or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple seeks permanent injunction to prevent Psystar sales
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple seeks permanent injunction to prevent Psystar sales - Page 2

post #41 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Your idea of creating some sort of slowdown via software code is no different than a hardware dongle. If it can be written to work properly on a Mac, then it can be bypassed in software. To be minimally effective, It would require code to be strewn through the entire OS to be effective. It would be a total rewrite, which would take way to much money, time, and support resources, all to prevent something that a lawsuit can do just as well. I would imagine that Apple has already thought about all the pro's and cons of trying to tack on some sort of copy protection scheme, or simply barring people like Psystar from continuing. I think they made the right choice. They obviously thought they could win, and they have so far. A permanent injunction against them preventing the sale of any future hardware or software that bypasses Apple hardware or licensing restrictions is just as effective when it counts - In apples pocketbook.

On top of that it adds complexity to the coding with more points of potential failure and performance loss. This pretty much goes against everything Apple tends to do with their OS.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #42 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Of course not, now that Mac's are really generic PC's like any other.

Using x86 CPUs doesnt make PC generic. All of Apple of Apples machine use custom boards and other hardware. I dont think you justify any notebook or AIO desktop as being generic.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #43 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

...To be minimally effective, It would require code to be strewn through the entire OS to be effective.

There you go, your catching my drift now!

Quote:
It would be a total rewrite, which would take way to much money, time, and support resources, all to prevent something that a lawsuit can do just as well.

Apple has changed from PPC to Intel, from System 7 or was it 9? (I can't recall) to OS X and they can't change again to save their own skin? Nonsense!

Also a total rewrite to effectively lock OS X to Mac's is a lot cheaper that whacking cloner moles in every country in the world.

Goodnight all. Sleep tight. zzzzzz
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #44 of 96
So all generic PC's have glossy screens too...

...so what's all the fuss about?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Of course not, now that Mac's are really generic PC's like any other.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #45 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

.
Apple has argued that Psystar's continued business will irreparably harm Apple, and that Psystar has also spawned other infringers by "trafficking in circumvention devices."


Schiller's affidavit filed this week attempts to convince the court to side with Apple, based on the logic that it would be a waste for Apple to have to file another suit.

"So long as Psystar continues these practices, the harm to Apple


Then why doesn't Apple build a machine millions would want? A mid range, headless mac made with i7 and non server parts?

if you have a good, great gaming machine by Apple, you also have a device that will run their Pro Apps and oddly, Apple assumes they will lose money as the Pros, 2~3%, would buy the cheaper alternative, and their right, we would but so woudnt the gamers (who make up more sales then video sales and music sales combined), as well as the millions of ProSumers who don't really have the cash for a server made desktop but do have the talent, not to mention all the studios that had mac pros would also buy these non existent devices for their smaller rooms. In a nutshell, Apple would MAKE money not lose money due to lack of sales but they can't seem to figure that out yet.*

Avid/Digidesing did!!!! They saw people were no longer buying their $$10,000 TDM (processing chips in a card, thus reducing CPU latency which you cannot have in music), and saw computers were getting faster and faster and more core on a single dye were happening, so they purchased M-Audio which relies on the cpu only. In music it's caled native recording vs TDM. In fact, for the mac pro, for those left with the express slot, now only the 17" has it forces yet higher prices on the pro, with an express card, you can purchase something similar that puts all the processing on the card that goes into the express slot. Google. "UAD laptop express" card and you'll see what I mean. Apple could make more money simply by adding an express slot on the iMac. Add in esata and the sales go even higher. *
EDIT. HERE IS JUST ONE DEVICE THAT IS MADE FOR THE EXPRESS SLOT AND WHY IT IS SO IMPORTANT!
http://emusician.com/hardware/universal-audio-uad-1209/

And that's just one use. Gamers and enthusiasts would get esata cards for numerous hard drives.

