backtop


Print 41 comment(s) - last by The0ne.. on Dec 4 at 10:07 AM


  (Source: Psystar)
Psystar is now refocusing its efforts on its unlocking software, but Apple is looking to hand it another defeat

Apple's legal campaign to crush Mac cloner Psystar made headlines several times over the last year and provoked diverse responses.  Some were supportive of Apple, arguing that the company had every right to tightly enforce the strict provisions on its operating system.  Others argued that Apple was being abusive and manipulating its position to sell overpriced hardware.

In the end Psystar was handed a defeat in a summary judgment.  Earlier this week it announced that it was partially settling with Apple.  Now details of that settlement have been finalized.

Psystar, which already went bankrupt once, has agreed to pay Apple $2.647M USD in damages for marring its "brand image" by releasing Mac clones.  It also agreed to suspend production and sales of all its Mac clones and has since pulled the sales page from the company's website.  The decision casts uncertainty on the status of orders from those who bought Mac clones in the final days before the settlement, individuals whose systems have not yet been shipped.

While the situation seems to be dire for Psystar, the company vows to persist in its campaign of rebellion.  The company is now focused on its unlocking software offering Rebel EFI, which allows OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) to be installed easily on a variety of hardware configurations with Intel processors.  Rebel EFI provides support for multi-boot systems with a mix of Linux, Windows, and OS X installed.

Apple is trying to kill off Rebel EFI, though.  The company is battling Psystar in a separate case in Florida court.  The Mac clone case took 17 months, so it appears that the final fate of Psystar won't be decided for some time.  The odds seem stacked against the company, though; the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which helped hand Apple a victory in the clone case, specifically outlaws users or businesses to circumvent software protections, even on devices they legally own.  As Psystar is doing exactly that, it seems to be on some pretty weak legal ground, regardless of how "fair" the DMCA is.

Until the hammer drops, though, Psystar plans to continue to sell its software and defy Apple's closed box business model.





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Funny thing about Apple... and boot camp
By Belard on 12/3/2009 9:17:21 AM , Rating: 4
Hey, doesn't anyone see the irony of this?

Apple has BOOTCAMP for mac users, its free. What does it do?

Allow any intel-based MAC run dual-boot full blown WindowsXP as well as Windows7 (why not?) on their Mac hardware.

Is Microsoft crapping out bricks? Of course not, as the user needs a legit key, etc.

So apple... you guys should do the same.




RE: Funny thing about Apple... and boot camp
By Flunk on 12/3/09, Rating: -1
By amanojaku on 12/3/2009 10:45:24 AM , Rating: 4
What Apple cares about is burying its tiny member into the collective anuses of everyone. That means:

1) Anyone who tries to sell a Mac clone, a la the Psystar lawsuits
2) Anyone who doesn't sell a Mac, a la the "I'm a Mac" ads
3) Anyone who doesn't use a Mac, ditto
4) Anyone who uses a Mac, a la the bugs, price model, and relatively underwhelming OS improvements when compared to the price
5) Anyone who wants a full-featured product at a reasonable price, a la AppleTV, the iTunes store, the App Store, the original iPhone, etc...

Apple's douchieness has single-handedly turned me against it since my pleasant experience with OS X on the G4 Powerbook a few years ago.


RE: Funny thing about Apple... and boot camp
By Yawgm0th on 12/3/2009 11:11:48 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Apple is a hardware company, Microsoft is a software company.
FinalCut Pro, Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server, iWork (Keynote, Pages, Numbers), QuickTime, Aperture, Logic, Shake, Xsan, and so on.

Zune, Xbox, XBox360, Xbox 360 accessories ranging from hard drives to controllers, mice, keyboards.

quote:
What Apple cares about is moving systems, they don't care about software sales.
There is only one thing any logical company cares about: profits. Apple does care about software sales, even of Mac OS X, specifically, since those sales yield revenue and ultimately profit.

Apple believes that Hackintosh users/makers siphon enough money away from its hardware sales that the potentially increased software sales will not make up about it.

Apple is wrong and is litigating itself out of a huge market through which it could drastically increase profits and expand its OS market share.


RE: Funny thing about Apple... and boot camp
By Camikazi on 12/3/2009 11:50:40 AM , Rating: 3
"Apple is wrong and is litigating itself out of a huge market through which it could drastically increase profits and expand its OS market share."

That last part, expand it's OS market share is probably why they won't do it. They know how much work it would be to code for and make sure their OS could run on the HUGE amounts of configurations out there.


