So along comes a company that offers a solution, and they get squashed. Sure I understand the entire debate, and I don't necessarily support Pystar in this case... but at the end of the day, there was a solution for my needs and now their is not. Apple seems content to not address my problems, therefore, I'm not a satisfied customer at this moment.
It's hard to extol the virtue's of the Mac when your new one is years behind in technology and sitting in the shop for repairs.
They never offered a solution. Ripping off someone else's IP and then repackaging it as your own is not a solution. You want a solution? Build a hackintosh.
Pretty shocking that a business owner is even the least bit supportive of corporate thieves. But maybe when your own IP rights are threatened, you'll understand.
They never offered a solution. Ripping off someone else's IP and then repackaging it as your own is not a solution. You want a solution? Build a hackintosh.
Pretty shocking that a business owner is even the least bit supportive of corporate thieves. But maybe when your own IP rights are threatened, you'll understand.
Didn't say I was supportive of Pystar. Right or wrong, they were offering a technical solution that Apple seems content to not address.
Don't want to build a hackintosh, want Apple to put some of their BILLIONS back into their company and catch up to the rest of the industry.
Have my IP rights threatened every day. Sucks. But I don't go around punishing my clients because of what someone else does.
Didn't say I was supportive of Pystar. Right or wrong, they were offering a technical solution that Apple seems content to not address.
Don't want to build a hackintosh, want Apple to put some of their BILLIONS back into their company and catch up to the rest of the industry.
Have my IP rights threatened every day. Sucks. But I don't go around punishing my clients because of what someone else does.
I don't think you are being honest here. There is so much hyperbole in these comments and the others you made earlier. There's also a lot of unspoken assumptions in evidence and some major anger just beneath the surface of everything you're saying.
Apple needs to "catch up to the rest of the industry?"
Who says? (and what do you really mean by that?)
You "get your IP rights threatened every day?" WTF?
You sound reasonable on first read, but me thinks you have some serious axes a' grinding there.
If you really cannot afford a new computer more than every five years or so, then why are you using a Mac in the first place? Either your a professional that needs the performance of a Mac, or your a low-end user and it doesn't matter what you use. Macs have advantages over PCs, but not so big of an advantage that being poor or cheap doesn't instantly make the Windows alternative more attractive.
F*** YOU, stupid Psystar pirates. And of course, a big F*** YOU to all you morons who bought Psystar products against Apple's continued investments in R&D and innovation...it's an exemplary judgement to block all such hackers from freeriding on someone else's efforts...now where are the pundits who said that the EULA was unenforceable? Go study some Law before you babble such incongruities, MS-fanboy geniuses!
Some nice lingual skills you've got there
Only one thing I can't understand: what do you think MS fanboys have to do with all this? Real MS fanboys wouldn't care less as he/she wouldn't touch Psystar - nor Apple's own, matter of fact - computers even with a stinky stick.
Psystar was trying to cater for OSX fanboys who wouldn't/couldn't pay for Apple hardware. I guess some Apple fanboys also were hoping Psystar and likes will eventually force Apple to change their hardware game a bit - as in releasing mid-range proper desktop Mac with decent expansion capabilities.
Fair enough. Is a Mac Pro not a solution? Even as a business owner, though, perhaps it might be a bit steep, especially in these times . . .
You might have missed my earlier post... I have a Mac Pro, the video card fried and now i'm without a mac pro while I wait for repairs/replacement.
The best card available for the Mac Pro has the worst drivers imaginable, and the last 2 SL patches have made things even worse. It's also antiquated by over a year and inferior to it's PC counterpart ... It's a ridiculous situation, and I expect more from a company like Apple.
I am a supporter for Psystar. I personally use Linux (many different flavours) as my main OS, I have a hackintosh as well as a "real" Mac and honestly I think its very un-innovative and anti-competitory for Apple to withhold all its software like it does.
The open source community is ever expanding and ever growing because it has no limitations to the developers imaginations! But with Apple, you have to wait and let the hired developers come up with the ideas. Now after saying that I am in NO way meaning that Apple should just open source their OS (hhahaha way far fetched of that even being an idea) but if they plan on keeping their inclining take of market share they are either going to have to cut prices or expand their OS to more hardware.