Anyway, Apple can do it but won't as I said earlier great grahics normally mean it can run pro apps and they don't really want that and rather have you buy the mac pro when in fact they would make so much more anyway.*

Check it out. Let's pretend apple released a $1000 i7 core with a great graphics card, 1000 FSB, normal memory, headless and in the future you could swap the CPU out. *
You would have thousands of gamers buy them.*
You would have millions of musicians buy them and buy their own ram after market, similar to gamers.*
You would have everyone that is tired of windows but has nice HDMI DVI diplays buy them.*
You would have the more semi pro photographer buy them. *
You would have most all semi pro video users buy these.*
And ironically, all the pros apple were afraid they would lose sale to, would buy these instead of the pc rendering farms as well as place them in their smaller studios, so it not a matter of how come, it more like their are misguided somehow. I mean they really only care about the iPhone now, example, One to One and Pro C are used to be one program. Now it's seperated and most of the training used to be pro apps, and is now iLife and $99 each. So why not go ahead and build them. *There is a huge market out there. The only problem I would see is people would want their own video card at new egg or Frys pricing and apple would have to start supporting numerous cards but all the companies are gone and there's only nvidia and ati, so that wouldn't be that big of a deal and it would for sure, put a dent in the hacntosh.

There are millions of users waiting. Just take a page from what digidesign did.*
They would have 20% of the marketshare within a year and to top it off, it would increase the sales of iMacs as business and enterprise started off with these mid range machines. 30% in less than 5 years. Is it really so hard to understand Apple?


Peace all.*
post #46 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Then why doesn't Apple build a machine millions would want? A mid range, headless mac made with i7 and non server parts?

I suppose we can ask that question about any company that doesnt make a product to fit a particular need or makes a product that does fit the low end of the market.

Quote:
They would have 20% of the marketshare within a year and to top it off, it would increase the sales of iMacs as business and enterprise started off with these mid range machines. 30% in less than 5 years. Is it really so hard to understand Apple?

HP has 25% of the market by selling $400 notebooks in the US and likely even cheaper machines in other countries. Unit marketshare is a pointless metric without increased profit.

But you arent suggesting cheap notebooks, you are suggesting selling towers for average consumers, not prosumers, that seem to be geared toward tinkers and gamers. This has never been Apples business model and i cant see how they could possibly sell 4x as many of these machines per quarter to give them a 20% marketshare of their current 4%.

When you look at the stats, notebook sales outnumber desktop sales, which have been declined YoY. With over 3M Macs sold last quarter I simply dont see how Apple selling their wares at their current profit margin, instead of subsidizing costs with preinstalled crapware and cutting corners by offering cheap components and less capable support services. Youre talking over 15M Macs sold per quarter within a year, without even accounting for the natural increase in PC unit sales worldwide. Its just not possible.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #47 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Cain't- still waiting for my precious, my matte iMac.

Apple doesn't want that. Computer is to strong now. Video and photographers (Pros), would buy these instead on server part Mac Pros.

They will never stop osx86. They offer a free script that does the same tying pystar offers. It allows you to install retail osx and updates without needing a hack.
post #48 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Is it really so hard to understand Apple?

"Is it really so hard for me to understand Apple?"

There! I fixed it for you.
post #49 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

No, the question needs to be "Why in the hell did Steve, do away with the matte screen?" When we were perfectly fine with choice!

'Choice and competition', where'd I hear that before? Oh yeah, the government run health care plan. Pass it and we'll have no choice and no competition. Just like we have no matte screen iMacs. The Liberals of the world think they always know what's best for the rest of us but negate suffering from their stupidity themselves. I bet Steve has matte screen 27" i7 Silver & Black iMac at him home even as I type!

Do you have to drag your moronic politics into this discussion? How did talking about Tekstuds matte screen become you bleating and whining about healthcare?
My Android phone is the worst phone I've ever owned.
Reply
My Android phone is the worst phone I've ever owned.
Reply
post #50 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Who wants to bet that as a final f-you, Psystar manages to "accidentally" let loose all it's stuff as open source?

They pretty much stole the stuff from open source in the first place.

However, if an injunction is granted then surely doing so would not exactly be the most sensible move from a legal standpoint?
post #51 of 96
How did the Matte discussion enter here?

Anyway, as for putting a "mac-chip" in, as previously mentioned, there's already one in there, and it doesn't need to be any more difficult to hack than it already is. I would say it's akin to giving people like Pystar enough rope to hang themselves with. There is no way to do what they do without bypassing, emulating, or decoding the chip, and that process breaks the applicable laws. Making it harder to do so doesn't particularly help Apple unless they can make it *impossible* to do so, which in itself is impossible. The only consumer device I am aware of that has not been cracked in such a sway (so far as I am aware) is the PS3. Why make it hard? Just make it necessary... You can't stop them, so you may as well nail them while they do it.
post #52 of 96
I resent Pystar for what they are doing....essentially keeping the lawyers busy making money.

I'm all for competition but this is really an infringement on Apple's design/products business.

