Report waves caution at shadiness of would-be Mac clone maker

1356

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 108
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    As if this wasn't enough, now Steve Woz is throwing his monkey into this 3-ring circus.



    Woz is to Apple the way that Jimmy Carter is to politics.



    Both are irrelevant and somewhat annoying.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 42 of 108
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by backtomac View Post


    Woz is to Apple the way that Jimmy Carter is to politics.



    Both are irrelevant and somewhat annoying.



    Yup, and both did very good things after their 'retirements'.

    Would that other ex (or soon to be ex) presidents did half as much good as Carter.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 43 of 108
    citycity Posts: 522member
    I keep my ride in the garage and work from the kitchen table. That's where the food and bevs are.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 44 of 108
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trboyden View Post


    Actually, only the GUI and certain other elements are Apple's IP in OS X. Most of the code is Free/Open/NetBSD which is open source software - free for anyone to use.



    But it's not what they're offering to install now is it? What they're offering to install is Apple Macintosh Operating System 10.5 Leopard. So they are using Apple's IP without expressed permission.



    I really don't get people who criticizing those who defend their intellectual properties. I mean, I'm a relatively green graphic designer/comic book artist... but, if I saw someone using one of my creations, fuck the lawyers, I'm getting a softball bat, and some of my bigger guy friends.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 45 of 108
    zlydenzlyden Posts: 20member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    ...or even Steve Wozniak...



    Or Another Steve or some other Apple's employee with a lot of AAPL stock that's climbing up for this or another reason today. Looks suspicious
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 46 of 108
    daseindasein Posts: 139member
    .."and further suggests the company may be little more than one-man basement operation"



    Houses in Florida usually don't have basements...they'd be in over their heads.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 47 of 108
    macosxpmacosxp Posts: 152member




    They shouldn't allow more orders than they can take, unless they don't really sell anything at all. So why does it allow me to add $300,000,000 dollars of stuff? Maybe now their stat counter indicated that I put that into my shopping account and they are getting giddy. Now I wonder, if I make the order will they finally have enough money to buy a building and a factory? Let's try
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 48 of 108
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zaphodsplanet View Post


    Clive.....THERE'S NOTHING CONTROVERSIAL ABOUT APPLE's EULA.....



    DUH dude.



    In order to use OSX you have to buy a MAC.... it's pretty clear and simple. This dimwit working out of his bathroom in Miami is a PUTZ with nothing to back up any of his threats, nor does he have a great "Idea" like Woz and Jobs had in their garage. I'd imagine Apple Legal already made the shit hit the fan for this LOOSER and that's why his lamo fako product is no longer on his web site.



    Good Riddance



    Quit smoking Pot.... You'll find it does wonders to clear up your mind!



    You registered just to flame me? How pathetic.



    I can guarntee your story would be different if Microsoft made computers and forced Windows users to buy their brand in order to use the OS. Then you all would be screaming "Monopoly."



    While it's true that this Psystar guy has a lot to prove before he can be considered trustworthy, that doesn't render his efforts complete bunk. You said that he's working out of his [garage] but didn't have a great idea like Woz? Then why is it that Woz himself said today that he'd be interested in getting one? Certainly Woz can afford a mess of MacPros and is certainly smart enough to build his own hackintosh. Why then would he be interested in this commercialized Hackintosh? If it piqued his interest, certainly it's not simply a dismissible idea.



    Perhaps you don't know your idols as well as you think you do.



    -Clive
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 49 of 108
    MacPromacpro Posts: 19,864member
    There are no basements in Florida (well very few ) lol
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 50 of 108
    trboydentrboyden Posts: 165member
    Wasn't my point, I was correcting your assumption that all of OS X is Apple's IP, which it is not.



    Whether what this guy is doing violates Apple's IP is up to the courts to decide. With the intermingling of proprietary and open source code, there is probably enough of a gray area that Apple doesn't want to risk opening a can of worms. The only thing he is assumed to have violated is Apple's EULA, which has no legal precedent under law and may or may not be upheld by the legal system. An IP is not the same as a licensing agreement. If anything, this guy is an unauthorized reseller, of which there are many in all different kinds of industries. There is nothing illegal in that. You just can't expect the support that you would get from Apple. Not that you get any from them or any other computer manufacturer today anyways.



    I think the whole idea that Apple can't license their software becuase they would then have to support all kinds of hardware is baloney. It is up to the hardware makers to make sure their stuff works with Apple or non-Apple hardware. Just because Microsoft has hand-holded the industry and is in the situation that they are in with bloated code and all, doesn't mean Apple has to take the same approach. The model for iPhone application development could equally work for clone program.



