So if Apple were to license it's OS software per computer, not computer company, at a price of $25,000.00 for each computer sold, would that end the lawsuit and cause Psystar to go back where it once came?
Nice try, but I think that would make Apple guilty of hindering competition.
Another important thing to note here is that Apple lawsuit claims that Psystar part of a larger plot. I think another "competing" company values MAC OSX as a significant technology and wants to get hold of it by hook or crook.
I suspect a company like MSFT which has its roots in Law may be behind it. Think about it... Bill Gates is from a family of attorneys. He was himself a law student before he found passion in computers.
Some of the "key" MSFT revenue streams are successful because of their strong team of attorneys.
MSFT stole Windows GUI from Apple. (Xerox which was using only as concept).
MSFT "killed" Netscape by monopolistic control and anti-competitive means.
It is all a hunch but I do believe there is something bigger behind Psystar, A small company with little money cannot risk taking on Apple. Especially after losing round 1. This is all very unusually daring or foolish.
Another important thing to note here is that Apple lawsuit claims that Psystar part of a larger plot. I think another "competing" company values MAC OSX as a significant technology and wants to get hold of it by hook or crook.
I suspect a company like MSFT which has its roots in Law may be behind it. Think about it... Bill Gates is from a family of attorneys. He was himself a law student before he found passion in computers.
Some of the "key" MSFT revenue streams are successful because of their strong team of attorneys.
MSFT stole Windows GUI from Apple. (Xerox which was using only as concept).
MSFT "killed" Netscape by monopolistic control and anti-competitive means.
It is all a hunch but I do believe there is something bigger behind Psystar, A small company with little money cannot risk taking on Apple. Especially after losing round 1. This is all very unusually daring or foolish.
If microsoft were behind it and psystar won then OSX would be sold as an option on every PC out there. I'm sure Microsoft wants to go head to head with OSX like that. Makes perfect sense.
You don't have to modify apples code. You just add EFI emulation. And there are boards starting to show up that use EFI. A retail copy of OSX could boot right up straight out of the box with no modification whatsoever. You would add drivers or rather kexts but that would be adding, not modifying. No different than installing your own software on your computer. There is also a USB EFI emulator. Plug that in a board running an Intel or even now certain Nvidia chipsets and OSX boots up right out of the box.
And apple certainly doesn't own EFI.
No but they do have to modify OS X to get it to install on a non-mac before they sell it to you. They then include a full version in the package, but that Full version is not what they install. You cannot, from what I have read, simply install a fresh OS X copy without first doing a mod during or before installation.
So even if you could simply install OSX, which you can't, but just for the sake of this argument, you are still circumventing the copy protection as you are fooling the copy protection into believing that you have a real Apple Mac.
But again, everything I have read states you have to modify or patch code in order for it to run on a hackintosh.
The Pystar claim is bull. Apple is not a software company, they are first and foremost a hardware company with first class software to support their hardware. They have a right to make software only compatible with their own hardware, just like Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo.
From the Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard EULA, Section 2A: "This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time."
You get two apple labels with the retail DVD.
I know you're being partly serious, but there is no way that would work in court as an argument.
its so stupid this is angering me just reading this i cant even imagine what the people at apple are feeling. the way i look at it is like any other software. so because you can buy a copy of the software outside of the machine it doesnt mean its not made specificly for those.
its like having creative sue apple because they cant use the ipod software on their mp3 players its pure bullshit. If i was a company who had a product and took the time to develop my own software and user interface there should even be a law governing what i can and cannot do with it. you cant force a company to make their software public thats so freakin stupid
BBAAHHH FCKUNIG PSYSTAR PICEE OF SIHT MOETHRFKCUERS
No but they do have to modify OS X to get it to install on a non-mac before they sell it to you. They then include a full version in the package, but that Full version is not what they install. You cannot, from what I have read, simply install a fresh OS X copy without first doing a mod during or before installation.
In the past (10.4 and earlier), that WAS the case. It is not any more. You don't have to change a single thing with an OS X disk and certain hardware to get it to boot and install. You can take a fresh disk out of the package, stick it in, boot off of it, and install.... again with certain hardware.
Quote:
So even if you could simply install OSX, which you can't, (YES YOU CAN), but just for the sake of this argument, you are still circumventing the copy protection as you are fooling the copy protection into believing that you have a real Apple Mac.
You aren't fooling anything. There is no copy protection period. All it sees is if the hardware is compatible. If they were checking for apple hardware serial numbers, and the user had to hack the install dvd from doing that or flashed their EFI to emulate it, THEN it'd be fooling it.
