Psystar says its Mac OS X copies are legal by nature

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gastroboy View Post


    Actually the last time there were clones it showed Apple to be incompetent, slow, unable to compete, and that they were building expensive sh*t. The clones kept trumping Apple on each release and, in the case of Power Computing, built an innovative Internet shop to market them, which became the origins of the Apple Store after Apple bought them out.



    Apple's desktop hardware at the time of the clones were far more reliable and better quality than the piece of shit clone boxes made by Power Computing, Umax, and Motorola. Each of those made piece of shit clone boxes that were noisy and unstable with compatibility issues mainly with drivers. Apple lost on sales because the clones were cheap, not because Apple was incompetent (except for the idiot CEO at the time), slow or unable to compete.
  • Reply 62 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gastroboy View Post


    No they are selling (reselling actually) a boxed OSX straight from Apple. You can then get from them or elsewhere on the Net, the software to let you install that on your PsyStar.



    People who submit to Apple's policies are rarely rewarded. Take for instance all those who went along with Apple's DRMed iTunes tracks, who are now sitting on damaged, old goods that they will be charged to replace.



    You left out the part where Pystar hacks OS X and installs it on their computer. That is exactly what Pystar is doing. Why don't you buy one since you seem so supportive of them.



    You do seem pretty clueless. What does buying music from iTunes have anything to do with Pystar? Rarely rewarded? If you hate Apple so much, why are you on this forum? My iTunes purchases are not "damaged, old goods." I also don't have to replace them either. They are not going to expire.
  • Reply 63 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    I actually agree with the First Sale Doctrine argument by Psystar. However, the First Sale doctrine doesn't extent to modifying the software for anything other then personal use.



    It's also not really the point. You can resell OSX, sure. But you still can't violate the terms of the license agreement saying that it's either A) an upgrade and/or B) can't be installed on a non-Apple system.
  • Reply 64 of 85
    So now it's "legal by nature" to copy someone else's software and re-sell it as an integral part of a completely different product (in this case, a computer)? I don't think so!
  • Reply 65 of 85
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    You left out the part where Pystar hacks OS X and installs it on their computer. That is exactly what Pystar is doing. Why don't you buy one since you seem so supportive of them.



    You do seem pretty clueless. What does buying music from iTunes have anything to do with Pystar? Rarely rewarded? If you hate Apple so much, why are you on this forum? My iTunes purchases are not "damaged, old goods." I also don't have to replace them either. They are not going to expire.



    I'm dumbfounded by the number of posters--despite discussing this issue for so long--that can't see a difference between selling a DVD of an OS in a box and selling an installed OS as a Mac clone.
  • Reply 66 of 85
    adjeiadjei Posts: 738member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mrochester View Post


    Hmmmmm, I think the whole point of this is that people want to use OSX, not create a new OS. I'm sure they could have gone about creating a whole new OS a long time ago, but it's still not OSX!



    Who gave you a right to use OSX, if you don't have the money for OSX, you don't deserve to be using it, that's how the world works, a company has the right to make a product and charge the price they want, if you want it on cheaper hardware or whatnot, too bad, life sucks.
  • Reply 67 of 85
    adjeiadjei Posts: 738member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gastroboy View Post


    No they are selling (reselling actually) a boxed OSX straight from Apple. You can then get from them or elsewhere on the Net, the software to let you install that on your PsyStar.



    The part that you seem to object to I gather is the small piece of software that gets added to prevent OSX crashing on install with the Psystar computer. I guess they could argue that is for the protection and enhancement of their hardware.



    They could also argue that it is no different than the haxies or drivers used by Apple's own 3rd party suppliers, who do the same to ensure their products work fine with Apple's.



    People who submit to Apple's policies are rarely rewarded. Take for instance all those who went along with Apple's DRMed iTunes tracks, who are now sitting on damaged, old goods that they will be charged to replace.



    It's Apple fault for DRM, big old evil Apple, they put on the DRM in order to trap their users into continously buying ipods.
  • Reply 68 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Adjei View Post


    It's Apple fault for DRM, big old evil Apple, they put on the DRM in order to trap their users into continously buying ipods.



    They refused to license the DRM so that the music could play elsewhere, did they not? A point the EEC anti-competition bodies astutely made.



    I never purchased a track from the iTunes store for this reason, not even cashed in the free vouchers they gave me, and I own 3 iPods. Now Apple will reward me for waiting them out and punish those who bought the schpiel.



    I don't have to support PsyStar. I see no harm in finding out whether there is a market for different form factors and see if that prods Apple into supplying that market themselves. The trouble with Apple is it is always telling us what we want and telling us how wrong we are when we don't agree. And the foolish amongst us say go for it Apple we can't really decide anyway unless you tell us what to think.



    That is why the iRack sketch really hits on the funny bone.
  • Reply 69 of 85
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gastroboy View Post


    They refused to license the DRM so that it could play elsewhere, did they not? A point the EEC anti-competition bodies astutely made.



    I never purchased a track from the iTunes store for this reason, not even cashed in the free vouchers they gave me, and I own 3 iPods. Now Apple will reward me for waiting them out and punish those who bought the schpiel.



