Psystar files for bankruptcy likely delaying Apple case

1356789

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 168
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    I doubt a venture capitalist would sink money into this. It's much too risky. When venture capitalists are lagging in putting money into legit firms, why would they want to put one into one that has at best, a 50/50 chance based on Apple's annoyance? It would be a bad enough risk without that to start up a company like this in this climate.



    You could be right. We're all pretty much in guess mode. Venture capitalists do take risks with their money, though you wouldn't find me risking a nickel on these guys.
  • Reply 42 of 168
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post


    Apple is doing great, but the Mac OS X platform is underperforming compared to where it should be. The company has too many holes. The "desktops" have a bias towards the low end of the scale and the laptops are too high end.



    What does that have to do with my comment?

    Regardless of "where they should be" Apple is having a banner year yet Psystar is filing for bankruptcy.
  • Reply 43 of 168
    striker_kkstriker_kk Posts: 246member
    Is there any chance that Psystar, in their battle with Apple, is being supported by M$?
  • Reply 44 of 168
    istinkistink Posts: 250member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by striker_kk View Post


    Is there any chance that Psystar, in their battle with Apple, is being supported by M$?



    I'm sure everyone here would love that being that it would give people another reason to hate them, but I see it as highly unlikely.
  • Reply 45 of 168
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by striker_kk View Post


    Is there any chance that Psystar, in their battle with Apple, is being supported by M$?



    Right- and GW Bush and Osama Bin Laden. Anything is possible in the mind of a deranged Apple fanboy.

  • Reply 46 of 168
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,564member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DDB View Post


    Wait a minute, Pystar is going out of business selling cheap, knockoff Macs because of the pullback in consumer spending?



    Aren't all the pundits and armchair experts constantly insisting that cheaper macs are THE ONLY WAY to weather the economic downturn?



    Looks like maybe a cheaper mac is not the answer to life after all.



    Maybe true if you did not have idiot running the business... Lots of companies make inexpensive products and still are in business today.



    it those companies who understand their business and what their customer want who are still in business
  • Reply 47 of 168
    striker_kkstriker_kk Posts: 246member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Right- and GW Bush and Osama Bin Laden. Anything is possible in the mind of a deranged Apple fanboy.







    Thats a probable given the change in M$'s attitude towards Apple " get a mac" campaign.

    You cant deny the fact that M$ loves monopoly!
  • Reply 48 of 168
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,098member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shavex View Post


    sad day.



    Not for Apple stockholders.
  • Reply 49 of 168
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macFanDave View Post


    Capitalism runs on the ability for competitors to protect their intellectual property. Apple clearly states that the Mac OS X must run on Apple hardware, therefore Psystar PC's are not 100% compliant -- they do not comply to the Apple License Agreement.



    There are plenty of choices in computing -- Macs, Windows PC's, Linux and other *nixes. Apple has a unique business model of a so-called monopoly of hardware, software and OS, and that gives the Mac its distinctive performance, consistency and reliablilty. Some of us choose this arrangement over ones that are supposedly freer or cheaper.



    Any group of crooks that would break the Apple way and making it work more like the Windows PC is actually taking away a distinct choice from consumers.



    Monopolies are only good until the company figures out the customers are locked in. You end up with inferior products and higher prices. You see it with the utility companies, you've seen it with Microsoft, and you're seeing in pro segments where Apple jacks the price of Mac Pros up $200 with each revision knowing that its much cheaper to pay the increase than the thousands it would take to switch.
  • Reply 50 of 168
    perrin21perrin21 Posts: 8member
    Ive just checked out www.psystar.com and they still look like they are in business. What is the source of this information? Theres no mention on their own site of being in administration.
  • Reply 51 of 168
    istinkistink Posts: 250member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GTL215 View Post


    DING DING DING! what do we have for him, Johnny?? Hit the nail right on the head.



    Mac software works great because of controlled hardware. Let the hardware run free, and the software ceases to work great. PERIOD!



    Ceases to work great on non-Apple certified machines*



    I don't understand why people think hardware vendors are completely incapable of writing drivers for operating systems. Occasionally you get a bad driver here and there, but it's really not as bad as people here make it out to be.



    OS X can obviously be ran on non-apple built machines, all while not at all effecting the performance and reliability of Apple computers. It's Apple's right to say no to this though, which is the key issue here.
  • Reply 52 of 168
    sipadansipadan Posts: 107member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    For its part, Psystar maintained in court documents filed last week that it "plans on emerging from this Chapter 11 with a strong and effective plan to make an increasingly higher profit and still provide the consumer with the product that they have grown to enjoy and trust."



    What the hell is wrong with the world today when they could be allowed to reopen with their unlegit business scheme (if I understand correctly they foresee winning the case and happily resume screwing with Apple's SLA?).
  • Reply 53 of 168
    rainrain Posts: 538member
    Still, it would have been nice to have built my own computer that was twice as fast and put OSX on it... all for half the price.

    Plus, it would have been a computer capable of real upgrades.



