HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
Another company making OS X compatible computers has popped up, totally ignoring the fact that the last people to try this are being sued.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Another OS X Compatible PC Maker Pops Up
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
Until their strategy of advertising to people who don't know better stops working (forever)
Them having no competition allows them to drive up the prices as far as they do
So basically Apple is suing them because they make a system that is capable of running OS-X????
Hrmm... that would be like an automobile company suing you for using their brand engine in a different car....
Or like a city suing you for using well water instead of city water...
Stupid, stupid, stupid...
I never liked Apple crap.. and now I like it even less if that is even possible.
Hrmm... that would be like an automobile company suing you for using their brand engine in a different car....
Or like a city suing you for using well water instead of city water...
Stupid, stupid, stupid...
I never liked Apple crap.. and now I like it even less if that is even possible.
SerpentSix
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Messages
- 108
We'll I love my new 24in Imac...probably the coolest computer I have ever owned. Including all the custom rigs I've built. Boot camped with vista Crysis runs great on High.
I'm slowly falling in love with OSX...is it perfect no, does it just work,definately not, does it have a place in this world....oh yea!
By apple controlling the hardware thdier able to make thier OS more stable...it ain't rocket science guys.
Stop hatin on Apple thier doin some cool shit.
I'm slowly falling in love with OSX...is it perfect no, does it just work,definately not, does it have a place in this world....oh yea!
By apple controlling the hardware thdier able to make thier OS more stable...it ain't rocket science guys.
Stop hatin on Apple thier doin some cool shit.
No, they are only using components that mac os will run on, they are not even doing anything special. Anyone can build this machine, it's just a matter of finding what components are compatible.
Wait, you are saying you are running high crysis settings on a 24" imac? Now if thats not the biggest boat of bs that I've ever heard I don't know what is.
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
I had this idea back in August 2005 when I... well, let's just say I have some framed emails from Apple Legal for my part in what people now call OSx86.
But the concept is simple, and I expected Psystar to follow it instead of this other company, but whatever works. Sell a machine, sell the boxed unopened OSX product (as a reseller) and the include the goodies and a nice well written guide to take care of possible issues and provide adequate support when it doesn't - because PEBKAC has more letters than OSX does and hence, shit will happen.
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Psystar gets off without even a slap on the wrist, to be honest.
We'll see what happens...
But the concept is simple, and I expected Psystar to follow it instead of this other company, but whatever works. Sell a machine, sell the boxed unopened OSX product (as a reseller) and the include the goodies and a nice well written guide to take care of possible issues and provide adequate support when it doesn't - because PEBKAC has more letters than OSX does and hence, shit will happen.
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Psystar gets off without even a slap on the wrist, to be honest.
We'll see what happens...
SerpentSix
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Messages
- 108
You think a computer that has a dual core 3.06ghz cpu, 2 gig of ram, Geforce 8800 gs with 512 of ram,500gig 7200rpm sata drive running Crysis on High is the biggest load of BS you have ever heard????
Recommended Requirements
CPU: Core 2 Duo/Athlon X2 or better
RAM: 1.5GB
Video Card: NVIDIA 7800 Series, ATI Radeon 1800 Series or better
VRAM: 512MB of Graphics Memory
Storage: 12GB
Sound Card: DirectX 9.0c Compatible
ODD: DVD-ROM
OS: Microsoft Windows XP or Vista
DirectX: DX9.0c or DX10
I'm running it at something like 1330*1008 in DX10 and it's pretty damn smooth.
Cut scenes will chop up on me a little bit but not enough to make me lower the res or detail. If you still think I'm "bullshiting" you then google Crysis on an Imac.
You are not even running native resolution and you are saying high settings, hahahahaha
Oh and do me a favor, why don't you go to youtube and pull some crysis imac videos, tons of imac users are posting saying that high is shens unless if you hack settings down like the resolution.
If you are not running native resolution, you are not running high. End of story.
SerpentSix
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Messages
- 108
Yea I thought you would say something like that. Dude all detail is set to high and it looks fucking amazing I give two shits if you believe me or not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4wvsehdyOk
Here's a dude playing it on the older Imac...lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4wvsehdyOk
Here's a dude playing it on the older Imac...lol
no i believe he is saying HE is HIGH....
Joe Average
Ad Blocker - Banned
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,459
"If it ain't native resolution at 60 fps, fuck it, you dare not call your machine "high end" especially if we're talking about playing Crysis..." -- Joe Average
Truer words were never spoken...
Truer words were never spoken...
BladeVenom
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,707
Apple's policy sounds like tying. Forcing a person to buy their hardware to use their software. I'd like to see someone file suit against them.
