Psystar bounces back from Chapter 11, intros new high-end hardware
By Paul Miller 
posted July 2nd 2009 11:16AM
posted July 2nd 2009 11:16AM
[Via TUAW]
posted July 2nd 2009 11:16AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
The last time someone did this IBM lost their hold over PC BIOS and that was such a tragedy for mankind wasn't it ?
"The last time someone did this IBM lost their hold over PC BIOS and that was such a tragedy for mankind wasn't it ?"
ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport.
Remember in Cool Hand Luke, where Luke is fighting the other guy, and just keeps getting up? It feels like that, but CHL is much more entertaining.
Having said that, I kind of want to order one.
hey, Even if apple had to put their OS into PC, they would probably gain a lot more money, mainly because apple develops the software and sells it to other companies. Still Psystar cloning Macintosh, well couldn't you just buy a macintosh installation software thingy?
(- im not sure of that...)
They tried that before OS X came out, and got eaten alive.
OS X is entirely subsidized by Apple's hardware sales, and they're doing very well at the moment. Licensing out OS X would basically kill their value add and OS X with it.
Also, the reason Macs "just work" is because Apple is in control of both the hardware and software. I, for one, don't want to see an OSX machine that I have to clear 2-4 GB of cruft out of before I even use it.
@ 01 "I, for one, don't want to see an OSX machine that I have to clear 2-4 GB of cruft out of before I even use it."
Then buy a Mac. What do you care if someone else buys a Psystar machine, and is willing to save a bundle of money in exchange for having to clear out the 2-4 GB of "cruft"?
Mikey - You're not seeing the big picture. If Apple licenses OS X for use on standard PCs, here's what will happen:
People will immediately stop buying Macs. They will start buying cheaper clones instead. This will hurt Apple's bottom line, since the vast majority of the money they make is on hardware. The few people who still want a Mac instead of a clone will not be able to sustain Apple's current operation and they will have to scale back drastically, and eventually they will have to shut down for lack of funding.
You think they haven't tried this before? There have already been Mac clones. It was an unmitigated disaster, with Apple immediately losing huge amounts of money. Apple's current userbase is not enough to sustain Apple through software sales alone - not even slightly close. Not even if they get a huge influx of new OS X buyers. And think about it - how many people would switch to OS X anyway? Windows has 90% of the market. What reason would there be for the average person to switch over?
It's a bad idea all around. Nobody wins.
Zak, I don't think you're seeing the big picture.
"People will immediately stop buying Macs. They will start buying cheaper clones instead. This will hurt Apple's bottom line."
Why the hell is that my concern? If Apple can't make money without restricting its OS, then maybe Apple shouldn't be in business in the first place. They are clearly too incompetent at business to compete fairly.
"You think they haven't tried this before? There have already been Mac clones. It was an unmitigated disaster, with Apple immediately losing huge amounts of money."
"And think about it - how many people would switch to OS X anyway? Windows has 90% of the market. What reason would there be for the average person to switch over?"
Logically, this statement cannot be reconciled with the rest of your argument. Either (a) lots of people would start switching to OSX but would do so on Psystar and other Mac clones and Apple would be unable to compete in the market because of their incompetance; or (b) OSX would still remain a niche, and Apple would be able to maintain their market.
Moreover, Apple is the juggernaut it is right now because of the iPod, iPhone, and iTunes, not becasue of Mac hardware. If Macs went away completely, Apple would still be in the black because of these products. So even if your "we've got to protect Apple because they can't protect themselves" argument had any merit (which it doesn't, because in our economy if you can't compete, you fail), it is unnecessary because Apple will be just fine riding on the fat revenues they get from iPod, iPhone, music, and App sales.
"It's a bad idea all around. Nobody wins."
Actually, pretty much everybody does win. Consumers get cheaper products, and the market is forced to price their products competitively. The only loser is Apple... and if they can't compete on their own, I'm OK with that.
Microsoft got beaten down in the courts many years back when it tried telling vendors what OS they could and could not put on machines. I think if this ever makes it to a court, Psystar will come out on top simply because precedent has been set already.
