Star Judge Dismisses Computer Maker's Claims Apple Is a Monopoly
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 19th Nov 2008 21:40 UTC
Law and Order Strike one for Apple. Curling is a better sport anyway - the first end goes to Apple. The Cupertino company sued clone maker PsyStar for licensing and trademark violations and copyright infringement, only to be greeted by a counter lawsuit from PsyStar, who claimed Apple was a monopolist. U.S. District Judge William Alsup sided with Apple on the counter lawsuit Tuesday. In his 16-page decision Tuesday, Alsup ruled Apple's products don't constitute a market to dominate. As a consequence, Apple then can't be considered a monopolist, Alsup wrote. An Apple spokesman had no comment. A representative for Psystar couldn't be reached for comment. The original lawsuit is still running, so PsyStar can, for now, continue selling its clones.
E-mail Print r 2   28 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/fux
Thread beginning with comment 337794
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Uhhh
by UZ64 on Wed 19th Nov 2008 23:52 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Uhhh"
UZ64
Member since:
2006-12-05

Apple is fair worse than Microsoft. Microsoft doesn't tie you to only buying their hardware.

Yeah, but they do quite a good job at anchoring the world to the Intel architecture.

I'd like to see SPARC and ARM take off. At the current rate I doubt SPARC will go anywhere fast, but with Ubuntu's new commitment toward ARM-powered netbooks/laptops, at least ARM has a chance of rising. Either one, though, I'll believe it when I see it.

Edited 2008-11-20 00:08 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[5]: Uhhh
by unclefester on Thu 20th Nov 2008 00:58 in reply to "RE[4]: Uhhh"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

MS supports AMD64, IA64 and x86 architectures. They also supported PowerPC back in the NT3.x days. They have never locked anyone into any hardware.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[6]: Uhhh
by UZ64 on Thu 20th Nov 2008 02:06 in reply to "RE[5]: Uhhh"
UZ64 Member since:
2006-12-05

MS supports AMD64, IA64 and x86 architectures. They also supported PowerPC back in the NT3.x days. They have never locked anyone into any hardware.

I have a hard time believing that x86-64 is much more than a 64-bit extension (or update) of x86 before it. Okay, it was designed by AMD instead of Intel, but so what? It's still basically just an extension to the same old architecture. And there's plenty of other architectures besides x86/x86-64 and IA64.

Edited 2008-11-20 02:07 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[5]: Uhhh
by proforma on Thu 20th Nov 2008 10:18 in reply to "RE[4]: Uhhh"
proforma Member since:
2005-08-27

Microsoft did support other processors earlier on with Windows NT. However, they were never supported properly and programmers did not write for them so they dropped off the map and Windows was later moved to Intel ONLY.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2