Psystar counter-sues Apple for anti-competitive business practices

[tsaka]

I find it ridiculous that if I buy Windows Vista, I can't use it on my PowerPC computers!

I find it ridiculous that if I buy electronics in the US, I can't use the same power adapter in the UK!

I find it ridiculous that if I buy a PS3 game, I can't use it on my Wii!

 

Getting my message yet?

 

What`s more ridiculous if i copy your lifetimes copyrighted work and share it with a thousand friends of mine, and not make money out of it, can you still say its yours when i was the one giving it to them,

 

EULA is EULA when you buy it you have to agree with its terms,if not don`t install it or better yet return it and get a refund,it`s as simple as that!

 

sometimes,we compromise our state of reasoning to fit our needs,or to what we are doing to justify what we want.

[dies]

Erm, do you have a link to a credible source for this story?

or is it fake?

 

Of course it's fake dude. I thought it was pretty clear that I was just comparing the consequences of others taking the same approach, sorry if it wasn't.

 

if so, the PC market will be screwed and a huge number of Manufacturers will be made redundant due to providing Hardware without an OS, only Linux will provide end users with a Operating system free of any EULA and Hardware restrictions

 

Exactly the point I was getting at.

 

No problem for me since I already prefer Linux anyways.

[mmcnally]

This is real easy for Apple to solve and legal too.

 

When you purchase your Apple Computer you never actually purchase your OS. OSX is supplied with the computer. This is how it is currently sold in the Apple Store. You buy an Apple Computer, not an Apple Computer and an OS license. This is one product. Show me a non doctored AppleStore page of an Apple Computer that lists OSX 10.5 as a purchase item, without adding on the OSX 10.5 product on it' s own. You see no item for your Operating System at all unless you are buying Mac Pro in which case if you buy OSX Server you do see an item or an xserver, and if buying either of these you aren't interested in Mac Clone or hackintosh are you!

 

Apple announce that upon release of OSX 10.6. They will not make any upgrade available in the stores from 10.5 to 10.6. They allow no on-line or physical stores to sell upgrade licenses for 10.6 All new Macs will ship with 10.6 upon release, and you haven't purchased OSX 10.6 at all. You buy the hardware to use as you see fit and they provide the OS to make it fit for purpose.

Instead they make make the software upgrades for OSX part of the Apple Care product. No Apple Care, no software Upgrade to 10.6 To register for Apple Care you have to create an account on the Apple Website and supply the serial number of the Apple Product that you purchased so that they can tie the Support to the product you purchased. No serial number, no account, no upgrade. You do NOT have to purchase the Apple Care product, merely that Apple will not supply software upgrades or support after the minimum legal requirement to do so to you. You are buying a Hardware Support contract so again nothing to do with the OS.

Apple do not force you to purchase Apple Care and will provide updates for 10.6 to all, ie 10.6.1, 10.6.2 etc. If you buy a MAC preloaded with 10.6 They will still supply patches and fixes for 10.5 for a period of time afterwards. Whatever the legal requirement is now for supporting previous versions of OSX.

 

How do you now get a legal copy of OSX 10.6 and later without first purchasing a Genuine Apple Computer? Even purchasing the computer does not get you a purchase of the Operating System license so at no time do you purchase an OS or an upgrade to the OS. The Apple Care is a hardware support contract so not an Operating System. You have no contract regarding the use of the OS, which remains purely the property of Apple. You don't even get a license for the use of OSX.

 

You already have to purchase 10.4 to 10.5 etc upgrades so these have never been free. Apple simply choose not to release such an upgrade as a product. There is nothing illegal in not making a product available for sale. As long as the product is fit for purpose as advertised Apple do not have to provide an upgrade to the software, only provide a patch to make the product fit for purpose.