I would prefer Apple spending the time and resources on making their products better for us than giving a lot of money to lawyers that really don't 'create' anything.

Apple does have to protect itself, but Pystar is a costly and unnecessary distraction.
post #53 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post

How could Judge Alsup not grant this request?

What I don't really understand is why an injunction against Psystar wasn't part of the summery judgment given how much Judge Alsup sided with Apples arguments.
post #54 of 96
Actually I was talking about priosumers mire than consumers that's why Avid, a huge music company, bought maudio as they saw the trend of native recording. You said the trend is more toward notebooks, well I agree on that too but this is why you don't see great dedicated graphics on theses machines as they would then run pro apps very well.

I think you missing the point that Apple does not make a comuter for the Prosumer at all. The MacBook pro is to out of reach for a lot of musicians and just starting videograhers, yet even the 15 " no longer has the express slot. That's insane. It's like apple taking a step backwards not forwad. The prosumer, enthusiast, gamer does not have a choice when it comes to Apple computers as the iMac is missing certain hardware upgradable slots such as the express slot or it's missing esata support or it's missing really fast graphic cards, thus the request for a headless mac made up with desktop parts.

In a way, Apples business model has cornered themself as they fear the loss of MacBook pro sale yet the 15 no longer has express and nine have really fast gpu's. and the prosumer market, the creatives especially, the one that apple one time targeted with a lower priced tower, has no machine for them and certainly no laptop as the 17 is the only machine that would come close and even that gas a slow grahic card compared to some pc laptops out there.
Just music alone would generate huge sales but the MacBook is to limited as thetnstill font iffer 4 core as seen in some laptops. Besides, prosumes and enthusiasts want desktops for audio and gaming so they can add on uad cards or the gpu of their choice.

I'm betting more than 75% of the people here didn't know back in the mac clone 1980's, Apple had nearly a 20% marketshare then stopped that and focused on the Pro but ever since the iPhone, Pros have taken a back seat to iPhone users. In addition, you say users want laptops yet Apple sells the iMac really well. How much bigger Di you think it would be if they started offering matte screens, esata, blue Ray, faster gpu's and
made it upgradeabe somehow. No. Apple only has two targets. The consumer. The high end pro user. There's a huge market out there. This is why OSX86 and people like pystar pop up all the time. They target the missing element that Apple refuses to help. Vist osx86 and you'll see them talking about fast benchmarks, rendering times, hacks to use any graphic card available.

Avid got it and they almost where 100 % Aople at one time. I dint see why Apple doesn't get it especially cnsidering the pro user base is no more than 3%.


TYPED ON IPHONE. Apologize for any grammar, spelling mistakes.

Cheers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I suppose we can ask that question about any company that doesnt make a product to fit a particular need or makes a product that does fit the low end of the market.


HP has 25% of the market by selling $400 notebooks in the US and likely even cheaper machines in other countries. Unit marketshare is a pointless metric without increased profit.

But you arent suggesting cheap notebooks, you are suggesting selling towers for average consumers, not prosumers, that seem to be geared toward tinkers and gamers. This has never been Apples business model and i cant see how they could possibly sell 4x as many of these machines per quarter to give them a 20% marketshare of their current 4%.

When you look at the stats, notebook sales outnumber desktop sales, which have been declined YoY. With over 3M Macs sold last quarter I simply dont see how Apple selling their wares at their current profit margin, instead of subsidizing costs with preinstalled crapware and cutting corners by offering cheap components and less capable support services. Youre talking over 15M Macs sold per quarter within a year, without even accounting for the natural increase in PC unit sales worldwide. Its just not possible.
post #55 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Then why doesn't Apple build a machine millions would want?

They do. They're called Macs.
post #56 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

I wasn't talking anti-copy like a dongle (which Quark X-Press had when it first came out and was very effective at preventing casual copying by employees), I was talking performance hobbling.

Say Microsoft tied so much of Windows operations to their proprietary Direct X video cards, it wouldn't run very well or at all on OpenGL video cards. Mac's wouldn't be able to run Windows without licensing Direct X from Microsoft right?

See where I'm going?

Except that DirectX like OpenGL is not supposed to care what the hardware even is--all that is needed is a driver to take the API instructions and tell the hardware what to do with them. In fact the iMac has used DirectX 10 complied graphic chips all they way back to 2007 and the PS3 while having DirectX graphic chips used a form of open GL for its game. So the idea that DirectX and OpenGL are somehow this incompatible is garbage.

