Even though I would never use OS X, I am happy to see Psystar putting up a fight against the big dudes. Apple just wants to be the only company out there providing consumers with OS X. You don't see Microsoft getting all pissed when people buy Windows and install it on a custom built machine.

Sure hope Psystar wins. I don't like OSX myself, but I like Apple trying to force people to use it's generic overprice PC hardware even less.

Go Psystar!

That's because that's what Microsoft wants you to do. They couldn't care less what hardware you run it on.

I hope Psytar wins.

Forcing the consumer to buy product A with product B is a-moral.

meh, I don't really care which way it goes. If i'm gonna by a computer with OSX, im gonna buy it from apple. there is a reason why most of their computers are so stable, all the hardware is the same for the most part so their OS works perfectly with the specified hardware.

So even if Psystar wins, which I don't think it will due to the EULA stating that you can't install OSX on non-apple hardware, I still wouldn't buy one from Psystar. Their prices aren't that much cheaper anyway.

Hey hypocrites, remember when MS was sued because they strong armed PC manufacturers like Dell, HP, etc to sell only Windows?

Apple build a closed market.
Banning from IPhone Apple Store every software making competition with his own OS. Banning Google and others big name.

Something with the Mac Hardware. It's a PC with specified hardware. Specified hardware that you pay over the current market price.

I think Apple build an Antitrust case with theirs products and we should stop them.

If you read all article about Apple on Toms, you can see... Apple trying to stop every user to use their software incorrectly (for them).
Actualy, if you can go somewhere else then "Apple Store" is BAD.

Basicly, if you jailbreak your IPhone, your a big hacker and you have destroyed their integrity and their phone tower.... Next step, they'll send policeman after people who have an IPhone jailbreaked...

Apple is actualy a worst Antitrust case than ever.

I have wondered why the EU has been raping Microsoft with all these "anti-trust" suits, but they do nothing against Apple and their forcing(or attempting to force) customer to use their hardware with software the customer purchased(namely, the Mac OS).

If Microsoft did that, the EU would go into a full fledged "emo" rage. Hey, I just found a copy of OSX, I think it is time to install it on my non-Apple machine.

It's not OSX customers that are being targeted by Apple, that's why you don't see them shutting down the various homebrew Hackintosh groups and hobbyists. What they're going after is other companies reselling their product against Apple's licensing terms, for a profit. Imagine if someone was buying up a bunch of DVD movies, transferring them to VHS, and then selling those tapes for a profit. That's kind of what Psystar's doing with OSX.
I dislike Apple's attitude about OSX only shipping on Apple hardware, but I also don't think Psystar has a leg to stand on in defending what they're doing either. For me this is kind of like watching two jerks get into a fight.

People like to complain about Apple's prices but according to Consumer Reports and others, they have the most reliable machines. And the build quality is superb - better than you get from any other large manufacturer. None of this comes cheap.

You may want to remember that Apple ][ clones predated all the "Windows" machines (that used to be called PC clones after the IBM PC they mimicked). And for a while Apple even licensed third party Mac clones. When they switched operating systems to OS/X - based on a BSD Unix variant - they released the kernel, and have also released their Webkit modifications to the Linux Konqueror web browser core. What they are really protecting is the GUI, the same way M$ protects the Windows GUI.

Apple's policy of insisting on only running OS/X on their hardware may or may not stand the legal challenge. However, I'm more concerned about M$'s efforts to control the market than I am about Apple's attempts to enforce its license.

Apple at least constantly innovates while M$ seems to sit back until forced to move. Remember the long period of IE6 before Firefox forced M$ to upgrade their browser? And how about the long wait for an update to Windows XP (we're still waiting for a real upgrade)? M$ only released Vista because it was so far behind everyone else. Even Windows 7 will be playing catch up to OS/X and Linux.

Let's not forget M$'s corrupting of ISO to get their docx format accepted despite the fact that ISO rules disqualified it.

And then there is M$'s legal challenge against Tom Tom for using their FAT32 file system. The same case can be made against every USB key maker. On the "evil" scale, Apple barely registers compared to the "great Satan".

I am actually a fan of apple products. I have a couple but I have also avoided a couple because its apple's way or the highway. Regardless of whether i like a company or on, I always like it when a the little guy calls bullshit on their practices and is willing to take it to court.
Bring on the clones.

No - strangely, it has been only Win or Linux and Dell and HP do that. We were in favor of it when it started happening, and MS isn't worried about it.

I'm against ANY strong-arming. I'm against the strong-armer portraying themselves as "open" and as the good guy. . .

