Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th May 2009 13:27 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Hot on the heels of the Russians, we have another clone maker popping up, this time in fish & chips country: Freedom PC. "Powerful and versatile, environmentally friendly yet inexpensive computer systems compatible with any and all of the main operating systems: Mac OS X, Linux or Windows. So YOU can decide which one to use for what YOU want to do. And we give you a choice of models, too - from the low priced and good looking office machine, the ideal choice for business, to the high powered, sleek, gaming media centre. All, with the operating system of your choice pre-installed - or none at all - at prices accessible to all." They offer various models pre-installed with Windows, Linux, or Mac OS X.
Permalink for comment 364582
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by darknexus
by PowerMacX on Wed 20th May 2009 15:32 UTC in reply to "Comment by darknexus"
Member since:

Well, that sure didn't take long. Soon enough every country will have a company like this.
This is why Apple is just going to have to adapt. They can't go after every one of these companies, in every country (some of which they have no legal authority) without throwing huge expendatures of money at the problem and likely failing or at the very least only partly succeeding.[...]

I find this line of reasoning repeated in every single story about Pystar & friends, but I don't see it as valid. You can make the same argument about almost anything, from software piracy to drunk driving. Is the fact that is "hard" to fight a reason not to bother at all?

The basic excuse used for preinstalling Mac OS X and violating the EULA seems to boil down to "I paid for it, I can install it anywhere I want, no matter what the EULA may say".
The problem with that is that if you ignore that EULA you may just as well ignore *any* licensing terms, so long as you don't violate copyright.
But... what happens then to "upgrade" licenses? Any upgrade that doesn't check for previous versions installs (as a convenience to the buyer) could be installed "legally" even if you don't actually own a previous version, as long as you ignore the fact the the license required it. And if it does check for previous license, by the same line of reasoning that makes people think it would be "valid" to remove any check Apple may add to Mac OS X to make sure you only install it on a Mac, it would be "valid" to remove a similar "check from previous versions" from upgrades.

What do upgrades have to do with Mac OS X? At some point, Apple used to label all OS releases as "upgrades", after all, since you can't buy a Mac without some version of Mac OS preinstalled, any later version could be considered an upgrade. They don't do that now, instead they simply say "to be installed only on Apple-labeled computers".
Upgrades are cheaper because you already paid for a previous version. Mac OS X, at $129 (compared to a full Vista which used to cost upwards $400), is to me an "upgrade" price, because by the EULA you are supposed to have paid for a Mac with a previous version already.

Reply Parent Score: 1