Quote:
But again, everything I have read states you have to modify or patch code in order for it to run on a hackintosh.
The data you have read is outdated.
Quote:
The Pystar claim is bull. Apple is not a software company, they are first and foremost a hardware company with first class software to support their hardware. They have a right to make software only compatible with their own hardware, just like Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo.
its so stupid this is angering me just reading this i cant even imagine what the people at apple are feeling. the way i look at it is like any other software. so because you can buy a copy of the software outside of the machine it doesnt mean its not made specificly for those.
its like having creative sue apple because they cant use the ipod software on their mp3 players its pure bullshit. If i was a company who had a product and took the time to develop my own software and user interface there should even be a law governing what i can and cannot do with it. you cant force a company to make their software public thats so freakin stupid
BBAAHHH FCKUNIG PSYSTAR PICEE OF SIHT MOETHRFKCUERS
I fail to see why Psystar is still getting press. It's a shady company run by a shady guy. They mark up cheap budget machines to the point where Apple's markups aren't really that much considering that you get better performing and better designed hardware.
Psystar never had a chance and only an idiot would believe this business idea wouldn't lead to legal troubles. They are going to be spending more in court than they'll ever make selling these things.
In the mean time, Appleinsider is giving them all kinds of press, along with any other BS story that has anything remotely to do with Apple. I don't know how they ever thought an antitrust lawsuit would hold up against a company with a 5% marketshare. There are literally hundreds of OS distributions to choose from in the home and enterprise PC markets, ranging from $0-thousands
Nothing to see here, folks. I give Psystar 4 more months maximum of existence before they tank.
Another important thing to note here is that Apple lawsuit claims that Psystar part of a larger plot. I think another "competing" company values MAC OSX as a significant technology and wants to get hold of it by hook or crook.
I suspect a company like MSFT which has its roots in Law may be behind it. Think about it... Bill Gates is from a family of attorneys. He was himself a law student before he found passion in computers.
Some of the "key" MSFT revenue streams are successful because of their strong team of attorneys.
MSFT stole Windows GUI from Apple. (Xerox which was using only as concept).
MSFT "killed" Netscape by monopolistic control and anti-competitive means.
It is all a hunch but I do believe there is something bigger behind Psystar, A small company with little money cannot risk taking on Apple. Especially after losing round 1. This is all very unusually daring or foolish.
Why would Microsoft open up a larger market for one of their competitors? They want everyone using Windows, not more people using OSX.
I do wonder where Psystar is getting all this money to pay their lawyers, though.
It seems to me the difference between OS X and the Wii OS or Playstation OS is that you can buy a copy of OS X WITHOUT any hardware
if apple were to make 10.x updates online updates somehow and stopped selling discs then psystar/hackintoshers would have to buy hardware and copy the OS. Problem solved.
Given that users can choose a Windows PC, a Mac, a linux box, etc for the same purposes, and Apple's decade-long campaign of appealing to switchers, I think the monopoly argument is bogus.
It seems to me the difference between OS X and the Wii OS or Playstation OS is that you can buy a copy of OS X WITHOUT any hardware
if apple were to make 10.x updates online updates somehow and stopped selling discs then psystar/hackintoshers would have to buy hardware and copy the OS. Problem solved.
I was thinking that. In fact, don't microsoft make Office disks that are update-only. I don't understand why OSX discs aren't update-only. It's still great to have disks to boot off as a backstop, but I would expect something would be possible here.
No they aren't hacking updates. You can install updates direct from apple. The only issue is the point updates and you simply have to run a script then install apples combo update. However this type of update has been disabled on psystars.
They are then adding EFI emulation and whatever drivers are needed for the hardware. Not modifiying but rather addition to.
I'm sorry but you're wrong. Yes, you need to add EFI emulation, kernel extensions for specific hardware etc etc. However, you also need to disable/replace the kernel extension "Dont Steal Mac OS.kext". This is used to decrypyt Apple's encrypted binaries. These are key programs such as the Finder. This kext is tied to the hardware in order to correctly decrypt these binaries on the fly.
You'll find that any Hackintosh out there needs to have either a dsmos.kext or an AppleDecrypt.kext or similar and that the "Dont Steal..." kext has been removed.
This is the copy protection that Apple have employed and that Psystar and any Hackintosh builder need to break in order to get OS X to run.
I do wonder where Psystar is getting all this money to pay their lawyers, though.
Assuming there are deep pockets involved I would say it's the Dells and Gateways of the world that would love to be out from under the thumb of Microsoft. They have virtually no bargaining power when dealing with MS because they have no viable alternative OS.
If you make an upgrade only DVD, how do you do a re-install or a fresh install when you change out your harddrive?