Apple doesn't have a monopoly on MacOS X, just like MS doesn't have a monopoly on Windows. You can't have a monopoly on your own product, only on a product class/market. The EU doesn't go after Apple for MacOSX because it's less than 5% market share, ie, Apple has no leverage to impose its commercial decisions on the computer market. MS has close to 95%, anything they do WILL have a strong impact. Now if you want to hit Apple for an antithrust case, the iPod/iTunes/iTS is a much better bet (just give it a little more time).
On Psystar; they're leeches, period. They want to profit from Apple brand name and marketing to squeeze a few bucks out of greedy and incompetent customers. Nothing they provide cannot be done by relatively simple home-made hacking . Plus, they're plundering the effort of the Hackintosh community, people Apple never went after. until now. GG Psystar...

Next Apple will claim that OSX clones will bring down the internet and set puppies on fire...

What exactly is wrong here? You pay for DVD movies, you pay for VHS tapes, you put effort to produce something and you want to make profit on your effort. I think all companies are doing this every day, buy supplies/parts put some labor and produce new product and sells it for profit.
Your example is incorrect because it implies that you get single DVD and making multiple copies and this is copyright violation, but Psystar is not copying, they are buying retail box of OS X for each computer they sell.

Your analogy is incomplete. Psystar is only making 1-to-1 "copies". Your analogy implies they bought 1 DVD and made 100 copies, but Psystar buys 100 copies of OSX and makes 100 computers. They aren't cheating Apple out of any money with regards to OSX. Apple is upset because they don't get to the corresponding hardware sales.

Imagine if Sony Pictures sued you because you bought the latest movie release on Blu-Ray, but played it on a JVC player instead of a Sony player. That's what Apple is doing here.

A Mac OS X that is no longer tied to Apple hardware would be a nice thing to see. It would mean that Dell or HP could then make a license agreement with Apple and sell their machines with the OS preinstalled. It would mean that Apple and Microsoft would finally be competing on even ground.

My only caveats are this.

1) As soon as Microsoft has to compete with Apple on the same hardware platform, Microsoft will shalve all future development for Mac OS X applications and suites, such as Office.

2) Large holes in driver-level support for hardware outside of Apple standard reference will become very apparent. Apple has been developing their own "drivers" (in BSD Unix, these are essentially kernel extensions) for their own hardware, to include any devices on the mainboard as well as any PCI or USB peripherals. Some third party developers are experienced in driver development for OS X, but not nearly enough to deal with the multitude of hardware available out there for Windows. Hell, not even Microsoft can keep up with the driver development, as has been demonstrated by Vista's lack of key peripheral drivers from third party developers.

3) Unstable hardware will give Apple an (even worse) name. The unwashed masses will blame pure hardware issues (ie, bad memory, faulty components, mishmashed hardware) on buggy unstable software from Apple. M$ has dealt with this for years, and while a large number of BSODs are verifiably attributable to bad programming, a large number of them are actually attributable to bad hardware. Apple uses near top-end hardware in their computers (which is less likely to have defects), while Dell (and other PC integrators) only use comparable hardware in their comparably-priced machines, while paying bottom dollar for their low end hardware that people snap up like hotcakes because it is such an unbelievable deal.

Except Sony would be selling you the Blu-Ray cheap, provided you only play it on a Sony player.
Apple doesn't sell "retail" version of MacOSX, only upgrades for existing customers. They require a Mac, which all come with a version of MacOS. Their only fault is not to require an install DVD to run the boxed version (like MS does for upgrade).

The thing that really bothers me is that Apple says OS X can only be installed on Apple based hardware. But when i look at an Apple computer's specs, i see an Intel processor and nVidia graphics. What's so different other than the motherboard being proprietary. I think Apple should be like Windows and sell OS X as a stand alone operating system for people who are interested in installing the OS on a $400 desktop.

I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this but Your IQ has a logic deficiency

Here more food for thought.
Per Apple we need to use copyright laws to stop the terrorists striking USA.
Apple Fears Jailbroken iPhones Could Kill Phone Networks
Are Apple lawyers thinking we are so dam stupid?!

I would love to be able to dualboot actual OS X on my main computer, hackintosh barely works as it is on my laptop.

Dear God Tom's readers are the worst PC/M$ fanboys I've ever seen. Whenever anyone has anything positive to say about Apple and it's products they get the "thumbs down", even when the poster is unbias and uses both pc's and mac's and has something constructive to say.

...hey look! abunch of thumbs downs!...

thats funny how mac users install windows on their macs hmmm.....

its funny how pc users are putting OSX on their hackintoshs hmmm....

Well I didn't mean to imply someone was selling a bunch of VHSes made from one DVD, I just reached for an example of someone making modified copies and reselling without the proper permission to do so. Psystar was selling computers with OSX pre-installed, not just clean computers and a bundled DVD of Leopard for the customer to figure out. If they were doing the latter there probably wouldn't be any standing for Apple to even sue.



I didn't say they were, I said they weren't following the terms by which 3rd parties are allowed to install and distribute it. I personally hope those terms get struck out as illegal and non-binding, but at this point I think it's a long shot.



