Username or EmailPassword
(edit: I should add that this isn't aimed directly at you, merely an in-general statement brought about by your comment)
If you don't agree with Apple's practices and terms, don't buy their stuff.
Seriously, is this really, really hard for people to grasp or something?
It feels like people have this misconception that "voting with your wallet" means buying a companies stuff even though they disagree with them, and then complaining about it endlessly.
Apple can tell people what to do with their hardware and software as long as people keep buying it, regardless of "come see the violence inherit in the system!" complaints. Edited 2008-07-15 20:32 UTC
I wouldn't buy anything from Apple, not even an iPod.
Not giving their blessing to Psystar is one thing. Suing them for selling hardware is something else. Since when nobody can sell hardware that supports MacOS (except Apple of course)?
This is a regrettable decision for the consumers (less choice) and for Apple (this is how you get more market share). Whatever, I don't give a flying shit actually.
I won't buy a Mac or a Mac clone in a thousand years.
Mac tried to licence it's OS to ther hardware makers. There where problems, and it didn't help them get more market share either.
In short: it was a experience for Apple. They probably don't want to repeat that mistake. (+ Jobs is a crazy controlfreak.)
>> Suing them for selling hardware is something else. Since when nobody can sell hardware that supports MacOS (except Apple of course)? <<
Apple isn't suing Psystar for selling "MacOS X Compatible Hardware", because they aren't. Nobody can. Apple puts stuff on the boards and in the BIOS that MacOS X looks for, and that nobody else can legally replicate. Plus, it wouldn't be financially sound for someone to keep re-engineering boards to be MacOS X compatible.
Apple is suing Psystar for selling systems pre-loaded with MacOS X and modifying MacOS X to work on otherwise incompatible boards.
Apple is claiming that Psystar is selling a derivative and unlicensed version of MacOS X. Which is based on the Retail MacOS X, but is altered in contravention of the license.
Whether that will hold up in court is interesting.
In any event, Apple makes more money from iPods and iPhones and the iTunes Music Store.
If they lose this suit and tons of Apple Clones start being marketed by Dell and Gateway... It won't hurt them all that much.
It might hurt us if Apple decides not to continue making computers or slows down the development on MacOS X.
We might lose, even if we "win".
How is it civil disobedience to steal someone else's hard work and try to make cash out of it. Don't make them into a martyr, they are far from it. The author of the OSX86 project clearly denounced the project as he didn't intend his work to be used commercially, yet Psystar went ahead and did it anyway. Civil disobedience my ass, they are plain crooks.
But we have right to criticize what Apple does right? This is about freedom of speech.
Apple IMO is worst company. One that itself [ab]uses open source and on top of that doesn't even let users decide what hardware they want to run their OS on.
Rotten Apple! Edited 2008-07-16 00:31 UTC
who died and made you boss of people's opinions? Complaining about a licensing practice or product is just as much a way of "wallet voting" as anything else. Besides, when it comes to large companies as well as monopolies "wallet voting" does NOT work which is the whole point of anti-trust.
I'm not saying that Apple is a monopoly at all btw I'm just pointing out the fallacy of your argument satan666.