As another person wrote (quite well) I'm also extremely ticked about the Psystar crap. Seriously, Apple pours a lot of money for R&D to make OS X so that their product in unique and people want it. That's the point, right? No one is required to give their innovation away to the competitor! People want Mac because of what Apple does in regards to hardware and software development that makes an amazing product!
Comments
So if Apple were to license it's OS software per computer, not computer company, at a price of $25,000.00 for each computer sold, would that end the lawsuit and cause Psystar to go back where it once came?
Nice try, but I think that would make Apple guilty of hindering competition.
Nice try, but I think that would make Apple guilty of hindering competition.
Competition with whom?
I suspect a company like MSFT which has its roots in Law may be behind it. Think about it... Bill Gates is from a family of attorneys. He was himself a law student before he found passion in computers.
Some of the "key" MSFT revenue streams are successful because of their strong team of attorneys.
MSFT stole Windows GUI from Apple. (Xerox which was using only as concept).
MSFT "killed" Netscape by monopolistic control and anti-competitive means.
It is all a hunch but I do believe there is something bigger behind Psystar, A small company with little money cannot risk taking on Apple. Especially after losing round 1. This is all very unusually daring or foolish.
Another important thing to note here is that Apple lawsuit claims that Psystar part of a larger plot. I think another "competing" company values MAC OSX as a significant technology and wants to get hold of it by hook or crook.
I suspect a company like MSFT which has its roots in Law may be behind it. Think about it... Bill Gates is from a family of attorneys. He was himself a law student before he found passion in computers.
Some of the "key" MSFT revenue streams are successful because of their strong team of attorneys.
MSFT stole Windows GUI from Apple. (Xerox which was using only as concept).
MSFT "killed" Netscape by monopolistic control and anti-competitive means.
It is all a hunch but I do believe there is something bigger behind Psystar, A small company with little money cannot risk taking on Apple. Especially after losing round 1. This is all very unusually daring or foolish.
If microsoft were behind it and psystar won then OSX would be sold as an option on every PC out there. I'm sure Microsoft wants to go head to head with OSX like that. Makes perfect sense.
You don't have to modify apples code. You just add EFI emulation. And there are boards starting to show up that use EFI. A retail copy of OSX could boot right up straight out of the box with no modification whatsoever. You would add drivers or rather kexts but that would be adding, not modifying. No different than installing your own software on your computer. There is also a USB EFI emulator. Plug that in a board running an Intel or even now certain Nvidia chipsets and OSX boots up right out of the box.
And apple certainly doesn't own EFI.
No but they do have to modify OS X to get it to install on a non-mac before they sell it to you. They then include a full version in the package, but that Full version is not what they install. You cannot, from what I have read, simply install a fresh OS X copy without first doing a mod during or before installation.
So even if you could simply install OSX, which you can't, but just for the sake of this argument, you are still circumventing the copy protection as you are fooling the copy protection into believing that you have a real Apple Mac.
But again, everything I have read states you have to modify or patch code in order for it to run on a hackintosh.
The Pystar claim is bull. Apple is not a software company, they are first and foremost a hardware company with first class software to support their hardware. They have a right to make software only compatible with their own hardware, just like Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo.
From the Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard EULA, Section 2A: "This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time."
You get two apple labels with the retail DVD.
I know you're being partly serious, but there is no way that would work in court as an argument.
its like having creative sue apple because they cant use the ipod software on their mp3 players its pure bullshit. If i was a company who had a product and took the time to develop my own software and user interface there should even be a law governing what i can and cannot do with it. you cant force a company to make their software public thats so freakin stupid
BBAAHHH FCKUNIG PSYSTAR PICEE OF SIHT MOETHRFKCUERS
No but they do have to modify OS X to get it to install on a non-mac before they sell it to you. They then include a full version in the package, but that Full version is not what they install. You cannot, from what I have read, simply install a fresh OS X copy without first doing a mod during or before installation.
In the past (10.4 and earlier), that WAS the case. It is not any more. You don't have to change a single thing with an OS X disk and certain hardware to get it to boot and install. You can take a fresh disk out of the package, stick it in, boot off of it, and install.... again with certain hardware.
So even if you could simply install OSX, which you can't, (YES YOU CAN), but just for the sake of this argument, you are still circumventing the copy protection as you are fooling the copy protection into believing that you have a real Apple Mac.
You aren't fooling anything. There is no copy protection period. All it sees is if the hardware is compatible. If they were checking for apple hardware serial numbers, and the user had to hack the install dvd from doing that or flashed their EFI to emulate it, THEN it'd be fooling it.