If JVC didn't have a license to make and sell Blu-Ray players in the first place that'd be a better analogy. Unfortunately that's not the case here.

Here's hoping I didn't screw up the formatting somewhere. Tom's needs a Preview feature, if not an Edit one, for comments.

I find it very annoying that people only refer to computers with Windows as personal computers! Are Mac computers not personal too? Sorry, dumb question...

OK, get some facts straight:
(disclaimer: I do not currently own a mac, nor am I a FanBoi, but I do despise FUD and will seek to quell it when it spills)

1) NOTE: OS X retail package is NOT the OS in a box, , it is NOT the retial equivalent of Windows Vista Ultimate retail box, it is the OS UPGRADE in a box. You are required to have a "full version" to install it, which opnly comes on a mac as Apple has not provided "full version" pricing. This is NO DIFFERENT than Microsoft suing people and companies from installing OEM or Upgrade-only licences on machines that do not qualify for those reduced prices. OS X full version is the equivalent of $300. When PsyStar pays Apple $300 a copy instead of $129, they'll have a case (and a lesser equipped machine in the same price category with crap support and questionable longevity)

2) Apple's hardware is not "cheap or generic" overpriced kit. Take a REAL and HONEST look at the system components and make comparrisons to the competition. Each Apple model is either in line or significantly CHEAPER than the competition (when like hardware and features are compared), and this higher end you go the more the price is in Apple's favor. Go on, find a kit with Bluetooth, dedicated 9400GPU, fast bus, dual core, high battery life, firewire, and wireless n priced under $850 in a 13" notebook factor. Dell's Adamo machines are rediculously priced compared to Apple's 15" line, and the Dell Studio line has crap components and is simply not in the same class as the 15" pro. Yes, you can get a "generic" PC cheaper, but that PC is NOT a machine that edits video, plays WoW, and manages a database of 10,000 songs and 50,000 pictures. Apple does not buld kit for the lowest tier of users becuase the lowest tier don't do things that require Apple's software (the 1 supprot call from a $400 laptop user blows all the profit on that machine).

As examples: Dell Studio 15 (GPU not available in 13, so we go bigger and heavier) same specs as Apple 13" white macbook, updated macbook to 320GB/4GB to match Dell. Dell $1298, Apple $1199. Or, compare to 15" Macpro machine which is $1399, but has a 7 hour battery, aluminum frame, weighs less, has a faster bus, CPU, and GPU, and a cheaper 3 year waranty. Oh yea, if you qualify for Apple's student/teacher discount, the better MacPro 15" comes out $100 CHEAPER. Closest machine Dell has to compete with Apples 15" or 17" pro system specs? The Alienware 17" at WAY over $2000, and not less than $220 more expensive then the equivalent apple model, and with a whoping 1.5 hr battery and 4.6lbs more weight than even the 17" pro.

Go further, try and even come CLOSE to Apple's included free software offering: non-linear video editing application capable of handling HD and multiple intermixed audio tracks, complete DVD authoring suite, web publishing/blogging suite, fairly advanced photo editor with awesome photo management capabilities, PDF converter, A productivity suite nearly rivaling Microsoft Office, a music composition and recording system, and no requirement for AV/AS software. Even if you could get a PC for $300 less, if you edit home movies, or manage massive numbers of images and music, and need a productivity suite (the only customers Apple targets, don;t talk to me about Grandmas who only surf and e-mail, they can have a $300 shitbox PC, that's all they need!), you can't get that software for the difference and get anything worth a shit. Pinnacle studio (inexpensive at $200) is still crap for editing anything over 30 minutes of footage and is quite limited. Adobe Photo management is $49. Office home is $129. Roxio is $79. AV and AS is another $30-70 depending on your choice of coverage/simplicity (I'm excluding free here as most people who know where to find and how to properly use the free alternatives for security software don't typically buy retial built machines). Apple is HIGHLY competitive on price WITHING THEIR TARGET MARKET SEGMENT. Again, they IGNORE the low end market (no profit, often losses, and it would make the OS experience suck).

Psystar is headed for the morgue. The problem isn't only with the copyright, it's the license agreement. Apple owns Mac OS X (with no legal ambiguity), and Psystar is violating the license agreement by circumventing the Macintosh EFI to boot on non-apple hardware. The DMCA has very specific wording regarding the use of technology to circumvent the copyright, for any reason. Good bye, Psystar.

Screw a Mac clone, let's take the same BSD kernel that Apple stole, and make a free, open-source, binary compatible OSX clone. It's kind of like the ReactOS project, but it'd be a heck of alot easier, since the hard parts to code are already freely available. Apple didn't base OSX on UNIX because "it's old, awesome, and secure", they based it on UNIX because it's what they could get away with stealing from the opensource community. They would've have probably prefered to steal a bunch of GNU/Linux code, but the license makes it illegal.