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...
You should change your name to Don Quixote.
Have I ever met one? Why there's one in this house, posting on a Mac.
Psystar are just looking to exploit years of Apple innovation to help them sell cheap crap PCs. It's like me ripping the badge of a BMW to help me sell a crap motor vehicle I've cobbled together. Psystar need the "quality by association", or else they have nothing.
Investment in high quality design and innovation must be protected for it to be worthwhile. If not, why the hell would Apple (or anyone else, for that matter) bother?
As a business, Apple are not trying to screw their customers. Apple users arguably get the best experience of modern computing precisely because of Apple's business model.
Anyone who wants a 'free', open-source operating system on their PC box should go get Red Hat Linux (or whatever). Please bugger off and leave Apple alone to improve, innovate and develop the OS that I love to use. And don't try to punish them just because Microsoft's attempts at an OS are so flawed!
Psystar are just looking to exploit years of Apple innovation to help them sell cheap crap PCs. It's like me ripping the badge of a BMW to help me sell a crap motor vehicle I've cobbled together. Psystar need the "quality by association", or else they have nothing.
Investment in high quality design and innovation must be protected for it to be worthwhile. If not, why the hell would Apple (or anyone else, for that matter) bother?
As a business, Apple are not trying to screw their customers. Apple users arguably get the best experience of modern computing precisely because of Apple's business model.
Anyone who wants a 'free', open-source operating system on their PC box should go get Red Hat Linux (or whatever). Please bugger off and leave Apple alone to improve, innovate and develop the OS that I love to use. And don't try to punish them just because Microsoft's attempts at an OS are so flawed!
Psystar are just looking to exploit years of Apple innovation to help them sell cheap crap PCs. It's like me ripping the badge of a BMW to help me sell a crap motor vehicle I've cobbled together. Psystar need the "quality by association", or else they have nothing.
Investment in high quality design and innovation must be protected for it to be worthwhile. If not, why the hell would Apple (or anyone else, for that matter) bother?
As a business, Apple are not trying to screw their customers. Apple users arguably get the best experience of modern computing precisely because of Apple's business model.
Anyone who wants a 'free', open-source operating system on their PC box should go get Red Hat Linux (or whatever). Please bugger off and leave Apple alone to improve, innovate and develop the OS that I love to use. And don't try to punish them just because Microsoft's attempts at an OS are so flawed!
And there's one here, who apparently didn't take history classes, and cannot read...
So you're 69, and an MBA. Which school?
You still can't read.
My wife has a BA in Behavioral Science, and an MBA in marketing. I have never offered anything about myself. Since this is a public forum, we will maintain our anonymity, so that's all you get. BTW, all of our machines are Macs, so both of us post on Macs.
My wife has a BA in Behavioral Science, and an MBA in marketing. I have never offered anything about myself. Since this is a public forum, we will maintain our anonymity, so that's all you get. BTW, all of our machines are Macs, so both of us post on Macs.
That's spooky, my BSc is in Psychology. You love to lure people into making assumptions or judgments, and then pan them for it, don't you? You may be anonymous, but you're entirely transparent.
I think it would be great for everyone if apple licensed the OS to 3rd parties. For people who like Mac OS, having more hardware sold with it would give more developers reason to sell software for Mac. It would also force apple to remain competitive with hardware quality and prices... where there is currently no competition if you want Mac OS.
By any definition, it simply means that Pystar is clutching at straws. A sure sign that they're in panic mode.
Well, "dispositive motion" is just a word, and a deadline for filing dispositive motions is just a date on a calendar.
By itself, setting the deadline for filing dispositive motions is a dispassionate part of any legal procedure, and doesn't contribute anything to the merits of the particular case at hand.
No doubt, Apple will file a number of such motions to try to get Psystar's counterclaims thrown out of court. Psystar's lawyers wouldn't be earning their pay unless they also filed a bucket load of such motions too. Ultimately it will be up to the judge to decide if he needs to hear any evidence in trial before he reaches a decision, or if he is prepared to render a decision summarily.
Psystar are Nazis because they want to sell affordable upgradable desktops? \
I am all for Apple being able to protect their intellectual property, but whatever happened to the free market?
By your definition, would it be OK for me to remove the operating system from Tivo and sell it on my own hardware? Should Tivo be required to sell the software separately from the hardware?
What is it with computers that we believe that it is the right of the consumer to get their OS separate from the hardware? Consoles, appliances, music players... all computers with OS's that few would say can fairly be moved to another device.