    My guess is that Apple is probably working on a tower now and they are usng this as a launchpad for that endeavor. "Rather then buy that crap tower, buy the new Apple xMac".
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 51 of 108
    samnuvasamnuva Posts: 225member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marc OSX View Post


    Apple didn't grab someone elses operating system and put it into someone elses hardware and try to flog it on a cheap template website whilst trying to trade off the name of the successful company they got the software from.



    No, That's microsoft
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 52 of 108
    minderbinderminderbinder Posts: 1,703member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    While it's true that this Psystar guy has a lot to prove before he can be considered trustworthy, that doesn't render his efforts complete bunk. You said that he's working out of his [garage] but didn't have a great idea like Woz? Then why is it that Woz himself said today that he'd be interested in getting one? Certainly Woz can afford a mess of MacPros and is certainly smart enough to build his own hackintosh. Why then would he be interested in this commercialized Hackintosh? If it piqued his interest, certainly it's not simply a dismissible idea.



    Woz probably just wants one as a collector's item. I got to hear the guy speak once - there's no question that he did a great job of creating the original apple computer, but now he comes off as half a bubble off plumb.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 53 of 108
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    I can guarntee your story would be different if Microsoft made computers and forced Windows users to buy their brand in order to use the OS. Then you all would be screaming "Monopoly."



    No, folks wouldn't because MS's OS market share would rapidly tank.



    Dell, HP, etc wouldn't suddenly dissappear. They'd suddenly sell a lot more linux boxes and try to crater MS' PC sales with superior business processes wrt selling hardware.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 54 of 108
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    So it doesn't have a "true business status" but even Apple Computer Inc. started in a garage. Who knows, maybe this guy has been selling his services to set up company networks, etc, for the past few months. His website is very thorough.



    Whether or not this is a "real" business hasn't been tested properly, the tests in the article are insufficient. BBB membership is a ripoff for any but the largest business, and then, a large business really doesn't need it either. I don't think being a member of a chamber of commerce is necessary to do business either. For my state, the bare minimum to be a business is a one page application to be a DBA. LLC is maybe $500, plus or minus, depending on lawyer fees.



    That said, I really don't have much confidence here.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 55 of 108
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    As if this wasn't enough, now Steve Woz is throwing his monkey into this 3-ring circus.



    I didn't think Woz was having any money problems, I don't understand why the price is a consideration.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 56 of 108
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    Wasn't my point, I was correcting your assumption that all of OS X is Apple's IP, which it is not.



    OS X as a whole is Apple's IP. Mach kernal, XNU, and Darwin are open source and Psystar is free to use them.



    A kernal is mostly useless without a UI or API. Aqua, Carbon, Cocoa, and Core API's are most surely Apple's IP.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 57 of 108
    Wow... another great article from AppleObvious! Great job, guys!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 58 of 108
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    No, folks wouldn't because MS's OS market share would rapidly tank.



    Dell, HP, etc wouldn't suddenly dissappear. They'd suddenly sell a lot more linux boxes and try to crater MS' PC sales with superior business processes wrt selling hardware.



    MS's market share is irrelevant. If they were to announce tomorrow that they would move to this market arrangement, would they be allowed to? Or would they be considered a monopoly? That is the question.



    And don't even try to convince me there would be a mass exodus to Linux. Until the feuding Lunix flavors can "get their ducks in a row" Linux will never become a mainstrem OS.



    -Clive
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 59 of 108
    iq78iq78 Posts: 256member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marc OSX View Post


    Apple didn't grab someone elses operating system and put it into someone elses hardware and try to flog it on a cheap template website whilst trying to trade off the name of the successful company they got the software from.



    No, but Compaq basically did it to IBM. I think Compaq had more than a few employees, but likely less than 10.



    IAMIQ78
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 60 of 108
    minderbinderminderbinder Posts: 1,703member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    Whether or not this is a "real" business hasn't been tested properly, the tests in the article are insufficient. BBB membership is a ripoff for any but the largest business, and then, a large business really doesn't need it either. I don't think being a member of a chamber of commerce is necessary to do business either. For my state, the bare minimum to be a business is a one page application to be a DBA. LLC is maybe $500, plus or minus, depending on lawyer fees.



    That said, I really don't have much confidence here.



    Should the test really be whether it's NOT a real business? Isn't the burden of proof on this company? So far there's no evidence that they have conducted any business of any kind, much less shipped even a single machine.



    Sorry, but I'm not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt just yet, while the things in the article don't definitively prove that this business is bogus, they cast a HUGE amount of doubt about it. Really, are the mac news sites supposed to take seriously any clown who puts up a website? I say no. I'll take them a tiny bit more seriously when we've heard that they've shipped one of these machines with OSX installed. So when is that going to happen?



    I think all the news sites are probably regretting they ever reported this in the first place, at this point it looks like they probably got suckered on this one.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.