But again, everything I have read states you have to modify or patch code in order for it to run on a hackintosh.
The data you have read is outdated.
The Pystar claim is bull. Apple is not a software company, they are first and foremost a hardware company with first class software to support their hardware. They have a right to make software only compatible with their own hardware, just like Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo.
I completely agree.
its so stupid
its like having creative sue apple because they cant use the ipod software on their mp3 players its pure bullshit. If i was a company who had a product and took the time to develop my own software and user interface there should even be a law governing what i can and cannot do with it. you cant force a company to make their software public thats so freakin stupid
BBAAHHH FCKUNIG PSYSTAR PICEE OF SIHT MOETHRFKCUERS
LOL
Psystar never had a chance and only an idiot would believe this business idea wouldn't lead to legal troubles. They are going to be spending more in court than they'll ever make selling these things.
In the mean time, Appleinsider is giving them all kinds of press, along with any other BS story that has anything remotely to do with Apple. I don't know how they ever thought an antitrust lawsuit would hold up against a company with a 5% marketshare. There are literally hundreds of OS distributions to choose from in the home and enterprise PC markets, ranging from $0-thousands
Nothing to see here, folks. I give Psystar 4 more months maximum of existence before they tank.
Another important thing to note here is that Apple lawsuit claims that Psystar part of a larger plot. I think another "competing" company values MAC OSX as a significant technology and wants to get hold of it by hook or crook.
I suspect a company like MSFT which has its roots in Law may be behind it. Think about it... Bill Gates is from a family of attorneys. He was himself a law student before he found passion in computers.
Some of the "key" MSFT revenue streams are successful because of their strong team of attorneys.
MSFT stole Windows GUI from Apple. (Xerox which was using only as concept).
MSFT "killed" Netscape by monopolistic control and anti-competitive means.
It is all a hunch but I do believe there is something bigger behind Psystar, A small company with little money cannot risk taking on Apple. Especially after losing round 1. This is all very unusually daring or foolish.
Why would Microsoft open up a larger market for one of their competitors? They want everyone using Windows, not more people using OSX.
I do wonder where Psystar is getting all this money to pay their lawyers, though.
if apple were to make 10.x updates online updates somehow and stopped selling discs then psystar/hackintoshers would have to buy hardware and copy the OS. Problem solved.
It seems to me the difference between OS X and the Wii OS or Playstation OS is that you can buy a copy of OS X WITHOUT any hardware
if apple were to make 10.x updates online updates somehow and stopped selling discs then psystar/hackintoshers would have to buy hardware and copy the OS. Problem solved.
I was thinking that. In fact, don't microsoft make Office disks that are update-only. I don't understand why OSX discs aren't update-only. It's still great to have disks to boot off as a backstop, but I would expect something would be possible here.
No they aren't hacking updates. You can install updates direct from apple. The only issue is the point updates and you simply have to run a script then install apples combo update. However this type of update has been disabled on psystars.
They are then adding EFI emulation and whatever drivers are needed for the hardware. Not modifiying but rather addition to.
I'm sorry but you're wrong. Yes, you need to add EFI emulation, kernel extensions for specific hardware etc etc. However, you also need to disable/replace the kernel extension "Dont Steal Mac OS.kext". This is used to decrypyt Apple's encrypted binaries. These are key programs such as the Finder. This kext is tied to the hardware in order to correctly decrypt these binaries on the fly.
You'll find that any Hackintosh out there needs to have either a dsmos.kext or an AppleDecrypt.kext or similar and that the "Dont Steal..." kext has been removed.
This is the copy protection that Apple have employed and that Psystar and any Hackintosh builder need to break in order to get OS X to run.
Apple Binary Protection
and here..
Netkas Frequently Asked Questions
I do wonder where Psystar is getting all this money to pay their lawyers, though.
Assuming there are deep pockets involved I would say it's the Dells and Gateways of the world that would love to be out from under the thumb of Microsoft. They have virtually no bargaining power when dealing with MS because they have no viable alternative OS.
Nice try, but I think that would make Apple guilty of hindering competition.
Guilty of hindering competition, dude don't make me laugh.
Nothing to see here, folks. I give Psystar 4 more months maximum of existence before they tank.
If their legal campaign is really financed by someone, they'll live at least until the case comes to trial in about a year.
As another person wrote (quite well) I'm also extremely ticked about the Psystar crap. Seriously, Apple pours a lot of money for R&D to make OS X so that their product in unique and people want it. That's the point, right? No one is required to give their innovation away to the competitor! People want Mac because of what Apple does in regards to hardware and software development that makes an amazing product!