Apple chooses to pair their OS with their hardware. Each offers a competitive advantage to sell the other. Importantly, Apple can create a better user experience by not having to fret every conceivable hardware configuration. Should knock-offs ever be allowed, Apple will be forcefully drawn into having to support a mish-mash of hardware, and we'll all be worse off for it.
Psystar are just looking to exploit years of Apple innovation to help them sell cheap crap PCs. It's like me ripping the badge of a BMW to help me sell a crap motor vehicle I've cobbled together. Psystar need the "quality by association", or else they have nothing.
Investment in high quality design and innovation must be protected for it to be worthwhile. If not, why the hell would Apple (or anyone else, for that matter) bother?
As a business, Apple are not trying to screw their customers. Apple users arguably get the best experience of modern computing precisely because of Apple's business model.
Anyone who wants a 'free', open-source operating system on their PC box should go get Red Hat Linux (or whatever). Please bugger off and leave Apple alone to improve, innovate and develop the OS that I love to use. And don't try to punish them just because Microsoft's attempts at an OS are so flawed!
A.
Furthermore, it seems that people think that Apple and SJ don't offer to license Mac OS because they are want to keep people buying their computers. Well, maybe true but this is not the whole issue. Apple is a business and they need to make money and years back they almost went bankrupt. Steve Jobs wanted to keep the Mac clones but the clone people didn't want to pay fair price for it. Watch this.
I like the way Apple currently does things and whilst some would appreciate the alternative choices that pystar would offer them (like obnoxious jet engined fans in their towers) I would hate to see Apple make any compromises to these or any other thieves.
Lock 'em up and keep them where they belong with bars on their Windows.
Psystar is buying time, it's to their advantage to postpone or stretch this case as long as possible. In the end when Apple comes to collect it's fees, Psystar will just file Chapter 11, and end up paying Apple close to nothing.
How does this work you say? It's been done before by one of my employers back in the 90's. He would force his company to buy components from a friend's company who will charge top price, almost as much as what the final product sells for. The company filing Chapter 11 will then immediately pay for those components, the payments are even top in line under Chapter 11 laws, then the owner of the company filing Chapter 11 and his friend will split the profits of the company that was selling the components at top dollar.
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.
I am not encouraging or implying that anyone should buy a Psystar, I'm only pointing out that the system will not become useless if the company closes its doors because these computers use widely available generic parts.
People who end up purchasing from Psystar are usually technically savvy. They would make their decision based on the fact that the chosen components in a Psystar system are compatible with OS X and have the correct drivers installed, saving them the risk of buying the wrong components.
People who end up purchasing from Psystar are usually technically savvy. They would make their decision based on the fact that the chosen components in a Psystar system are compatible with OS X and have the correct drivers installed, saving them the risk of buying the wrong components.
I don't see how people can be technically savvy if they are allowing Psystar to make them an OSx86 Mac. There are so many resources including HCLs available to get the right components with good KEXTs. If you tech savvy then why not just build it your self in the 2 hours it would take. It would be fun for tech savvy individual and considerably cheaper. I juts can't see what market this would appeal to.
I didn't say I was going to buy a Psystar, I don't know how you came up with that conclusion. Even if I did, that doesn't give you the right to be offensive!
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinfella
...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?
Your assuming the most improbable scenario which is Hakintosh getting shut down. Even if the improbable does happen and Hakintosh closes shop, users can do whatever they choose to do with their hardware, they don't have to put another OS on it, they can stay on OS X 10.5.5, or install something else.
I have a G4 still running 10.4, I also have a G3 running 10.3 Server, I even have a machine running Windows 98. I can still buy PCI cards, memory, WiFi cards, and hard-drives for all those "obsolete" systems.
Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean you can be rude.
I don't see how people can be technically savvy if they are allowing Psystar to make them an OSx86 Mac. There are so many resources including HCLs available to get the right components with good KEXTs. If you tech savvy then why not just build it your self in the 2 hours it would take. It would be fun for tech savvy individual and considerably cheaper. I juts can't see what market this would appeal to.
Well you got a point there. But Psystar is making money, otherwise they wouldn't bother, and I'm sure those who are buying from them may not be uber savvy, but savvy enough to upgrade memory and swap a HD, and yet not savvy enough to build their own computer. Again I'm not interested in buying a Psystar or building my own computer, I've recently dished out over $7,000 for a MacPro.
The retail copies of OS X are a license for an upgrade of Mac purchased from Apple not a new license for a generic computer that was not purchased from Apple.
