reasons why many people have been rooting for Psystar.

How would you feel if Psystar was the company with their OWN operating system, sold in conjunction with their hardware... and Apple came steaming in and based a business on selling Psystar's OS with cheaper hardware?

[souliisoul]

Originally Posted by teckstud

Apple has no time persuing such frivolous lawsuits as this or Palm.
Needs to go after the SuperFresh Apple sign instead.

you are so funny with your witty digs at Apple

[Shookster]

Originally Posted by Gazoobee

Why would I buy anything from a company that can't spell anything properly, and who's advertising "artist" doesn't even know how to make a drop shadow?
(don't even get me started on the box)

Isn't the box an official Apple one? It looks official to me.

[KingOfSomewhereHot]

Originally Posted by mcloki

What is the difference between this and a Hackintosh?.

The difference is a person at home screwing around with hardware and software he owns for his own amusement... vs... a commercial operation trying to profit by re-selling someone ELSES product (without the expressed written consent of this station and MLB! ).

[souliisoul]

Originally Posted by piot

I appreciate your sentiments and think that is one of the main reasons why many people have been rooting for Psystar.

How would you feel if Psystar was the company with their OWN operating system, sold in conjunction with their hardware... and Apple came steaming in and based a business on selling Psystar's OS with cheaper hardware?

I think already answered your question by saying, I do not want Apple to become like MS.

On a serious note, I buy a premium product, since I demand the highest quality of product/service from the company. To be frank, I would not purchase that Apple product, if that was being offered. Same reason, I will not buy from Psystar.

[Gazoobee]

Originally Posted by tawilson

Haven't Psystar broken copyright law by taking and modifying Apple's advertising copy and using it for their own commercial purposes. ...

I am far from an expert on that topic, but it seems to me that this ad directly implies that they are a re-seller of the product in the picture (The Apple Box Set), which they aren't, and that this usage is probably illegitimate in some sense.

To Psystar, the ad is probably intended to say "buy our computer and we will install this product on it for you," but the majority of people looking at the ad would get the impression that Psystar is an authorised re-seller of Apple's products.

The ad copy doesn't to me seem to be Apple's (even if you correct the punctuation), but the picture is definitely Apple's IP.

[Gazoobee]

Originally Posted by Shookster

Isn't the box an official Apple one? It looks official to me.

It is an official box, (which is part of the problem), but when I said "don't get me started on the box," I was referring to the amateurish Photoshop job on it though.
(Check out the "O's" and the "D's")

[webpoet73]

Originally Posted by mcloki

My read of the Press release was exactly that. They are "validating your hardware" so that it will run OSX, but not selling you OSX installed. You have to do that yourself.

Apple tying their OS directly to hardware would be a logistical nightmare for Apple. As soon as there was a hardware dongle/ROM to take advantage of. Someone would clone it, making it even easier to create a hackintosh.

It's an interesting dilemma. Only a constantly connected, verifying OS would work, but I'm not sure too many people would like that. A bit too Big Brother.

That's true for their "partners." But I thought that the Psystar computers had OS X pre-installed? I haven't been to their website since the first OC came out last March or so...

I am sure Apple will be interested in their Darwin Universal Boot Loader and if it contains any hacks into the OS...

On an episode of Tekzilla, they showed Colleen (from TWiT) building a Hackintosh using some USB boot loader that you attach directly to the motherboard... the interesting thing is that as difficult as it is to make one of these, the general public will a) not ever know about this and b) won't care because it not the same experience as using the official Mac hardware.

[ascii]

Originally Posted by KingOfSomewhereHot

The difference is a person at home screwing around with hardware and software he owns for his own amusement... vs... a commercial operation trying to profit by re-selling someone ELSES product (without the expressed written consent of this station and MLB! ).

That's right, the law and tax departments in various countries differentiate between doing something as a hobby or as a business. For example you can make backups of your own DVDs but you can't print hundreds of copies and sell them out the trunk of your car.

[Gazoobee]

Originally Posted by Wiggin

Anyone else see the irony here? The hardware has to be approved by Psystar before they will license their software to you. So they are in total control of what hardware their software gets installed on. Granted, they probably aren't offering their software retail, but isn't it one of their arguments that license agreements aren't enforceable and that Apple is using the license agreement to maintain their monopoly hold on a "market" (never mind that Mac hardware is not a "market" in and of itself)?

Can we not argue that Psytar has a monopoly in non-Apple branded computers that run Mac OS and sue them for illegally leveraging their monopoly by not selling their software to me so I can install it on any computer I want to?

Brilliant point. love it.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by ascii

That's right, the law and tax departments in various countries differentiate between doing something as a hobby or as a business. For example you can make backups of your own DVDs but you can't print hundreds of copies and sell them out the trunk of your car.

That was probably Psystar's former business ...

[DCJ001]

Originally Posted by Gazoobee

This ad is hilarious.

It's so funny how it *looks* like an Apple ad, yet is poorly executed and "cheap" with a lot of mistakes.
Wow, is that a perfect metaphor for Psystar itself or what?!

Why would I buy anything from a company that can't spell anything properly, and who's advertising "artist" doesn't even know how to make a drop shadow?
(don't even get me started on the box)

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

[Hudson1]

I can't see any significant hardware vendor jumping on the Prystar offer. Why would they risk getting caught in the cross-hairs of the Apple-Prystar legal dispute where they could instantly become a party to Apple's lawsuit?

[Quadra 610]

Ballsy. But oh-so-stupid.

[ghostface147]

bunch of morons

[Gazoobee]

Originally Posted by DCJ001

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Okay so "who's" is the wrong usage, (many apologies,) but then I'm not writing ad copy for a living am I?

Besides there is a heck of a lot more wrong with that ad (in both the copy and the images), than a single word use mistake.

"customizable"? "upgradable"? changing the shading on the box but forgetting about the centre of the closed letters on the front? using a radial drop shadow as a stroke? leaving out the apostrophe's in "It's"? top-light effect on the ad as a whole, with a sidelight effect on the button? purple as a highlight colour even though it is probably the only colour that *doesn't* appear on the box? the lack of a space on the last bullet point? the fact that the last bullet point fades into the background? period(s) in the first bullet point, but none on the rest?

This ad is strictly amateur.