Apple, Psystar ask court to set trial date for next November

13468916

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 312
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zinfella View Post


    Com'on! Apple can decide not to sell to Best Buy, or any retailer, at will. Your arguments are ridiculous, nobody is trying to make this a racial or ethnic issue.



    As ridiculous as stating that equality for homosexuals is the same as allowing NAMBLA to bugger little boys.
  • Reply 102 of 312
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zinfella View Post


    The bottom line here is that when it's all over Pystar will not be able to afford the cost of losing. It will put them out of business, leaving their customers holding the bag.



    Leaving it's customers holding the bag?!

    These computers are generic, they use generic PC components which can be found at low prices all over eBay. Even if Psystar goes under, Hackintosh will continue to update their hacks, and if somehow Hackintosh bites the dust, one can always install Linux, Unix, or Windows.
  • Reply 103 of 312
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    It sure has something to do with "Nobody said anything about Nazi's.".



    If you don't want to talk about Nazis, don't mention one.







    You mentioned Hitler, who was a Nazi. And I do agree, such a reference IS off the wall in this thread.



    He also had a mustache, so does this thread now include all mustachioed people? Don't be dense.
  • Reply 104 of 312
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zinfella View Post


    He also had a mustache, so does this thread now include all mustachioed people? Don't be dense.



    Watch it. Someone bringing up hitler then saying that nobody mentioned nazis really shouldn't be calling other people dense.



    Seriously, if you want to use an example of a person without invoking nazis, maybe you'd be better off mentioning a person who actually isn't a nazi?
  • Reply 105 of 312
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    Leaving it's customers holding the bag?!

    These computers are generic, they use generic PC components which can be found at low prices all over eBay. Even if Psystar goes under, Hackintosh will continue to update their hacks, and if somehow Hackintosh bites the dust, one can always install Linux, Unix, or Windows.



    Are you dumb enough to pay for a Pystar machine, only to have to later put another OS on it? did you forget the reason that these mental giants bought the Pystar in the first place?
  • Reply 106 of 312
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    Leaving it's customers holding the bag?!

    These computers are generic, they use generic PC components which can be found at low prices all over eBay. Even if Psystar goes under, Hackintosh will continue to update their hacks, and if somehow Hackintosh bites the dust, one can always install Linux, Unix, or Windows.



    And these customers that decided to pay extra for their Hackintosh, instead of building it their own for hundreds less are "now holding the bag" as they will have to learn to frequent hack sites and torrent sites to get the latest updates as their Software Updater has been redirected to Psystar, which will no longer exist or be updated with the latest hacks for their system.



    This is about Psystar's lobotomized consumer base, not about the OSx86 Project community.
  • Reply 107 of 312
    adjeiadjei Posts: 738member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    This seems really odd. Wouldn't apple want to pursue some sort of action to stop sales until this thing is settled?



    This seems like they're giving them a whole year of violating their IP.



    Can anyone knowledgeable about the law explain?



    I don't think Apple has anything to worry about it, I mean anyone foolish enough to buy one shouldn't be crying when the company is out of business, I mean who has even purchased one of these?
  • Reply 108 of 312
    adjeiadjei Posts: 738member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    For the twelve billionth time, IT'S NOT A MONOPOLY.



    I'm annoyed that this case is dragging on so long - I want it to be over so it puts an end to the posts from idiots whining that Apple is a monopoly.



    Some people don't know what the word means and tend to use it loosely.
  • Reply 109 of 312
    bwikbwik Posts: 565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zinfella View Post


    The bottom line here is that when it's all over Psystar will not be able to afford the cost of losing. It will put them out of business, leaving their customers holding the bag.



    Isn't this the case with every new business? Not every new idea works. It's about risk and reward. This guy is risking a small business in exchange for a massive payoff that will allow him to buy huge castles all over the world, yachts, fine paintings, wine, and privilege for himself and his heirs. I would take that chance too, after all, small businesses go bankrupt all the time. Most fail but this one has a lot of potential.
  • Reply 110 of 312
    Psystar has no anti-competitive case. Cant they get a lawyer smart enough to understand the definition of monopoly? Once that's defined the judge has to throw out the case.



    Apple does not have a monopoly on OSX.

    Amiga, Inc does not have a monopoly on AmigaOS

    Sun does not have a monopoly on Solaris OS

    Be Inc does not have a monopoly on BeOS.

    Microsoft does not have a monopoly on Windows.



    MS doesn't have to license Windows to Psystar if they don't want to.

    Apple does not have to license OSX to anyone. Hell, Apple can license Windows for its hardware if it wanted to.



    Lenovo, Dell, Toshiba, Sony can all develop their own OS if they want to put in the resources and use it with their own brand of hardware.



    Amiga, Sun, IBM sell or sold their own OS on their hardware just like apple.



    Apple computers are part of the personal desktop computer industry. If you dont like its product you choose a computer from other manufacturers. But MS's OS dominates this industry, which Apple choose not install on its computers.
  • Reply 111 of 312
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,092member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by synp View Post


    Not quite. Apple cannot decide that it doesn't allow black people to use its software. Similarly, it can't decide that Jews are prohibited from installing Mac OS X.



    If Apple had decided that Mac OS X is only to be used inside the company, that's their right. But they have decided to sell it.



    You have got to be kidding.

    First off, you comparing it to a racial issue just confirms your ignorance and self-respect.