When you buy an Mac, Apple sells you both a computer and and OS. Just because they bundle them together does not make them one product. Reread the file permission example. This was an actual decision by an American court.
Comments
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?
You should change your name to Don Quixote.
Have I ever met one? Why there's one in this house, posting on a Mac.
Investment in high quality design and innovation must be protected for it to be worthwhile. If not, why the hell would Apple (or anyone else, for that matter) bother?
As a business, Apple are not trying to screw their customers. Apple users arguably get the best experience of modern computing precisely because of Apple's business model.
Anyone who wants a 'free', open-source operating system on their PC box should go get Red Hat Linux (or whatever). Please bugger off and leave Apple alone to improve, innovate and develop the OS that I love to use. And don't try to punish them just because Microsoft's attempts at an OS are so flawed!
A.
Psystar are just looking to exploit years of Apple innovation to help them sell cheap crap PCs. It's like me ripping the badge of a BMW to help me sell a crap motor vehicle I've cobbled together. Psystar need the "quality by association", or else they have nothing.
Investment in high quality design and innovation must be protected for it to be worthwhile. If not, why the hell would Apple (or anyone else, for that matter) bother?
As a business, Apple are not trying to screw their customers. Apple users arguably get the best experience of modern computing precisely because of Apple's business model.
Anyone who wants a 'free', open-source operating system on their PC box should go get Red Hat Linux (or whatever). Please bugger off and leave Apple alone to improve, innovate and develop the OS that I love to use. And don't try to punish them just because Microsoft's attempts at an OS are so flawed!
A.
Well said!
Even Hitler had fans.
Hitler made the Nazis wear "flair."
Psystar are just looking to exploit years of Apple innovation to help them sell cheap crap PCs. It's like me ripping the badge of a BMW to help me sell a crap motor vehicle I've cobbled together. Psystar need the "quality by association", or else they have nothing.
Investment in high quality design and innovation must be protected for it to be worthwhile. If not, why the hell would Apple (or anyone else, for that matter) bother?
As a business, Apple are not trying to screw their customers. Apple users arguably get the best experience of modern computing precisely because of Apple's business model.
Anyone who wants a 'free', open-source operating system on their PC box should go get Red Hat Linux (or whatever). Please bugger off and leave Apple alone to improve, innovate and develop the OS that I love to use. And don't try to punish them just because Microsoft's attempts at an OS are so flawed!
A.
Well said dude.
Well maybe Apple doesn't want to be like Microsoft.
Let's hope not.
Have I ever met one? Why there's one in this house, posting on a Mac.
And there's one here, who apparently didn't take history classes, and cannot read...
So you're 69, and an MBA. Which school?
Let's hope not.
And there's one here, who apparently didn't take history classes, and cannot read...
So you're 69, and an MBA. Which school?
You still can't read.
My wife has a BA in Behavioral Science, and an MBA in marketing. I have never offered anything about myself. Since this is a public forum, we will maintain our anonymity, so that's all you get. BTW, all of our machines are Macs, so both of us post on Macs.
You still can't read.
My wife has a BA in Behavioral Science, and an MBA in marketing. I have never offered anything about myself. Since this is a public forum, we will maintain our anonymity, so that's all you get. BTW, all of our machines are Macs, so both of us post on Macs.
That's spooky, my BSc is in Psychology. You love to lure people into making assumptions or judgments, and then pan them for it, don't you? You may be anonymous, but you're entirely transparent.
By any definition, it simply means that Pystar is clutching at straws. A sure sign that they're in panic mode.
Well, "dispositive motion" is just a word, and a deadline for filing dispositive motions is just a date on a calendar.
By itself, setting the deadline for filing dispositive motions is a dispassionate part of any legal procedure, and doesn't contribute anything to the merits of the particular case at hand.
No doubt, Apple will file a number of such motions to try to get Psystar's counterclaims thrown out of court. Psystar's lawyers wouldn't be earning their pay unless they also filed a bucket load of such motions too. Ultimately it will be up to the judge to decide if he needs to hear any evidence in trial before he reaches a decision, or if he is prepared to render a decision summarily.
Psystar are Nazis because they want to sell affordable upgradable desktops?
I am all for Apple being able to protect their intellectual property, but whatever happened to the free market?
By your definition, would it be OK for me to remove the operating system from Tivo and sell it on my own hardware? Should Tivo be required to sell the software separately from the hardware?
What is it with computers that we believe that it is the right of the consumer to get their OS separate from the hardware? Consoles, appliances, music players... all computers with OS's that few would say can fairly be moved to another device.
