Apple Wins Key Battle Against Psystar

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
What the hell? This case is still going?

Circuit Judge Mary Schroeder ruled yesterday that Psystar'sMac clones violated copyrights Apple holds, and its ban on sales will be upheld. According to Judge Schroeder, Psystar specifically violated copyrights Apple holds in Mac OS X, and said that the U.S. District Court's ruling in favor of Apple was just.
 

Azhar

Fixing stupid since 1972
Joined
Jan 9, 2001
Messages
18,876
Well Psystar just won't die. They've been smacked a lot in the past and they're still building Mac clones. They're like a child who hasn't quite figured out that fire is hot.
 

TeeJayHoward

Limpness Supreme
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
11,558
1) Make clones.
2) Make money.
3) Get sued.
4) Continue making clones.
5) Continue making money.
6) Get a court date set.
7) Continue making clones.
8) Continue making money.
9) Get the court date pushed back.
10) Continue making clones.
11) Continue making money.
12) Long, drawn-out trial.
13) Continue making clones.
14) Continue making money.
15) Verdict received.
16) Stop making clones.
17) Enjoy your money.
 

Ualdayan

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Messages
1,793
Back when Apple's strength was software it made sense that to drive their high margin parts they needed OSX to remain ONLY on their hardware. Nowadays though, when you buy Apple you're buying it because you want their hardware, and the software comes secondary. You think all the interest in Macbook Airs is some newfound love of OSX? No. It's that those are some of the lightest, fastest, thinnest notebooks you can get. Why not allow people to install OSX on other hardware (just make sure you make it clear there will be no support)? Heck, people might like the OS enough to go out and buy a version that won't require maintenance to keep going like a Hackintosh does.
 

TechLarry

RIP [H] Brother - June 1, 2022
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
30,483
Wow, this is still going on?

Almost as bad as those Linux and RAMBUS people, who's names I forget and frankly don't care to remember.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,031
The joke is on Apple.

If they allowed Mac clones, and instead sold OSX at a higher price - a la Microsoft - I feel fairly certain they'd make A LOT more off of the computer segment of their business than they currently do.

OSX is a sleek and sturdy OS, I would be happy to use (especially now that Steam works on it) but there is no way I am going to be locked into the Apple hardware.
 

SamuraiInBlack

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 10, 2003
Messages
5,772
I'd like to give OSX a whirl to see what the big deal is, but I'm not buying a whole system just to try it. I already have a pc, a laptop, and two project pc's. I don't need another computer in my household.
 

Stone Cold

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
1,146
This, dear children, is why companies use DRM, even though pirates easily crack it and the cracked software works better than the DRMed software. It's illegal to bypass DRM, which prevents companies from putting even legal copies of software or content to other uses.

Apple makes a ton of money on common PC parts by using DRM to prevent OSX from legally running on non-Apple brand hardware.
 

DarkStar_WNY

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
2,362
Everytime something like this comes up I just think about Apple's old "1984" think different commercial and I have to shake my head and laugh.
 

TechLarry

RIP [H] Brother - June 1, 2022
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
30,483
Back when Apple was allowing Clones, I was certified on some of those clones for service. They were not that impressive, especially compared to the actual apple products.

And since there was no way to self-build one, what was the point?

Zarathustra[H];1037813465 said:
The joke is on Apple.

If they allowed Mac clones, and instead sold OSX at a higher price - a la Microsoft - I feel fairly certain they'd make A LOT more off of the computer segment of their business than they currently do.

OSX is a sleek and sturdy OS, I would be happy to use (especially now that Steam works on it) but there is no way I am going to be locked into the Apple hardware.
 

rat

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,915
This, dear children, is why companies use DRM, even though pirates easily crack it and the cracked software works better than the DRMed software. It's illegal to bypass DRM, which prevents companies from putting even legal copies of software or content to other uses.

Apple makes a ton of money on common PC parts by using DRM to prevent OSX from legally running on non-Apple brand hardware.