 

If you purchase a genuine apple computer, then take your OSX Media and install onto a non-apple computer, you really think Apple will care. You have already paid them for a computer and they made the sale. To get from 10.6 to 10.7 you will need to have an Apple Care product for your Apple Computer still so you still need to purchase the Apple Care to get the upgrade to 10.7, but you will still need to have a registered genuine apple computer. If you resell the Apple computer then the use OSX goes with it and the Media would need to go as well. They then register the computer and either they can't as registered to you or Apple take away your account so you can't get the upgrade.

 

End Users now are having to purchase a genuine Apple Computer to obtain genuine legal usage of OSX. Apple simply do not make the product available to purchase to ANYONE at all.

 

Resellers such as Psystar cannot purchase OSX to sell on an Open System without first purchasing an Apple Computer. Suddenly that OpenComputer running OSX gets mighty expensive to buy as paying for the Apple Computer and Apple Care as well.

 

As a side benefit to Apple as well as cutting Psystar and any like minded companies off at the knees you also kill off sales of EFI-X to people looking to run OSX as they can no longer get OSX without an Apple Computer. They may be selling as a Boot Device but lets be honest here, Hackintosh the lazy way, they do all the hardwork for you but leave the End User to install the OS.

 

And none of this is illegal. They provide patches to 10.5 to fix problems, they do not have to provide an upgrade to 10.6 or later.

[jaez]

This is real easy for Apple to solve and legal too.

 

When you purchase your Apple Computer you never actually purchase your OS. OSX is supplied with the computer. This is how it is currently sold in the Apple Store. You buy an Apple Computer, not an Apple Computer and an OS license. This is one product. Show me a non doctored AppleStore page of an Apple Computer that lists OSX 10.5 as a purchase item,

 

http://store.apple.com/ca/product/MB576Z/A?mco=MTIxODk3Mw

 

Leopard 10.5.4 Price $129 FREE SHIPPING -- No questions asked. All they ask you for is your money, and address to ship to.

[dies]

http://store.apple.com/ca/product/MB576Z/A?mco=MTIxODk3Mw

 

Leopard 10.5.4 Price $129 FREE SHIPPING -- No questions asked. All they ask you for is your money, and address to ship to.

 

He was speaking hypothetically, as to what Apple could do, not what they currently do or will do.

 

mmcnally's point was that if Apple were to stop selling the OS to the general public then there would be no argument about whether the EULA is valid or not, because it wouldn't matter at that point.

 

Feel free to correct if me if I misunderstood you.

 

Of course the whole thing is deeply flawed as to whether it would stop people from using it on non-Apple hardware, since it assumes that no one would be willing to share an image of a fresh install and subsequent updates, but that would obviously be illegal and that's not the point, actually I guess that was the point, it does make legality clear cut.

[Maxintosh]

This is real easy for Apple to solve and legal too.

 

Apple announce that upon release of OSX 10.6. They will not make any upgrade available in the stores from 10.5 to 10.6. They allow no on-line or physical stores to sell upgrade licenses for 10.6 All new Macs will ship with 10.6 upon release, and you haven't purchased OSX 10.6 at all. You buy the hardware to use as you see fit and they provide the OS to make it fit for purpose.

Yep this is what I was alluding to earlier. I don't think Apple will go a far as requiring Apple Care, but they could easily treat OS X 10.6 just like MobileMe; You go to the store and buy the 'box' for OS X 10.6. You get home and open the box to find a little booklet that describes the new features, and a certificate with your license serial number on it. Once the serial number is used once with your Apple ID - it cannot be registered again. From that point on 10.5 upgrades to 10.6 the same as any other update. This is what people like jaez could push Apple to do in the future, and Apple would have every right to do it, but they wouldn't even have to go that far. They could have a vital part of the OS reside on a servers 'cloud' from Apple. There are many ways that Apple could stop those that ignore EULA's, the only question is will they?

[slacker25]

@Maxintosh This is what me and you have said time and time again but my guess is we used too big of words for jaez to get it

[jaez]

There are many ways that Apple could stop those that ignore EULA's, the only question is will they?

 

No. They will not. Apple likes things the way they are right now.

 

It is only some of you guys here that have fantasies about Apple.

