Linked by Nescio on Mon 9th Mar 2009 08:05 UTC
Apple Numerous irrelevant issues and feelings about them are ventilated in comments on the case. However, there are only two important issues. One is what the law is, the other is what we think the law should be.
Permalink for comment 352293
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
r_a_trip
Member since:
2005-07-06

All fine and dandy, but what has "There is NOTHING in the MacOS that the F/OSS software movement cannot replicate with some effort." to do with the case at hand?

Psystar isn't an Open Source company. They even use a proprietary license for their "retail hackintoshes". Although the case is about the validity of after sale license conditions, this doesn't mean it automatically is related to FOSS. If a license is deemed void, the software doesn't automagically become Public Domain or Free Software.

The magic of Apple is limited hardware support on preselected components, with a pretty UI on top of their UNIX. This is also already available in the FOSS world. Get supported hardware and install/get-a-preload-with a nice WM/DE on top of a *Nix. Same result.

Reply Parent Score: 2