1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Judge rules against Psystar

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 16 Nov 2009.

  1. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
  2. 13eightyfour

    13eightyfour Formerly Titanium Angel

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2003
    Posts:
    3,397
    Likes Received:
    108
    I still dont understand how MS can get shafted at every turn on anti competitive grounds yet apple can seemingly do whatever they like and have no problems? Im not an MS fanboy nor a mac hater but i just cant see the sense in any of it!
     
  3. Rkiver

    Rkiver Cybernetic Spine

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    930
    Likes Received:
    42
    I agree, if MS did something like this they'd likely be slammed for it, yet Apple get away with it.

    Doesn't stop me installing the Mac OS on hackintoshes I make mind you.
     
  4. steveo_mcg

    steveo_mcg New Member

    Joined:
    26 May 2005
    Posts:
    5,841
    Likes Received:
    80
    Its about scale, MS control >90% of the market. Any action MS make can and does effect more or less every computer user on the planet, Apple on the other hand are a bit part player in the scheme of things.
     
  5. cgthomas

    cgthomas Cpt. Handsome

    Joined:
    20 Oct 2009
    Posts:
    295
    Likes Received:
    2
    As long as you don't grow to +50% market share you can do whatever you want....... "crush those little companies who resell my products ARRGGGGHHHH" - said the Apple monster
     
  6. B1GBUD

    B1GBUD ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Accidentally Funny

    Joined:
    29 May 2008
    Posts:
    3,297
    Likes Received:
    406
    This guy should be Knighted instead of punished....
     
  7. lp1988

    lp1988 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24 Jun 2008
    Posts:
    1,288
    Likes Received:
    64
    There should be no diffrence between the big and the small companies in terms of law, a good exsample is the IE case, why aren't microsoft allowed to include IE when Apple can include Safari ?
     
  8. Dreaming

    Dreaming New Member

    Joined:
    31 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    589
    Likes Received:
    7
    I think copyright is important. Apple made Mac OS X so they should have the right to say who can copy it or reproduce it. However, if it was the case that Psystar had legitimate licences then even if it goes against the EULA (which wont really hold up in court anyway) then why should they be able to dictate where and how you are allowed to use their software. If you have a licence then it's expected that you should be able to use that licence whenever and wherever you like.

    The problem comes in when divorcing the operating system from a retail apple product. We know apple don't like people tampering with their code - putting out updates to brick jailbroken iPhones for example - whether they have that right (as it's not technically copyright, it's not being reproduced without authorisation, it is just being used in a different way as it stipulated in EULA and legally speaking the EULA won't tend to hold up in court as a binding document, it comes down to the judges agreement on 'reasonableness') and in this case I expect Apple had far more and far more expensive lawyers than Psystar.
     
  9. Shagbag

    Shagbag All glory to the Hypnotoad!

    Joined:
    9 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    320
    Likes Received:
    4
    I don't give a **** about if it were MS. I think it's a **** decision all round that harms the consumer and I'm angry about it.
     
  10. DarkLord7854

    DarkLord7854 New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    121
    Welcome to reality and capitalism. Enjoy your stay. :)
     
  11. specofdust

    specofdust Banned

    Joined:
    26 Feb 2005
    Posts:
    9,568
    Likes Received:
    168
    Because when Microsoft do it it's anti-competitive, whereas when apple do it it is not, because apple lack the power to seriously control the browser market, whereas Microsoft could very easily control the browser market.

    Anti-monopoly practices are actually nothing to do with laissez-faire capitalism DarkLord7875 - but rather are measures instituted by the state for the benefit of the consumer (at the cost of impacting upon the ability for any single corporate entity to fully maximise profits).

    In fact it's much better for consumers, in general, to have this guarantee of anti-monopoly laws. Part of the purpose of a state is to maintain it's own monopoly on force and legislation, this is in order that corporate entities which are not designed to represent you, but rather designed to create or gain wealth for their shareholders, do not use their size and economic power to restrict the choices of the individual in society.
     
  12. 13eightyfour

    13eightyfour Formerly Titanium Angel

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2003
    Posts:
    3,397
    Likes Received:
    108
    So where does the law stand if Psystar, supply the hardware with the option of including a retail copy of OSX for the end user to install?

    Surely there cant be a problem with that? its just a company selling PCs that just so happen to be fully capable of running OSX
     
  13. sotu1

    sotu1 Ex-Modder

    Joined:
    24 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    2,877
    Likes Received:
    26
    does that mean i should act quickly if i wanna get my psystar mac ^_^
     
  14. l3v1ck

    l3v1ck Fueling the world, one oil well at a time.

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    12,945
    Likes Received:
    17
    As much as I hate Apple's business practices and attitude towards their customers, I think they're in the right here.
     
  15. oasked

    oasked Stuck in the Mud

    Joined:
    24 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    4,015
    Likes Received:
    55
    Yay for Lobby Groups and yay for winning through buying the best lawyers!!

    Isn't America great?
     
  16. woodshop

    woodshop UnSeenly

    Joined:
    14 Oct 2003
    Posts:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    8
    Sure took long enough..

    OSX is created as the software component to a Mac.
    Its no different then palm, palm OS is only for palm devices.

    Apple has always marketed OSX only to its Mac customers. When you buy a Mac you buy a hardware + software solution that provides a function.

    Microsoft is Selling Software, period. Comparing OSX to Windows in this way is like trying to say that since the xbox360 OS runs on a PPC, then there shouldn't be any reason i can't buy a PS3 and install the 360 OS on it.

    A Mac is NOT a PC.
     
  17. specofdust

    specofdust Banned

    Joined:
    26 Feb 2005
    Posts:
    9,568
    Likes Received:
    168
    Wikipedia disagrees ;)
     
  18. Tokukachi

    Tokukachi New Member

    Joined:
    20 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    225
    Likes Received:
    4
    No it really is. Then again if you own a mac and are the kind of mindless sheep that fools for cheap marketing ploys and shows no signs of any self determination to find anything out for yourself other than what Steve Jobs tells you to do.... So pretty much the perfect Mac customer :)
     
  19. b5k

    b5k New Member

    Joined:
    10 May 2009
    Posts:
    181
    Likes Received:
    4
    10 years ago I might've agreed with your agruement. I mean, back then Macs were made with Mac hardware. Hardware actually built from scratch for the macs. Now you get Macs which are made of cheap commercial parts which any consumer can go pick up. The difference between regular PC's and a Mac is that the Mac has some kind of bios chip which is integrated into the O/S.

    Macs can run on a standard PC, it's just there's a layer of driver/hardware integration that's slightly different to PC. I'm sure this has a valid design reason and isn't intentionally put in place to block running MacOS on PC, but it doesn't mean it'd be that difficult to release two installs of MacOS. Mac version and "Unsupported" PC version.

    As far as I can tell, Apple are concerned about delivering a stable end product every time (even though they ****ed up on multiple accounts(here's look at you lying about your screens colour reproduction!)). Sort of why we want dedicated servers for MW2. When that mac comes out the box it works. If people got the idea that they could install MacOS on PC hardware and have it work perfectly then Apples reputation would start to crumble.

    What they should do is have an install on the disc that is "unsupported" by Apple. I.e. install at your own risk. Hidden from the non-power users. To prevent...idiots.

    I just don't wanna pay £2k for something I could get for £500. :)
     
  20. HourBeforeDawn

    HourBeforeDawn a.k.a KazeModz

    Joined:
    26 Oct 2006
    Posts:
    2,637
    Likes Received:
    6
    second that, Apple is the real monopoly
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page