Think about how anti-competitor this is for hardware vendors! If Apple is to gain 25% of market share (just for example) then that would cut into hardware vendors pockets for sure! Especially ATI and AMD, with Apple choosing Intel and Nvidia, they will lose those customers that use to be in that percentage that had a PC with their hardware.
So unless Apple plans on REALLY having anti-trust laws problems they better release Mac's with more hardware vendors or keep their prices high where they dont gain much more market share.
Apple needs to "catch up to the rest of the industry?"
Who says? (and what do you really mean by that?)
Says the entire Mac Pro computing population looking for GPU solutions... where yah been man?
If your not up to speed on the situation... the GPU solutions for Mac Pro's are in a dismal state at the moment.
If you want read up on it more:
Bearfeats.com
Apple discussion forums
xlr8yourmac
Appleinsider
Macworld
even EVGA's site discusses that they are aware of the driver problems and there is nothing they can do about it.
etc...
Yah... I'm miffed at the moment. Who wouldn't be in my situation?
If you want a metaphor... Apple is content to put wooden wheels on a Ferrari. Sure it gets you there, but it's a slow bumpy ride and embarrassing when passed by a Yugo.
Don't agree with what Pystar was doing... but I would sure love to be able to stay current with my computer hardware. The Mac Pro is supposed to be upgradeable, but the choices for upgrades (GPU's) is anemic and pathetic.
I want the best of both worlds. That is my 'ideal' and I want it... and I think Apple is partially responsible for my attitude here.
Delusional. All software has bugs. It has always had bugs and always will have bugs.
Its just that what you expect is more complex than it was in the 70's
No, back then, most programs we wrote were less than 4KB. It didn't take too long to write them, and it didn't take too long to de-bug them. Computers couldn't run anything bigger. Often, there wasn't more than 8KB of RAM and for storage we had, well uh, nothing.
Dow Jones is reporting the following quote from a Psystar attorney:
Eugene Action, one of Psystar's lawyers, said the decision is "ripe for appeal."
"Judge Alsup has written some very well reasoned findings that you couldn't fault, even though they went against us," Action said. "But it looks like ( Friday's ruling) was written by misguided bloggers."
That's very funny. If he thinks the findings were very well reasoned, that can't be faulted, then there is no basis for appeal. Appeal isn't made on the facts, it's made on the law. Id there were no errors by the judge, then where's the appeal?
So.... not defending Psystar's unauthorized selling of OS X-loaded systems, but since when does adding/removing/modifying kexts = copyright infringement? I've purchased hardware that has done that to OS X... is that copyright infringement too?
-Clive
Psystar did this as an unauthorized entity. Those who make peripherals for the Mac are considered to be authorized agents. You are allowed to alter software to make your equipment work WITH something that has copyrighted software. That's been established.
But you're not allowed to alter the software to make it run on an unauthorized computer.
You might have missed my earlier post... I have a Mac Pro, the video card fried and now i'm without a mac pro while I wait for repairs/replacement.
The best card available for the Mac Pro has the worst drivers imaginable, and the last 2 SL patches have made things even worse. It's also antiquated by over a year and inferior to it's PC counterpart ... It's a ridiculous situation, and I expect more from a company like Apple.
Was that under warrantee? Why would this be any different if Your Dell's video card was fried and you were waiting for repair/replacement?
I am a supporter for Psystar. I personally use Linux (many different flavours) as my main OS, I have a hackintosh as well as a "real" Mac and honestly I think its very un-innovative and anti-competitory for Apple to withhold all its software like it does.
The open source community is ever expanding and ever growing because it has no limitations to the developers imaginations! But with Apple, you have to wait and let the hired developers come up with the ideas. Now after saying that I am in NO way meaning that Apple should just open source their OS (hhahaha way far fetched of that even being an idea) but if they plan on keeping their inclining take of market share they are either going to have to cut prices or expand their OS to more hardware.
