Apple picks at Psystar counterclaim as court info goes secret

[AppleInsider]

Apple has responded to Psystar's latest copyright abuse claims against it by pointing out technicalities; simultaneously, both have successfully won approval for a protection order that keeps some of their discoveries out of each other's view.

The latest shot in the conflict between the Cupertino-based Mac maker and its unsanctioned, clone-building nuisance was exchanged on Wednesday when Apple submitted its response to Psystar's amended complaint, which accused Apple of abusing its end-user license agreement and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by forbidding third-party hardware from running Mac OS X.

Submitted through a Northern District of California court in San Francisco, the 13-page response unsurprisingly denies Psystar's accusations point-for-point but takes issue with Psystar's requests that the court find Apple's claimed copyrights untenable until it no longer interprets the license or the DMCA as valid.

Simply stated, Apple claims that the Mac clone builder hasn't asked for declaratory relief, or its own rights, in the newest form of the complaint. The move doesn't necessarily force a further amendment by Psystar, but does leave room for Apple to voice its opinion further on into the case.

Regardless of any possible modifications to the case, the discovery phase that follows next is now closer to reality.

A day before the Apple response, Northern District Judge William Alsup approved the protective order requested by both sides. The decision prevents anyone but the attorneys and others necessarily involved in any court proceedings from viewing information marked as confidential.

While most of the case will remain public, the order will prevent either company from obtaining trade secrets, such as source code for Mac OS X, in the course of collecting evidence before they go to trial -- though both will have to prove that the information is important enough to be worth protecting, the judge said.

[MacMad]

I really don't understand how Psystar can even have a case.

If I purchased a Sony PS3 game and then got home and found it didn't play on a Nintendo Wii, how could I take Sony to court for this?

Apple's software/OS etc, clearly states on the box the system requirements... a Mac machine.

What am I missing here?

[jenkman91]

Originally Posted by MacMad

I really don't understand how Psystar can even have a case.

If I purchased a Sony PS3 game and then got home and found it didn't play on a Nintendo Wii, how could I take Sony to court for this?

Apple's software/OS etc, clearly states on the box the system requirements... a Mac machine.

What am I missing here?

I agree with you 100%

[jenkman91]

Why is Apple letting this happen?

I by macs for a reason ( not because its shiny [for all you win fanboys who think that is the reason])

I use macs because they use their own software and hardware.

for Psystar to keep operating as a company that sells third party mac machines is crazy.

I understand that Apple wants to gain growth in the computer market but, this is not how you do it.

What Psystar is doing is illegal!!!

they are ignoring Apple's copyright and user agreements.

[MacMad]

Originally Posted by jenkman91

I agree with you 100%

Then there are at least two of us who are really confused!

I know the legal system in the U.S. is a funny thing, but, well, I just really don't get it.

[jenkman91]

Originally Posted by MacMad

Then there are at least two of us who are really confused!

I know the legal system in the U.S. is a funny thing, but, well, I just really don't get it.

HAHA

I don't understand why Apple is letting Psystar getting away with this.

Like I said in my comment: Pystar is going against the copyright and user agreements that Apple set in stone.

I don't have a problem if somebody does a homebrew mod on a machine and is able to put OS X on it for fun.

But to go and start out a company to sell OS X is f*** up. It just boggles my mind at how they are getting away with this.

If I was in the Apple legal dept. I would be raising hell, and doing everything I can to shutdown this company

[MacMad]

Originally Posted by jenkman91

I don't have a problem if somebody does a homebrew mod on a machine and is able to put OS X on it for fun.

Personally, I have a problem with this too. I think if you want Apple's OS, you should buy the Mac that was designed to run it. But for sure, the idea that a company does this and then sells it to make a profit is... well... plain illegal.

Though the fact that a court is even hearing the case makes me worried for Apple.

[jenkman91]

Originally Posted by MacMad

Personally, I have a problem with this too. I think if you want Apple's OS, you should buy the Mac that was designed to run it. But for sure, the idea that a company does this and then sells it to make a profit is... well... plain illegal.

Though the fact that a court is even hearing the case makes me worried for Apple.

True... But what if one purchases OS X legally, then it should be okay.

oops, I think I just said what Psystar said in their claim

I still think apple should put a bullet into Pystar's head.