Furthermore given the console market prefers OpenGL in some form or another Microsoft would be cutting it own throat as developers who work on a regular computer would go to the platform that supports OpenGL: the Mac. Watch the already declining PC game marketshare (vs consoles) go into a total tailspin and the Mac get console ports. Even with their current CEO Microsoft is not this stupid.
post #57 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

"Is it really so hard for me to understand Apple?"

There! I fixed it for you.

WRONG.
Do you think Avid is a small company. The leader in TV and feature film editing that FCP that Final Cut has barely scratched the suface in. They would though ig they made more options for Prosumers as they ate the next producers and editors. Yet they saw the writing on the wall and bough M-Audio.

Do you think Adobe is a small company when most of the laptops can hardly run illustator let alone After Rffecta. Even the MacBook pro has trouble with AE yet apple keeps missing the point.It's reasons like this that pystar and osx86 even exist so users can use any gpu they want or so musicians can add pci fx cards. The mac pro is made of server parts mostly to keep margins of profit high.

Apple should release a 2nd model made with non server parts, support more graphic cards and you would see many 3rd party hardware quickly follow but for now, these companies focus on the PC.

I've already listed the market that would by these machines and as unsaid before, gamers outsell music and video combined.
post #58 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac

then why doesn't apple build a machine millions would want?
They do. They're called macs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quadra 610 View Post

they do. They're called macs.

lol
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #59 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

WRONG.
Do you think Avid is a small company. The leader in TV and feature film editing that FCP that Final Cut has barely scratched the suface in.

What? Final Cut *is* the leader.

According to a 2007 SCRI study, Final Cut made up 49% of the US professional editing market, with Avid at 22%.

http://tvbeurope.com/index.php?optio...1269&Itemid=46

http://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/20...vs-avid-redux/

Apple claims 1.3 million licensed Final Cut users, however, this figure includes all Final Cut Pro, Final Cut Express and Final Cut Studio licenses since day one, excluding upgrades. One research study pointed to 47% market share for Apple and 22% for Avid a couple of years ago. Recently Apple execs indicated to me that FCP has now passed the 50% mark for all new NLE sales. If the figure of 1.3M licensed users represents nearly 50% of the total market, then this means that Avid must have between 400,000 and 600,000 systems (all products) out in the field worldwide.


Major films edited with Final Cut Pro

The Rules of Attraction (2002)
Full Frontal (2002)
The Ring (2002)
Cold Mountain (2003) (Academy Award nominee for Best Editing – Walter Murch)
Intolerable Cruelty (2003)
Open Water (2003)
Napoleon Dynamite (2004)
The Ladykillers (2004)
Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004)
Super Size Me (2004)
Corpse Bride (2005)
Dreamer: Inspired by a True Story (2005)
Happy Endings (2005)
Ellie Parker (2005)
Jarhead (2005)
Little Manhattan (2005)
Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005)
The Ring Two (2005)
300 (2007)
Black Snake Moan (2006)
Letters from Iwo Jima (2006)
Happy Feet (2006)
Zodiac (2007)
The Simpsons Movie (2007)
No Country for Old Men (2007) (Academy Award nominee for Best Editing – Roderick Jaynes)
Reign Over Me (2007)
Youth Without Youth (2007)
Balls of Fury (2007)
The Tracey Fragments (2008)
Traitor (2008)
Burn After Reading (2008)
The X-Files: I Want to Believe (2008)
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008) (Academy Award nominee for Best Editing – Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall)
Where the Wild Things Are (2009)
A Serious Man (2009)
Tetro (2009)
post #60 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

They do. They're called Macs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

What? Final Cut *is* the leader.

According to a 2007 SCRI study, Final Cut made up 49% of the US professional editing market, with Avid at 22%.

http://tvbeurope.com/index.php?optio...1269&Itemid=46

http://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/20...vs-avid-redux/

Apple claims 1.3 million licensed Final Cut users, however, this figure includes all Final Cut Pro, Final Cut Express and Final Cut Studio licenses since day one, excluding upgrades. One research study pointed to 47% market share for Apple and 22% for Avid a couple of years ago. Recently Apple execs indicated to me that FCP has now passed the 50% mark for all new NLE sales. If the figure of 1.3M licensed users represents nearly 50% of the total market, then this means that Avid must have between 400,000 and 600,000 systems (all products) out in the field worldwide.