Think about how anti-competitor this is for hardware vendors! If Apple is to gain 25% of market share (just for example) then that would cut into hardware vendors pockets for sure! Especially ATI and AMD, with Apple choosing Intel and Nvidia, they will lose those customers that use to be in that percentage that had a PC with their hardware.
So unless Apple plans on REALLY having anti-trust laws problems they better release Mac's with more hardware vendors or keep their prices high where they dont gain much more market share.
I don't understand your argument at all.
Open source has plenty of problems on its own. If fact, all of the major Distro projects are at least two years behind their announced schedules. In addition, you have to recompile much software to get it to work on different distro's, and then, it often doesn't work as well from one to the other.
Rarely are open source programs nearly as polished as those from the for profit firms' software is.
Open source is great for those who want to spend lots of time with their computers maintaining them. Most people just want to buy something, plug it in, and start using it.
Apple isn't being anti-competitive at all. In fact, Apple gives more back to the open source community than any other company.
If people wanted to, they could take Darwin, the core of Apple's OS, and build a GUI around it, just like Apple does.
That's very funny. If he thinks the findings were very well reasoned, that can't be faulted, then there is no basis for appeal. Appeal isn't made on the facts, it's made on the law. Id there were no errors by the judge, then where's the appeal?
Yeah.. Eugene Actions statement seems to be written by one of the frequent posters in this forum
That's very funny. If he thinks the findings were very well reasoned, that can't be faulted, then there is no basis for appeal. Appeal isn't made on the facts, it's made on the law. Id there were no errors by the judge, then where's the appeal?
Not only that, but there are some issues still to be decided by THIS judge. It is hard to imagine he will appreciate being insulted by Psystar's lawyer. I am sure he will try to be impartial.
Open source has plenty of problems on its own. If fact, all of the major Distro projects are at least two years behind their announced schedules. In addition, you have to recompile much software to get it to work on different distro's, and then, it often doesn't work as well from one to the other.
Rarely are open source programs nearly as polished as those from the for profit firms' software is.
Open source is great for those who want to spend lots of time with their computers maintaining them. Most people just want to buy something, plug it in, and start using it.
I think anyone who looks at OpenOffice, Gimp, Inkster, or even WINE would ask just what you are smoking!
I would like to remind you that in many ways the MacOS is effectively a shell program (like bash and all the rest) that runs on top of an open source OS--Darwin.
Why does a judge rule on a key issue before the trial has even started? I understand that a judge has to rule on issues of what exactly the trial is about (ie, what charges are dismissed and which go to trial) and what evidence should be allowed.
If an issue is a simple matter of law, as opposed to a matter of fact, the judge can make a decision of summary judgment. In jury trials, the jury makes decisions based on facts presented, but if the law has something specific to say, it's the judge who makes the call, not the jury. If all issues in a case are matters of law, then the judge can decide the whole case on summary judgement without it even going to trial.
Should your employers given themselves the "freedom" to force you to work without paying you?
That's not exact relevant to anything really, is it?
However, you and your employer have entered into a contract, and they do have the right to expect you to undertake an reasonable (not illegal) task as part of your job for renumeration. It's certainly not as "free" as you might think. You may not like the task they want you to do, but if it's a reasonable request, then tough shit...you've got to get on with it.
a company that generates huge profits for US investors, employs many thousands of US citizens, run by one of the industries richest men...
wins a case in its homestate against a no name company
in a country where presidents can steal elections....
hmm..... where's the news here?
I wish that this case had been in Europe..
Not being funny, but Apple hadn't abused copyright, so I don't think that the summary judgment would have been any different.
Psystar's claims were just BS from the start, and to be fair the same goes for the rest of their allegations. Which I'm sure we'll find out when it goes to trial.
Comments
So along comes a company that offers a solution, and they get squashed. Sure I understand the entire debate, and I don't necessarily support Pystar in this case... but at the end of the day, there was a solution for my needs and now their is not. Apple seems content to not address my problems, therefore, I'm not a satisfied customer at this moment.
It's hard to extol the virtue's of the Mac when your new one is years behind in technology and sitting in the shop for repairs.