Thats like Microsoft buying Apple machines then selling it with VISTA on it. :X

(blah blah blah) I know Microcrap is a software comapny.....(its a metaphor) (for all you win fanboys trying to find something wrong in my commnet)

your welcome

[aaarrrgggh]

Originally Posted by jenkman91

Why is Apple letting this happen?
What Psystar is doing is illegal!!!

NO

Psystar is violating Apple's licensing terms which is a civil matter. Psystar is claiming either that Apple's licensing terms are not binding, or that their claim of copyright protection under DMCA is not applicable... can't quite tell which.

I prefer Apple hardware, and I am well aware of the fact that Apple's strengths are in no small part due to the fact that they only consider about 30 models to be supported by their OS.

I also prefer to only pay $100 for "point upgrades" rather than them costing $500.

But, long-term, I don't think it is best for Apple or the industry to block the hackintosh or virtualization. There are too many benefits. I also hate the idea that a EULA can be binding if it is more than one paragraph of plain english.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh

But, long-term, I don't think it is best for Apple or the industry to block the hackintosh or virtualization. There are too many benefits. I also hate the idea that a EULA can be binding if it is more than one paragraph of plain english.

Apple has yet to go after the Hackintosh community. They have only gone after a company that selling Mac clones without their consent. I think we'll find when all is said and done that a company can't act as a reseller of wares if the copyright holder doesn't wish them too. Reselling the physcial media is not the problem, reselling the installed media which is being transfer (read: copied) from the disc to the HDD and then selling it is the issue. This never had anything to do with the end user.

[jenkman91]

Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh

NO


I also prefer to only pay $100 for "point upgrades" rather than them costing $500.

What do you mean by "point upgrades"?

You can buy a mac machine and upgrade it yourself for a cheaper price than what Apple charges.

Yes, Apple makes it hard to access some parts of their machines, but they don't totally stop you from actually putting more RAM in your machine.

It would have cost me $200 for a RAM upgrade from Apple. I bought the Mac without the optional upgrade. Went to NEWEGG.com and bought the RAM for more than half of what Apple was charging.

[Walney]

Originally Posted by jenkman91

You can buy a mac machine and upgrade it yourself for a cheaper price than what Apple charges.

Yes, Apple makes it hard to access some parts of their machines, but they don't totally stop you from actually putting more RAM in your machine.

...unless it's a Mini, where they are a bit sniffy about you doing the upgrade yourself

[Chris_CA]

Originally Posted by jenkman91

Why is Apple letting this happen?

Hello? Did you read this article (or the dozens of other related articles)?
Why do you think Apple is "letting this happen?"
You do realize this is a court case in which Apple is not simply "letting it happen?"

[Chris_CA]

Originally Posted by jenkman91

What do you mean by "point upgrades"?

10 point 3
10 point 4
10 point 5

[jenkman91]

Originally Posted by Chris_CA

10 point 3
10 point 4
10 point 5

good point. I did not understand what I was reading at that point in time. He should have said the different versions of OS X. less confusing

[jenkman91]

Originally Posted by Chris_CA

Hello? Did you read this article (or the dozens of other related articles)?
Why do you think Apple is "letting this happen?"
You do realize this is a court case in which Apple is not simply "letting it happen?"

If Apple was really trying, Psystar would only be a faint memory now.

[jenkman91]

Originally Posted by Walney

...unless it's a Mini, where they are a bit sniffy about you doing the upgrade yourself

But, its still possible. I have done memory upgrades numerous times on my mac minis. Yes, its difficult, but not impossible. All you need is patience, and the right tool

[hillstones]

What confidential info would Psystar even have? How to build a piece of crap computer?

The fine print on their website is interesting. When you buy one of their Mac clones, they give you a retail copy of Leopard. However, that disc is USELESS because it will not install on the Mac clone they sold you. They preinstall (or hack) OS X to get it installed. If you need to recover your system, you have to contact them and submit a form requesting their "special" software disc that will allow you to re-install Mac OS X. Also, they state that Boot Camp doesn't work because that only works with Apple-specific hardware. So it is clear based on their fine print that their computers are not truely compatible with OS X.

[Archipellago]

go Pystar.... here's hoping.!