Companies use DRM because they're insecure, hate allowing their customers to do what they want and hate competition. Full stop.
 

timta2

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
1,393
The clones almost destroyed Apple once and they aren't going to let it happen again. It's as simple as that. They aren't interested in selling their OS for use on hardware made by other companies. They are in business to make money and they will do what they want, not what you think they should do.
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2000
Messages
2,470
Back when Apple was allowing Clones, I was certified on some of those clones for service. They were not that impressive, especially compared to the actual apple products.

And since there was no way to self-build one, what was the point?

Sometimes the clone can blow past the original.

Look at SPARC64
 

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Zarathustra[H];1037813465 said:
OSX is a sleek and sturdy OS, I would be happy to use (especially now that Steam works on it) but there is no way I am going to be locked into the Apple hardware.

That's just it....anyone can make an OS / game that runs on one set of hardware. It is when you have to make it run on every possible hardware combination on the planet that things get tricky,

I don't think Apple is willing to commit those kinds of resources towards OS X.
 

Azhar

Fixing stupid since 1972
Joined
Jan 9, 2001
Messages
18,876
That's just it....anyone can make an OS / game that runs on one set of hardware. It is when you have to make it run on every possible hardware combination on the planet that things get tricky,

I don't think Apple is willing to commit those kinds of resources towards OS X.

Not to mention the support nightmare that Microsoft goes through - though Microsoft has a bit of an advantage - they would tell you to call HP or nVidia or a software developer if it's not OS related.
 

Shambler

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
6,420
I'd like to give OSX a whirl to see what the big deal is, but I'm not buying a whole system just to try it. I already have a pc, a laptop, and two project pc's. I don't need another computer in my household.
Same mindset here.

I also feel weird spending $600, the cheapest of all Mac's) on a Mini. Love the compactness of it but that isn't enough. It needs to meet some criteria for me to purchase one.

A: Keep the size
B: Lower the price

or

A: Increase the size
B: Up the specs
 

AMD T-type

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2002
Messages
4,591
Zarathustra[H];1037813465 said:
The joke is on Apple.

If they allowed Mac clones, and instead sold OSX at a higher price - a la Microsoft - I feel fairly certain they'd make A LOT more off of the computer segment of their business than they currently do.

OSX is a sleek and sturdy OS, I would be happy to use (especially now that Steam works on it) but there is no way I am going to be locked into the Apple hardware.

The problem is, the only reason OSX is as sturdy as it is, is because the hardware it runs on is a very selective set of hardware. If Apple started letting OSX be installed on anything and everything, there would be a lot more problems with it.... a la Windows
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2000
Messages
2,470
The problem is, the only reason OSX is as sturdy as it is, is because the hardware it runs on is a very selective set of hardware. If Apple started letting OSX be installed on anything and everything, there would be a lot more problems with it.... a la Windows

it's been sturdy on all the hackintosh stuff i've seen

So if Apple started letting OSX be installed on the things it's already installed and working great on, there would be a lot more problems with it?
 

AMD T-type

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 26, 2002
Messages
4,591
it's been sturdy on all the hackintosh stuff i've seen

So if Apple started letting OSX be installed on the things it's already installed and working great on, there would be a lot more problems with it?

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying.
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2000
Messages
2,470
Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying.

I think I see where you're coming from. There's a top to bottom vendor integration. Apple's shareholders, the revenue streams, the software, the hardware, the peripherals, all the way down to the interactions with the barista.
Yes that OS X may run great now on hackintosh with your random X58 motherboard, but if you had Apple's approval to install it, then it might not run as well.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
As many have said, Apple is a hardware company these days, not a software one. Apple simply isn't a world class software company, they aren't trying to be one and they just don't want or need to really sell OS X standalone, not at this time. Sure they could sell a more copies of OS X but they would have to invest in a lot more software testing and engineering and support.

My guess is that Apple has looked at the numbers and concluded that selling OS X standalone simply isn't worth it to them.
 

MrGuvernment

Fully [H]
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
20,593
Zarathustra[H];1037813465 said:
The joke is on Apple.