    Second, Apple does not "sell" OSX to the general public. It's only for installation as an "upgrade" to an existing Apple system. The fact that one can walk into a retail store and purchase it does not grant you the ability to install it on your non-Apple machine and try to sell it to the public.



    Third: Apple is an equal-opportunity company and I'm sure has sold their systems to people of African, Caucasian, Asian, and Hispanic descent. I'm sure they have even sold systems to individuals with physical and mental disabilities. Rumor has it they have even sold systems to Jews, Catholics, Protestants, Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists and agnostic folks too. However I would only partially agree with you on one portion in that while they should be free to sell their systems to anyone i just mentioned above, Apple should outlaw selling their systems to individuals of "moronic" descent like those that try to justify their violation of IP rights by playing the race card.



    You have serious issues.
  • Reply 112 of 312
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Adjei View Post


    Some people don't know what the word means and tend to use it loosely.



    Monopoly and obsolete get thrown around on the sites a lot incorrectly. The latter is a pet peeve of mine.
  • Reply 113 of 312
    adjeiadjei Posts: 738member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by synp View Post


    Well, it is up to a court to decide whether the OS and hardware are components of a single product (like the blackberry and PS3 and Xbox) or two separate items that are only sold together to gain an unfair advantage for the vendor.



    The case for Mac OS and Macs is far weaker than MVS and file permissions. Mac OS runs perfectly well on hackintoshes, and Windows runs very well on Macs. Their marriage is not technical necessity, but still, it's for a court to decide.



    Dude if Psytar were to win, the reprecussions for the tech industry would be huge, I mean all those cases of products tied to their OS would also be affected (iphones, blackberries, ipods, zune, televisions, vcrs, dvd players, etc.) Which is one of the reasons they won't.
  • Reply 114 of 312
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Adjei View Post


    Some people don't know what the word means and tend to use it loosely.



    And they usually still insist on using it wrong even after it has been explained to them. Unfortunately people find it a catchy buzzword and tend to throw it at any company they don't like whether it fits or not.



    Seriously, a company with market share under TEN PERCENT, and some morons still insist that it's a "monopoly".
  • Reply 115 of 312
    adjeiadjei Posts: 738member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    You seem to miss the fact that Apple put up its own capital and resources to produce and maintain OS X. How do you force a company to share a product that they used their own resources to produce? How is it an unfair advantage if said company refuses to share its products with a competitor?



    Psystar is perfectly free to develop their own OS and compete against Apple.



    That's the main point, Apple spent their money and resources developing the OS and Psystar feel they should entitled to it, how much of their resources was involved in creating Mac OSX, as you said if they want to compete they should develop their own OS and sell it with their computers to compete against Apple.
  • Reply 116 of 312
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bwik View Post


    Isn't this the case with every new business? Not every new idea works. It's about risk and reward. This guy is risking a small business in exchange for a massive payoff that will allow him to buy huge castles all over the world, yachts, fine paintings, wine, and privilege for himself and his heirs. I would take that chance too, after all, small businesses go bankrupt all the time. Most fail but this one has a lot of potential.



    You obviously don't know it, but you're in desperate need of someone with a marketing degree. Preferably an MBA to offset your ignorance. Nobody, with an ounce of sense, goes into business without a business plan, and yours stinks. HTH
  • Reply 117 of 312
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,092member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Adjei View Post


    Some people don't know what the word means and tend to use it loosely.



    I know exactly what it means! I've been waiting for someone to buy my Park Place property for ages!!!



    No if you'll excuse me, I just passed "Go" and am waiting to collect my $200.00.
  • Reply 118 of 312
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post


    I wouldn't call collaborators 'fans'.





    Is this some of your "experience" speaking?
  • Reply 119 of 312
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    And they usually still insist on using it wrong even after it has been explained to them. Unfortunately people find it a catchy buzzword and tend to throw it at any company they don't like whether it fits or not.



    Seriously, a company with market share under TEN PERCENT, and some morons still insist that it's a "monopoly".



    "Apple has a Monoploy on Macs!"



    Even if Apple had a monopoly, that wouldn't necessary make it an illegal monopoly. On a related note, their is evidence that Apple doubled the capacity, at the last minute, of the iPod Nano from 4/8GB to 8/16GB to match the Zune, which points to Apple not even having an exclusive possession in that market if it has to go such lengths to prevent another digital media player from gaining ground. Of course, that is speculation, but the delay of the 16GB model doesn't seem to point to it being true.
  • Reply 120 of 312
    bwikbwik Posts: 565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zinfella View Post


    You obviously don't know it, but you're in desperate need of someone with a marketing degree. Preferably an MBA to offset your ignorance. Nobody, with an ounce of sense, goes into business without a business plan, and yours stinks. HTH



    Whatever, I am just a humble cave man with a low IQ. You must be really embarrassed that you haven't won the argument. The guy stands to reap a huge payoff should he win or draw. If he loses, his little trojan horse business (which he custom designed for this purpose) will go under, having accomplished its intended mission (to challenge Apple's software to hardware implicit bundling lock). Win or lose, this is all part of his contingency plan. So far indications could not be more positive for Psystar. As an AAPl shareholder I find it mildly worrisome.



    As for MBAs... have you ever met one? Do you really think they know anything? Oh but the marketing majors will save us...
Sign In or Register to comment.