Their taking a huge risk by doing so. Judge Alsup already advised them of it, and they continue to play with fire.
Kind of playing devils advocate here, but I kind of like the idea of being able to run OS X on PC hardware.
Not that I do it or help others do it illegally, I don't want trouble, but I got XP friends who really can't afford neither a copy of Windows 7 (still needs anti-virus) or a new machine. PC or Mac. So they are in nobody's hardware market what so ever. They keep calling me to fix their machines, and quite frankly I'm tired of it and telling them to "get a Mac" which they can't afford one.
Linux is fine, but a hassle to install, get drivers for and there isn't much software, certainly no iTunes, it could make a good netbook OS though, just the basics.
So that leaves OS X or a hacked version of Windows 7, which will need updates because Microsoft makes the most 'insecure by design' OS in human history, a hacked version is even worse.
See if we could easily install OS X on these old Windows XP boxes for near little price, the users will get used to OS X and it's remarkable ease and security, then when they do get enough money and the XP box finally kicks the bucket, they will buy a real Mac instead of a Windows box.
Just the cost savings in anti-malware alone is worth it.
So Pystar is sort of helping Apple in a way with Rebel EFI, because the low end eventually buys again, it's just their turnover is a lot longer, and given this poor economy even longer. But hardware eventually fails and these people will again flock to the lowest priced machine they can afford, which will be another insecure Windows box that actually costs them more in headaches, anti-malware, crapware and support.
But once they get spoiled on OS X, they will see the value of buying a Mac once the "Stockholm Syndrome" Microsoft software and cheap PC vendors inflict gets eliminated.
Apple could allow Rebel EFI to go on for some time and secure the low end with OS X, then start introducing some sort of hardware+OS X performance tie in new Mac's later on down the road that OS X won't run well or near not at all on anything else but Apples machines.
After all it's easy to hack a OS, but a lot harder to rewrite the whole dam thing for free and test it against all software to avoid a necessary hardware feature the OS and applications need to function.
Heck, just mentioning that OS X + Apple only hardware tie-in is coming will keep the cloners from considering establishing a long term business on clones with OS X.
For the short term, I see a opportunity for Apple here to gain significant market share and a future base of new Mac users by spoiling the low end.
Perhaps Apple could do it themselves, one OS X trial disk that will keep/backup all the users files and replace Windows with OS X?
but I got XP friends who really can't afford neither a copy of Windows 7 (still needs anti-virus) or a new machine. PC or Mac. So they are in nobody's hardware market what so ever. They keep calling me to fix their machines, and quite frankly I'm tired of it and telling them to "get a Mac" which they can't afford one.
I hear that argument myself but let's be honest, when someone says they can't afford something, are they the same people who take out £5,000-10,000 finance deals to buy a car, who buy 32-50" HDTVs and have big mortgages to pay? It comes down to what you value. A lot of my family don't place much value on their computers so they expect to spend very little and still get a good experience but have no problem paying hundreds or thousands for everything else.
However, just because they don't value it doesn't mean they deserve a good experience while holding back revenue from the people who make it possible. Apple subsidize the cost of the software through their hardware sales. If people don't buy the hardware, it's like buying an iphone for $200 on an AT&T contract, not paying the contract and expecting to keep the phone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper
But once they get spoiled on OS X, they will see the value of buying a Mac once the "Stockholm Syndrome" Microsoft software and cheap PC vendors inflict gets eliminated.
I doubt it. Like I say, people who have families try to scrimp and save on the least important things to them. When it gets round to the time they need to buy another machine, the cycle will repeat where they decide they can't afford a Mac and so buy a cheap PC and do the same hacking they did before.
I hear that argument myself but let's be honest, when someone says they can't afford something, are they the same people who take out £5,000-10,000 finance deals to buy a car, who buy 32-50" HDTVs and have big mortgages to pay?
No, these people really can't afford much more than $50 and they already have a perfectly working Pentium, just need a good OS that's all.
If they could hack they wouldn't need me.
See the problem is Windows is expensive AND it doesn't work like it should.
Apple could take over the world if it would find a way to not only sell premium hardware, but a premium OS as well that nearly everyone could afford.
I use to believe the "one clone sold, steals a hardware sale" but Apple isn't small anymore like before.
In my opinion Apple is large enough now and enough people desire Apple hardware that selling OS X separately isn't as much as a danger as it was before.
No, these people really can't afford much more than $50 and they already have a perfectly working Pentium, just need a good OS that's all.
If they could hack they wouldn't need me.
See the problem is Windows is expensive AND it doesn't work like it should.
Apple could take over the world if it would find a way to not only sell premium hardware, but a premium OS as well that nearly everyone could afford.
I use to believe the "one clone sold, steals a hardware sale" but Apple isn't small anymore like before.
In my opinion Apple is large enough now and enough people desire Apple hardware that selling OS X separately isn't as much as a danger as it was before.
Well, your logic may make perfect sense to you. I won't say it doesn't. However, the question isn't in your hands to answer. It's in Apple's hands and so far they've chosen to not let people install OS X on non-Apple hardware. So it doesn't matter if you think that's right or if you think Apple is missing an opportunity. Personally, I don't think they are.