Major films edited with Final Cut Pro

The Rules of Attraction (2002)
Full Frontal (2002)
The Ring (2002)
Cold Mountain (2003) (Academy Award nominee for Best Editing Walter Murch)
Intolerable Cruelty (2003)
Open Water (2003)
Napoleon Dynamite (2004)
The Ladykillers (2004)
Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004)
Super Size Me (2004)
Corpse Bride (2005)
Dreamer: Inspired by a True Story (2005)
Happy Endings (2005)
Ellie Parker (2005)
Jarhead (2005)
Little Manhattan (2005)
Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005)
The Ring Two (2005)
300 (2007)
Black Snake Moan (2006)
Letters from Iwo Jima (2006)
Happy Feet (2006)
Zodiac (2007)
The Simpsons Movie (2007)
No Country for Old Men (2007) (Academy Award nominee for Best Editing Roderick Jaynes)
Reign Over Me (2007)
Youth Without Youth (2007)
Balls of Fury (2007)
The Tracey Fragments (2008)
Traitor (2008)
Burn After Reading (2008)
The X-Files: I Want to Believe (2008)
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008) (Academy Award nominee for Best Editing Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall)
Where the Wild Things Are (2009)
A Serious Man (2009)
Tetro (2009)

You had me until "X-Files: I Want To Believe"
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #61 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

You had me until "X-Files: I Want To Believe"

I'm still wondering about "Black Snake Moan."
post #62 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

This is only a small victory.

There are several OS X on PC cloners operating openly in various countries with various laws.

The Germany and UK companies are easily shut down with this decision per the EU's version of the DMCA the Copyright Directive which as fewer outs than the US' DMCA. That would leave Russia. Who in their right mind would by a Russian computer?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Apple is playing whack a mole and that still doesn't stop the home gamers and covert sales.

The majority of people doing this are pennywise and pound foolish idiots who don't understand that it isn't just the part going into a mac but how those parts work together that matters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

I guess someone in Cupertino thought it was cheaper to fight the cloners than install a $20 chip in each Mac that OS X needed in order to function.
.

That wouldn't stop the pirates--all they have to do is write code that either read what was on that chip or fooled the OS into thinking the chip was there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Perhaps they thought: "Well if they won't buy a Mac anyway, then they are going to buy a cheap PC with Windows" " So we could gain OS X market share and steal a customer away from Windows, that better than nothing and they might buy a Mac later on"

Any logic in that?

Yes there is plenty of logic in that. The main reason Microsoft has so much problem with windows is the insane variety with PC hardware. Apple doesn't want that headache.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Since I'm so close to Pystar, perhaps I'll talk to them about starting a new company using their existing technology and start selling clones too. Sure I will plan to be bankrupt in a few months or years, in Florida they can't take your house or car in a lawsuit.

Actually they can as there are limit on Florida's homestead exemption.
post #63 of 96
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/2...y-sale-either/

"Make no mistake, Apple legal is going to grind Psystar into fine silicon dust," Paczkowski reports. "In addition to the injunction, Apple is requesting compensation for legal costs and statutory damages owed under the Copyright Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. And according to Apples expert witness, statutory damages for the former should run 'between $1500 and $300,000' and for the latter 'between $449,500 and $4,495,000.'"

Paczkowski reports, "Suffice it to say, thats quite a bit more than the current value of Psystars assets which, according to its bankruptcy filing, are no more than $50,000."


Wow. Talk about annihilation.
post #64 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

'Choice and competition', where'd I hear that before? Oh yeah, the government run health care plan. Pass it and we'll have no choice and no competition.

Wow. That is just breathtakingly stupid. Is up down? Is black white? If someone sells pies, does that mean that nobody will be able to buy pies? That makes as much sense as what you just said.

Pro tip: they key word in "public option" is "option". Look it up and find out what it means.

(And if you're afraid that government can provide a more affordable healthcare system to people than profit-minded private insurance companies can, then you must not be much of a capitalist. That's the funniest thing about conservative opposition to public health. Roll up your sleeves and build something better if you don't like it! Nobody's stopping you. And why people seem to think that anyone deserves to profit by withholding healthcare from human beings in need is another question entirely; insurance companies provide no services and only add 30% to every dollar spent on healthcare. What a racket. If the whole industry went bankrupt, good! It should. Wal-mart is always hiring.)

