I think this outfit may be on the wrong side of the law on several counts. First, by calling their product "OpenMac" they are likely already infringing on Apple's trademarks. Additionally, as previously mentioned, they likely need a reseller agreement of some type to avoid being considered the end-user. At any rate, Apple does have some say how there IP can be used.
The monopoly argument is really kind of a stretch. Sure, Apple has a monopoly within Macintosh systems just as Chevy has a monopoly on Corvettes, but does it make sense to define the market so narrowly? Put in the proper market context (PCs and cars), neither holds a monopoly. A more likely argument is that Apple has a monopoly in portable media players.
I really wonder what makes people feel that a company should be compelled to release their IP to its competitors. When Lexicon developed Logic 7 audio processing, it was offered exclusively in Lexicon products so Lexicon had a 100 percent monopoly on Logic 7 audio processing. When Harman International acquired Lexicon they offered Logic variants in products from some other Harman brands. As the owner of the technology, that is their right and they are free to do what they wish with the technology as long as they do not: a) have a monopoly in their market, and b) use that monopoly in an unfair anti-competitive manner.
Well, it's still a lot cheaper than a comparably set up Mac Mini, and with that firewire upgrade, you get 3 firewire outputs, to the mini's single. Also, isn't just the idea of being able to upgrade the system, including adding a dedicated graphics card or 8 GB ram, a bit leap up from the Mini?
Why are people so thick headed and ignorant? Apple sells hardware. That's the ONLY reason OS X, iTunes and the iPhone SDK exist. Turn OS X loose on crap PC hardware, iTunes loose crap MP3 players, and the iPhone SDK loose on crap cell phones, and Apple ceases to exist the next day. It's that simple. Don't you people know your Apple history? Apple turned Mac OS loose on third party hardware and damn near went out business in the 90's. Is the concept just too complicated for small minds to grasp?
While many of us like to tinker, there are many people out there who do not. That is who Apple is appealing to and it is only a matter of time before corporate America decides on adopting a similar stance (if Macs are to make inroads there). In a sense, they do with their MS-only attitude when it comes to rolling out desktops and having back-end servers; soon they will want working solutions!
I can't see any end-user wanting to buy this thing to save a few bucks. And I can't see anyone who tinkers thinking this thing is a great deal.
I can't see any end-user wanting to buy this thing to save a few bucks.
There are many many people who bought hacked iPhones to avoid getting locked into paying 2 years of AT&T rates. They face the same updating issues as Hackintosh folks will, but that doesn't stop what is estimated to be a few million folks from doing it.
Speaking of which, is there anything in the iPhone EULA that says you can't run the iPhone software on a non-AT&T phone for the first 2 years?
So can you ask SWIY how GarageBand and pro-app performance is on his/her hackintosh? I haven't - I mean, SWIM hasn't had an opportunity to get his/her PC prepped for his/her hackintosh implementation yet. (S)he'd really like to know.
-Clive
Never tried Garageband or most Pro Apps, but Aperture, iTunes, and iPhoto work fine. They have even been successful with getting the latest updates via Software Updater.
Dell Optiplex w/ 2.66Ghz Pentium with SSE2 (and maybe SSE3, but not sure), 1.5GB DDR RAM, 2x80GB and 1x160GB internal HDDs, DVD±R. Start up time is 25 seconds.
Handbrake is very, very slow, DVD Player and Front Row do not work but SWIM never concerned with a solution to that. Sharing libraries with iTunes had issues, too. I'm pretty sure most of these issues, if not all have been worked out by now since SWIMs copy of OSx86 is a couple years old.
Yes, but with the mini you are not just paying for a low end machine, you're paying for the form factor. How much would a PC with the same form factor and specs as a $599 Mac mini cost?
That would assume the end user actually cares about the form factor and isn't simply interested in a cheap Mac system. I doubt the majority of purchasers would really be upset if the Mini was in a Mini- or Midtower configuration (from the number of comments on Mac sites, there seems to be a large group that would be absolutely giddy about that prospect).
The only reason you're paying for the form factor with the Mac Mini is that Apple gives you no other choice if you want a (vaguely) budget priced Mac.
The fact that it can easily and cheaply be upgraded both at time of purchase and afterwards makes a non-Apple sanctioned OS X running computer highly attractive. Even if the actual package won't be as pretty to look as Apple's product.
