Psystar lawyer claims company not shutting down permanently - Page 2

Originally Posted by matt_s

Like this guy and yourself, I really want a netbook running OS X. After 144 plane flights in 2009, I'm sick and tired of toting that damn 13" MacBook everywhere I go. I want to buy a 27" i7 iMac for my office and a 10" netbook for the road, and provide myself with the perfect office/road combo computing experience.

Apple just doesn't make anything for the uber road warrior, all of their portables feature a similar size footprint (13") and it just has to get more compact to suit my needs, and keep the schlepping factor low. A 10" (or even 11") MacBook Trail - a removable battery for long flights, no DVD, 2-3 USB2.0 ports, Ethernet, DVI (or their idiotic miniDP), maybe 1394 - would be awesome. Don't de-feature to achieve lightweight portability, innovate instead. Not to be.

Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss

You are making my point -- both are products of Honda, not some other car manufacturer licensed by Honda to make Honda cars. Some believe that Apple should be licensing OSX to other hardware makers, though why they believe this, has never been clear to me. So you'd have to ask them why. The point I'm making is, if Apple followed this advice, they'd be creating competitors for themselves, which is an unusual business strategy to be sure.

Originally Posted by Traqqer7777

I think this just means that the lawyers are trying to keep the ship afloat a little longer so they can attend to the further lawsuit in Florida and their appeals. That's all it sounds like. In any case, it won't make any difference.

What were they thinking going against Apple with such clearly defined rights and usage rules with the Mac OS?

Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss

One, which is the way Apple does business, like it or not. If the "average consumer" wants a Honda, how many choices do they have? One, which is the way Honda does business, like it or not. That doesn't mean they can't also buy a Toyota.

Originally Posted by MobileMe

I couldn't help read your phrase of "MacBook" which isn't meant to be for the "Road Warrior".

Apple has the MacBook Air and as our Steve said "Was meant to be for the Wireless World" An innovative piece of engineering in a slim and sexy design. Not to mention the MacBook Air beats any netbook in the market in regards to computing power.

http://www.apple.com/macbookair/features.html

Give this a try

Originally Posted by emig647

I completely agree with you. I think what they believe is if apple licenses OS X to other builders, that their computing experiences will suddenly get cheaper for using OS X. They *think* they would have more hardware options. I suppose they would to a point (like more graphic card options and configurations), but more or less it would be just as expensive.

Originally Posted by The Madcapper

No. This would be more along the lines of...

Originally Posted by MacTripper

Neither the MacBook nor the MacBook Air are "Road Warrior" laptops.

A matte screen 15" or17" MacBook Pro IS a road warriors machine.

Why? You need it be able to anything just about anywhere on battery power.The MacBook Air is a dainty, fragile, overpriced and underpowered piece of junk that looks like it's more effective at being thrown as a sharp weapon or used to cut vegetables or something. I'm almost afraid I or someone else would sit on the poor thing and bend it completely unless in a seconds.

Apple is dicking around now, making the matte screen 15" a "top of the line" BTO 15" only, they are really pissing me and a lot of professional Mac users off.

My next machine is a Dell Mini with a large SSD drive running Ubuntu, screw Apple and their $3000 plus glossy screen crap.

Originally Posted by MobileMe

1: Not tying OS X to Apple hardware. ( They actually do )

2: Ignoring the low end of the PC market. ( Ignoring for a Great Reason, the low end PC market are just a bunch of Wal-Mart minded consumers, wanting A MAC PRO for the price of a MACBOOK, I'm glad Apple ignores these people and as STEVE told a reporter during the 2007 Apple event " WE DON'T SHIP JUNK, IT'S NOT IN OUR DNA TO SELL PRODUCTS WE WOULDN'T RECOMMEND TO OUR LOVED ONES")

3: Thinking the law is going to protect their sales. ( The law does protect those who are doing right and Apple is doing right so the Law protects them )

Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss

Not at all. You make the common mistake of thinking that Apple sells boxes of parts. In fact, they sell Mac computers, not computer parts -- in precisely the same way that Honda sells cars, not tires. Very simply, you either buy the entire product as it is sold, or you don't, depending entirely on your preference. Neither company is under any obligation to break their products down into assembly parts, so you or anyone else can build them in competition.

Originally Posted by MacTripper

Neither the MacBook nor the MacBook Air are "Road Warrior" laptops. ...