Oh yeah, and I like my glossy screen. But I have no problem with you having a matte one. Apple is under no obligation to build one for you, though. Sounds like another great opportunity for an eager capitalist... if Apple won't give you what you want, then work very hard, figure out a way to do it yourself, sell it, and get rich! Should be music to any true conservative's ears.
post #65 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

I think you missing the point that Apple does not make a comuter for the Prosumer at all. The MacBook pro is to out of reach for a lot of musicians and just starting videograhers, yet even the 15 " no longer has the express slot. That's insane. It's like apple taking a step backwards not forwad. The prosumer, enthusiast, gamer does not have a choice when it comes to Apple computers as the iMac is missing certain hardware upgradable slots such as the express slot or it's missing esata support or it's missing really fast graphic cards, thus the request for a headless mac made up with desktop parts.

I really don't understand the complaint here. Just why would a musician or just starting videographer want a high end Mac like the MacPro when a lower end Mac would serve their needs.

Garageband makes makes very good music thank you very much and it runs very well on even the current macmini (provided you max out the RAM) and iMovie plus avidemux is likely all that a "just starting" videographer would need. So just why do these people need the kind of speed and power seen in a MacPro?
post #66 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Actually I was talking.... (six miles of text goes here)....no more than 3%.


TYPED ON IPHONE. Apologize for any grammar, spelling mistakes...


Oh my god, you poor thing.

You see what Apple has done?

They got you typing on a phone instead of a real computer keyboard and they are laughing all the way to the bank because your paying about the same price for a MacBook Pro for a device a fraction of it's size and function.

Jesus will SOMEBODY PLEASE GET A iPHONE APP EMULATOR OUT!!!
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #67 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

Avid/Digidesing did!!!! They saw people were no longer buying their $$10,000 TDM (processing chips in a card, thus reducing CPU latency which you cannot have in music), and saw computers were getting faster and faster and more core on a single dye were happening, so they purchased M-Audio which relies on the cpu only. In music it's caled native recording vs TDM. In fact, for the mac pro, for those left with the express slot, now only the 17" has it forces yet higher prices on the pro, with an express card, you can purchase something similar that puts all the processing on the card that goes into the express slot.

There are millions of users waiting. Just take a page from what digidesign did.*
They would have 20% of the marketshare within a year and to top it off, it would increase the sales of iMacs as business and enterprise started off with these mid range machines. 30% in less than 5 years. Is it really so hard to understand Apple?

Digidesign had an "LE" solution waaaaay back in Protools 4 with the Toolbox AMIII card. They even had a free native solution at the time with PowerMix.
That was, if I recall, 1997 or 98...
People bought and still buy the TDM cards, and I'm sure that they make a bigger profit margin on those than the cheaper LE stuff.
Apple's game is about making the most money with the least outlay of cash. They haven't been forced to dip into the "LE" part of the PC market much... and hopefully won't have to do so.
AVID is a small company losing money and employees left and right. Ship's going down for them if they can't change something core in their business soon.
post #68 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/2...y-sale-either/

"Make no mistake, Apple legal is going to grind Psystar into fine silicon dust," Paczkowski reports. "In addition to the injunction, Apple is requesting compensation for legal costs and statutory damages owed under the Copyright Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. And according to Apples expert witness, statutory damages for the former should run 'between $1500 and $300,000' and for the latter 'between $449,500 and $4,495,000.'"

Paczkowski reports, "Suffice it to say, thats quite a bit more than the current value of Psystars assets which, according to its bankruptcy filing, are no more than $50,000."


Wow. Talk about annihilation.


Not going to happen. Pystar is broke and even if Apple could touch the owners, they can't touch their house or car in Florida.

Reading their text on their website gives me the impression they are from India or foreigners of some sort, thus they got money stashed overseas.

Pystar didn't go into this thing blindly, they knew they were going to get beat.

It was the free press they got, which they will now take to a country that doesn't give a flying ratt's behind about IP law and set up shop there and the clones will continue, just like it's already occurring in other countries.

Pystar was testing the market by running rogue in a "in your face Apple" approach, now they got to know what they needed to know and will appear elsewhere, free from Apple's lawyers.

(Disclaimer: I have no ties to Pystar, nor approve of what they do. My opinion is Apple screwed up by not effectively locking OS X to their hardware straight off and just brought this problem upon themselves by turning Mac's into PC's)
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #69 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

I'm betting more than 75% of the people here didn't know back in the mac clone 1980's, .....

It wasn't the 1980s... it was the mid 90s !