They never offered a solution. Ripping off someone else's IP and then repackaging it as your own is not a solution. You want a solution? Build a hackintosh.
Pretty shocking that a business owner is even the least bit supportive of corporate thieves. But maybe when your own IP rights are threatened, you'll understand.
They never offered a solution. Ripping off someone else's IP and then repackaging it as your own is not a solution. You want a solution? Build a hackintosh.
Pretty shocking that a business owner is even the least bit supportive of corporate thieves. But maybe when your own IP rights are threatened, you'll understand.
Didn't say I was supportive of Pystar. Right or wrong, they were offering a technical solution that Apple seems content to not address.
Don't want to build a hackintosh, want Apple to put some of their BILLIONS back into their company and catch up to the rest of the industry.
Have my IP rights threatened every day. Sucks. But I don't go around punishing my clients because of what someone else does.
Didn't say I was supportive of Pystar. Right or wrong, they were offering a technical solution that Apple seems content to not address.
Don't want to build a hackintosh, want Apple to put some of their BILLIONS back into their company and catch up to the rest of the industry.
Have my IP rights threatened every day. Sucks. But I don't go around punishing my clients because of what someone else does.
Fair enough. Is a Mac Pro not a solution? Even as a business owner, though, perhaps it might be a bit steep, especially in these times . . .
Didn't say I was supportive of Pystar. Right or wrong, they were offering a technical solution that Apple seems content to not address.
Don't want to build a hackintosh, want Apple to put some of their BILLIONS back into their company and catch up to the rest of the industry.
Have my IP rights threatened every day. Sucks. But I don't go around punishing my clients because of what someone else does.
I don't think you are being honest here. There is so much hyperbole in these comments and the others you made earlier. There's also a lot of unspoken assumptions in evidence and some major anger just beneath the surface of everything you're saying.
Apple needs to "catch up to the rest of the industry?"
Who says? (and what do you really mean by that?)
You "get your IP rights threatened every day?" WTF?
You sound reasonable on first read, but me thinks you have some serious axes a' grinding there.
If you really cannot afford a new computer more than every five years or so, then why are you using a Mac in the first place? Either your a professional that needs the performance of a Mac, or your a low-end user and it doesn't matter what you use. Macs have advantages over PCs, but not so big of an advantage that being poor or cheap doesn't instantly make the Windows alternative more attractive.
All I can say is:
F*** YOU, stupid Psystar pirates. And of course, a big F*** YOU to all you morons who bought Psystar products against Apple's continued investments in R&D and innovation...it's an exemplary judgement to block all such hackers from freeriding on someone else's efforts...now where are the pundits who said that the EULA was unenforceable? Go study some Law before you babble such incongruities, MS-fanboy geniuses!
Some nice lingual skills you've got there
Only one thing I can't understand: what do you think MS fanboys have to do with all this? Real MS fanboys wouldn't care less as he/she wouldn't touch Psystar - nor Apple's own, matter of fact - computers even with a stinky stick.
Psystar was trying to cater for OSX fanboys who wouldn't/couldn't pay for Apple hardware. I guess some Apple fanboys also were hoping Psystar and likes will eventually force Apple to change their hardware game a bit - as in releasing mid-range proper desktop Mac with decent expansion capabilities.
Fair enough. Is a Mac Pro not a solution? Even as a business owner, though, perhaps it might be a bit steep, especially in these times . . .
You might have missed my earlier post... I have a Mac Pro, the video card fried and now i'm without a mac pro while I wait for repairs/replacement.
The best card available for the Mac Pro has the worst drivers imaginable, and the last 2 SL patches have made things even worse. It's also antiquated by over a year and inferior to it's PC counterpart ... It's a ridiculous situation, and I expect more from a company like Apple.
The open source community is ever expanding and ever growing because it has no limitations to the developers imaginations! But with Apple, you have to wait and let the hired developers come up with the ideas. Now after saying that I am in NO way meaning that Apple should just open source their OS (hhahaha way far fetched of that even being an idea) but if they plan on keeping their inclining take of market share they are either going to have to cut prices or expand their OS to more hardware.