 

Apple deliberately built a box that could run windows.

 

Why do you think?

[slacker25]

@jaez hmmmm so it could run windows

 

nothing to do with running osx on anythign other then a mac

[Maxintosh]

@Maxintosh This is what me and you have said time and time again but my guess is we used too big of words for jaez to get it

I know, it's like trying to nail jello to a wall

[jaez]

I know, it's like trying to nail jello to a wall

 

One guy with two identities, nice.

[slacker25]

never tried to nail jello to the wall before ... but i bet jaez pry thinks ome one is trying to crucify him because he is the only one who thinks he is right

 

 

@ Jaez .... are you reffering to me and Maxintosh as being the same person

[mmcnally]

Apple moved to Intel x86 as IBM wouldn't gaurantee the PPC development as IBM can sell more PPC to the console boys. If IBM had developed the PPC further to meet Apples requirements would Apple have shifted. Why have the effort and bother, also makes it easy to differentiate between yourself and Wintel boxes. Plus you know that OSX only going to be found on Macs.

 

Once you take away PPC what are the other options other then an x86

 

Sun - They are really going to get enough chips from TI for this.

Itanium - You think apple is expensive now, see what it would be if gone Itanium.

Cell - not ready at the time.

Develop a new CPU from scratch - Fantasy.

[jaez]

Apple moved to Intel x86 as IBM wouldn't gaurantee the PPC development as IBM can sell more PPC to the console boys. If IBM had developed the PPC further to meet Apples requirements would Apple have shifted. Why have the effort and bother, also makes it easy to differentiate between yourself and Wintel boxes. Plus you know that OSX only going to be found on Macs.

 

Once you take away PPC what are the other options other then an x86

 

IT IS ALL APPLES FAULT !

 

Apple moved to Intel x86 because Apple tried to protect its PPC platform preventing compatibles from being built, this caused sales of APPLE type computers to suffer, which caused sales of PPC to suffer, which caused IBM to decide not to bother with PPC, which caused PPC to fall behind x86, which caused APPLE to HAVE TO change to x86.

 

It all began with APPLE "closed box" mentality.

 

Now APPLE wants what MICROSOFT has.

 

To do that, APPLE has to become LIKE MICROSOFT.

[Redliner]

OMGOSH! i have just got back from a trip... and i had 400+ notification emails! you guys are seriously still mulling over this!??

[jaez]

OMGOSH! i have just got back from a trip... and i had 400+ notification emails! you guys are seriously still mulling over this!??

 

It's either mulling over this, or mulling over the stock markets. This has more upside.

[Redliner]

or you could get an Acer Aspire One and mull over getting sleep working

[slacker25]

@Redliner

 

i will never stop i like seeing him prove his ignorance

[Redliner]

ha ha ok you peoples...

[slacker25]

not you peoples just jaez

[jaez]

@Redliner

 

i will never stop i like seeing him prove his ignorance

 

Oh slacker25, dying for attention. What do you want?

 

Shall I buy you a Mac Pro or an iBook?

[Maxintosh]

Shall I buy you a Mac Pro or an iBook?

I'll (cough) take one of those

[Thekwah]

I segugst taht you raed a book Slacker25. You cna't eevn wirte. It's hrad to raed yuor txet. I neevr meddod aynhthig. It so hnppaes taht my cetupmr has teh rhgit cmpoonetns to inatsll OSX. So, waht if I got a llttie hlep form Kwlyaay? Huh? It's his cdoe cntbriuttioon to teh intsall proecss taht eanlbes OSX to wrok. But, I ddin't innevt teh moodatiicifns. I Jsut uesd tehm. And tehy are in teh plbuic daomin. Who kowns waht Alppe ientdned? Tehy neevr tlod me aynnhtig. I bguoht OSX and uesd it for waht I wntaed to. It's my menoy tehy took. Tehy ddin't hvae to tkae my menoy. But, tehy did. And so, I hvae teh rgiht to do waht I wnat wtih teh swotfare.

