Wow, I feel like I have a collector's item!

My box is still running happily, with its 4 cores and 8GB of RAM for a fraction of what Apple wanted to charge me at the time.

Man, Fanboys sure do hate Psystar.

I love OS X. And I run it on about 4 Apple machines and 2 non-Apple machines. One of those (the one I'm using right now), is a Psystar Open Pro quad core box that I bought when Apple was only willing to sell me an outdated mini or a vastly overpowered Mac Pro tower that was twice what I was willing to spend.

Now, if I were buying right now, I'd probably buy a mini (since they finally updated), but I'm still terribly glad someone like Psystar was there to fill the void.

So, Dave Caolo, if you're so annoyed by them, stop reporting on them and giving them press. Stop pretending they're as bad as SCO.

If you order a machine and they bump the specs, they upgrade you to the new specs. I've seen this happen time and time again.

"Drop". Ugh.

I agree with you, but this was supposed to happen with the G1, too. It hasn't yet. Maybe more android phones will help.

I've been using my Battery Geek portable power station since 2006. Love it.

@bhamm: I can't believe I'm arguing on the internet. Okay, here goes...

"Apple owns OS X and can allow (or disallow) it on whatever hardware they want. It's really not your decision. If you don't like that, you should write your own OS."

That sounds an awful lot like an apologist defending his fanboy object of desire.

Do you really believe that? Would you believe that if Microsoft did it? Like, say, if Microsoft made a keyboard that just totally kicked ass, and there were no solid technical reasons you couldn't use it on a Mac, but MS said you couldn't and would sue anyone who sold a Mac with that keyboard bundled?

Maybe if Sony released a PC that had no technical reason you couldn't run linux on it, except they put in the EULA that you weren't allowed.

Nobody's asking Apple to do anything.

I sincerely hope you were opposed to Microsoft having to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows, and are similarly unopposed to Microsoft's practice of disallowing resellers of selling computers with any OS other than Windows installed.

As for the entitlement comment, I fail to see how this is a sense of entitlement. Apple would not provide me with a sub $2000 machine that was easily upgradeable. Psystar did. I bought from them. I even paid for a license for Leopard, which I shouldn't even have needed to so, since I have extra licenses for it. All I did was pay Psystar to install the OS on it for me, because when I made that purchase, I did the math and decided my time was worth more than the cost difference of going it alone.

It'll be okay. Apple isn't going to get hurt over this. If anything, more copies of OS X will be sold. Apple's OS footprint will grow. These are all good things.

Who is making Apple support OS X on non Apple hardware? Is Psystar selling AppleCare on non-Apple hardware now?

What's so bad about running OS X on non-apple hardware? You fanboys really need to get a grip -- OS X is an awesome OS, but some of us don't need to pay Apple's exorbitant hardware costs on something that sits under our desk.

Stop taking it so personally. Psystar isn't out to get you. I'm glad I finally have a consumer-grade product to buy. I didn't need to drop the bucks on a Mac Pro just for the case form factor I wanted. Why won't Apple release something more affordable than a Mac Pro. The Mini doesn't count -- it's an unopenable box as far as Apple is concerned. The iMac at least lets you upgrade RAM trivially, but anything else requires a warranty-voiding disassembly. And you still have the cost of an LCD whether you need it or not.

As one who owns one of these machines, I hope the opposite. I also hope you have a good recess, and that you do well in finals and move on to the fifth grade next year.