The ever-dreaded car analogy: I don't feel comfortable paying for a Mercedes Benz now but I might later. MB should allow me to get one at, let's say half price, because they will win we over and cause me to buy another at full price the next time out. I don't think they'll go for it nor do they have any "obligation" to do so.
Well, your logic may make perfect sense to you. I won't say it doesn't. However, the question isn't in your hands to answer. It's in Apple's hands and so far they've chosen to not let people install OS X on non-Apple hardware. So it doesn't matter if you think that's right or if you think Apple is missing an opportunity. Personally, I don't think they are.
Well Apple in a sense is allowing OS X to be installed on PC's by not preventing it in hardware to begin with. They are not stupid, they KNOW their OS is highly desirable, it's developed to be that way to drive hardware sales.
Apple already has booted the cloners once before, why go through that again knowing enforcement is rather weak in most parts of the world?
Apple has only won a partial victory, Pystar is using this free advertising to develop a client list for it's Rebel EFI, once it's done that, it's disappears and sells to the middlemen who are selling clones illegally. The potential is huge in China, where most iPhones and Windows copies are illegal in some way or another.
I wouldn't be surprised if a future Pystar copy of OS X comes with Rebel EFI all bundled together on one disk.
So somebody is now doing what Apple should have done long ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1
The ever-dreaded car analogy: I don't feel comfortable paying for a Mercedes Benz now but I might later. MB should allow me to get one at, let's say half price, because they will win we over and cause me to buy another at full price the next time out. I don't think they'll go for it nor do they have any "obligation" to do so.
Good car dealers will allow qualified potential customers to test drive a car for a few days before purchase. And people can lease good quality cars, but they can't lease a Mac easily.
Right now it's rather a cold sale, "Get a Mac!" ok fine, but to most people a computer is a pain in the ass, so what makes a Mac different? People don't know because they haven't experienced OS X, all they see is a bunch of wild eyed enthusiasts with a cult gleam in their eye.
I'm not saying Apple should allow people to take a Mac home to try, rather allow some method to try OS X and/or buy it to run on their present Windows machines to get them adjusted to using it.
If and when Apple implements a OS X + Mac hardware tie in, future versions of OS X won't run well at all on non-Apple hardware, so these future customers will see the value of paying a bit more for quality and reliability when they update their hardware.
Apple has sewn up the low end of the iPod market effectively, I didn't think they would bother since the margins are so low. But they did as to keep competition out of the more lucrative higher end and from stealing sales from iTunes.
Comments
Their taking a huge risk by doing so. Judge Alsup already advised them of it, and they continue to play with fire.
Kind of playing devils advocate here, but I kind of like the idea of being able to run OS X on PC hardware.
Not that I do it or help others do it illegally, I don't want trouble, but I got XP friends who really can't afford neither a copy of Windows 7 (still needs anti-virus) or a new machine. PC or Mac. So they are in nobody's hardware market what so ever. They keep calling me to fix their machines, and quite frankly I'm tired of it and telling them to "get a Mac" which they can't afford one.
Linux is fine, but a hassle to install, get drivers for and there isn't much software, certainly no iTunes, it could make a good netbook OS though, just the basics.
So that leaves OS X or a hacked version of Windows 7, which will need updates because Microsoft makes the most 'insecure by design' OS in human history, a hacked version is even worse.
See if we could easily install OS X on these old Windows XP boxes for near little price, the users will get used to OS X and it's remarkable ease and security, then when they do get enough money and the XP box finally kicks the bucket, they will buy a real Mac instead of a Windows box.
Just the cost savings in anti-malware alone is worth it.
So Pystar is sort of helping Apple in a way with Rebel EFI, because the low end eventually buys again, it's just their turnover is a lot longer, and given this poor economy even longer. But hardware eventually fails and these people will again flock to the lowest priced machine they can afford, which will be another insecure Windows box that actually costs them more in headaches, anti-malware, crapware and support.
But once they get spoiled on OS X, they will see the value of buying a Mac once the "Stockholm Syndrome" Microsoft software and cheap PC vendors inflict gets eliminated.
Apple could allow Rebel EFI to go on for some time and secure the low end with OS X, then start introducing some sort of hardware+OS X performance tie in new Mac's later on down the road that OS X won't run well or near not at all on anything else but Apples machines.
After all it's easy to hack a OS, but a lot harder to rewrite the whole dam thing for free and test it against all software to avoid a necessary hardware feature the OS and applications need to function.
Heck, just mentioning that OS X + Apple only hardware tie-in is coming will keep the cloners from considering establishing a long term business on clones with OS X.
For the short term, I see a opportunity for Apple here to gain significant market share and a future base of new Mac users by spoiling the low end.
Perhaps Apple could do it themselves, one OS X trial disk that will keep/backup all the users files and replace Windows with OS X?
but I got XP friends who really can't afford neither a copy of Windows 7 (still needs anti-virus) or a new machine. PC or Mac. So they are in nobody's hardware market what so ever. They keep calling me to fix their machines, and quite frankly I'm tired of it and telling them to "get a Mac" which they can't afford one.