[elroth]

Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh

NOI also prefer to only pay $100 for "point upgrades" rather than them costing $500

Are you crazy or a troll? Vista costs $500, each Mac OS upgrade is $129.

The only reason they number them 10.1, 10,2, etc. is to keep the number 10 in the name. They could easily have named them 10, 11, 12, etc. They are not equivalent to other software makers' point upgrades.

[sflocal]

Originally Posted by Archipellago

go Pystar.... here's hoping.!

Hey everyone! The troll has returned!

[NasserAE]

Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh

NO

Psystar is violating Apple's licensing terms which is a civil matter. Psystar is claiming either that Apple's licensing terms are not binding, or that their claim of copyright protection under DMCA is not applicable... can't quite tell which.

I think the judge already dismissed the licensing term violation part. Psystar are now claiming that Apple is abusing the copyright law by limiting Mac OS installation to their own machines and they want Mac OS copyright to be invalidated based on that. If they succeed, which I think is impossible, then Apple cannot have control over the distribution on their Mac OS and Psystar (and anyone else) can do whatever they want with the software without Apple permission.

[stevielee]

Originally Posted by Archipellago

go Pystar.... here's hoping.!

With the recently announced, Nehelem Mac Pro's, Apple has just re-enforced the growing demand for a more economical, third party desktop hardware solution that can run OSX - Apple's EULA be damned.

Charging $2499 for an entry level Mac Pro that has only a single socket 2.66GHz Nehalem Xeon processor (retailing for around $350), is the ultimate in hubris from Apple in these harsh economic times.
The New 4-core, entry level 2.66GHz Mac Pro has about $1200-1400 in hardware cost total - a mark-up of anywhere from 80-100% by Apple. The same is true with the New 8-Core Mac Pro that is going for $3299.
It sports (2), low level, 2.26 Xeon processors - that retail for around $350 each ($700 for both). The mark-up for these machines is well over 100%.
At least my 2008, entry level, 8-core 2.8GHz Penryn Mac Pro had (2) $750 ($1500) chips when it was released at $2799 - a far better value in hardware cost.

Apple, and all of you die hard Appleholics can scream bloody murder at pip-squeek upstarts like Psystar till you turn blue in the face. As long as Apple insists on increasing it's profit margins, and price gouging for generic (PC) hardware that is readily and affordably available on the open market, then the we are going to see more and more challengers to Apple's Hardware monopoly - both personally and publicly - regardless of Apple's pathologically litigious behavior.

And don't give me that old " If you don't like what Apple is charging - then don't but it" crap. In reality - most of us are locked into OSX as an operating system - simply because of the fact that we have already invested thousands of $$$ in OSX compatible software throughout the years. Apple knows and is exploiting this to the hilt - that is why they have become even more aggressive in applying their "Apple Tax" on all of their new OSX hardware. But the Mac natives are getting mighty restless in these fragile economic days.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=95870
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=660643

If you AppleTologist are up in arms over the heathen Psystar, and it's "crappy" Mac clones, you had better buckle up - cause it's gonna be a very, very bumpy ride for ya'll in the coming months. EFI-X Here we come!!!

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by stevielee

Charging $2499 for an entry level Mac Pro that has only a single socket 2.66GHz Nehalem Xeon processor (retailing for around $350), is the ultimate in hubris from Apple in these harsh economic times.

Geez! can we get some proof from Intel as to what they are selling these new Xeons for per 1000 before making such claims?!

If you AppleTologist are up in arms over the heathen Psystar, and it's "crappy" Mac clones, you had better buckle up - cause it's gonna be a very, very bumpy ride for ya'll in the coming months. EFI-X Here we come!!!

EFI-X is great and legal, proving you have a supported MoBo. The only issue is if companies sell Mac OS X pre-installed on machines using the chip, like the EFIX USA tried to do before EFI-X rightly quashed them. If Psystar offer this solution with an uninstalled disc of Mac OS X, I see no reason why that would illegal, but that isn't what they doing, is it?

[stevielee]

[QUOTE=solipsism;1386215]Geez! can we get some proof from Intel as to what they are selling these new Xeons for per 1000 before making such claims?!

Proof: see 2 posts below
Sorry for the double posting...