Having a monopoly is not illegal by itself. Abusing that monopoly is. Apple does not have a monopoly by any stretch of the imagination (except the deluded, Apple-hating stretch.)
Microsoft got beaten down because they said "If you include any OS but ours on -any- of your hardware, we will make you unable to compete in the market." The precedent completely does not apply to this case at all.
No. You people really don't understand any of this do you?
Microsoft: OEM and retail distributor of operating software trying to dictate to OEMs what they could and could not install.
Apple: Hardware company that makes their own OS for their own hardware, and only licenses OS X for their own hardware.
There is no chance that any court will tell Apple they need to become an OS provider for OEMs. Ain't gonna happen.
Woo! Go Psystar!
La La La. Here we go again.
All of you people on Psystar's side need to realize something Mac OS X is Apple's ball if Apple decides they don't want to share it, it is well with in there rights not to, and others need to respect that and move on to some one who will share. Bottom line Apple made it Apple owns it and is under no obligation to let other companies sell it as their own, that is called stealing! Just because Microsoft choose to license their OS to others doesn't mean everyone has to. Also you people saying that the way you get the OS from Microsoft and the hardware from someone else is pushing tech forward are really backwards. Fact is most of the time it is Apple and their OS pushing tech forward with their hardware tied to the OS they make. For god sakes we would still be using beige boxes and floppy disks if the rest of the PC industry had their way.
EULA violation stealing
Nonetheless, Apple is well within it's rights to sue Pystar. They will win if they decide to. I suspect that Pystar is so small as to barely qualify as a minor distraction let alone any kind of threat...
"Bottom line Apple made it Apple owns it and is under no obligation to let other companies sell it as their own, that is called stealing!"
This is the problem when laypeople such as yourself try to talk about the law. It just isn't that simple. If Apple made it and refused to sell it to anyone, then yes "they made it, so they own it." The problem is, they do sell it, and under the EULA they restrict what the buyer can do with the product after they have sold it. Usually that is OK, but not always. If the restrictions are, for lack of a better term, "too restrictive," then they can be considered invalid, in which case the sale is an unrestricted sale, and the buyer is free to do whatever they want.
Also, I don't think Psystar is selling OSX as their own... I believe they freely admit that it is an Apple-developed operating system. All they are doing is making a computer that will run OSX. Since they are paying Apple for their copies (albeit indirectly), how exactly are they "stealing"?
Say what you will about whether it's "legal" or not, but the Psystar computer is incredible value. If you can get past it not having an Apple logo on it, or a nicely designed case, the specs and price speak for themselves:
Mac Pro Quad-Core
One 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processor
3GB (three 1GB) memory
640GB hard drive
18x double-layer SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB
Price: $2,499.00
Open(7) with Mac OS X
One 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processor (same processor as in the Mac Pro)
6GB DDR3 1333 (twice the RAM in the Mac Pro)
1TB 7,200RPM SATA2 hard drive (60% larger hard drive than in the Mac Pro)
20x DVD±RW DL SuperDrive (faster DVD burner than in the Mac Pro)
NVIDIA GeForce 9500GT with 512MB (slightly slower video card than in the Mac Pro)
Price: $1,499.99 (a $1,000 less than the Mac Pro)
actually, if you configure it you get it closer to the MacPro, it's more like $1,982.98.
By default the Psystar doesn't include wireless, bluetooth, firewire 800, etc.
Adding 6GB and a 1TB drive to the Mac makes it $2,749. So the difference, while still significant is $766.
I think the Mac Pro case is probably a lot more expensive than the psystar case, and I'm not comfortable that psystar will be around to honor the the 3-year parts and Support (no service?) warranty, plus, who knows what Apple might do to stop future versions OS X from installing?. Call me crazy or a fan boy but I'd rather spend the extra $766 and get the real thing with a better video card and the knowledge that apple will be there in 2 or 3 years if I have a problem.
But half the point is that you don't have to buy stuff you don't need...like Firewire 800. If it's really about cost though you could just build it yourself for even cheaper
This who thread is tiring. He said, she said, I'm right, your wrong. Who cares. Buy what ever the f** you want and be happy about it.
