Some more information regarding PsyStar and its Opencomputer have surfaced, that try to dispel some of the doubts surrounding the company. Last week, the company posted a video online that supposedly showed the inside of the company, as wel as a bunch of OpenComputers running Mac OS X, Ubuntu, and Windows XP. In addition, a Gizmodo reader has sent a video to Gizmodo where he shows off his OpenComputer.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-19
I think Apple is sorely needing an expandable PC that is not the full blown Mac Pro. I want a Mac where I can add a second hard drive, for RAID, and have the option to upgrade the video card. I can't do that with the iMac or the Mac Mini. That said I wouldn't buy from PsyStar. It's very tempting to build my own but in my experience PCs from manufacturers like Dell, HP or Apple are quieter than these generic boxes. Being quiet is another important feature.
Member since:2005-11-10
I agree that people should use the hardware they want. I don't agree with EULA's neither.
But buying from a company like PsyStar is not the way to do it; and I object to the comparisons on price being made (as pertains to features).
Apple only offer computers with a minimum of x number of features. Other manufacturers offer computers with less than x features, and therefore lower cost.
If you spec a Dell with exactly equal features to a Mac (x=x). The Mac is the same, if not cheaper price.
But since you cannot spec a Mac exactly equal to a cheaper Dell (with <x features), a comparison cannot be made. The Apple looks "expensive" because you cannot have <x features. However this is a false analysis.
People seem to have a real difficult time grasping this. Some people also don't want to buy flat-pack furniture.
Edited 2008-04-29 14:00 UTC
Member since:2005-07-22
Member since:2007-09-17
Member since:2005-07-06
"So what is the problem with being cheap. If I want a cheap MAC machine, at least I should have the option to get one. "
Your logic is a bit flawed. Using the same logic then you should be able to get a cheap Rolex, or a cheap BMW, or even a cheap Vista. Every company, at least here, has the right to produce models or not as they see fit. Anything else is a cheap knockoff. You can choose to buy what the company sells or you can buy another brand. In some cases the knockoff can be illlegal.
At the moment if you want to run OS X you have to buy a Mac or risk doing something that may not legal. That is for the courts to decide. I would think that in most countries Apple is probably on good legal footing.
I have a Power Mac G5 and an IBM here in my computer room. The IBM is much better engineered than the typical PC on the market today. But the G5 is head and shoulders above the IBM in its engineering and design.
While I can applaud what Psystar is trying to do I would tell prospective buyers caveat Emptor.
Member since:
2005-11-10
But it's not competing on price; it's competing on features.
If the Psystar had exactly equal specification, and every feature of a real Mac - but was still cheaper then it would be competing on price.
But it's not. It's not an iMac, nor a MacPro. Where's the webcam (iMac)? It's slower. OPTIONAL firewire. Integrated graphics on base configuration. No bluetooth, no mouse or keyboard.
Is it a Mac Mini? No bluetooth, no IR, the size doesn't even compare (the most important thing about the Mac Mini)
This isn't competing at all. It's just 'cheap'.
Edited 2008-04-29 11:34 UTC