I hear that argument myself but let's be honest, when someone says they can't afford something, are they the same people who take out £5,000-10,000 finance deals to buy a car, who buy 32-50" HDTVs and have big mortgages to pay? It comes down to what you value. A lot of my family don't place much value on their computers so they expect to spend very little and still get a good experience but have no problem paying hundreds or thousands for everything else.
However, just because they don't value it doesn't mean they deserve a good experience while holding back revenue from the people who make it possible. Apple subsidize the cost of the software through their hardware sales. If people don't buy the hardware, it's like buying an iphone for $200 on an AT&T contract, not paying the contract and expecting to keep the phone.
But once they get spoiled on OS X, they will see the value of buying a Mac once the "Stockholm Syndrome" Microsoft software and cheap PC vendors inflict gets eliminated.
I doubt it. Like I say, people who have families try to scrimp and save on the least important things to them. When it gets round to the time they need to buy another machine, the cycle will repeat where they decide they can't afford a Mac and so buy a cheap PC and do the same hacking they did before.
I hear that argument myself but let's be honest, when someone says they can't afford something, are they the same people who take out £5,000-10,000 finance deals to buy a car, who buy 32-50" HDTVs and have big mortgages to pay?
No, these people really can't afford much more than $50 and they already have a perfectly working Pentium, just need a good OS that's all.
If they could hack they wouldn't need me.
See the problem is Windows is expensive AND it doesn't work like it should.
Apple could take over the world if it would find a way to not only sell premium hardware, but a premium OS as well that nearly everyone could afford.
I use to believe the "one clone sold, steals a hardware sale" but Apple isn't small anymore like before.
In my opinion Apple is large enough now and enough people desire Apple hardware that selling OS X separately isn't as much as a danger as it was before.
No, these people really can't afford much more than $50 and they already have a perfectly working Pentium, just need a good OS that's all.
If they could hack they wouldn't need me.
See the problem is Windows is expensive AND it doesn't work like it should.
Apple could take over the world if it would find a way to not only sell premium hardware, but a premium OS as well that nearly everyone could afford.
I use to believe the "one clone sold, steals a hardware sale" but Apple isn't small anymore like before.
In my opinion Apple is large enough now and enough people desire Apple hardware that selling OS X separately isn't as much as a danger as it was before.
Well, your logic may make perfect sense to you. I won't say it doesn't. However, the question isn't in your hands to answer. It's in Apple's hands and so far they've chosen to not let people install OS X on non-Apple hardware. So it doesn't matter if you think that's right or if you think Apple is missing an opportunity. Personally, I don't think they are.
The ever-dreaded car analogy: I don't feel comfortable paying for a Mercedes Benz now but I might later. MB should allow me to get one at, let's say half price, because they will win we over and cause me to buy another at full price the next time out. I don't think they'll go for it nor do they have any "obligation" to do so.
Well, your logic may make perfect sense to you. I won't say it doesn't. However, the question isn't in your hands to answer. It's in Apple's hands and so far they've chosen to not let people install OS X on non-Apple hardware. So it doesn't matter if you think that's right or if you think Apple is missing an opportunity. Personally, I don't think they are.
Well Apple in a sense is allowing OS X to be installed on PC's by not preventing it in hardware to begin with. They are not stupid, they KNOW their OS is highly desirable, it's developed to be that way to drive hardware sales.
Apple already has booted the cloners once before, why go through that again knowing enforcement is rather weak in most parts of the world?
Apple has only won a partial victory, Pystar is using this free advertising to develop a client list for it's Rebel EFI, once it's done that, it's disappears and sells to the middlemen who are selling clones illegally. The potential is huge in China, where most iPhones and Windows copies are illegal in some way or another.
I wouldn't be surprised if a future Pystar copy of OS X comes with Rebel EFI all bundled together on one disk.
So somebody is now doing what Apple should have done long ago.
The ever-dreaded car analogy: I don't feel comfortable paying for a Mercedes Benz now but I might later. MB should allow me to get one at, let's say half price, because they will win we over and cause me to buy another at full price the next time out. I don't think they'll go for it nor do they have any "obligation" to do so.
Good car dealers will allow qualified potential customers to test drive a car for a few days before purchase. And people can lease good quality cars, but they can't lease a Mac easily.
Right now it's rather a cold sale, "Get a Mac!" ok fine, but to most people a computer is a pain in the ass, so what makes a Mac different? People don't know because they haven't experienced OS X, all they see is a bunch of wild eyed enthusiasts with a cult gleam in their eye.
I'm not saying Apple should allow people to take a Mac home to try, rather allow some method to try OS X and/or buy it to run on their present Windows machines to get them adjusted to using it.
If and when Apple implements a OS X + Mac hardware tie in, future versions of OS X won't run well at all on non-Apple hardware, so these future customers will see the value of paying a bit more for quality and reliability when they update their hardware.
Apple has sewn up the low end of the iPod market effectively, I didn't think they would bother since the margins are so low. But they did as to keep competition out of the more lucrative higher end and from stealing sales from iTunes.
Pystar exists because Apple is making mistakes.