RE: Funny thing about Apple... and boot camp
By Murloc on 12/3/2009 12:41:14 PM , Rating: 5
it would make mac OS like windows, with the same problems, like drivers.

The myth about "it just works" would completely fall


RE: Funny thing about Apple... and boot camp
By stugatz on 12/3/2009 12:52:04 PM , Rating: 5
Exactly, Apple is neither a hardware company, or a software company, they are a "brand package" company. They design their software to work with a specific set of hardware, and sell you that resulting product at an inflated price, because consumers have come to believe there is extra value in the Apple brand, they know what they are getting, and are willing to pay extra for it and the support they know they can get.

Once Psystar comes in and starts breaking up that model by selling the OS on non Apple hardware, there is no longer that guarantee that things will work as expected, people at a friends house with a Psystar Mac, could see it crash, and tarnish the brand, which is the important thing for Apple to avoid.


By seamonkey79 on 12/4/2009 12:22:39 AM , Rating: 2
bing bing bing we have a winner

or should I say...

bing 2.0 bing 2.0 bing 2.0 we have a winner


By tlmck on 12/3/2009 10:13:47 PM , Rating: 2
They could amend their license to state that if you install OSX on non Apple hardware you will receive no tech support from Apple. In other words, you would be on your own.

The real reason they do not release OSX to the masses is that it would be the final nail in the coffin for Mac hardware. Some would still buy Apple branded computers, but probably not enough to sustain the business.


RE: Funny thing about Apple... and boot camp
By Yawgm0th on 12/3/2009 10:40:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That last part, expand it's OS market share is probably why they won't do it.
I agree partly. They're deathly afraid of losing control of any of their products, especially Mac OS X.

quote:
They know how much work it would be to code for and make sure their OS could run on the HUGE amounts of configurations out there.
I disagree here. There's this myth that Microsoft does all this work to make Windows run on (almost) any x86 computer. Totally untrue. Microsoft's work on Windows relates almost entirely to the OS itself. The vast majority of drivers are coded by hardware manufacturers, as they should be. Security, interface, kernel enhancements, random features, etc. are what Microsoft works on with Windows.

Microsoft has a platform that is open enough that it's an incredible business model. Apple has a platform that is technologically capable of being in the same boat but has been arbitrarily held back. Apple is the #1 blockade to OS X's market share.

In any case, I'm not talking about Apple even supporting third-party Macs. Simply not spending engineering time on making the OS inaccessible to third party hardware alone would be enough to drastically increase software sales.


By The0ne on 12/4/2009 10:07:01 AM , Rating: 3
Yes, but most consumers will blame the OS instead of the 3rd party mfg. And that's where a lot of the problems come from.


By Belard on 12/3/2009 2:11:11 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft also sells notebook cooling pads, remotes, web cams. To a degree celphones (fail) and network products (fail) such as routers.

Yep, 2-3 years ago, there were Microsoft brand routers at best buy. No nothing... which is why you buy such things from reputable manufactures.


By sprockkets on 12/3/2009 6:00:58 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
FinalCut Pro, Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server, iWork (Keynote, Pages, Numbers), QuickTime, Aperture, Logic, Shake, Xsan, and so on.


Which works on, *wait for it* Macs!

And if you want that, you have to buy, *wait for it*, a Mac!

SOFTWARE SELLS HARDWARE. NEVER FORGET THAT.


By talozin on 12/3/2009 12:44:51 PM , Rating: 4
Apple is a hardware company, Microsoft is a software company.

As has been pointed out, it's not quite that simple. Apple does make and sell software. Microsoft does make and sell hardware.

A better distinction would be that Apple is more vertically integrated than Microsoft. Apple wants to sell you the entire computing experience -- computer, monitor, keyboard, mouse, operating system, applications, media management, e-mail presence and data synchronization, and so on. The upside of this is obvious -- it's what people have taken to terming "the cult of Apple". The down side is, you have to play even in low-margin sections of the "computing experience" market, or sections you aren't especially good at.

Microsoft, by contrast, has mostly stayed away from the systems integration part of computing. They'll sell you the OS and the applications, and they'll sell you accessories (mice, keyboard, etc.), but they won't sell you an actual computer, or certain types of related hardware (anything internal to the case, it seems like). They get to focus on those parts of the market that they're best at, or that they see high-revenue opportunity in.

Of course, this doesn't really hurt your main point, since Psystar is, after all, taking sales from a class of product that Apple does sell and Microsoft doesn't. Theoretically, at least -- it's a very open question as to how many people who bought a Psystar box would have bought an Apple system absent Psytar's existence.