Apple sucks! wonder ifi can get this computer to dual boot? i support this company because they stole what apple stole in the first place. Steve Jobs is a Douche!
HOw come the fact that people doing exactly what Pystar is doing is what pushed Apple mainstream. It's amazing how Apple die hards over look the fact that Apple used the OS86x project to make OSX on intel possible. It wasn't eh brilliant minds at Apple that made that happen it was some brilliant code monkeys that got nothing but a "You did it! Now he'res your cease and desist order!" from Apple for making it happen.
As for the David and Goliath reference I would say that has some validity. Why? Well for one Apple took Pystar to court with a brought federal judge in their pocket and it still did not crush them. If you dare to disagree ponder on this for a moment. Pystar brought Anti Trust claims against Apple. The judge threw the argument out, when months later Apple was once again under Anti Trust claims. The latter being a smoke screen to hide the real Anti trust actions that Apple daily practices. I don't want the mighty Apple to fall and dissaprea, but I would like them to play fair. They routinely take open source code and then slightly tweak it and copyright it. Like that new video featur on your 3G S well thank DreamCatcher and saurik. Like that new Copy and Paste, well Apple took two other open source coders work and combined the two methods to make what you have now. Wow a new voice memo function, wasn't that an App Store app before it was an Apple feature? Well i guess that's a big pisssssss off to the devs that not only made it, but now because it's an Apple feature can not sell it in the App Store. Remember no direct competition with Apple features allowed in the App Store. The Apple developers program is a sham. It's just Apples way to make money while they steal peoples hard work. I just find it hard to believe that people can't see it for what it is, and it's Apples underhanded ways that would make me purchase a Pystar and not a Mac, because at least Pystar isn't ripping off everyone involved in the deal. Wonder why Apple wants you to register your mac when you enter the Apple programers development program? It's because they want to make sure you are using a mac that they got you to pay 3 to 7 times more than it is worth, plus they want your entrance fee, and a cut off the top of al your sales, and don't forget that next year the 4.0 sdk will require you to use a new mac and a new OSX alley cat release, and a new device,because your old one won't work with all the new API's they have made available to you as a developer.
Sure Apple makes some slick gear, but it's all over priced,. it's all heavily governed and restricted, and just as prone to issues as any other device. Apple products just work! Yeah they also just explode, and get so hot they discolor or soil themselves if you will. They just don't work with most of the stuff you already own, but that's okay because the Apple store is full of shiny new things to take the place of all those things you had that still function quite well. Any one that tries that sorry "Don't be mad because you can't afford it!" is just proving themselves as a douch bag that uses the things they own to A) give them their self worth, and B) trying to fix that self worth issue with stuff to say "Oh you don't have a Mac and a Macbook , and an Apple TV, and an iPhone, and Apple personal message device to releave all the tension I have from being in debt for all the crap I've bought from Apple each year, and that makes me better than you!" That is a sad way to live ones life. Apples OS is not the king of all OS's or well there would be no need to update it, or release updates to fix the problems the new update is causing.
Way to Go Pystar I am glad you guys survived chapter 11. Keep up the good fight!
It's a giant tome of nothing! Also, Engadget needs a better way to quote.
"HOw come the fact that people doing exactly what Pystar is doing is what pushed Apple mainstream. It's amazing how Apple die hards over look the fact that Apple used the OS86x project to make OSX on intel possible."
Is someone paying you to be this stupid? Seriously, I can't believe anyone would be this dumb. Is there some sadistic jackass out there funding Psystar AND paying a bunch of people to come troll boards like Engadget every time a Psystar article comes up?
Please, post more factually incorrect, logically inconsistent crap. It shows us just what morons are "supporting" Psystar.
I would also like to ban laptop track pads for constantly making my cursor jump around and creating entirely too many errors in my typing to be able to track down :(
whenever start manufacturing a Nahelam laptop with OSX, then I'll be interested
"I here fore declare, from this day forward, OS X will be known as BSD Unix Extra Icing Edition 10.5."
You forgot to add Leopard to there. :)
I for one, am AMAZED that Paul a. Chapel was able to take up the whole first page. It's ridiculous guys... please stop feeding him.