    Big deal. I think you're forgetting that the people that bought the DRMed tracks either knew what they were buying, or could easily have known if they actually spent the five minutes it takes to get a basic grasp, they got what they were promised. They weren't promised free upgrades later. There is almost no commercial entertainment media where you get free upgrades for the update. A remastered / reencoded movie on DVD isn't given to those that bought the previous version, they almost never even get discounts! You want the new version, you paid full price again. This is usually the same with CDs too. Exceptions are very rare.



    Normally I'm not big on the whole buyer-beware mentality, but in this case, it's clearly not that tough of a concept to understand. Even those too dumb to understand what they were buying still got what they paid for.
  • Reply 70 of 85
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gastroboy View Post


    They refused to license the DRM so that the music could play elsewhere, did they not? A point the EEC anti-competition bodies astutely made.



    I never purchased a track from the iTunes store for this reason, not even cashed in the free vouchers they gave me, and I own 3 iPods. Now Apple will reward me for waiting them out and punish those who bought the schpiel.



    I don't have to support PsyStar. I see no harm in finding out whether there is a market for different form factors and see if that prods Apple into supplying that market themselves. The trouble with Apple is it is always telling us what we want and telling us how wrong we are when we don't agree. And the foolish amongst us say go for it Apple we can't really decide anyway unless you tell us what to think.



    That is why the iRack sketch really hits on the funny bone.



    Your assesment of Psystar's business practices and Apple's stance on DRM are not even close to reality.
  • Reply 71 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Your assesment of Psystar's business practices and Apple's stance on DRM are not even close to reality.



    Well, there you go.



    Point me to Apple's efforts on licensing their DRM.



    As for Psystar's "business practices", I am quite happy with them tipping a bucket, however small, on the status quo.
  • Reply 72 of 85
    rnp1rnp1 Posts: 175member
    APPLE:

    To stop this nonsense, simply state in the requirements, that the machine needs to strictly follow Apple's guidelines published on a regular basis at Apple.com. Then create the guidelines that prevent cheap and junky PCs from running OSX!

    Something like, "it shall be a violation of the agreement if the device does not have a power supply that is x amps, x volt, x degrees, etc. The case must be made of solid aluminum, weighing less than x lbs. for laptops. Desktop machines must include integrated screens at dimensions of exactly 17 and 24". Stand alone machine must be cooled to a temperature of x degrees and contain either an Intel 8 core xxxx or 8 core xxxx processor, running at 3.x GHZ. An Apple licensed logo, which has been specifically authorized by Apple, must appear on any device running OSX, as it is the sole property of Apple."

    In other words, publish a described current Macs list in detail and allow only well built devices with high standards to run OSX. If the PC community starts matching Apples standards, then that would improve their miserable lives anyway-despite them foolishly suffering from running Windows!



    -SIDE NOTE:

    Don't bother downloading Windows 7, unless you have Vista, XP is not an upgrade path. The interesting thing is that MS never tells you that in advance. They are so inept!
  • Reply 73 of 85
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rnp1 View Post


    APPLE:

    To stop this nonsense, simply state in the requirements, that the machine needs to strictly follow Apple's guidelines published on a regular basis at Apple.com. Then create the guidelines that prevent cheap and junky PCs from running OSX!



    They already do list the requirements:
  • Reply 74 of 85
    The Apple Company is trying to defeat property rights.

    J.P.M.G.

    http://www.boystoys.cl
  • Reply 75 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    Apple's desktop hardware at the time of the clones were far more reliable and better quality than the piece of shit clone boxes made by Power Computing, Umax, and Motorola. Each of those made piece of shit clone boxes that were noisy and unstable with compatibility issues mainly with drivers. Apple lost on sales because the clones were cheap, not because Apple was incompetent (except for the idiot CEO at the time), slow or unable to compete.



    Of course the clones competed on price, they also competed on innovation. Multiple processors, individual configuration, extra speed, the Internet store, realistically priced upgrades etc.



    Apple just couldn't keep up and that is why Jobs canned the clones. It was them or us.



    You forgot Radius, although none of the above will have forgotten how shabbily Apple treated them. Power Computing came out of it best with at least some money. Motorola I think couldn't have given a flying f*ck for Apple after that and it didn't encourage them to go out of their way to feed Apple the chips they wanted.



    My Umax 900 was a good machine, if in a dowdy box, and would be still running today if I bothered turning it on again.
  • Reply 76 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gastroboy View Post


    They refused to license the DRM so that the music could play elsewhere, did they not? A point the EEC anti-competition bodies astutely made.



    I never purchased a track from the iTunes store for this reason, not even cashed in the free vouchers they gave me, and I own 3 iPods. Now Apple will reward me for waiting them out and punish those who bought the schpiel.



    I don't have to support PsyStar. I see no harm in finding out whether there is a market for different form factors and see if that prods Apple into supplying that market themselves. The trouble with Apple is it is always telling us what we want and telling us how wrong we are when we don't agree. And the foolish amongst us say go for it Apple we can't really decide anyway unless you tell us what to think.