[NasserAE]

Originally Posted by stevielee

[
Proof:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_N...roarchitecture)

The "entry level" 2.66GHz Quad core Mac Pro has a Xeon W 3500 series Chip that is for SP motherboards only, and sells for around $375.00.
Do the math here. Outside of the processor ($375) and motherboard ($250 Max), what other
hardware components included in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro, that would bring the total hardware cost anything over $1.500 at best?
The same is true for the 8-core 2.26GHz Mac Pro. As you can clearly see by the Nehalem pricing charts, the 2.26GHz chip is going for $378 each in batches of 1,000. I would guess that Apple
was able to get even better pricing than that.

The new Mac Pro's are one of the worst value-to-performance ratios that Apple has ever released in their high-end desktop line.

Unless everyone else (Dell, HP etc.) follows suit and sets their upcoming Xeon Nehelem workstation prices similar to Apple's HUGE mark-ups (highly unlikely in this economy), then
Apple will be all alone in shamelessly doubling their profit margins on hardware, at their "loyal" consumers expense.

Apple could get away with price-gouging like this when they used proprietary PPC processors.
Not anymore. We can now all see pretty much what it cost to "build a mac" from scratch, and it's not anywhere near what Apple is charging. Keep it up Apple. Talk about killing the goose here.

I suggest you visit Dell website and configure a machine to match Mac Pro specs. The price is within $100 of Mac Pro. Try it and tell us what you get please.

[stevielee]

[QUOTE=solipsism;1386215]Geez! can we get some proof from Intel as to what they are selling these new Xeons for per 1000 before making such claims?!

Proof:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?...e)&redirect=no

The "entry level" 2.66GHz Quad core Mac Pro has a Xeon W 3500 series Chip that is for SP motherboards only, and sells for around $375.00.
Do the math here. Outside of the processor ($375) and motherboard ($250 Max), what other
hardware components included in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro, that would bring the total hardware cost to anything over $1.500 at best?
The same is true for the 8-core 2.26GHz Mac Pro. As you can clearly see by the Nehalem pricing charts, the 2.26GHz chip is going for $378 each - in batches of 1,000. I would guess that Apple
was able to get even better pricing than those listed.

The new Mac Pro's are one of the worst value-to-performance ratio hardware that Apple has ever released in their high-end desktop line thus far.

Unless everyone else (Dell, HP etc.) follows suit and sets their upcoming Xeon Nehelem workstation prices similar to Apple's HUGE mark-ups (highly unlikely in this economy), then
Apple will be all alone in inexplicably doubling their profit margins on hardware, at their "loyal", "pro" customers expense.

Apple could get away with price-gouging like this when they used proprietary PPC processors.
Not anymore. We can now all see pretty much what it cost to "build a mac" from scratch, and it's not anywhere near what Apple is charging. Keep it up Apple. Talk about killing the goose here.

[hillstones]

Originally Posted by stevielee

Apple could get away with price-gouging like this when they used proprietary PPC processors.

Pretty clueless, aren't you? Apple didn't price gouge with the Power Macs. In fact, the entry level Power Mac typically started at $1,499. Configure a PC with matching specs of the Mac Pro and you will see a close match in price. So if you don't like it, don't buy it. The Mac Pro is so much more of a machine than any of the prior Power Macs, and most of those cheap PC's that you refer to.

[TBell]

If by letting you mean not taking an army down there and blowing up Psystar's building, I suppose Apple is letting Psystar get away with Copyright INfringement. Otherwise, Apple is doing the only legal thing it can: sue Psystar.

Originally Posted by jenkman91

Why is Apple letting this happen?

[Chris_CA]

Originally Posted by jenkman91

If Apple was really trying, Psystar would only be a faint memory now.

Really? How exactly would Apple speed it up?

[MacMad]

Originally Posted by stevielee

And don't give me that old " If you don't like what Apple is charging - then don't but it" crap. In reality - most of us are locked into OSX as an operating system - simply because of the fact that we have already invested thousands of $$$ in OSX compatible software throughout the years.

I don't really understand your point. Earlier in your post you say you have a 2008, entry level, 8-core 2.8GHz Penryn Mac Pro which cost you $2799, and you say it is better value than the new models with their respective pricing...

... so what are you moaning about? You are "locked into" the Mac OS, but locked in with a great machine and have to pay around $130 whenever that OS is upgraded by Apple. In your case, if you don't like what Apple charges for new hardware releases, you really don't have to buy it.