By Redwin on 12/3/2009 10:31:30 AM , Rating: 2
Goes to the heart of MS vs Apple. Microsoft makes software for the (relatively) open PC platform. They want their OS run on as many computers as possible, because that means they sell as much of their product as possible.

Apple sells hardware, and only puts their OS on it as an afterthought to to make it more useful than a big paper weight. They aren't in the business of selling OS-X. Even if you were to pay them for the license, if they see you running OS-X on a $500 PC, all they see is a lost sale of a $2500 Mac.


RE: Funny thing about Apple... and boot camp
By UrbanBard on 12/3/2009 11:14:09 AM , Rating: 1
Are you under the impression that the Windows OS that you run in Boot Camp is free? No, you have to buy an expensive license from Microsoft. How does Microsoft lose from that? Microsoft makes more money when it is loaded on a Mac than when it is sold by an OEM.

But every Hackintosh means a possible lost Macintosh sale. Apple makes their money on the hardware. The Snow Leopard DVD is sold as an upgrade to existing Apple hardware, so Apple already made its profit on the initial sale.

There is no irony here. Nor can Apple copy Microsoft; they have entirely different marketing plans. The last time Apple allowed clones, they almost went out of business. Is this what you want?


By EasyC on 12/3/2009 12:05:07 PM , Rating: 2
The last time Apple allowed clones, they almost went out of business. Is this what you want?

I'm trying desperately to fight the urge to say yes. As much as Apple is a "necessary evil", I wouldn't be heartbroken to see them go under. In fact, I'd probably smile.


RE: Funny thing about Apple... and boot camp
By thekdub on 12/3/2009 1:13:03 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The Snow Leopard DVD is sold as an upgrade to existing Apple hardware, so Apple already made its profit on the initial sale.

So you're telling me that Microsoft can make a profit on a $150 operating system, but Apple does not make a profit on their own $150 operating system?


By michael2k on 12/3/2009 3:46:14 PM , Rating: 2
Correct.

In case you weren't aware, Microsoft sells 20x as much product than Apple.

You know, being the official OS on 96% of the PCs.

So even making $30 a box on 96 PCs vs making $120 a box on 3 Macs means Microsoft makes $2,880 while Apple makes $360.

On the flip side, each Mac generates about $200 in revenue, so those three Macs also happen to increase Apple's total from $360 to $960.

Which lines up with the 09 revenue of $36k and $13k gross profit for Apple and Microsoft's $58k revenue and $46k profit.

Microsoft sells 20x as many copies, earns 2x as much, and gets 3x as much profit.


By frobizzle on 12/3/2009 4:30:15 PM , Rating: 3
Apple is the Scientology of the computer world.


By zero2dash on 12/3/2009 1:41:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Is Microsoft crapping out bricks? Of course not, as the user needs a legit key, etc.

So apple... you guys should do the same.


Except the installation of OS X does not require a product key, because the OS has no product keys. The only thing that comes close to tying you into the OS is the registration, which can be quit by hitting Command-Q.

With Windows, it's not easy to run it without a "legit key" as you say. Mac, you don't need a key because there is no such thing as a key.


Apple is full of hot air and smoke
By nasyesta30 on 12/3/2009 11:07:34 AM , Rating: 2
Mac OS X is only good for video editing other than that the operating system sucks beyond imagination if they like to be the bullies and pick on companies that want to sell clones Apple needs to leave the computer business for ripping off the consumers. Overprice laptops, iMacs, iphones, ipod.

No more Apple




RE: Apple is full of hot air and smoke
By UrbanBard on 12/3/2009 12:22:41 PM , Rating: 1
You need to get a clue. Or you need to learn something about the Macintosh. Your attitude betrays your ignorance. You are spouting out dated arguments.

The Mac is the only universal computer there is. It can run Linux, Macintosh and Windows software. That kind of flexibility is worth more to people.

Also, we Mac users tend to keep our Macs for twice as long as Windows users. This lowers the total cost of ownership below a PC. Macs are not overpriced, because quality equipment cost more than junk. Macs need to be built well to last as long as we keep them.

What? Do you actually like cheap equipment which never satisfies you, but you don't mind that because it quickly breaks and you throw it away?

You say that Apple makes overpriced products, but part of the purchase price includes the operating systems that you want to steal. The only purpose of the Mac OS is to help sell Mac hardware. If you can get away with stealing the OS; there goes a hardware sale. It's foolish to say that Apple has no right to defend itself.