    That is why the iRack sketch really hits on the funny bone.



    you do realise that has completely nothing to do with the ethnic problem proposed in this clip
  • Reply 77 of 85
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lotusz View Post


    you do realise that has completely nothing to do with the ethnic problem proposed in this clip



    That was what made it even funnier for me.



    I know Apple and Steve Jobs would have been diametrically opposed to the Government policies, but they share that stubborn, won't listen approach that masquerades as considered thought, when it is only personal prejudice.
  • Reply 78 of 85
    davidwdavidw Posts: 977member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gastroboy View Post


    They refused to license the DRM so that the music could play elsewhere, did they not? A point the EEC anti-competition bodies astutely made.



    In order for Apple to sell digital music online, the record labels (at the time) required Apple to put in and MAINTAIN a DRM. Which means that everytime the DRM gets hacked, Apple was required to fix it. Apple wasn't about to fix the DRM on a Creative, Sansa, Samsung, iRiver, etc. everytime they got hacked. There was no way. Unless Apple required all those players to use iTunes. (In which case you would most likely be here bitching about that.) With an iPod, you had to use iTunes to get your music in it. So it was simple to fix a hack. As Apple had access to the firmware of your iPod everytime you plugged it in to your computer. The record label approved of this arrangement and let Apple sell their music with FairPlay DRM. Apple did what it had to do to applease the music labels. The music labels OWN the music. And thus had the right to dictate how their music is to be distributed. Unlike Psystar. Who's doing as they please with someone elses IP.



    You want to talk about being screwed. What about Play For Sure. MS licensed their DRM to any MP3 player maker. But it kept gettng hacked and MS couldn't keep up. So what did MS do? They stop supporting Play for Sure and all the music sold with Play For Sure DRM will no longer work on new MP3 players. (It won't even play on a MS Zune. ) You had to strip the DRM out of it in order to save it. Otherwise you lost your music when your old Play For Sure MP3 player dies. Did you see any discount given to those music purchasers to upgrade to a DRM free (and higher bit rate) track? At least with Apple, you'll be able to buy a new iPod that will play your old Fair Play music. I don't see Apple cutting off Fair Play support in the near future.



    BTW- MS new DRM (SurePlay?) is only for the Zune. They don't license it out. And the Zune is on it's death bed.



    Quote:

    I never purchased a track from the iTunes store for this reason, not even cashed in the free vouchers they gave me, and I own 3 iPods. Now Apple will reward me for waiting them out and punish those who bought the schpiel.



    I don't see how the eariler purchasers are being punished. They got to listen to their music from the first day they bought it. And they can still listen to them today and tomorrow. That's like claiming the people that bought movies on VSH, Laser Disc and DVD are being punished because BluRay is here. I sure would like to be able to turn in my Laser Disc movies for a sizable discount on the DVD or BluRay versions. But I guess all companies can't be like Apple. (On the other hand, I would never trade in my vinyl collection for CD's. Even if they gave me the CD's. )







    Quote:

    I don't have to support PsyStar. I see no harm in finding out whether there is a market for different form factors and see if that prods Apple into supplying that market themselves. The trouble with Apple is it is always telling us what we want and telling us how wrong we are when we don't agree. And the foolish amongst us say go for it Apple we can't really decide anyway unless you tell us what to think.



    If you feel that Apple is telling you how to spend your money. Then you got other problems that aren't evident in your postings. Be a Man and spend your money else where, if you don't like what Apple has to offer. Apple is not the only game in town. 95% of the World uses something other than a Mac. And yet Apple is one of the most profitable computer company in the world. Even if you take away iPods and iPhones.
  • Reply 79 of 85
    davidwdavidw Posts: 977member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gastroboy View Post


    Of course the clones competed on price, they also competed on innovation. Multiple processors, individual configuration, extra speed, the Internet store, realistically priced upgrades etc.



    Apple just couldn't keep up and that is why Jobs canned the clones. It was them or us.



    You forgot Radius, although none of the above will have forgotten how shabbily Apple treated them. Power Computing came out of it best with at least some money. Motorola I think couldn't have given a flying f*ck for Apple after that and it didn't encourage them to go out of their way to feed Apple the chips they wanted.



    My Umax 900 was a good machine, if in a dowdy box, and would be still running today if I bothered turning it on again.





    It didn't matter that (some not all) clones were cheaper or more innovative than a Mac. They were still more expensive (a lot more expensive) than a comparable PC. The writing was on the wall. Apple and the clones were all fighting for the same dwindling market share. Eventually the clones would die off one at a time as Mac market share decreased. The clones could innovate past Apple all they want. But they didn't (or couldn't) innovate past the one thing that matter, the PC. And clones were dependent on Apple's OS. So if Apple dies first, so do all the clones. It's as simple as that. Or are you going to claim that the companies making clones were also capable of developing an OS for their computers?
  • Reply 80 of 85
    olternautolternaut Posts: 1,376member
    LOL they sure are coming up with new defense strategies from the top of their heads aren't they?
Sign In or Register to comment.