Think about how anti-competitor this is for hardware vendors! If Apple is to gain 25% of market share (just for example) then that would cut into hardware vendors pockets for sure! Especially ATI and AMD, with Apple choosing Intel and Nvidia, they will lose those customers that use to be in that percentage that had a PC with their hardware.
So unless Apple plans on REALLY having anti-trust laws problems they better release Mac's with more hardware vendors or keep their prices high where they dont gain much more market share.
Apple needs to "catch up to the rest of the industry?"
Who says? (and what do you really mean by that?)
Says the entire Mac Pro computing population looking for GPU solutions... where yah been man?
If your not up to speed on the situation... the GPU solutions for Mac Pro's are in a dismal state at the moment.
If you want read up on it more:
Bearfeats.com
Apple discussion forums
xlr8yourmac
Appleinsider
Macworld
even EVGA's site discusses that they are aware of the driver problems and there is nothing they can do about it.
etc...
Yah... I'm miffed at the moment. Who wouldn't be in my situation?
If you want a metaphor... Apple is content to put wooden wheels on a Ferrari. Sure it gets you there, but it's a slow bumpy ride and embarrassing when passed by a Yugo.
Don't agree with what Pystar was doing... but I would sure love to be able to stay current with my computer hardware. The Mac Pro is supposed to be upgradeable, but the choices for upgrades (GPU's) is anemic and pathetic.
I want the best of both worlds. That is my 'ideal' and I want it... and I think Apple is partially responsible for my attitude here.
QQ
Delusional. All software has bugs. It has always had bugs and always will have bugs.
Its just that what you expect is more complex than it was in the 70's
No, back then, most programs we wrote were less than 4KB. It didn't take too long to write them, and it didn't take too long to de-bug them. Computers couldn't run anything bigger. Often, there wasn't more than 8KB of RAM and for storage we had, well uh, nothing.
Dow Jones is reporting the following quote from a Psystar attorney:
Eugene Action, one of Psystar's lawyers, said the decision is "ripe for appeal."
"Judge Alsup has written some very well reasoned findings that you couldn't fault, even though they went against us," Action said. "But it looks like ( Friday's ruling) was written by misguided bloggers."
That's very funny. If he thinks the findings were very well reasoned, that can't be faulted, then there is no basis for appeal. Appeal isn't made on the facts, it's made on the law. Id there were no errors by the judge, then where's the appeal?
So.... not defending Psystar's unauthorized selling of OS X-loaded systems, but since when does adding/removing/modifying kexts = copyright infringement? I've purchased hardware that has done that to OS X... is that copyright infringement too?
-Clive
Psystar did this as an unauthorized entity. Those who make peripherals for the Mac are considered to be authorized agents. You are allowed to alter software to make your equipment work WITH something that has copyrighted software. That's been established.
But you're not allowed to alter the software to make it run on an unauthorized computer.
Didn't say I was supportive of Pystar. Right or wrong, they were offering a technical solution that Apple seems content to not address.
Don't want to build a hackintosh, want Apple to put some of their BILLIONS back into their company and catch up to the rest of the industry.
Have my IP rights threatened every day. Sucks. But I don't go around punishing my clients because of what someone else does.
Why don't we just talk about LEGAL solutions?
It's not likely that your IP is costing you any money by your clients actions. They are YOUR clients.
You might have missed my earlier post... I have a Mac Pro, the video card fried and now i'm without a mac pro while I wait for repairs/replacement.
The best card available for the Mac Pro has the worst drivers imaginable, and the last 2 SL patches have made things even worse. It's also antiquated by over a year and inferior to it's PC counterpart ... It's a ridiculous situation, and I expect more from a company like Apple.
Was that under warrantee? Why would this be any different if Your Dell's video card was fried and you were waiting for repair/replacement?
I am a supporter for Psystar. I personally use Linux (many different flavours) as my main OS, I have a hackintosh as well as a "real" Mac and honestly I think its very un-innovative and anti-competitory for Apple to withhold all its software like it does.