Quote:
....Apple had nearly a 20% marketshare...

The Mac has NEVER had a 20% share of the PC market.

Quote:
...then stopped that and focused on the Pro but ever since the iPhone, Pros have taken a back seat to iPhone users.

After the clone 'experiment' ended, Apple sold G3 and G4 towers for another six or seven YEARS. The iPhone has nothing to do with it.

Note: (BIG note!) You should go and check Apple's financials for that time. Apple used to break down their Mac sales by product. Back in 2003/4 you could buy your " xMac". Upgradeable G4 towers starting at around $1600. Apple only sold about 650K units... out of over 3 Million Macs.

Today... Mac Pros start at $2499 and Apple will sell nearly 11 Million Macs.

If you want to make a point get your facts straight, 'Cos your history is shit, and your figures are shit.

Quote:
TYPED ON IPHONE. Apologize for any grammar, spelling mistakes.

All your posts ARE THE SAME. Just use the new copy/paste feature.
post #70 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximara View Post

Who in their right mind would by a Russian computer?!


What you mean is who in the United States would buy a Russian computer.

I'm sure a lot of Russians and nearby countries would be glad to have a low cost computer with great operating system security and ease of use.

Especially since Russians are known the world over as good hackers of Windows.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #71 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

They do. They're called Macs.




Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

What you mean is who in the United States would buy a Russian computer.

As a phone, a lot of people. Have you seen the Droid. Im quite certain that was developed in Russia during the Cold War.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #72 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

It was the free press they got, which they will now take to a country that doesn't give a flying ratt's behind about IP law and set up shop there and the clones will continue, just like it's already occurring in other countries.

Maybe, but they still could not sell their computers in countries where IP laws are enforced, pretty much everywhere except China. Is anyone manufacturing and selling Mac clones in China today?
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #73 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

The Mac has NEVER had a 20% share of the PC market.

I think you're right, but it was fairly close to 20% during the early '90s.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #74 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I think you're right, but it was fairly close to 20% during the early '90s.

This is not definitive but I think it's reasonably accurate.

PC Market Share
post #75 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I think you're right, but it was fairly close to 20% during the early '90s.

Did he mean the Apple or the Macintosh, specifically? If we're talking 1984 and through the 90s we're talking Macintosh.
post #76 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Did he mean the Apple or the Macintosh, specifically? If we're talking 1984 and through the 90s we're talking Macintosh.

And that '20% unit share stat also ignores the fact that Apple could have more marketshare if they choose to have it instead if the usual "Apple has no idea what they are doing and could have more marketshare if they just made a computer to fit my specific needs mantra.

The bottom line is that Apple is making more money than they have ever made in PC sales and they are selling more PC units than ever before with a nice healthy growth that is outshining the industry average. Of all the companies we "armchair business managers should be directing Apple should be the last one, not the first. How can Dell turn their business around? How can Nokia and RiM get out of their old business models to rule their market segments again?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #77 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

This is not definitive but I think it's reasonably accurate.

PC Market Share

That looks about right, peaking out at 12% in 1992. I seemed to remember 15% but that was a long time ago!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Did he mean the Apple or the Macintosh, specifically? If we're talking 1984 and through the 90s we're talking Macintosh.

Not necessarily, since Apple continued to make the Apple II until 1993.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #78 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Maybe, but they still could not sell their computers in countries where IP laws are enforced, pretty much everywhere except China. Is anyone manufacturing and selling Mac clones in China today?

Of course there is! The Chinese copy EVERYTHING!

It's just they have a lot more experience hiding the fact that's all.

In a lot of Asian countries, in fact most countries of the world, if you want something and got cash, you'll get it. The law be dammed, people are that desperate to make a living.

It's a rather big shock to Americans and Europeans who travel the world the first time, the rather widespread illegal behavior and the cheap value of human life, but it's reality.

That's why so many "anti-war" types who lived their life in a safe cocoon of Western type economies, fail to understand what the world is REALLY like.

Even Obama has turned, learning the truth. 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan to "finish the job".

I only think serious dilution of the native population is the answer there, perhaps allowing the Indians to move some of their excess population into the country. They seem to be a stable race of humans. Iran is and has been moving it's excess people into Iraq for years now. The Iranian people are pretty stable, it's their government that's mental.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #79 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Of course there is! The Chinese copy EVERYTHING!

Can you name one?
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #80 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

What? Final Cut *is* the leader.