Apple chooses to pair their OS with their hardware. Each offers a competitive advantage to sell the other. Importantly, Apple can create a better user experience by not having to fret every conceivable hardware configuration. Should knock-offs ever be allowed, Apple will be forcefully drawn into having to support a mish-mash of hardware, and we'll all be worse off for it.
Psystar are just looking to exploit years of Apple innovation to help them sell cheap crap PCs. It's like me ripping the badge of a BMW to help me sell a crap motor vehicle I've cobbled together. Psystar need the "quality by association", or else they have nothing.
Investment in high quality design and innovation must be protected for it to be worthwhile. If not, why the hell would Apple (or anyone else, for that matter) bother?
As a business, Apple are not trying to screw their customers. Apple users arguably get the best experience of modern computing precisely because of Apple's business model.
Anyone who wants a 'free', open-source operating system on their PC box should go get Red Hat Linux (or whatever). Please bugger off and leave Apple alone to improve, innovate and develop the OS that I love to use. And don't try to punish them just because Microsoft's attempts at an OS are so flawed!
A.
Furthermore, it seems that people think that Apple and SJ don't offer to license Mac OS because they are want to keep people buying their computers. Well, maybe true but this is not the whole issue. Apple is a business and they need to make money and years back they almost went bankrupt. Steve Jobs wanted to keep the Mac clones but the clone people didn't want to pay fair price for it. Watch this.
Lock 'em up and keep them where they belong with bars on their Windows.
Ahh. thanks
still an awful sounding word though.
You're confusing it with despot.
How does this work you say? It's been done before by one of my employers back in the 90's. He would force his company to buy components from a friend's company who will charge top price, almost as much as what the final product sells for. The company filing Chapter 11 will then immediately pay for those components, the payments are even top in line under Chapter 11 laws, then the owner of the company filing Chapter 11 and his friend will split the profits of the company that was selling the components at top dollar.
Yup... seen it with my own eyes.
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.
I am not encouraging or implying that anyone should buy a Psystar, I'm only pointing out that the system will not become useless if the company closes its doors because these computers use widely available generic parts.
People who end up purchasing from Psystar are usually technically savvy. They would make their decision based on the fact that the chosen components in a Psystar system are compatible with OS X and have the correct drivers installed, saving them the risk of buying the wrong components.
People who end up purchasing from Psystar are usually technically savvy. They would make their decision based on the fact that the chosen components in a Psystar system are compatible with OS X and have the correct drivers installed, saving them the risk of buying the wrong components.
I don't see how people can be technically savvy if they are allowing Psystar to make them an OSx86 Mac. There are so many resources including HCLs available to get the right components with good KEXTs. If you tech savvy then why not just build it your self in the 2 hours it would take. It would be fun for tech savvy individual and considerably cheaper. I juts can't see what market this would appeal to.
Are you dumb enough to pay for a Pystar machine
I didn't say I was going to buy a Psystar, I don't know how you came up with that conclusion. Even if I did, that doesn't give you the right to be offensive!
...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?
Your assuming the most improbable scenario which is Hakintosh getting shut down. Even if the improbable does happen and Hakintosh closes shop, users can do whatever they choose to do with their hardware, they don't have to put another OS on it, they can stay on OS X 10.5.5, or install something else.
I have a G4 still running 10.4, I also have a G3 running 10.3 Server, I even have a machine running Windows 98. I can still buy PCI cards, memory, WiFi cards, and hard-drives for all those "obsolete" systems.
Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean you can be rude.
I don't see how people can be technically savvy if they are allowing Psystar to make them an OSx86 Mac. There are so many resources including HCLs available to get the right components with good KEXTs. If you tech savvy then why not just build it your self in the 2 hours it would take. It would be fun for tech savvy individual and considerably cheaper. I juts can't see what market this would appeal to.
Well you got a point there. But Psystar is making money, otherwise they wouldn't bother, and I'm sure those who are buying from them may not be uber savvy, but savvy enough to upgrade memory and swap a HD, and yet not savvy enough to build their own computer. Again I'm not interested in buying a Psystar or building my own computer, I've recently dished out over $7,000 for a MacPro.
No one is arguing anything like this.
And neither am I. Learn to read.
The retail copies of OS X are a license for an upgrade of Mac purchased from Apple not a new license for a generic computer that was not purchased from Apple.
When you buy an Mac, Apple sells you both a computer and and OS. Just because they bundle them together does not make them one product. Reread the file permission example. This was an actual decision by an American court.