All those hits must be from the non-existent mid-range tower market.
If they get over here to the UK and come with some sort of warranty, I am buying one. To hell with the EULA and to hell with Apple. I've been waiting for a machine like this the entire time I've used a Mac and they've seen the demand often enough to make one.
I don't care about updates. I hardly ever update my system anyway and I'm sure someone will figure out how to get updates working anyway.
If this machine runs Leopard unmodified, I don't see how Apple can even have any say in this. They are only selling a box that runs Apple's system.
All I wanted was a machine I could use at home with good graphics. A 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo with an 8600 and 7200 rpm drives is ideal.
I'm not tied down to a single glossy display and I can replace my optical drives and hard drives however I like. 20x burner vs 8x in the iMac. For the first time in years, I'm excited about a Mac and it's not sold by Apple and as I suspected, there are a lot of people who feel the same way.
The End-User license agreement is just that - an agreement with the "End User", not the manufacturer or necessarily the installer. The only person who can violate is whoever buys it. Apple would have to take the company to court to get lists of purchasers, and then sue the individual users, which would be difficult and time consuming.
Does anyone know of any instances of a company actually suing for breach of EULA? I know that all of the recent piracy lawsuits have involved copyright law exclusively and not breach of EULA...
Before you start offering legal opinions you should make sure that you know what you are talking about because everything that you said is 100% false.
Software may be covered by patents, trademarks, and copyrights and with all three, inducement or contributory infringement are actionable against suppliers. Additionally, manufacturers are subject to a separate license, rather than the EULA (which as the name states applies to end users) and may only install the licensed software in accordance with the terms of that license.
In practice, end users are never sued for IP violations because it is easier to sue the contributory infringer who would be liable for each violation by his or her customers.
Piracy lawsuits are a different matter because the person who induces the infringement is often overseas and beyond the reach of American courts. Therefore, it is easier to sue end users. However, end users have been sued for EULA violations, most recently by Microsoft (end users who violated OEM licensing of Windows and Office products by installing on another machine).
There will always be cheapos out there unwilling to pay even a nickel for something, yet they will spend all of their waking hours to get something for nothing. This thread is evidence of that.
That would assume the end user actually cares about the form factor and isn't simply interested in a cheap Mac system. I doubt the majority of purchasers would really be upset if the Mini was in a Mini- or Midtower configuration (from the number of comments on Mac sites, there seems to be a large group that would be absolutely giddy about that prospect).
The only reason you're paying for the form factor with the Mac Mini is that Apple gives you no other choice if you want a (vaguely) budget priced Mac.
Agreed. I happen to have just finished helping a friend build a Hackintosh. Why? Because it was a fraction of the cost of a Mac Pro. The damage:
$100 Gigabyte P35-DS4 motherboard (open box) with 8 USB 2.0 and 2 Firewire ports
$60 aluminum case with 11 drive bays
$70 80-Plus rated 500w power supply
$65 4GB of DDR2 800 RAM
$40 GeForce 7600GT PCIe video card with both DVI and VGA outputs
$30 CPU cooler
$200 Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz CPU
$89 Leopard from Amazon
$25 Philips SATA 20x DVD burner
$115 Samsung 750GB 7200rpm 32MB cache hard drive
Total: just over $800 including shipping, and every spec is vastly superior to the Mac Mini, even the low-end video card. The only thing the Mini has that the Hackintosh doesn't is Bluetooth and Wifi, and we could add those for about $30 if he wanted it. The case isn't as elegant as the Mac Pro's, but you can't have everything. And if he decides to upgrade next year, it will again cost him less than selling a Mac Pro and buying a new one. I can't say I'm not sorely tempted to build one for myself.
dang.... i was about to buy my first Mac from there... for just $400 dollars. I'm sure if Apple released something similar to that it would be a hit. I'd buy it.
