Apple has filed a suit (more details) on July 3rd against Psystar in the northern district of California. Psystar dubbed its cheap Mac Clone as Open Computer and started shipping them around April of this year.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
This is a very bad move. I mean, the latest Apples are just dual core pentiums with intel gfx. Pretty much standard on dirt cheap PC's
Are we mow going to see Apple sue every PC manufacturer becuse someone "might" be able to install OSX on their white box ?
Member since:2005-11-21
This is a very bad move. I mean, the latest Apples are just dual core pentiums with intel gfx. Pretty much standard on dirt cheap PC's
Are we mow going to see Apple sue every PC manufacturer becuse someone "might" be able to install OSX on their white box ? "
<p>Of course not. The lawsuit targets an incorporated name unlawfully selling pre-installed copies of OS X or offering services to install OS X illegally on non-Apple hardware.</p>
<p>If the douchebag had offered to publish a thorough write up on how to install it there would be no lawsuit and people would run the risk, on their own, of seeing their warranty policies nullified and getting zero support from Apple.</p>
Member since:2006-01-06
The problem here seems to be that Psystar is selling the cloned hardware + OSX. If they had only sold the cloned hardware, I doubt that Apple would have a leg to stand on, legally speaking. The solution is pretty simple (but a pain in the ass): Psystar is going to have to decouple the sale of their hardware from the installation of OSX; ergo, they're going to have to let somebody else install OSX. Naturally, Apple is betting that no consumer is going to want to go through that kind of hassle just to get a clone with OSX, and they're probably right. It's odd: For all the criticism that Microsoft gets, Apple is 10 times worse when it comes to OS licensing. MS doesn't give a rat's ass about which hardware you install their products on. Apple, on the other hand, is ready to deploy a phalanx of attorneys to sue anyone into submission who dares to challenge their platform monopoly.
Member since:2007-02-05
Member since:2005-11-21
In short: it was a experience for Apple. They probably don't want to repeat that mistake. (+ Jobs is a crazy controlfreak.)
Seeing as you clearly didn't work there I'll put it bluntly, by stating that the Clone Market didnt' grow the Apple market but cannibalized pre-existing Mac customers.
The fact they didn't grow the market for Macs was the reason the Clone Program was yanked, but more to the point, Apple had 21 separate Marketing Groups when us NeXT merged with Apple. The way to save Apple was to consolidate redundant groups, unify the marketing vision and reintroduce a streamlined product sheet from Apple. The product sheet was a joke and in complete chaos when we arrived.
Member since:2005-07-11
Actually, the clones grew the Mac market share from 3% of the market to just over 5%.
The problem with the clones was that they were eating Apple's lunch. They were coming out with faster, better machines in shorter cycles than Apple.
Apple wanted the clones to take the low-end of the market. Power Computing and Motorola did that, AND came out with machines that blew Apple's away on the high end as well.
It was a year after Apple shut down Motorola and Power before Apple produced a PPC model that was as fast and advanced as the ones that were out the year before.
Apple didn't want to become another IBM that let the "PC Compatible" market make them an also-ran.
Perhaps smart for Apple, but bad for us.
Who knows what kind of Macs we'd have today if Apple had simply licensed back the best designs and released them under the Apple Label.
Instead, Apple shut down innovation.
Member since:2005-07-11
>> 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".
Member since:
2008-04-18
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.