OS X is a retail software product.
The User is greeted with the restrictive EULA once it is too late to return the software to the retailer. Even if you disagree with the terms, and discontinue installation, you are left no recourse as a consumer.
Can you imagine if Microsoft began producing hardware and only licensing Windows on Microsoft boxes? We would all be up in arms!
What if Ubuntu treated users to a license agreement that only allowed installations on hardware you engineered yourself? Insanity I tells ya!
I understand that Apple is protecting theire market share and image while allowing the end user the best possible experience, but it is uncompetitive and, I think, unlawful for them to restrict how their paying customers use a product they paid for.
I don't think apple needs to support installations on other vendor's hardware, but they should not be able to restrict what a vendor does with a copy of OS X that has been paid for.
@Paul
It's very noticeable that you keep coming up with specifics and reasoned arguments, while the majority of the replies are along the lines of "You must be in grade 8", "You live with your mommy" and "You should shoot yourself in the head".
Why do you bother trying to convince such jerks?
Good luck.
And best wishes.
The one thing that Apple hates about Psystar, besides the fact they're using OSX, is how they remind people what hardware could sell for if the ever increasing Apple tax wasn't added in. If Apple would just get off of their royal asses & produce a netbook & a sub $1000 Mid-Size tower none of these type of problems would even surface. I find it interesting how Psystar can purchase OSX at retail & build systems with equal or better hardware for so much less. Oh, I'm a long time Apple user who's falling off the bandwagon due to Apple's recent change in attitude when it comes to remembering what & who got them here. I'm really pissed that now I can't even buy a new MBP that allows me to change the battery myself or buy a MBP that doesn't have a screen that I could use as a mirror..
Also mister microlith anyone that actually uses a Mac to Produce, Create, Manifest something from nothing, and not just carry it around to look cool and make stupid squished face web cam pictures, and post new facebook updates and tweet their world shattering news, however you want to put it, knows there are pro to the Mac and there are cons. They generally also have a PC and don't let their ownership of Apple Products define them. They generally when the subject comes up they tend to be honest about the pros and cons and are willing to agree some things are better done on a Mac and some are better done on PC, but that all depends on who that individual likes to do things.
By being a Nazi Mac Zombie you are saying you are better than other people just because you have more newer Apple products. Can we say no real sense of self worth. By being a Nazi Mac Zombie you are also saying that you are an elitist and you are better than everyone else. Must have been what caused you to feel the need to call people names. You are also saying that you want to live in a world where it's ok for the big guy to get other big guys to help push little guys around, and force them out of business, or to do things their way. You are not only a patriot, but a saint as I stated before.
Perhaps you don't feel that everyone has the right to set out and build a life in this country. Maybe it is wrong to root for the little guy with the chips stacked against them.
This house analogy is fundamentally flawed in that a leaser is well with in their rights to sub lease a property. They are and will be held responsible for any damages incurred though. It's perfectly legal to sub lease. One does not owe the owner any more money for doing so. it's quite common practice, and is the basis for most property management companies. All they are doing is sub leasing the property. End of story..
Apple has boot camp and therefore nullifies the claim that what Pystar is doing is illegal. The only charge that can legally stick to Pystar is distribution of said software with out authorization. Sorry that's the only thing and then that can be circumvented by saying they are merely offering a service of putting the Os on the hardware for the customer. Obtaining the legal copy of the OS for the customer and installing it for them is well within the coverage of the law.
I still can't see the point of Psystar. If they want a nice, working and reliable OS then go make themselves. Taking away by 'force' like this from Apple just show how violent Psystar is.
@Mikey
They are stealing buy stealing Apple's profits.
Apple paid for the programming of the OSX and now Psystar is using the OSX as their main selling point.
No-one is going to buy their PC's for the hardware in it self.
this is awesome but at the same time so much time wasting. I love reading you guys. Paul, keep up men, your doing a god job at entertaining people and at defending your points... I guess!