Agreed. I happen to have just finished helping a friend build a Hackintosh. Why? Because it was a fraction of the cost of a Mac Pro. The damage:
$100 Gigabyte P35-DS4 motherboard (open box) with 8 USB 2.0 and 2 Firewire ports
$60 aluminum case with 11 drive bays
$70 80-Plus rated 500w power supply
$65 4GB of DDR2 800 RAM
$40 GeForce 7600GT PCIe video card with both DVI and VGA outputs
$30 CPU cooler
$200 Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz CPU
$89 Leopard from Amazon
$25 Philips SATA 20x DVD burner
$115 Samsung 750GB 7200rpm 32MB cache hard drive
Total: just over $800 including shipping, and every spec is vastly superior to the Mac Mini, even the low-end video card. The only thing the Mini has that the Hackintosh doesn't is Bluetooth and Wifi, and we could add those for about $30 if he wanted it. The case isn't as elegant as the Mac Pro's, but you can't have everything. And if he decides to upgrade next year, it will again cost him less than selling a Mac Pro and buying a new one. I can't say I'm not sorely tempted to build one for myself.
1) Have you verified the HW will work (and are optimized) with the hacked copy of Leopard?
2) Once you have this store bought version of Leopard, how are you going to get it to install? The usual way is to just DL the pre-edited x86 install disc, from what I'm told.
Before you start offering legal opinions you should make sure that you know what you are talking about because everything that you said is 100% false.
... manufacturers are subject to a separate license, rather than the EULA (which as the name states applies to end users) and may only install the licensed software in accordance with the terms of that license.
Wow, so everything I wrote is 100% false, but then you repeated what I wrote about EULA's as though it's true. Hmm, did i forget that it's opposite day today?
1) Have you verified the HW will work (and are optimized) with the hacked copy of Leopard?
2) Once you have this store bought version of Leopard, how are you going to get it to install? The usual way is to just DL the pre-edited x86 install disc, from what I'm told.
Most of the hardware doesn't care what OS is running. Only the motherboard and the video card may have problems. The P35 series from Gigabyte are known to be some of the most compatible with OS X (along with Intel's Bad Axe 2 and Asus' P5 series, but those use older chipsets and will not work with Yorkfield), with almost all features working out of the box and only a few patches required, if any. There are plenty of options for making Geforce cards work properly with OS X. The retail copy of Leopard was mainly to salve his conscience, not for installation.
We need Apple to listen closely, we've been begging for a mid-tower Mac for ages!
Bingo. That would be the reason that this product would be successful; Apple does not sell the product that a large number of Mac users want to buy. If someone else comes along as does so, Apple's losses are entirely of their own doing.
I just bought a new iMac, but I'll give it to my son and buy an OpenMac in a heartbeat if it actually comes to fruition, for no other reason than it's the Mac I wanted to buy from Apple in the first place.
Comments
The monopoly argument is really kind of a stretch. Sure, Apple has a monopoly within Macintosh systems just as Chevy has a monopoly on Corvettes, but does it make sense to define the market so narrowly? Put in the proper market context (PCs and cars), neither holds a monopoly. A more likely argument is that Apple has a monopoly in portable media players.
I really wonder what makes people feel that a company should be compelled to release their IP to its competitors. When Lexicon developed Logic 7 audio processing, it was offered exclusively in Lexicon products so Lexicon had a 100 percent monopoly on Logic 7 audio processing. When Harman International acquired Lexicon they offered Logic variants in products from some other Harman brands. As the owner of the technology, that is their right and they are free to do what they wish with the technology as long as they do not: a) have a monopoly in their market, and b) use that monopoly in an unfair anti-competitive manner.
LOL, they charge you an OSX install fee.
For the entry level model, it's $604.99
Base $399.99
Firewire + $50.00
OSX Installed +$155.00
Total $604.99
Well, it's still a lot cheaper than a comparably set up Mac Mini, and with that firewire upgrade, you get 3 firewire outputs, to the mini's single. Also, isn't just the idea of being able to upgrade the system, including adding a dedicated graphics card or 8 GB ram, a bit leap up from the Mini?
Apple, please make us a QUIET Mac miniTOWER with FireWire 800 and 7200 rpm disks inside.
Your ilk has been asking for this for over what, twenty years now? Haven't you gotten the message yet?
While many of us like to tinker, there are many people out there who do not. That is who Apple is appealing to and it is only a matter of time before corporate America decides on adopting a similar stance (if Macs are to make inroads there). In a sense, they do with their MS-only attitude when it comes to rolling out desktops and having back-end servers; soon they will want working solutions!