This is nothing new. I am fairly certain it has always been that way. I think the older mac clones where approved by them.
As for a city suing you for using a well instead of city water. I know a lot of cities that won't let you put in wells but make you use the city water. So that does happen.
Dude, I'm 100% with you (my 24" iMac is my favorite computer ever) but even I call shenanigans on the Crysis statement. The PC I built back in November (E8400, SLI 8800GT, blah blah blah) won't run Crysis that great at high at 1920. It'll run great on high settings at 1440, but even with that rig I wouldn't dare say it runs at a "high" setting.
Then again, Crysis is only good for e-peen bragging rights since it is mediocre at best as a game, so whatever. You should have used any of the Valve games or Call Of Duty 4 to prove your points better, as those will run great with everything cranked on your machine.
Its also worth noting that an iMac makes for an awesome Final Cut Studio rig (it screams and a Mac Pro tower is no longer necessary), it takes up very little space, it is nearly silent, and it sports one of the best 24" LCD panels on the market. The only other place to get it is in the $1100 NEC 2490WUXi, the best 24" out there. Oh yeah, and while I think Vista SP1 is great, OS X is still years ahead of it.
So yeah, the 24" iMacs are awesome machines, among the absolute best desktops you can get anywhere, just don't say that it'll tear through Crysis.
Ok, I partly retract what I said. Its not the best quality but its not terrible either.
I still think you should have have used COD4 or HL2:EP2 as an example instead.
No, they're suing the company for violating their shrinkwrap agreement. It says in there that you can only install OS-X on apple branded hardware.
Microsoft should start following this business model.
Seems like a solid idea. Sign an agreement with Dell for billions of dollars in future payments and make it very hard and illegal to run Windows on any un-sponsored hardware.
Of course everyone would be outraged, because the entire concept is ridiculous.
But the apple fanboys seem to think all of this is okay.
I want to see this go to court. If it does hold up...then something needs to be changed.
If I pay for software I should be able to use it however I want. Given that I don't do anything illegal. By illegal I mean not in violation of any laws, not some statement thrown into the TOS.
qft.
Microsoft was sued so many times because their software wont run on compeditor products... yet Apple is perfectly okay to do this. The EU never seems to have a gripe with Apple, yet Apple is all about exclusivity and are blatant about it.
I think that if Apple had anywhere near the market share that MS does then the EU would probably be looking to beat them down too.
The EU is looking closely at Intel's practices in Europe too. They just like beating the biggest fight in the pond around a little. Gets them some money.
The size that you are should not matter when it comes to legal issues. Because they are bigger they should be punished more or scrutenized more?
It doesn't matter if you are a one man company, you should be held to the same standards... I thought that was EU's main goal to level the playing field and not playing favors.
This size does matter (that's what she said). This is the entire point of anti-trust laws.
I just thought about this whole issue for a while and now I am somewhat conflicted.
On one hand obviously software developers should be able to do whatever they want with their software. It seems reasonable. Its their property, who are we to say what is okay and what isn't?
At the same time, this particular clause in the documentation they drew up doesn't pass the smell test. I can't put into words why it isn't right, but it just seems corrupt.
As a software developer you are free to choose whether to sell your product or not. You are even free to choose the price(though supply and demand will assist you lol).
However, forcing the public to buy an additional product which has a price 10 times+ more expensive than the software itself is obviously wrong.
I'm no lawyer, but hopefully there is already a law(or precedent) which supports that this is not okay. The whole idea of what apple is doing goes against the good nature of our economy.
On one hand obviously software developers should be able to do whatever they want with their software. It seems reasonable. Its their property, who are we to say what is okay and what isn't?
At the same time, this particular clause in the documentation they drew up doesn't pass the smell test. I can't put into words why it isn't right, but it just seems corrupt.
As a software developer you are free to choose whether to sell your product or not. You are even free to choose the price(though supply and demand will assist you lol).
However, forcing the public to buy an additional product which has a price 10 times+ more expensive than the software itself is obviously wrong.
I'm no lawyer, but hopefully there is already a law(or precedent) which supports that this is not okay. The whole idea of what apple is doing goes against the good nature of our economy.
There are many proprietary electronics products that have an "OS" that only a specific product can run as stated by the EULA. There are also no restrictions as far as what operating systems you can run on Mac hardware; Windows, Linux, another version of BSD, Solaris, pretty much whatever is compiled for an Intel CPU will work.
Put it this way, if Microsoft sold a piece of hardware that was a closed-end system like the Mac that ran specific software for the OS, then nobody else would be legally allowed to run that software on another piece of hardware. Wait a second, they already do. If I somehow cobbled together a custom piece of hardware that could run the XBox 360 operating system and dashboard that could run all XBox 360 games and then tried to sell it on the open market, you can bet that Microsoft would come down on me with the full force of their legal department and the US justice system would have every reason to support their case.
