[Macworld]

Post your comments for Psystar files amended complaint against Apple here

[Kyle_Varnell]

Good God will these clowns just go away. It seems like every couple of weeks we're hearing something about Psystar amending their lawsuit against Apple.
This is akin to a kid in grade school challenging you to to a contest then constantly changing the rules when he sees he's getting his butt kicked up and down the playground.
One of the reasons I bought a Apple computer is that, unlike with a Pc, the software and hardware come from one place and not from a million different sources.
Psystar, get ye gone.

[aceshelman]

So buy your OS and hardware from the same place. Nobody is forcing you or anyone else to buy a pystar.

[kdbarto]

I think Apple should sell 2 versions of MacOS - 1 for Apple branded hardware for about $99. One for 'generic' intel hardware for about $399, with a license that ties it to your hardware MAC address of your ethernet chip. One registration per OS License number/Person. Second registration requires you go to the Genius bar (see below) to get it authorized and installed again.
And the generic version comes without free support at the Genius bar, that costs $20/hr. And no phone support.
This gives incentive to run on the Apple hardware without making running on the generic stuff impossible.

[robco]

Unfortunately Apple would face the same mess that game makers have had with products like SecuROM. There is the TPM that Apple could easily exploit. Apple doesn't have the resources to support a huge range of hardware.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[bgrieco]

People are right in fearing that Psystar's complaint will in some way hurt Apple. It will. But it's not something that Apple didn't seek for.
From 1999 Apple has been replacing choice technologies for mainline stream market ones in order to lower the prices and make their products more affordable. Changing SCSI for IDE for instance. My old PM 9600 was certainly the best machine I ever had in my life. Robust as a tank.
The lack of a portable G5 was really a problem, but, IMHO, it could have been prevented with a little foresight. Jumping to a 64 bit CPU didn't really produce the greater processing power that the waterfall to a cup of water comparison announced.
The Intel move placed Apple directly on the mainstream. No wonder it started facing mainstream problems.
The Intel processors shown that the difference between a mac and a PC is indeed the software.
Yes, mac hardware is great. Everything is pre-tested and works like a charm. But so is IBM's, HPs or even DELL's PC hardware.
If Microsoft decided to create it's own hardware and restrict Windows to run only on it, we would be seeing a MAJOR worldwide anti-trust lawsuit. Just remember the IE anti-trust suite. So Apple may step on the competition by licensing it's software to it's hardware only and Microsoft may not bundle IE for free and make it part of the OS ?
Yes, folks, Apple's future is not clear but who's future is ?

[Photonerd]

I hope they lose and are ultimately bankrupted by this little stunt.

[Don_Quixote]

The central issue here is that to what extent a company or (a copyright owner) can claim its right. In other words, can a company puts whatever it wants in EULA which, then, becomes a "law" that users must conform?
One thing I noticed from the discussion of this issue in the MacWorld is that many users are not really concerned about this part of the issue--they are more interested in how user experiences will change if Psystar wins. I understand these Mac users are quite satisfied with their Macs and they don't want it go away by Psystar's case. I think the issue Psystar has raised is quite important because it does not just involve Apple and Psystar but all software and hardware companies.
There are many interesting questions involved. Can Microsoft put a clause like "Windows must be used with Microsoft-branded web browser" into EULA? If I can transfer a hard drive from a dead Mac to a Dell PC, but why can't I transfer one license of OS X from a dead Mac to a Dell PC?

[muddybulldog]

"If Microsoft decided to create it's own hardware and restrict Windows to run only on it, we would be seeing a MAJOR worldwide anti-trust lawsuit."
Huh huh what? If MS suddenly locked Windows to MS only hardware everyone would stop dead in their tracks and watch as MS market share dropped to next to zero effectively relieving them from all the antitrust hassles they've been having.
Apple isn't stepping on competition, they're stepping on somebody illegally redistributing their product a clone of their own product. The only reason there is even a debate here is because they sell OS X as a standalone SKU.
How far do you think this lawsuit would make it if GM purchased Ford Mustang engines and body panels on the open market and then installed them onto Corvette frames while claiming it's fair because Ford has a monopoly on Mustangs?

[Rhywun]

Couldn't this be "solved" by simply not selling a stand-alone OS X?

[muddybulldog]

That seems to be the most likely outcome should Psystar prevail.

[tech_head]

Apple could cease to sell a boxed version of MacOS which in fact is an upgrade not a new OS.
Pepsi will put a cooler at you place of business and require you to only put Pepsi products in it. perfectly legal and they will revoke your reantal/lease if you do otherwise.

[KGBguy]

Hopefully they win, we need to put an end to Apple madness.
ps Love apples the way to go, however, they are overboard with their views.

[mdawson]

Quote

kdbarto wrote:

>

Quote

I think Apple should sell 2 versions of MacOS - 1 for Apple branded hardware for about $99. One for 'generic' intel hardware for about $399, with a license that ties it to your hardware MAC address of your ethernet chip.

No, Apple needs to protect and stick to the business model that has kept them in business for the past 25 years. Learn this fact, Apple is not Microsoft and Apple?s bottom line is the manufacture and sale of hardware that they develop software to support. The idea that Apple needs to adopt the modus operandi of a company that is not even in the same line of business is absurd. Microsoft is and has always been a software company and that is why Microsoft can stay afloat mostly on software sales. Apple is and has always been a hardware company.