The open source community is ever expanding and ever growing because it has no limitations to the developers imaginations! But with Apple, you have to wait and let the hired developers come up with the ideas. Now after saying that I am in NO way meaning that Apple should just open source their OS (hhahaha way far fetched of that even being an idea) but if they plan on keeping their inclining take of market share they are either going to have to cut prices or expand their OS to more hardware.
Think about how anti-competitor this is for hardware vendors! If Apple is to gain 25% of market share (just for example) then that would cut into hardware vendors pockets for sure! Especially ATI and AMD, with Apple choosing Intel and Nvidia, they will lose those customers that use to be in that percentage that had a PC with their hardware.
So unless Apple plans on REALLY having anti-trust laws problems they better release Mac's with more hardware vendors or keep their prices high where they dont gain much more market share.
I don't understand your argument at all.
Open source has plenty of problems on its own. If fact, all of the major Distro projects are at least two years behind their announced schedules. In addition, you have to recompile much software to get it to work on different distro's, and then, it often doesn't work as well from one to the other.
Rarely are open source programs nearly as polished as those from the for profit firms' software is.
Open source is great for those who want to spend lots of time with their computers maintaining them. Most people just want to buy something, plug it in, and start using it.
Apple isn't being anti-competitive at all. In fact, Apple gives more back to the open source community than any other company.
If people wanted to, they could take Darwin, the core of Apple's OS, and build a GUI around it, just like Apple does.
That's very funny. If he thinks the findings were very well reasoned, that can't be faulted, then there is no basis for appeal. Appeal isn't made on the facts, it's made on the law. Id there were no errors by the judge, then where's the appeal?
Yeah.. Eugene Actions statement seems to be written by one of the frequent posters in this forum
There is no chance for Psystar to win this case.
That's very funny. If he thinks the findings were very well reasoned, that can't be faulted, then there is no basis for appeal. Appeal isn't made on the facts, it's made on the law. Id there were no errors by the judge, then where's the appeal?
Not only that, but there are some issues still to be decided by THIS judge. It is hard to imagine he will appreciate being insulted by Psystar's lawyer. I am sure he will try to be impartial.
I don't understand your argument at all.
Open source has plenty of problems on its own. If fact, all of the major Distro projects are at least two years behind their announced schedules. In addition, you have to recompile much software to get it to work on different distro's, and then, it often doesn't work as well from one to the other.
Rarely are open source programs nearly as polished as those from the for profit firms' software is.
Open source is great for those who want to spend lots of time with their computers maintaining them. Most people just want to buy something, plug it in, and start using it.
I think anyone who looks at OpenOffice, Gimp, Inkster, or even WINE would ask just what you are smoking!
I would like to remind you that in many ways the MacOS is effectively a shell program (like bash and all the rest) that runs on top of an open source OS--Darwin.
Can somebody explain me this:
Why does a judge rule on a key issue before the trial has even started? I understand that a judge has to rule on issues of what exactly the trial is about (ie, what charges are dismissed and which go to trial) and what evidence should be allowed.
If an issue is a simple matter of law, as opposed to a matter of fact, the judge can make a decision of summary judgment. In jury trials, the jury makes decisions based on facts presented, but if the law has something specific to say, it's the judge who makes the call, not the jury. If all issues in a case are matters of law, then the judge can decide the whole case on summary judgement without it even going to trial.
That's absurd.
Should your employers given themselves the "freedom" to force you to work without paying you?
That's not exact relevant to anything really, is it?
However, you and your employer have entered into a contract, and they do have the right to expect you to undertake an reasonable (not illegal) task as part of your job for renumeration. It's certainly not as "free" as you might think. You may not like the task they want you to do, but if it's a reasonable request, then tough shit...you've got to get on with it.
so..
a company that generates huge profits for US investors, employs many thousands of US citizens, run by one of the industries richest men...
wins a case in its homestate against a no name company
in a country where presidents can steal elections....
hmm..... where's the news here?
I wish that this case had been in Europe..
Not being funny, but Apple hadn't abused copyright, so I don't think that the summary judgment would have been any different.
Psystar's claims were just BS from the start, and to be fair the same goes for the rest of their allegations. Which I'm sure we'll find out when it goes to trial.