Originally Posted by The Madcapper

You don't seem to be disagreeing with me. Re-read my post for clarification, if needed.

Originally Posted by MacTripper

OS X was only tied to hardware with PPC processors, now Mac's use common Intel processors, making the difference between a Mac and a PC nearly zero.

Just because some words in the EULA says you can't use OS X on non-Apple hardware doesn't mean laws in other countries honor that or that people follow it.

Even Apple sells millions of black market Wifi enabled iPhones in China against China's law.

I'm not suggesting Apple give away their hardware for free, but something is obviously WRONG if Psystar and other cloners are able to make a business and PROFIT from selling PC's with OS X installed.

Only in the US. Apple still has cloners to whack in many other countries, the laws are different in different countries and enforcement is a whole another matter too.

Look at the untold millions of illegal copies of Windows sold in China's street corner vendors there.

Originally Posted by Aizmov

There is competition it is called Dell, HP, Sony, Acer, Asus, Toshiba, ...

Originally Posted by MobileMe

The term portability for notebooks require Weight, and Power combined, the macbook air does that well compared to the nascent segment of netbook users, spec for spec. I can't see to many people showing up with a 17" MacBook pro saying it's portable enough

The Air when released was the WORLDS THINNEST NOTEBOOK, Not to mention the extreme functionality and use of the notebook, All that power in a paper weight design. Steve has answered the portable segment of users with the MacBook Air

Apple was reminded that the small majority of pro's still prefer the matte option. Remember at the 2009 MacWorld when Phil Shiller showed the 17" MBP in Matte and only a small few cheered, as Phil said "SEE THERE ARE STILL A FEW OUT THERE ".

I'm a professional and the glossy screen is actually much better with an overall experience when I'm not doing photography editing on PS or Aperture.

A statement like this fully verifies that their are some users who simply have a Wal-Mart mindset. You want a MAC PRO for a MAC MINI price. Your un-realistic, oh yeah I almost forgot that all this Hardware is managed by the WORLDS MOST ADVANCE OPERATING SYSTEM. By the Way the 15" Pro's start at $1,699.

Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss

I hope I am disagreeing, since your analogy makes no sense. Your analogy assumes that someone could patent the concept of rubber tires, which in itself is nonsense. It becomes deeper nonsense to compare rubber tires to a Macintosh computer, which as nearly as I can figure out, is what you're doing. To make it as clear I can, Apple could no more patent the concept of a personal computer than Honda or anyone else could patent the concept of a rubber tire. None of which prevents Apple from patenting a Macintosh computer or Honda or anyone else from patenting their particular type of rubber tire.

And just to settle an extremely silly side issue, none of the above has anything even remotely to do with whether these companies "care" about us.

Originally Posted by MobileMe

2: Ignoring the low end of the PC market. ( Ignoring for a Great Reason, the low end PC market are just a bunch of Wal-Mart minded consumers, wanting A MAC PRO for the price of a MACBOOK, I'm glad Apple ignores these people and as STEVE told a reporter during the 2007 Apple event " WE DON'T SHIP JUNK, IT'S NOT IN OUR DNA TO SELL PRODUCTS WE WOULDN'T RECOMMEND TO OUR LOVED ONES")

Originally Posted by MobileMe

I'm aware of that and like Apple I see nothing wrong with selling wiFi to users whos government wants to control their people. Apple selling of those enabled devices has to do with choice, and human rights.

There is something wrong with riding the backs of a company's innovative software. While profiting from it. Psytar was attempting to destroy the Apple experience in which users and consumers are accustomed to. Not to mention their whole business model was ILLEGAL

Thats why we have a GREAT LEGAL TEAM

Windows is experiencing Karma. When you've been stealing from others for decades expect the same in return, Microsoft is only getting what it deserves.

Originally Posted by MacTripper

You may be right, but it's NOT a road warriors machine.





I got no problem if people want something like that, but it's too frail to be a road warrior's laptop.

And I took my MacBook Pro "on the road" for two straight months in all sorts of environments taking pictures all around the US.



Screw Phil, I've met him and liked him right off, but his stance on glossy screens is bullshit. He's trying to con us and we are not taking it lightly nor appreciate it. Pro's are giving Apple the finger in record numbers.

It was me that got a hold of Steve himself and got the 15" matte screen back, but it seems Phil or someone else is playing games again.

Yea, in a dark hole it's wonderfully accurate.

Don't need it or want it anymore.

