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:2005-06-29
Kroc, that argument is so old and inherently flawed I'm amazed people still use it.
If computer A costs 300 EUR, and computer B 400 EUR, computer A is cheaper, whether it has more features or not. What you, and so many other Mac people, are referring to with this argument is value. 400 is more than 300, but if the customer thinks he's better off with the 400 machine, it's better value for him - but it's still not cheaper than the 300 EUR machine.
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:2007-01-13
Rolex are mass produced (1+ million a year) watches with crudely made and inaccurate mechanical movements. Equally good or better watches can be bought for 1/10th the price. There are many excellent Rolex submariner clones sold for around $100. BMW made many very cheap cars in the 1950s and 1960s including 3 wheelers.
Member since:2006-06-02
Well, things might not be too inconceivable, in relation to the BMW analogy. If you compare:
BMW
http://www.bmw.co.uk/bmwuk/modelselector/0,,1156___sit-bmwuk,00.htm...
with
Ford:
http://www.ford.co.uk/ns7/all_cars/-/-/-/-/-/-
You will see (unless I have scanned it too quickly) that Ford has but 5 models under the starting price of what BMW offers at its lower end (BMW vehicles appear to start from £15k).
So, you can get a relatively inexpensive BMW, yet BMW still has kudos as a quality, up-market brand (so I am to understand, actually, I don't drive and detest cars).
Does Apple really offer the consumer this same sort of choice relative to its competition that BMW appears to be able to?
(I am over my bad-Apple Karma, so I am just wondering)
Member since:
2007-09-17
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.
Isn't this how Linux compete by providing cheaper alternative?