    My Mac Pro is a great machine, but I'm also well over $5000 into it. On the PC side of things, $5800 buys me a heck of a box and probably a new display too.



    If Apple extended their warranty to 3 years on the Mac Pro without Applecare, and the option to extend to 5 years with Applecare, it would be a different story. Their premium desktops should be lasting more then 3 years.

    Common Apple... show some trust in your products... extend the length of warranty. Thats better then a price cut.

    1 year warranty is a joke and tells the world "hey, we are making shit products too".



    I don't mind paying premium for premium. Is this not the Apple mantra?
  • Reply 54 of 168
    leonardleonard Posts: 528member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by perrin21 View Post


    Ive just checked out www.psystar.com and they still look like they are in business. What is the source of this information? Theres no mention on their own site of being in administration.



    Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's nothing to stop Psystar from still operating while they file for bankruptcy protection.



    Seeing that the info is on all the news sites, I imagine someone got ahold of it from wherever this stuff is available for viewing. They must list somewhere where all the submitted lawsuits and bankupties are.
  • Reply 55 of 168
    bwikbwik Posts: 562member
    Now it's even more important that the court case go forward. Just because Apple has more money for lawyers, should not in itself guarantee that new competitors are blocked.



    This is America. It should be possible for new competitors to enter (if a court agrees with their model). The court has not yet ruled. Until that time, Apple's legal maneuvers could be interpreted under anti-trust law as a predatory move that is illegal. Apple could eventually be broken up, legally, if they kill everything that moves like this. IMO. Just having more lawyers does not prove you were right. In that way, Microsoft could have extinguished Apple at a sensitive moment 10 years ago. I'm just saying, Psystar stands for something important even if they are wrong. It is important the court gets the chance to say so, so we don't have to deal with this type of question again.
  • Reply 56 of 168
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by roehlstation View Post


    They are on retainer, I doubt we're in the hundreds of thousands at this point.



    If an attorney sits at his desk and even "thinks" about your case? Well, that goes on the billable hours sheet. Same thing goes for faxes, emails, letters, phone calls, etc.



    You would be amazed how quickly it all adds up. Plus, since presumably we are talking about a large team of attorneys? It wouldn't take long at all.



    Not to mention the fact that the firm mentioned does not bill at $100/hour.
  • Reply 57 of 168
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bwik View Post


    Now it's even more important that the court case go forward. Just because Apple has more money for lawyers, should not in itself guarantee that new competitors are blocked.



    This is America. It should be possible for new competitors to enter (if a court agrees with their model). The court has not yet ruled. Until that time, Apple's legal maneuvers could be interpreted under anti-trust law as a predatory move that is illegal. Apple could eventually be broken up, legally, if they kill everything that moves like this. IMO. Just having more lawyers does not prove you were right. In that way, Microsoft could have extinguished Apple at a sensitive moment 10 years ago. I'm just saying, Psystar stands for something important even if they are wrong. It is important the court gets the chance to say so, so we don't have to deal with this type of question again.



    What exactly is so important about stealing another companies property?
  • Reply 58 of 168
    sipadansipadan Posts: 107member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bwik View Post


    I'm just saying, Psystar stands for something important even if they are wrong. It is important the court gets the chance to say so, so we don't have to deal with this type of question again.



    I'd agree with you if Psystar represented healthy competition, but as I see it the only thing they stand for is intellectual thievery.
  • Reply 59 of 168
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post


    Monopolies are only good until the company figures out the customers are locked in. You end up with inferior products and higher prices. You see it with the utility companies....



    Really? Here's a thought. Go take a poll of folks in California who are serviced by the current, post-Enron version of Pacific Gas & Electric. Ask them if they preferred being serviced by the old, public monopoly version of PG&E, or what happened after PG&E was forced to sell off assets. Which led to their being owned and operated by Enron. Which then led to their being sort of back on their own, but now having to pay higher prices as, oops, they no longer own the facilities that make the power.



    Yep, that really led to lower prices and better service. Not!
  • Reply 60 of 168
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,445member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ruel24 View Post


    Okay, so Pystar makes computers that are 100% Mac OS X compliant. Why does that make them crooks? The parts are open and freely used on PC's running Windows... Folks, if Pystar would win, we all win. It creates competiton, and therefore better products and lower prices. That's capitalism. Hoping Apple wins out is a vote for higher prices, less choice, and whatever Apple feels we deserve to get from them. In other words, you, the consumer, loses.



    I disagree. Psystar is not a fair competitor as it is using Apple's intellectual property to make a sale. The fact is that if the courts ruled that Apple HAD to release its OS for use on any clone, Apple would have to raise prices: do you think the Mac OS is really worth only $129? Apple is able to charge that (really an update price) because hardware always is sold with the OS (except for updates).



    One of the reasons why Apple computers are superior is because Apple is able to control both the hardware and the software (even though much of the hardware parts are off-the-shelf). If Apple permitted clones, think of the extra customer service and operational costs necessary to support those clones.



    So I disagree that Psystar is a true competitor and I disagree that prices would drop if they were permitted to exist in their current form.
Sign In or Register to comment.