As far as the battle between Mac and Pc goes, (please, don't tell me this isnt about Mac vs Pc! ) off the bat, I'm a Mac, but hey, I think I"m not close minded too, soo for the pleasure of everyone out there, here is my opinion on psytar like company : I really like the fact that there is an alternative out there for OS X machine and frankly, I dont care that much who puts the hardware together, I just want my computer to work like and OS X computer works. But at the same time, if everyone out there was to make computer designed for OS X, wouldnt we see some Acer like crap computer produced with OS X on it that would fail even more often than Apple computers do ( I work in an apple specialist and we do repair tons of Mac every month) and I am not so sure that this would be good for Apple/OS X. I mean, some people know the difference between a crappy motherboard and one thats not, and so on, but for the average consumer out there, I dont know, is it not bettter if apple does the hardware too ? I do not want another MS company out there, one is enough.
that is way too long of a comment for what it says...
keep up guys, I need more juice of of this non-sense-oooh-but-so-amusing discussion between Paul and the rest of the world
cheers
Interesting discussion, for the most part.
One thing to remember straight out of the box is that Steve is Apple and Apple is Steve. That is one situation that's sort of becoming clear. When you've got Warren Buffet sort of stepping in and saying "people are going to find out anyway", which of course, everyone did, this kind of ties into it. People say Apple wants this and Apple wants that and so on and so forth, but I think the easiest way to boil it down is that. Apple is Steve and Steve is Apple.
And don't get me wrong, Steve Jobs is an extremely inspirational and special human being, he is truly one in a million. He's also very passionate about "the device". And I think that's where the focus is going -- "the device". It's all about "the device".
I think Apple is making a mistake by not leveraging existing hardware standards, if you will (e.g. building their own batteries). Obviously, certain things (RAM on riser cards) are less technical decisions, but still -- Steve (Apple) is obsessed with (passionate about) "the device", and it shows. Like any mass-manufactured device, in some cases, reliability and hardware/software compatibility is at times going to be an issue. There's no getting around that. As such, Psystar also runs the risk of this. I would recommend Psystar to focus on the concept of "handmade" and "burned-in" and "extensively quality-tested" and maybe use Lian-Li cases and other high-end stuff. Go for the high-end, and don't sacrifice quality for the low-end. You can get cases with better ventilation than that, even inexpensive ones (e.g. NZXT beta). Building your own can be an art form, and it can be an opportunity to offer a "handbuilt" quality, extensive burn-ins, even custom overclocks. This way, apart from software upgrades (sans usb-dongle), to best Apple mass-produced "devices".
Apple is not a monopoly, but Microsoft arguably is. It's almost 2010, and we've got one choice -- Windows. OK, Linux, but you can't get software for that that lots of people need/want, and with Linux you're dealing with shared libraries, which for most people, unfortunately is a massive deal-breaker. What do you mean I can't check for the latest version of Firefox or Open Office and have it "install and relaunch"???? Linux is awesome, but unfortunately, for most folks, this just doesn't cut it. Updates WILL break your system eventually. Shared libraries for user apps will never work. Looks like android may have a way around this, actually (don't quote me on that).
So that leaves us with Windows, and it's 2010. Apple is in the business of selling an operating system. Windows has somewhere near 90% market share. OS X runs just fine on anything that has SSE3, given a recompiled kernel (no big deal in BSD and Linux), and sufficient drivers (again, no big deal with Linux and BSD). Just as almost any app that runs on Linux can be complied via MacPorts or installed via Fink on OS X, hardware is similarly easier to deal with than in Windows - if there's drivers on Linux or BSD, they can probably be fairly easily recompiled for OS X. No wizards required, just place the .kext where the kernel can find it and make sure the permissions are correct. What could be easier? Of course, it'll never have the compatibility Linux has, but hardware compatibility is probably not such a big deal.
Again, remember, it's 2009 and we have one (1) OS for most people -- Windows. Apple isn't a monopoly, but Windows has almost 90% market share. That's should definitely weigh in on the enforceability of that one single clause of that EULA. People want another choice that doesn't use shared libraries for EVERYTHING. People deserve another choice that doesn't use shared libraries for everything.