This is very different from the anti-trust lawsuits brought up against Microsoft in the 90s (remember, it is not illegal to have a monopoly, but it is illegal to abuse it). In the case with Windows, Microsoft threatened IBM with an audit over OS/2, with the consequence that they would not allow them to license Windows until they were finished, not to mention strong arming PC manufacturers into not carrying OS/2. In essence, they were punishing IBM for trying to compete in the OS arena. Then there was Compaq which was bundling AOL and Netscape. Microsoft threatened to withhold or raise license fees unless they stopped, because their Windows license agreement did not allow Compaq to modify the Windows desktop. This was anticompetitive since Microsoft had MSN and Internet Explorer as the defaults.
No such restrictions exist within OS X, and this is even disregarding the fact that it is an OS running on what is explicitly sold as a closed-end system. This is different from a piece of software that is ostensibly supposed to run on everything. If Microsoft ever sold a PC that was a Macintosh equivalent closed-system that ran a version of Windows, the same rules would apply here as well. If Apple wanted to be accused of the same anticompetitive practices then they would have to do something more along the lines of pulling iPods off the shelf of Walmart/Best Buy/Target because they also sold Zunes, pulling Macs off of Best Buy shelves because they were selling HPs or Acers, or forcing non-Apple store Mac retailers to pay a greater than wholesale price for the exact same hardware.
I am going to put the legality aside(clearly it is illegal) and offer my opinion of the way this SHOULD work:
Whatever the software is, it should be on the market(separate from any hardware) and if you have the hardware to run it, THEN GO FOR IT.
The company can price the software however they want.
Do you really think microsoft would have a problem with someone selling hardware they could run the 360 OS and games?
They make their money on the games.
There is absolutely zero doubt in my mind that Microsoft would litigate the everloving crap out of someone that sold hardware that ran the XBox 360 OS on it and ran games.
We're talking sued to oblivion.
lord_farfig
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,410
To an extent they already do this. (MFG) OEM Windows, these copies will only run on supported hardware. There are little chips on the board or code in the BIOS that says "I'm a Dell," and when you pop an OEM Dell disc in, it checks for that string. If it validates it, then it will install. You put an OEM Dell disc in your HP or your Homebrew it will not install. However, if you put a Retail copy or Generic OEM (not MFG specific) in your Dell it will install.
Now, Apple doesn't have this protection so you can install it on 'unsupported' hardware, thus you're in violation of their EULA. Apple looks at themselves as a Development company, not a hardware company. Since it's their software, they have the right to say what it can and cannot run on... it's theirs. They just happen to make nice looking computers that run their software.
scottatwittenberg
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2002
- Messages
- 3,306
a dell XP cd works in a non-dell fyi.. i have "seen it done" on a gateway and an HP with no problems.
I think he's referring to Vista.
Is this new? I had no idea.
lord_farfig
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,410
It shouldn't have. I guess it depends on which Dell CD you have...
Regardless, the point is, if Apple had this type of protection there wouldn't be other people "stealing" their intellectual property. Hence the lawsuit.
Anything that shows the public that macs are not worth 1/3 of what they sell for tends to send mr. Jobs into a suing frenzy.
I hope apple loses this one and apple actually has to compete as an operating system not just an expensive machine for the ignorant.
I hope apple loses this one and apple actually has to compete as an operating system not just an expensive machine for the ignorant.
I don't see these two things being anywhere near related.
If you buy an OEM or a retail version of windows, it will install on any machine. There is no locking you to a single machine or anything like that. However Dell, HP and the rest give you either a restore media that is used to push an image back onto your machine, or a special version of the windows install disc that they made themselves with all their drivers, software and setting on it. That has nothing to do with Microsoft any more than Microsoft has anything to do with the settings you put on your own machine. If you disable the wireless on your laptop, is it fair to say that Micorosft prevents you from using wireless internet in Windows? They didn't do that, you did.They gave you working wireless, you took that away, thus it is your fault your wireless doesn't work. Same here, Microsoft gives them OEM copies that should work on any machine, however they customize them to be their own and in the process lock them from being using on machines other their their own type. It could be due to the fact that of course Dell won't include hp drivers or vise versa. So they are keeping the average person from running into driver issues. It could be that they include software that is only licensed for use on their machines so they are preventing it from being used on other machines as best as they can. Or it could just be that they are being assholes. Regardless of what it is, it is not Microsoft that decides what Dell or HP do.
However in the case of Apple they are doing it just to lock you into their hardware.