Got ripped off spending big bucks for a PowerMac G5, 30" monitors and Apple goes off and changes processors and no more OS X for PPC. So the long term investment with the machine just dropped like a stone.

The MBP has served me well, despite having to upgrade the crappy hard drives and Superdrives Apple uses. Now it's the Magsafe that failed.

The white MacBook was a utter and complete waste of a good $1000, it was supposed to be a gift and a honest attempt to see if glossy would still bother my eyes, it did and unfortuntly so did the person I gave it too, who just ignored it and then through that neglect got water spilled on the keyboard. Like a good machine shouldn't be susceptible to this sort of thing right?





No, I want a $500 OS X laptop, the extra $100 over the $400 Dell Mini for a slightly better quality build, a matte screen and a three year mail in warranty.

But alas, with Apple unless you spend more than $1000 they don't want to hear from you, then for only a year, another $349 gets you another two years.

Apple can remain happy with their 10% market share, the world will move on, but as soon as the "steve Jobs effect" wears off, it's curtains for Apple.

I already see the partial control of someone else, a bean counter.

Originally Posted by MobileMe

I couldn't help read your phrase of "MacBook" which isn't meant to be for the "Road Warrior".

Apple has the MacBook Air and as our Steve said "Was meant to be for the Wireless World" An innovative piece of engineering in a slim and sexy design. Not to mention the MacBook Air beats any netbook in the market in regards to computing power.

Give this a try

Originally Posted by The Madcapper

Tires are what make cars move. Many mac enthusiasts would agree that Apple (Honda, in this analogy)'s systems are rolling smoothly along on rubber tires, while other systems are restricted to the wood wheel of yesteryear. (Though some believe that the new Windows' synthetic rubber-like material is almost comparable!)

Originally Posted by bobertoq

Just because a computer costs less than $1000 doesn't mean it's a piece of junk that only "Wal-Mart minded consumers" would want.... It's something that someone with not a lot of money might want.

Originally Posted by MacTripper

Ok , so then what's wrong with serving a market Apple is ignoring?

No Psystar was serving a market Apple is ignoring and making a profit too, which Apple is ignoring.

Because Apple's prices are insanely high compared to similar PC offerings of the same quality.

Enjoy the world travel, bring lots of warm clothes and condemns.

So Apple pirates Xerox, Microsoft pirates Apple, Apple pirates Unix and Psystar pirates Apple.

And Apple complains?

Apple is a pirate, they KNOW others are pirates, so why not tie OS X harder to Apple hardware so it's near impossible to run on PC's?

It's because Apple want's their OS to be pirated, just not publicly and for commercial profit that's all.

Psystar see's this too, thus they purposely challenged Apple in court knowing they are going to lose but reap a client list and free publicity for Rebel EFI.

Heck, they file for bankruptcy and they don't even have to pay fines or fee's!

Originally Posted by MobileMe

Apple has a computer under $1000, the Mac Mini and MacBook. Those are hardly junk and appeal to they low end user market

Originally Posted by MobileMe

]THIS JUST IN!!!! Nobody cares about Psytar going out of business.

Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss

You are making my point -- both are products of Honda, not some other car manufacturer licensed by Honda to make Honda cars. Some believe that Apple should be licensing OSX to other hardware makers, though why they believe this, has never been clear to me. So you'd have to ask them why. The point I'm making is, if Apple followed this advice, they'd be creating competitors for themselves, which is an unusual business strategy to be sure.

Originally Posted by matt_s

No thanks. It's not for road warriors. I know this, I'm that guy. 144 flights this year.

The machine is a bit under powered. No storage. No replaceable battery. Lousy graphics. I couldn't get it to work with my InFocus projector, not enough graphics performance or oomph or something. Can't do a business presentation, why tote it? Not a road warrior machine.

Maybe for Steve. But he probably forgot that the rest of us don't have our own private jet, and can rarely afford to sit in Business Class, where the power ports are.

ORD to CGY is a little over 9 hours. LAX to MEL is almost 16 hours. SYD to HKG is 9-1/2 hours & HKG to LAX is 13 hours. I travel these routes all the time. Traveling with the toy MBA would mean I'd get anywhere from 3 to 4, maybe 4-1/2 hours of work done, and then I'd be finished. What do I do for the next 12 hours? At least with my aluminum MacBook boat-anchor, I can snap in another battery and keep going. Also, TSA will let me on the plane with Apple's replacement batteries, because they are original equipment... sometimes, they force 3rd party batteries into the cargo hold. We've seen it happen to our crews.