I can't see any end-user wanting to buy this thing to save a few bucks. And I can't see anyone who tinkers thinking this thing is a great deal.
I can't see any end-user wanting to buy this thing to save a few bucks.
There are many many people who bought hacked iPhones to avoid getting locked into paying 2 years of AT&T rates. They face the same updating issues as Hackintosh folks will, but that doesn't stop what is estimated to be a few million folks from doing it.
Speaking of which, is there anything in the iPhone EULA that says you can't run the iPhone software on a non-AT&T phone for the first 2 years?
So can you ask SWIY how GarageBand and pro-app performance is on his/her hackintosh? I haven't - I mean, SWIM hasn't had an opportunity to get his/her PC prepped for his/her hackintosh implementation yet. (S)he'd really like to know.
-Clive
Never tried Garageband or most Pro Apps, but Aperture, iTunes, and iPhoto work fine. They have even been successful with getting the latest updates via Software Updater.
Dell Optiplex w/ 2.66Ghz Pentium with SSE2 (and maybe SSE3, but not sure), 1.5GB DDR RAM, 2x80GB and 1x160GB internal HDDs, DVD±R. Start up time is 25 seconds.
Handbrake is very, very slow, DVD Player and Front Row do not work but SWIM never concerned with a solution to that. Sharing libraries with iTunes had issues, too. I'm pretty sure most of these issues, if not all have been worked out by now since SWIMs copy of OSx86 is a couple years old.
Yes, but with the mini you are not just paying for a low end machine, you're paying for the form factor. How much would a PC with the same form factor and specs as a $599 Mac mini cost?
That would assume the end user actually cares about the form factor and isn't simply interested in a cheap Mac system. I doubt the majority of purchasers would really be upset if the Mini was in a Mini- or Midtower configuration (from the number of comments on Mac sites, there seems to be a large group that would be absolutely giddy about that prospect).
The only reason you're paying for the form factor with the Mac Mini is that Apple gives you no other choice if you want a (vaguely) budget priced Mac.
The fact that it can easily and cheaply be upgraded both at time of purchase and afterwards makes a non-Apple sanctioned OS X running computer highly attractive. Even if the actual package won't be as pretty to look as Apple's product.
If they get over here to the UK and come with some sort of warranty, I am buying one. To hell with the EULA and to hell with Apple. I've been waiting for a machine like this the entire time I've used a Mac and they've seen the demand often enough to make one.
I don't care about updates. I hardly ever update my system anyway and I'm sure someone will figure out how to get updates working anyway.
If this machine runs Leopard unmodified, I don't see how Apple can even have any say in this. They are only selling a box that runs Apple's system.
All I wanted was a machine I could use at home with good graphics. A 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo with an 8600 and 7200 rpm drives is ideal.
I'm not tied down to a single glossy display and I can replace my optical drives and hard drives however I like. 20x burner vs 8x in the iMac. For the first time in years, I'm excited about a Mac and it's not sold by Apple and as I suspected, there are a lot of people who feel the same way.
The End-User license agreement is just that - an agreement with the "End User", not the manufacturer or necessarily the installer. The only person who can violate is whoever buys it. Apple would have to take the company to court to get lists of purchasers, and then sue the individual users, which would be difficult and time consuming.
Does anyone know of any instances of a company actually suing for breach of EULA? I know that all of the recent piracy lawsuits have involved copyright law exclusively and not breach of EULA...
Before you start offering legal opinions you should make sure that you know what you are talking about because everything that you said is 100% false.
Software may be covered by patents, trademarks, and copyrights and with all three, inducement or contributory infringement are actionable against suppliers. Additionally, manufacturers are subject to a separate license, rather than the EULA (which as the name states applies to end users) and may only install the licensed software in accordance with the terms of that license.
In practice, end users are never sued for IP violations because it is easier to sue the contributory infringer who would be liable for each violation by his or her customers.
Piracy lawsuits are a different matter because the person who induces the infringement is often overseas and beyond the reach of American courts. Therefore, it is easier to sue end users. However, end users have been sued for EULA violations, most recently by Microsoft (end users who violated OEM licensing of Windows and Office products by installing on another machine).