According to a 2007 SCRI study, Final Cut made up 49% of the US professional editing market, with Avid at 22%.

http://tvbeurope.com/index.php?optio...1269&Itemid=46

http://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/20...vs-avid-redux/

Apple claims 1.3 million licensed Final Cut users, however, this figure includes all Final Cut Pro, Final Cut Express and Final Cut Studio licenses since day one, excluding upgrades. One research study pointed to 47% market share for Apple and 22% for Avid a couple of years ago. Recently Apple execs indicated to me that FCP has now passed the 50% mark for all new NLE sales. If the figure of 1.3M licensed users represents nearly 50% of the total market, then this means that Avid must have between 400,000 and 600,000 systems (all products) out in the field worldwide.


Major films edited with Final Cut Pro

The Rules of Attraction (2002)
Full Frontal (2002)
The Ring (2002)
Cold Mountain (2003) (Academy Award nominee for Best Editing Walter Murch)
Intolerable Cruelty (2003)
Open Water (2003)
Napoleon Dynamite (2004)
The Ladykillers (2004)
Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004)
Super Size Me (2004)
Corpse Bride (2005)
Dreamer: Inspired by a True Story (2005)
Happy Endings (2005)
Ellie Parker (2005)
Jarhead (2005)
Little Manhattan (2005)
Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005)
The Ring Two (2005)
300 (2007)
Black Snake Moan (2006)
Letters from Iwo Jima (2006)
Happy Feet (2006)
Zodiac (2007)
The Simpsons Movie (2007)
No Country for Old Men (2007) (Academy Award nominee for Best Editing Roderick Jaynes)
Reign Over Me (2007)
Youth Without Youth (2007)
Balls of Fury (2007)
The Tracey Fragments (2008)
Traitor (2008)
Burn After Reading (2008)
The X-Files: I Want to Believe (2008)
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008) (Academy Award nominee for Best Editing Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall)
Where the Wild Things Are (2009)
A Serious Man (2009)
Tetro (2009)


Your kidding right??? The only time I see final cut is when I am visitin NBC or Bravo, etc, and they are using FCP to create bumpers for "coming up next, on Desperate Housewives" - other then that, all rooms at Paramount, Burbank, will be Avid first, FCP second and even then, it has to be running on a mac pro to run flawlessly, and Apple still fears, to this day, the PROSUMER HEADLESS midsize mac that would make them a fortune.

With regard to your links.

This is taken from your own link number 2

Although this would seem to give Apple the lead in the NLE wars, one must understand that the Final Cut world is heavily skewed with a wide range of amateur users students, hobbyists and non-editing video professionals who occasionally do some of their own hands on cutting. I think that its fair to say that a greater percentage of Avid users are professional editors. Its my observation that broadcast news and traditional (major studio) film and television show post is dominated by Avid NLEs.

And the other 10,000 films per year are done on Avid. And the same thing is seen everywhere - if you do a side by side vs, you will get, most low budget, or indie films are FCP whereas a high paying editing job is FCP.

The point is there is no machine beside the mac pro that can do the job well enough thus )SX86 and Pystar, for $800 you can build your own and it will run circles around the Mac Pro as since you still have the bios, you can over clock the FSB and CPU, then down the road, swith out the chip when a faster new chip comes along.

The reason we see no MATTE iMac is Apple wants you to buy the Mac Pro, if it were Matte, you would see these in graphic houses as well as smaller studios, With regard to the laptops, now only the 17" can truly be called a PRO machine due the express bus and of course, it makes the 2008/2009 15" express slot Mac Book Pro's worth more.

This is why Pystar does what it does, there is a market that Apple is ignoring, the Pro Sumer, which end up becoming Pro users. Right now, there is even talk of Shake no longer being updated, so some are saying the PRO market from Apple is dead as all the care about are iphones and ipods, which is probably why 5 years ago, Procare and One to One were combined for $99 and they taught FCP, Logic, Shake, now they teach iLife and how to add an attachment to emails. LAME.

With regard to FCP vs Avid, go to craigslist or Mandy.com and look for an Avid job vs a FCP job, most FCP jobs are PAYLESS, or offer some sort of pay if the project takes off whereas you will hardly ever see that as an Avid Editor, even assistant Avid Editors make $25-$30 a year.

Apple needs to get over the fear that if they release a decent machine with good graphics and headless that they will lose PRO SALES, they won't, they will increase in their market share, not decrease.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple seeks permanent injunction to prevent Psystar sales