 

Here is the kicker. You can install Winbloze to any updated intel box. Pay for it and its yours. Spend your $$$ and you have Vista on a PC. Spend the same cash on OS X and you have to "Kwlyaay" it [Love the speek] Look, [Not to Jaez] Apple had its corner not having intel boxes for its OS. Now it moved into our corner, and its broke. We buy the OS, break it to work on our hardware then its ours to use how we wish. They need to lock it to the PROMs like they did in the old days, make us really work for it. Until then its open season.

 

On the back flip, if Microsoft made proprietary hardware, we'd still all be tapping on our Amgia's. [Or Atair ST's] If anyone remembers those, remember there was a fight between Apple/Commodore and Atari at that time on the "GEOS" or something like that... Graphical interface {censored}.

 

Whatever my age is showing.. I am finally able to enjoy a Mac, and will most likely purchase one. But until I feel I want another OS I want to play. I can buy a Mac, not like OS X and install XP/Vista no problem... kinda stupid if you ask me. [Not like that would happen, but it would work fine]

 

Ending, I think Apple has lost. They sell the OS without the hardware and it can be minimally hacked to work then its their fault. Sell all of them with a dongle then the hacking will be cut in 3/4ths [or more]. [We've made dongles] would and could be done. Its the hardware they are putting it on that they are not ready for. Its open, its fresh, and hard to lock down. [unless they use propriety hardware again] = $$$ again.

 

Done beating a dead horse.

 

Kwah

[slacker25]

@Thekwah and im fine with that its the idiots that want to whine and say we dont want it to be called illegal cause we dont wanna feel lie the outlaws and be repreminded or conform to any kinda structure at all.

 

or Whine when apple does make you work harder for it or make it impossible to do. with this entitlement issues going ... its illegal accept it if you dont like doing illegal things.... then no one is twisting your arm dont do it.

[mmcnally]

IT IS ALL APPLES FAULT !

 

Apple moved to Intel x86 because Apple tried to protect its PPC platform preventing compatibles from being built, this caused sales of APPLE type computers to suffer, which caused sales of PPC to suffer, which caused IBM to decide not to bother with PPC, which caused PPC to fall behind x86, which caused APPLE to HAVE TO change to x86.

 

It all began with APPLE "closed box" mentality.

 

Now APPLE wants what MICROSOFT has.

 

To do that, APPLE has to become LIKE MICROSOFT.

 

Apple has always been a closed system apart from the few years when they licensed clones to be made after Steve Jobs left to go do Next. I didn't see a huge upswing in the market share of computers running Mac OS during the clone years of 95 through 97. In fact the market share and sales actually dropped during those years when it had been opened up to other manufacturers. 95 was 8%, 96 was 7.2%, some reports show as low as 5.4% so despite making the system open to anyone that wanted to license Mac OS7 market share still fell. To be fair it had be slowing for years before hand so wasn't anything new, but was why Apple tried the licensing route. So despite being made open to people who wanted to license build mac clones sales still fell. OPENED UP the system and sales FELL! This was down from the 20% Apple had in 1985. 16% with the Apple 2 and 4% with the Mac. It may just be that Win95 seemed to be a good alternative at last to a lot of potential mac buyers. Windows machines were more attractive then MacOS machines. I remember in 95 or 96 using a MacOS computer preferring Win95. Yet I prefer OSX to XP/Vista.

Apple started there comeback in 98 with the iMac whilst still a closed system and sales of Mac's are continuing to grow despite being a closed system and not licensing clones to be made.

 

Current figures seem to be showing that Apple Laptops in the US are around 20% of the market, 10% worldwide and this is just the official Apple machines, not counting hackintoshes.

 

Being a closed system doesn't seem to have had a negative impact or positive impact on sales. Although it can be shown that since 97 the sales have improved despite going back to a closed system. That and the iPod factor. Apple are simply making better products then they used too, products that people want. Why pay the premium for an Apple if you are only interested in running Windows on it.