I have more Power Point presentations, Excel budget spreadsheets and PDF specification sheets on our products than the MBA can hold on it's puny drive. This doesn't even account for any applications or music or photos or any other documents. This thing is a cute toy.

Hell, you can't even connect to an Ethernet network and plug a USB thumb drive into the stupid-ass machine at the same damn time. Hilarious. All for $1400, $1500? Give me a break. What kind of modern computer is that? It's for suburban housewives who want to look cool surfing at StarBucks.

The size and weight of the MBA was achieved by de-featuring, not innovation. If Fujitsu can get DVI, HDMI, Gig Ethernet, a removable battery, 3 USB2.0 ports plus 1394 into a 10" ultra-portable netbook, I would hope Apple might be able to do the same thing. If they bothered trying.

Also, I'm thinking you didn't really pay attention to my post. I want & need a computer with a smaller footprint. This is really the show stopper - the 13" LCD means the base of the machine has to accommodate it. I want a smaller footprint. The smallest footprint Apple produces is 13", 30% greater than my desired standard. This is ok for 2004 or 2005 technology but not in today's netbook world.

Apple needs to start innovating again in the portable computer space (I don't mean phones), and stop resting on their previous, now long in the tooth designs. I want something that absorbs 30% less space than their most portable Macintosh book.

Originally Posted by MobileMe

Apple has a computer under $1000, the Mac Mini and MacBook. Those are hardly junk and appeal to they low end user market

Originally Posted by hill60

What about the people who bought their systems with a three year warranty?

They might care.

Originally Posted by bobertoq

I never said either of those products were junk. You said low-end PCs are junk that only 'Wal-Mart minded" consumers would want. I was saying that just because low-end PCs are cheap doesn't mean they are pieces of junk.

The cheapest Mac is crap (price wise) compared to a low-end PC. I can get a PC just as good as Mac Mini for half the price. Now you're probably gonna say, "oh well but that PC has crap hardware, even though the Mac Mini uses the same hardware..."

Originally Posted by MacTripper

The Mac Mini is nothing but a netbook in a desktop case.

The MacBook is junk for the high price, I know I had one for two whole months.

The case chipped straight off, the glossy screen is annoying and it's underpowered and under featured for the price.

A similar PC laptop can be had for $300 less AND include a 3 year warranty.



The metal case matte MacBook Pro's, that's a good machine, a good road warrior machine if one can afford one.

Of course a Toughbook running Ubuntu might be a close competitor, if you didn't need to run certain professional level software.

Originally Posted by emig647

I completely agree with you. I think what they believe is if apple licenses OS X to other builders, that their computing experiences will suddenly get cheaper for using OS X. They *think* they would have more hardware options. I suppose they would to a point (like more graphic card options and configurations), but more or less it would be just as expensive.

Many people believe apple sells a full copy of OS X for $129. In reality they are upgrade prices that are offset by the past hardware sales that person has made. So in order for Apple to sell full blown copies without the hardware offset, it's unknown what the price would be. My guess is in the $300-$500 range.

In the end it makes no sense for apple to completely change their business model. What they have works and works well. Some people think that a greater market share would bring them a lot more money, imo it would just bring a lot more problems and less money.

Originally Posted by MobileMe

Huh???

Thats why we have a GREAT LEGAL TEAM

Xerox ALLOWED APPLE TO SEE IT'S TECHNOLOGY AND SECRETS AND GAVE ENGINEERS PERMISSION TO DEMO THEIR TECHNOLOGIES Which was a mistake on Xerox part for not seeing Apple was the competition. What did you expect would happen???

Originally Posted by MobileMe

http://www.apple.com/macmini/features.html

It's actually THE WORLDS MOST ENERGY EFFICIENT DESKTOP...

Also you can get 500GB HD with 4GB RAM for under $1000.

I don't need to argue about hardware cause Mac Mini runs the WORLDS MOST ADVANCED AND FASTEST OS for only $599

Originally Posted by MacTripper

You said:




And I said:

"Enjoy the world travel, bring lots of warm clothes and condoms." (correction) To fight the world of Mac clones that is, as Russia and China are rather cold and you'll need condoms because you'll be doing a lot of spooning to keep warm.







I was there, it didn't happen like that.

Steve had no pass and later we find the emergency exit was open and several disks missing.