Why on earth do people think that Apple should have to charge lower amounts for their product??? Of course, we'd all love it if they significantly dropped their prices, but their prices are what they are.

Just because they price high doesn't mean another company should be allowed to break copyright laws.

I would like an Omega watch. Currently, I can't afford one. Should I scream bloody murder about it? Should another company be allowed to rip off any of Omega patents, for example, and put out a cheap Omega clone that reaps the benefits of Omega's research and expertise?

Don't be silly.

[stevielee]

[QUOTE=NasserAE;1386242]I suggest you visit Dell website and configure a machine to match Mac Pro specs. The price is within $100 of Mac Pro. Try it and tell us what you get please.[/QUOTE

WRONG!. Dell has not released a desktop Workstation on the Nehalem platform as of yet. Only Apple has with the Mac Pro line. The one you sited that is "within $100 of Mac Pro" comes with the previous generation's "Harpertown Xeon chips which still retails for $750 or more each. Dell is NOT charging 2.5K for a Workstation with a $350 single processor, and a $60.00 rebranded Nvidia 9500GT video card. There would be a revolt if they did.

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Intel-Quad-C...3286.m20.l1116

When Dell announces it's own Nehalem platform Workstation later this month, it will most likely offer much higher end processor variants (@ higher clocks) for around the same cost as the new Mac Pro's (providing a better performance-to-value ratio than Apple's), or a lower priced entry level option equivalent to Apple's 2.66GHz SP, for less than 2K . Dell, as well as other high-end Workstation maker, will be forced to reflect the actual hardware costs for the simple fact that in PC-Land, anyone can go and build for themselves the very same spec'ed out Xeon Workstations for about half the cost of Apple's entry-level pricing of $2500 (Nehalem processors included).

Apple was the first to show it's hand in it's Xeon Nehelem pricing structure. Watch for the rest of the PC pack to take full advantage of Apple's arrogant and exclusive OSX "Tax" by seriously undercutting them by at least 30-50%.

Read: "What is Apple smoking?"
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/2009-03-blog.html

[stevielee]

[QUOTE=MacMad;1386291]

"Just because they price high doesn't mean another company should be allowed to break copyright laws. "

Well...what in the hell do you think is driving folks to seek an "alternative" machine to run OSX on in the first place? Could it be Apple's price-gouging perhaps????

The more Apple tries to maximize it's profit margins on their hardware, the more there will be hackers, cloners, EFI dongle companies etc...


"Don't be silly." you say?

Silly is paying $1000 more than it's actually worth in hardware cost just because it comes embalmed in aluminum and sports a piece of fruit -with a bite out of it - logo. The bite is coming to be symbolized more and more as a "premium Apple tax bite out of our wallets".

Psystar is just the beginning. This OSX closed loop crappola is about to be busted wide open.
You can take your EULA and......
My next Mac is going to be a state-of-the-art PC that will run OSX faster and cheaper than any
Aluminum entombed, monetary sink hole.
http://www.testfreaks.com/blog/revie...b-v1-reviewed/

[MacMad]

Originally Posted by stevielee

Well...what in the hell do you think is driving folks to seek an "alternative" machine to run OSX on in the first place? Could it be Apple's price-gouging perhaps????

Silly is paying $1000 more than it's actually work because it comes embalmed in aluminum and sports a piece of fruit with a bite out of it logo. The bite is coming to be symbolized more and more as a "premium Apple bite out of our wallets".

Psystar is just the beginning. This OSX closed loop crappola is about to be busted wide open.
You can take your EULA and...... My next Mac is going to be a state-of-the-art PC that will run OSX faster and cheaper than any Aluminum entombed, monetary sink hole.

Dude, you gotta get that anger under control.

You are right when you say the high prices drive the cloners. They see a way to turn a profit without doing any real work (they are not designing their own system). But whatever the reason for cloning Mac's OS, it is probably illegal! It is (I certainly hope) breaking copyright laws.

I don't know what job you have, but wouldn't you speak to a lawyer if someone ripped off your work and then sold it to your boss cheaper?

If Psystar lose then it will be the end... no other company would be stupid enough to try it and face the lawsuit.