That would assume the end user actually cares about the form factor and isn't simply interested in a cheap Mac system. I doubt the majority of purchasers would really be upset if the Mini was in a Mini- or Midtower configuration (from the number of comments on Mac sites, there seems to be a large group that would be absolutely giddy about that prospect).
The only reason you're paying for the form factor with the Mac Mini is that Apple gives you no other choice if you want a (vaguely) budget priced Mac.
Agreed. I happen to have just finished helping a friend build a Hackintosh. Why? Because it was a fraction of the cost of a Mac Pro. The damage:
$100 Gigabyte P35-DS4 motherboard (open box) with 8 USB 2.0 and 2 Firewire ports
$60 aluminum case with 11 drive bays
$70 80-Plus rated 500w power supply
$65 4GB of DDR2 800 RAM
$40 GeForce 7600GT PCIe video card with both DVI and VGA outputs
$30 CPU cooler
$200 Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz CPU
$89 Leopard from Amazon
$25 Philips SATA 20x DVD burner
$115 Samsung 750GB 7200rpm 32MB cache hard drive
Total: just over $800 including shipping, and every spec is vastly superior to the Mac Mini, even the low-end video card. The only thing the Mini has that the Hackintosh doesn't is Bluetooth and Wifi, and we could add those for about $30 if he wanted it. The case isn't as elegant as the Mac Pro's, but you can't have everything. And if he decides to upgrade next year, it will again cost him less than selling a Mac Pro and buying a new one. I can't say I'm not sorely tempted to build one for myself.
Agreed. I happen to have just finished helping a friend build a Hackintosh. Why? Because it was a fraction of the cost of a Mac Pro. The damage:
$100 Gigabyte P35-DS4 motherboard (open box) with 8 USB 2.0 and 2 Firewire ports
$60 aluminum case with 11 drive bays
$70 80-Plus rated 500w power supply
$65 4GB of DDR2 800 RAM
$40 GeForce 7600GT PCIe video card with both DVI and VGA outputs
$30 CPU cooler
$200 Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz CPU
$89 Leopard from Amazon
$25 Philips SATA 20x DVD burner
$115 Samsung 750GB 7200rpm 32MB cache hard drive
Total: just over $800 including shipping, and every spec is vastly superior to the Mac Mini, even the low-end video card. The only thing the Mini has that the Hackintosh doesn't is Bluetooth and Wifi, and we could add those for about $30 if he wanted it. The case isn't as elegant as the Mac Pro's, but you can't have everything. And if he decides to upgrade next year, it will again cost him less than selling a Mac Pro and buying a new one. I can't say I'm not sorely tempted to build one for myself.
1) Have you verified the HW will work (and are optimized) with the hacked copy of Leopard?
2) Once you have this store bought version of Leopard, how are you going to get it to install? The usual way is to just DL the pre-edited x86 install disc, from what I'm told.
Before you start offering legal opinions you should make sure that you know what you are talking about because everything that you said is 100% false.
... manufacturers are subject to a separate license, rather than the EULA (which as the name states applies to end users) and may only install the licensed software in accordance with the terms of that license.
Wow, so everything I wrote is 100% false, but then you repeated what I wrote about EULA's as though it's true. Hmm, did i forget that it's opposite day today?
Or are you, sir, a conundrum?
1) Have you verified the HW will work (and are optimized) with the hacked copy of Leopard?
2) Once you have this store bought version of Leopard, how are you going to get it to install? The usual way is to just DL the pre-edited x86 install disc, from what I'm told.
Most of the hardware doesn't care what OS is running. Only the motherboard and the video card may have problems. The P35 series from Gigabyte are known to be some of the most compatible with OS X (along with Intel's Bad Axe 2 and Asus' P5 series, but those use older chipsets and will not work with Yorkfield), with almost all features working out of the box and only a few patches required, if any. There are plenty of options for making Geforce cards work properly with OS X. The retail copy of Leopard was mainly to salve his conscience, not for installation.
We need Apple to listen closely, we've been begging for a mid-tower Mac for ages!
Bingo. That would be the reason that this product would be successful; Apple does not sell the product that a large number of Mac users want to buy. If someone else comes along as does so, Apple's losses are entirely of their own doing.
I just bought a new iMac, but I'll give it to my son and buy an OpenMac in a heartbeat if it actually comes to fruition, for no other reason than it's the Mac I wanted to buy from Apple in the first place.