[Macworld]

Post your comments for Psystar rolls out new, compact Mac clone here

[mr.steevo]

I wonder "who" is behind Psystar. It has a big corp feel to it.
s.

[tewha]

Honestly, I'd find the idea of an expandable Mac mini more appearing: Buy a Mac mini, buy a custom case that improves air flow with a low-speed, high-airflow fan, a drive bay or two, built-in USB hub...

[Schneb]

Apple could have put this whole thing away with introduction of the MacMid Pro. Basically, a Mac Pro cut in half.

[patrickmacworld]

Everyone reading this article could clearly see it was written by a biased author.
"Psystar still manages to find the time and the guts to release new models of its Open Computer line."
Isn't having the guts to be bold part of the American way of doing things? No guts, no gain. Rosa Louise McCauley Parks had the guts to say no, and see what happened after.
"Either way, it appears that Psystar’s going to milking this cloning gig unless the law tells it in no uncertain terms to cease and desist forthwith."
Why shouldn't they? Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Until the law says that Psystar can continue selling non-Apple computer running under OS X, I don't see why Psystar should stop its activities. I would not. Expecting them to stop is preposterous.

[patrickmacworld]

It's clear that this article was written by a biased author.
"Even in the midst of a lengthy legal disagreement with Apple, Psystar still manages to find the time and the guts to release new models of its Open Computer line."
Isn't having the guts to be old part of the American way of doing things? No guts, no gain. Rosa Louise McCauley Parks had the guts to say no to the bus driver, and we all know what happened after.
"Either way, it appears that Psystar’s going to milking this cloning gig unless the law tells it in no uncertain terms to cease and desist forthwith."
Why should they stop? Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. As long as the law does not tell Psystar that it cannot continue to sell non-Apple computers running OS X, I don't see why Psystart should stop. I would not. Expecting Psystar to stop is ridiculous.

[Grapho]

Schneb said:

Apple could have put this whole thing away with introduction of the MacMid Pro. Basically, a Mac Pro cut in half.

I agree, but still, I find it infuriating that they feel they are in their right to utilize copy protected material to compete directly against the creator of such copy protected material. I hope justice prevails in November.

[MorrisTheCat]

Schneb said:

Apple could have put this whole thing away with introduction of the MacMid Pro. Basically, a Mac Pro cut in half.

this is exactly what I thought after reading this news earlier today. All this money and time wasted on legal action against Psystar, when all it would take is to intro a mid tower, semi expandable Mac. Heck, it doesn't even need to compete that much on price with the Psystars of the world. Just make it fairly affordable. The build quality and rep alone coming from Apple would make it sell well, far better than what any clone company could do.

Sigh. But Apple is sticking to their usual stubborn guns on this, refusing to see that there is a very viable market they're missing out on. As long as they continue to snub users who want something between the Mac mini and a Mac Pro, there will be Psystars. Doesn't change that what Psystar is doing is wrong (IMO), but it would be so much easier to beat them by making a better product that addresses this gap in their product line.

Oh well.

[patrickmacworld]

bq. I agree, but still, I find it infuriating that they feel they are in their right to utilize copy protected material to compete directly against the creator of such copy protected material. I hope justice prevails in November
Psystar is not stealing the OS, it's buying legal retail copies.

[Kyle_Varnell]

*Isn't having the guts to be old part of the American way of doing things? No guts, no gain. Rosa Louise McCauley Parks had the guts to say no to the bus driver, and we all know what happened after.
Patric, that's one of the more asinine statements I've ever heard. Having the guts to do something is one thing. Blatant theft is another. Violating ELUA's has nothing in common with somebody's civil rights.
Try again.

[MorrisTheCat]

What the? What happened to the comments on this article? Everything is suddenly chopped off on the left for me? Just me or a coding problem?

[patrickmacworld]

>Blatant theft is another. Violating ELUA's has nothing in common with somebody's civil rights
So far, the court has not found Psystar guilty. I don't own a Psystar system, and never will (nor do I have a Hackintosh system). And I don't condone theft. But my point is, Psystar has found a way to get the system to work for them. They probably know that they might lose their court case. But until this happen, it is very very unlikey that it will cease its activity.

We might not like it, but we live in a real world, where people do commit crimes whether we like it or not. Is Psystar to blame or the people who buy Psystar systems? A gun by itself is not dangerous, but people who buy them are, because they will be the ones pulling the trigger.

[mdawson]

Psystar is not buying OS X because OS X is not and has never been up for sale. Please learn the difference between buying and licensing/leasing renting.

[mdawson]

The case is about more than the lack of an expandable mid-range pro system. From the day Apple announced that they would be switching to x86 processors the ?me too? leeches have been clamoring for Apple to do exactly what they already know is bad for business. As numerous others have mentioned, there is a high probability that some big players are behind Psystar flapping them in the wind in the hopes that they can ultimately pull the rug from under Apple and use their product against them.

I, like you, would love for Apple to sell a toned-down pro system that is better suited to the needs of (most) power users that do not need an uber-expandable full-sized tower, but instead a level of processing power and future-proofing that the iMac does not offer. That stated, no one else has the right or legal leeway to infiltrate a proprietary platform to fill in that gap using the property of the platform?s owner.