Originally Posted by bobertoq

No, these are the most "energy efficient" desktops:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nettop
Which is completely irrelevant, considering a computer can only add a couple dollars, max, to your electricity bill each month.

Also, you can get a PC with a 500 GB HD with 4 GB RAM for under $500.

And I don't need to argue about this "cause" if Apple allowed their OS to run on other computers, you could get the "WORLDS MOST ADVANCED AND FASTEST OS" for less than that.

Originally Posted by MobileMe

THEIR IS NO COMPUTER THAT WILL MEET YOUR UN-REALISTIC NEEDS. YOU NEED A 8TB HARDDRIVE, NVIDIA 285FX GRAPHICS CARD, A 3.3GHZ 8CORE PROCESSOR, WITH 99GB RAM, 8 USB PORTS 7 FW800 PORTS AND 100HR BATTERY LIFE IN ONE CHARGE, ALL CRAMMED INTO A 10" OLED SCREEN

It's also not Steve's fault you don't have access to the Airline adapter ports
Also the last I checked user run PS and Play WoW on the current version MBA SSD version.

Apple is innovating (Unibody enclosure, the WORLDS FIRST MAGIC MOUSE)

The MacBook Pro's can fit your needs easily with it's 8hr or even 7hr battery life.

Originally Posted by MobileMe

I'm not arguing, I just need you to come out of your un-realistic reality and see the light through Apple. The company profits every quarter and year so you just fall into a category of nascent whiners . Apple expects this type of user since it's very successful in the Tech Industry and Digital Music Industry (APPLE REVOLUTIONIZED THIS INDUSTRY BTW)

Originally Posted by matt_s

No thanks. It's not for road warriors. I know this, I'm that guy. 144 flights this year.

The machine is a bit under powered. No storage. No replaceable battery. Lousy graphics. I couldn't get it to work with my InFocus projector, not enough graphics performance or oomph or something. Can't do a business presentation, why tote it? Not a road warrior machine.

Maybe for Steve. But he probably forgot that the rest of us don't have our own private jet, and can rarely afford to sit in Business Class, where the power ports are.

ORD to CGY is a little over 9 hours. LAX to MEL is almost 16 hours. SYD to HKG is 9-1/2 hours & HKG to LAX is 13 hours. I travel these routes all the time.

Traveling with the toy MBA would mean I'd get anywhere from 3 to 4, maybe 4-1/2 hours of work done, and then I'd be finished.

What do I do for the next 12 hours? At least with my aluminum MacBook boat-anchor, I can snap in another battery and keep going. Also, TSA will let me on the plane with Apple's replacement batteries, because they are original equipment... sometimes, they force 3rd party batteries into the cargo hold. We've seen it happen to our crews.

I have more Power Point presentations, Excel budget spreadsheets and PDF specification sheets on our products than the MBA can hold on it's puny drive. This doesn't even account for any applications or music or photos or any other documents. This thing is a cute toy.

Hell, you can't even connect to an Ethernet network and plug a USB thumb drive into the stupid-ass machine at the same damn time. Hilarious. All for $1400, $1500? Give me a break. What kind of modern computer is that? It's for suburban housewives who want to look cool surfing at StarBucks.

Also, I'm thinking you didn't really pay attention to my post. I want & need a computer with a smaller footprint. This is really the show stopper - the 13" LCD means the base of the machine has to accommodate it. I want a smaller footprint. The smallest footprint Apple produces is 13", 30% greater than my desired standard. This is ok for 2004 or 2005 technology but not in today's netbook world.

And you're absolutely wrong there - it is Steve's fault he hasn't built a netbook machine for the rest of us who sit in Economy. This used to be the company that built the computer for the rest of us, remember? Now I guess it's all about those with their own private jets, eh?

The MacBook Pro's you tell me are such road warrior machines are also 13, 15 and 17 inches in size. Again, too large - 30%, 50% and 70% larger than what I want. I don't want to travel with a machine of this heft. I used to, don't want to have to anymore. Stop trying to force me. It's my money, not yours. If Fujitsu can do it, maybe Apple can, too. Like I said: if they bothered trying.

I want a 10" netbook that runs OS X. Why do you insist on stepping on my dream? WTF, dude? A guy can't dream anymore? Not cool, man.

You can now get great taste in a decaffinated coffee

Originally Posted by matt_s

Or maybe it's in the koolaid...