Originally Posted by wizard69
Frankly Apples behaviour here is enough to make me go back to Linux machines. If they can't win on the weight of the evdence they need to pack up and go home. An appology to the user community would be nice too. Unfortunately I think Apples goal here is to make Pystar go away anyway they can and avoid determination of their legal behaviour.
Apple's "legal behaviour" has been under scrutiny in one form or another since the advent of the iPod + iTunes. Judge Alsup has already participated in the case some months ago and has come out heavily in favour of Apple regarding several aspects of the case, particularly in terms of anti-trust.
Apple's goal here is indeed to make Psystar go away, and as Apple users who are interested in a healthy Apple that faces healthy and legitimate
competition (as opposed to thieves who violate their IP rights), that should be our
goal as well.
With resepct to winning "on the weight of the evidence" . . . we're talking about civil litigation here, esepcially as it plays out in the United States. At least in Canada, as part of the work I do, I've seen seemingly clear-cut civil suits drag on for several years, one in particular that spanned over the course of eight years. That's just one of the reasons the US and Canada have different forms of ADR now (since about the early 90's), that is, Alternative Dispute Resolution, like mediation and arbitration. There is (or at least was) a lot or Private Judging in the US, especially in California, to help provide an alternative means of adjudication. ADR, however, has met with varying degrees of success, and has in no way supplanted the standard civil adjudication process. It was simply meant to ease the pressure on the court docket. There are plenty of cases that go nowhere during mediation, for example, and are simply referred back to the courts.
Originally Posted by hiimamac
Look, if Apple can run windows is then an end user should be able to out the os on any hardware they want. In fact, this day will come, not if, but when. Apple OS is already becoming a commondity. I remember saying one day it would be in x86 and got laughed out but it happened didn't it.
We're talking about the integrity of OS X here as a piece of Intellectual Property that relies on heavy differentiation (stability, reliability, mated with the hardware) in order to succeed, and we're also talking about Apple's business model which relies on OS X being sold with the hardware. That's the whole point, both from an end-user experience perspective and Apple's business interests. OS X unhinged from Macs en masse would mean that it would fast become a Windows clone, facing the very same problems (and a victim of them) the same as Windows.
As long as Apple is interested in the computer business, what you're looking for will never happen. Having OS X running on a different chip architecture is one thing, but "freeing" the OS a la Windows is an entirely different thing. And ultimately, doing so would be extremely detrimental to the average user
and would effectively kill Apple's Mac business at the same time. Apple went from the old Motorola 68000 architecture to PowerPC. And then then they went from PowerPC to Intel. The only reason this latter move was such a surprise to everyone was not just because it was x86, but because this was the same architecyure on which the competition ran. But all throughout the history of Apple, their OS has always in one form or another been locked to or otherwise limited to their own hardware. The advantage of x86 is that the chip suppliers are reliable, the supply is plentiful, hardware upgrades can be rolled out much faster (especailyl faster than the old G4 and G5 architecture) and more importantly, this allows Apple to boast that you can install Windows on a Mac, and really, any other OS. But OS X still remains locked to the hardware. This fact was common to ALL architectures Apple has used, and for good reason.
Apple locks OS X onto specific hardware because that's the hardware it gets tested the on the most. This means that OS X works as intended on this hardware
. If there was no lock and if any old company could produce a PC that ran OS X, Apple would have less control over the hardware being used and OS X might not work as intended on it. This would pose a serious problem for the average user, which comprises the bulk of Apple's market.
Unless of course it's ok for the average user to have a consistent Windows-like experience. Not going to happen.
Think about what you're saying. There is simply no way for Apple to pull it off at this time, nor for the foreseeable future, without killing anything and everything that differentiates OS X and makes it the Gold Standard of operating systems. Bye-Bye exclusivity and desirability. OS X is so successful and so universally admired because it is offered as a complete software+hardware package.
It's a simple, all-in-one, turn-key solution that is targeted at the average user, and is good for the average user. It's everything that Windows is not. That's the whole point. Simple to use yet powerful, right out of the box. You unlock OS X from its hardware so it can be installed on any old PC, and you erase most of its advantages. And this is the problem with Windows . . .
Microsoft is facing a problem (like they always have), in that they are trying to compete against a vendor who uses a vertically integrated model rather than the horizontal model, which Microsoft and the PC market uses. The result is that you have a poor integrated approach to marketing, hardware and software design where the experience is as much dictated by the hardware vendor as the quality of the operating system - both of which are developed by two separate companies with different goals overall in regard to their respective strategies.
Yeah, Apple. Open up and give away your core business. That way you can grow the $119 licensing fee market, and ditch that annoying $700 per unit you earn from hardware. Then you can hire a lot more programmers and begin the arduous process of writing drivers for every device out there, and supporting untold numbers of hardware combinations with your newly expanded support team. And while you're at it, why not just give iTMS to me.
That's the Windows world. And I'm sure that's the last thing any of us would want.