Call me crazy, but I think this is going to happen. This jazz about Apple reliability is just jazz. All mass-produced stuff is mass-produced stuff. Apple could really leverage the standards (things) that exists (ATX cases, power supplies, motherboards (so you can use your own case at least, they could leverage things like NVIDIA and ATI drivers, letting you buy whatever video card you want (latest and greatest of your choosing from the Egg or elsewhere), and so forth. All-in-ones are nice if that's what you want, but how about the ATX version for those who want to minimize the initial investment and then add/upgrade as the funds become available? Not everyone has money growing on trees, and there's just one OS out there right now with almost 90% market share that doesn't use shared libraries for everything.
Quality is an issue, and Apple isn't immune from this. Certainly, some of the low-balling in terms of hardware that some of the OEMs engage in is inexcusable, but things like dust accumulation, properly grounded power outlets, quality of electrical service available, and general issues of taking care properly of a computer also come into play in the home environment.
In a sense, Apple isn't Apple - at least not in the way most people speculate. Apple doesn't want the things people think Apple wants because Apple isn't Apple in the way people think it is. In a sense, it's mainly a "device" company, and what folks are interested here is just one small portion of that device company, the OS X operating system. This won't affect ipods or iphones (but Android probably will affect iphones). Non-removable batteries will probably affect MacBooks more than freeing up OS X will. It wouldn't surprise me to find a negative correlation of sorts between the two, actually (freeing up OS X will sell more MacBooks, while non-removable batteries will sell less).
But we do need to consider what is best for Apple -- yes, we do. We need to treat Apple with respect. But we also have to realize that Microsoft is pretty much the only OS out there that doesn't use shared libraries, and that having two OS's out there in the wild that don't use shared libraries would be of ENORMOUS benefit to consumers as a whole. And since Apple is in the business of selling an OS in the marketplace, respect needs to be a two-way street. Companies can't just do whatever (although they will try). We try to make the marketplace as safe and good for consumers as we can, and having two OSs to choose from can only be a benefit overall. If Apple weren't in the business of selling an OS, that would be different. But they are using the "marketplace" to make money, so they have some responsibilities. While they may not be colluding with Microsoft intentionally (they aren't), the impact of Apple's EULA only serves to strengthen Microsoft's grip on the marketplace, depriving consumers internationally of any real choice or competition. There may not be a law against that, but perhaps there should be.
Driver issues can be overcome. Pricing can be changed. Quality control can be written in to OEM contracts, and information and product reviews are much easier to come by in this information age. BBB ratings can be easily accessed.
Apple is Steve, and Steve is Apple. He's done some really impressive stuff, and he's an incredibly inspirational human being. He's very passionate about "the device", however, I'd say that it's passionate to a fault. Not leveraging existing ATX standards is a waste of resources and R&D, in my opinion, and it's also (thanks to Microsoft) a disservice to the consumer and the marketplace as a whole. There may be potential product safety concerns lurking around any corner as well. Apple isn't really set up to provide "handbuilt" quality, either.
So add all those things up together, and you have one big mess that can probably be straightened out.
Apple designs and sells OS X with restrictions on its use. If you don't like the restrictions, you do not need to buy it. The same principle applies to every purchase you make. Caveat emptor. Buyer beware. In this case, Psystar bought licenses it fully intended to violate, and accordingly, Apple has every right to sue them.
Apple believes that the quality of the hardware contributes to the quality of the experience. In my experience, this is a valid concern. If you run Windows on a crappy PC next to a good one, the crappy one will crash more often. Many people blame their Blue Screens of Death on Windows, when in fact many of those crashes are caused by the junk it is installed on. Apple doesn't want the same reputation Microsoft earned itself by supporting everything. They want to control the experience. You have every right not to support that goal, and to buy and use a PC. If you intend to buy and use a PC with illegal software on it, be prepared to forego support for your hardware, or perhaps, to forego receipt of the hardware post-purchase. It goes without saying that a company that's just emerged from Chapter 11 doesn't have a problem walking away from a creditor or two...
Go ahead and violate the license. People do it all the time. In my opinion, you're better off doing it with both eyes open, and checking out the OSX86 project.
Cheers.