Either way, good luck with your next Mac that is a PC. If you are happy with a PC then I am happy for you. I wish my tastes were as cheap

[stevielee]

[QUOTE=MacMad;1386321]Dude, you gotta get that anger under control.


"Dude", you gotta get that little smilie thing under control!

Aren't they actually "copyrighted" by someone?

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by stevielee

Proof:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?...e)&redirect=no

The "entry level" 2.66GHz Quad core Mac Pro has a Xeon W 3500 series Chip that is for SP motherboards only, and sells for around $375.00.
Do the math here. Outside of the processor ($375) and motherboard ($250 Max), what other
hardware components included in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro, that would bring the total hardware cost to anything over $1.500 at best?
The same is true for the 8-core 2.26GHz Mac Pro. As you can clearly see by the Nehalem pricing charts, the 2.26GHz chip is going for $378 each - in batches of 1,000. I would guess that Apple
was able to get even better pricing than those listed.

The new Mac Pro's are one of the worst value-to-performance ratio hardware that Apple has ever released in their high-end desktop line thus far.

Unless everyone else (Dell, HP etc.) follows suit and sets their upcoming Xeon Nehelem workstation prices similar to Apple's HUGE mark-ups (highly unlikely in this economy), then
Apple will be all alone in inexplicably doubling their profit margins on hardware, at their "loyal", "pro" customers expense.

Apple could get away with price-gouging like this when they used proprietary PPC processors.
Not anymore. We can now all see pretty much what it cost to "build a mac" from scratch, and it's not anywhere near what Apple is charging. Keep it up Apple. Talk about killing the goose here.

How is a wikipage proof? For starters, it clearly states that prices may not correct. Secondly, they don't even list the entry level MP's CPU. I think you are making assumptions about a similarly named 3500.

We really can't make any definitive decisions until we get an actual price list (like from Intel) and then we'll see Dell et al. with their workstations offerings. Granted, if you want a tower but not that much computing power then a cheaper machine will be the best solution for you.

PS: Throwing around terms like "price gouging" make you sound like a troll. The term has a specific meaning and is a recognized illegal practice. If you really think Apple has commuted such a crime I suggest you report this to the Better Business Bureau.

[MacMad]

Originally Posted by stevielee

"Dude", you gotta get that little smilie thing under control!

Aren't they actually "copyrighted" by someone?

I'm sorry, I thought you understood that that we were talking about the rights and wrongs of the Apple/Psystar legal action.

I will just agree with you now so that this doesn't go back and forth forever.

You are right, Stevie. It is good that one company takes what belongs to another and sells it. We should all use PCs. (and not a single emoticon used to highlight when humour, etc, is being used)

[Archipellago]

[QUOTE=stevielee;1386315]

Originally Posted by MacMad

"Just because they price high doesn't mean another company should be allowed to break copyright laws. "

Well...what in the hell do you think is driving folks to seek an "alternative" machine to run OSX on in the first place? Could it be Apple's price-gouging perhaps????

The more Apple tries to maximize it's profit margins on their hardware, the more there will be hackers, cloners, EFI dongle companies etc...


"Don't be silly." you say?

Silly is paying $1000 more than it's actually work because it comes embalmed in aluminum and sports a piece of fruit with a bite out of it logo. The bite is coming to be symbolized more and more as a "premium Apple bite out of our wallets".

Psystar is just the beginning. This OSX closed loop crappola is about to be busted wide open.
You can take your EULA and......
My next Mac is going to be a state-of-the-art PC that will run OSX faster and cheaper than any
Aluminum entombed, monetary sink hole.
http://www.testfreaks.com/blog/revie...b-v1-reviewed/

spot on...

[Archipellago]

Originally Posted by MacMad

I'm sorry, I thought you understood that that we were talking about the rights and wrongs of the Apple/Psystar legal action.

I will just agree with you now so that this doesn't go back and forth forever.

You are right, Stevie. It is good that one company takes what belongs to another and sells it. We should all use PCs. (and not a single emoticon used to highlight when humour, etc, is being used)

they aren't taking anything..they are buying it!!!...jeez.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by stevielee

Dude, you gotta get that anger under control.


"Dude",, you gotta get that little smilie thing under control!

Aren't they actually "copyrighted" by someone?

""Dude"", you gotta learn how to use the site's markup language.