It's true that in 1998, Apple's market share was very low (1.5% of the world market) and it was confined to its niche markets in graphics, design and education. Since then, it has been taking over the upper half of the consumer market. Recently, Apple has been expanding into the Small to Medium sized Business market. Apple has little interest in the lower half of the consumer market, government or big business sales.

Currently, Apple has been growing at over 30% a year and now has 4 percent of the computers sold in the world and just under 10% of those in the US. Apple sells 93% of the notebooks which cost over $1000 and 75% of Mac's sold are notebooks.

It defies logic to say that Apple is acting like a bully when they defend their intellectual property rights. The little people can be thieves, too. And if Mac OSX sucks, why do hackers want to steal it?

Please, never buy a Mac. We Mac users don't need your sort.


RE: Apple is full of hot air and smoke
By Donkeyshins on 12/3/2009 1:22:21 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
The Mac is the only universal computer there is. It can run Linux, Macintosh and Windows software. That kind of flexibility is worth more to people.


The Mac is simply a PC that Apple builds. If they didn't block companies like Psystar (or Open Source variants) that want to allow users to run Snow Leopard on non-Apple sourced hardware, then you could say exactly the same thing about any Intel x86-EMT64-based PC.

And with regard to Mac reliability and quality, I think there have been enough stories on DailyTech lately about failing Apple hardware (Macbooks, i7-based iMacs and Mac Pros) that put this particular myth to bed. Anyone can build quality systems if they choose to, and anyone who builds quality systems can still fall victim to bad components - end of story.


By MScrip on 12/3/2009 5:27:05 PM , Rating: 2
HP, Acer and Dell are the largest computer vendors... but nobody cares when one of those breaks.

I imagine there are more HP laptops that fail... but no one is gonna write an article about it.


By sprockkets on 12/3/2009 6:45:37 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Anyone can build quality systems if they choose to, and anyone who builds quality systems can still fall victim to bad components - end of story.


You know there is a world out there outside of Dailtytech readers who can't even figure out how to turn on a computer right, let alone build one?


By eddieroolz on 12/3/2009 2:35:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You say that Apple makes overpriced products...The only purpose of the Mac OS is to help sell overpriced and underpowered Mac hardware.


Fixed for ya.


Stolen Code
By albertdup on 12/3/2009 8:20:24 AM , Rating: 2
Irony of it all is that Psystar stole the code from opensource projects to create Rebel EFI. They do not even own what they are trying to sell.




RE: Stolen Code
By jonmcc33 on 12/3/2009 8:36:17 AM , Rating: 1
Wouldn't be the first time that someone took opensource code and tried to make profit from it. Recall Linspire?


RE: Stolen Code
By Bateluer on 12/3/2009 8:50:11 AM , Rating: 3
You can still sell open source products, especially if you provide other services than just the code. Red Hat sells RHEL for big dollars by providing thorough documentation and service contracts.

Most major Linux distros will gladly sell you CDs or USB drives of their distros as well.


RE: Stolen Code
By albertdup on 12/3/2009 11:12:46 AM , Rating: 3
Problem is they do not acknowledge the creators of the code or make the source code available, The original code is under APSL2 terms and it requires: ( They are not abiding to any of this)

2.1 Unmodified Code. You may use, reproduce, display, perform, internally distribute within Your organization, and Externally Deploy verbatim, unmodified copies of the Original Code, for commercial or non-commercial purposes, provided that in each instance:

(a) You must retain and reproduce in all copies of Original Code the copyright and other proprietary notices and disclaimers of Apple as they appear in the Original Code, and keep intact all notices in the Original Code that refer to this License; and

(b) You must include a copy of this License with every copy of Source Code of Covered Code and documentation You distribute or Externally Deploy, and You may not offer or impose any terms on such Source Code that alter or restrict this License or the recipients’ rights hereunder, except as permitted under Section 6.

2.2 Modified Code. You may modify Covered Code and use, reproduce, display, perform, internally distribute within Your organization, and Externally Deploy Your Modifications and Covered Code, for commercial or non-commercial purposes, provided that in each instance You also meet all of these conditions:

(a) You must satisfy all the conditions of Section 2.1 with respect to the Source Code of the Covered Code;

(b) You must duplicate, to the extent it does not already exist, the notice in Exhibit A in each file of the Source Code of all Your Modifications, and cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files and the date of any change; and

(c) If You Externally Deploy Your Modifications, You must make Source Code of all Your Externally Deployed Modifications either available to those to whom You have Externally Deployed Your Modifications, or publicly available. Source Code of Your Externally Deployed Modifications must be released under the terms set forth in this License, including the license grants set forth in Section 3 below, for as long as you Externally Deploy the Covered Code or twelve (12) months from the date of initial External Deployment, whichever is longer. You should preferably distribute the Source Code of Your Externally Deployed Modifications electronically (e.g. download from a web site).