If they allowed Mac clones, and instead sold OSX at a higher price - a la Microsoft - I feel fairly certain they'd make A LOT more off of the computer segment of their business than they currently do.

OSX is a sleek and sturdy OS, I would be happy to use (especially now that Steam works on it) but there is no way I am going to be locked into the Apple hardware.

Apple is a hardware company not a software company, why they wont ever sell OS* separate.
 

Greene420

Gawd
Joined
Sep 29, 2011
Messages
767
yeah, I am pretty sure I have seen a few normal laptops recently, running dual boot mac/windows
 

Exavior

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 13, 2005
Messages
9,700
Not to mention the support nightmare that Microsoft goes through - though Microsoft has a bit of an advantage - they would tell you to call HP or nVidia or a software developer if it's not OS related.

Apple could do the same if they didn't insist on writing every driver in house

I think I see where you're coming from. There's a top to bottom vendor integration. Apple's shareholders, the revenue streams, the software, the hardware, the peripherals, all the way down to the interactions with the barista.
Yes that OS X may run great now on hackintosh with your random X58 motherboard, but if you had Apple's approval to install it, then it might not run as well.

Tell me are you just dumb or mentally handicap?

When you have to pick from a set list of parts for your hackintosh you can't claim that it works great on every configuration. You are limited to what you can pick there it DOES NOT WORK ON ALL PLATFORMS. fuck your X58 board. I want it to run on a socket A motherboard. I want to use a 1.1Ghz Athlon and 1 GB of ram and run OS X 10.7, windows 8 would install on that. There is a list of motherboards that WILL support OS X and a list of ones that WILL NOT. The fact that the list of WILL NOT exist means that your points are completely invalid from the start. If you have to pick from a set list of parts that you can buy then it isn't running on everything, and there are issues like people said.

Thanks for playing though.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Apple could do the same if they didn't insist on writing every driver in house.

And this goes to the core of Apple's business model as it's shrouded in secrecy to create the "magic". A version of Windows has to go through of pre-releases and testing and working with partners and simply can't be done in secrecy.

In order for Apple to do the same thing it would have to pre-announce stuff well in advance of GA, with warts and bugs and comments and input along the way. This is just completly and totally inconsistent with Apple's business model.
 

mope54

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,449
I don't consider Apple a hardware company anymore than a software one; they are selling a service, a complete ecosystem, and the hardware/software are merely vectors for it.
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2000
Messages
2,470
Tell me are you just dumb or mentally handicap?

When you have to pick from a set list of parts for your hackintosh you can't claim that it works great on every configuration. You are limited to what you can pick there it DOES NOT WORK ON ALL PLATFORMS. fuck your X58 board. I want it to run on a socket A motherboard. I want to use a 1.1Ghz Athlon and 1 GB of ram and run OS X 10.7, windows 8 would install on that. There is a list of motherboards that WILL support OS X and a list of ones that WILL NOT. The fact that the list of WILL NOT exist means that your points are completely invalid from the start. If you have to pick from a set list of parts that you can buy then it isn't running on everything, and there are issues like people said..

It's called an HCL, and there's one for Windows 7.
A D975XBX will not work with Windows 7.
The fact that the list of WILL NOT exist means that your points are completely invalid from the start. If you have to pick from a set list of parts that you can buy then it isn't running on everything, and there are issues like people said..

Thanks for playing though.

:rolleyes:
 

evilsofa

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
10,078
An interesting side effect of this case is that it has strengthened the GPL:

"Do you remember all the predictions on message boards all over the web by anti-GPL activists like Alexander Terekhov that someone could get a copy of Linux, under the GPL, and then make copies and sell them under another license, under the first sale doctrine? That fantasy has just died a permanent death. It was never true that one can do that. But now we can prove it with this Psystar ruling."

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110929014241932

Psytar is not a company worth defending, even if you hate Apple. Psytar's main defense was that operating systems are too hard to develop. Wah wah wah.
 
Top