RE: Stolen Code
By Smilin on 12/3/2009 10:06:27 AM , Rating: 2
So?

Any product sold using the Linux kernel is doing the same thing. If Psystar is refusing to re-share their modified opensource code then they might be in some hot water though.


RE: Stolen Code
By albertdup on 12/3/2009 11:14:15 AM , Rating: 2
They are not sharing the code, they claim its all their own.


I've used RebelEFI
By blppt on 12/3/2009 8:35:02 AM , Rating: 2
It really is quite easy, as long as you make sure your hardware is listed on the wiki page.

Easier than any hackintosh distro, such as iatkos, kalyway, ideneb, etc.

I do understand the annoyance of the hackintosh community though, since it appears to use a lot of what they worked hard to keep free. But cant you say a lot of the same thing about retail Linux distros? IMHO, how easy the RebelEFI installer makes building a hackintosh makes it worth SOME compensation to Psystar, if nothing else.




RE: I've used RebelEFI
By Flunk on 12/3/2009 9:54:37 AM , Rating: 2
Their compatibility page specifies a very small number of mostly outdated equipment. It's not much of an endorsement to say that it works on the tiny spec of hardware that they certify it to work on.


RE: I've used RebelEFI
By blppt on 12/3/2009 11:40:45 AM , Rating: 2
Thats more a limitation of the osx86 community than anything else..being that many of the kernel extensions installed by RebelEFI are created by the osx86/hackintosh community, they are limited to what drivers have been developed to work in a hackintosh.

Besides, a GTX280/285 isnt really "outdated", nor is an i7-975 and X58 mobo. All of which have been approved in various iterations.

The problem with a lot of mobos not working properly (ther than gigabyte) from what I've learned in using various hackintosh distros, is something to do with the ACPI cpu mapping in the BIOS, which cause you to need to use the cpus=1 flag when booting, or OSX will not boot. Gigabyte mobos dont seem to have this problem/issue for whatever reason.

Of course, this severly retards performance by forcing OSX to only use one core of the CPU (or 2 in a quad, IIRC) as cpus=1 disables core(s).

The Gigabyte GA-EP45UD3LR (P45) mobo I use for my Hackintosh works nearly flawlessly, although I dont use RAID or the onboard audio (outboard USB X-Fi works flawlessly). Q9550 CPU.


RE: I've used RebelEFI
By MScrip on 12/3/2009 5:29:28 PM , Rating: 2
Did you already have that hardware? Or did you buy that motherboard specifically for building a Hackintosh?


RE: I've used RebelEFI
By blppt on 12/3/2009 6:00:46 PM , Rating: 2
Actually already had it. Bought the Q9550, a hard drive, dvd/r drive, 8GB DDR2, case + psu and built me a hackintosh.

It had been used with my Q6600, which is now in another mobo on my windows machine.

Actually, the most difficult thing involved in this build has been calling MS and writing down those darn key sequences to reactivate win7 after the mobo swap. ;-)


orly?
By Motoman on 12/3/2009 11:38:16 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Psystar, which already went bankrupt once, has agreed to pay Apple $2.647M USD in damages for marring its "brand image"


...does anyone think Apple needs any outside help to do that?




Open source
By vailr on 12/4/2009 1:02:16 AM , Rating: 2
Psystar should probably just release their "Rebel EFI" project to open source. Sell "OSX Ready" PC's with blank hard drives. Offer Apple only a certain small percentage of their new machine sales, as a payment for the court fines. End of litigation. Steve Jobs can go back to designing more ways to defeat Hackintoshers.




A Summary
By ex2bot on 12/3/2009 11:40:54 PM , Rating: 1
To summarize the conversation:

Apple sux. Bad. Their OS is terrible (except for video editing). We want them to die. Hard. Now. Or sooner. They are bad. Their OS is useless. Worthless. A waste of plastic / RAM / etc. One button mouse. Latte.

And why won't they let us buy their OS on clone hardware??? Why, why, why?? It's no fair!!! We want their OS!!!! Uh . . .

We. Hate. Ourselves. Must. Move. Out. Of. Parents'. Buy. MacBook Pro. Hate. Apple. Need. Latte.
;)




"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki