Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 24th Dec 2008 20:49 UTC, submitted by judgen
Legal The legal back-and-forth between PsyStar and Apple is slowly but surely moving into the twilight zone. Not too long ago we had Apple going all black helicopter on PsyStar claiming people and/or companies other than PsyStar are involved in the clone maker's unlawful practices, even though Apple could so far not name any of them because, well, they don't know who they are yet. If that wasn't enough, PsyStar now claims that Apple's copyright on Mac OS X is invalid.
Thread beginning with comment 341549
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
apple
by solarcontrol on Fri 26th Dec 2008 13:11 UTC
solarcontrol
Member since:
2008-11-17

Making Mac OS installable on PCs was Apple's mistake.
Now MS can say to them, "welcome to my world" lol.

Apple should have developed a strategy that made their hardware cheaper. This would have given them more users - thus encouraging software makers to port to their OS.

Also, they should have made their GUI more intuitive a LONG LONG time ago.
While OS X is like using Linux with Gnome or KDE, OS 9 and earlier versions were decidedly unfriendly to noobs and the cybernetically inept - who make up most of the home user market.

Reply Score: 1

RE: apple
by tomcat on Fri 26th Dec 2008 19:41 in reply to "apple"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Apple should have developed a strategy that made their hardware cheaper. This would have given them more users - thus encouraging software makers to port to their OS.


The reason that Apple is using Intel hardware is twfold: (1) most shops are already running Intel hardware, more parts are available, and it provides ensured compatibility, and (2) the Intel ecosystem is advancing faster than competing architectures and Apple can leverage those advances at the same rate (or faster) than competitors (Dell, Microsoft, HP, etc).

Also, they should have made their GUI more intuitive a LONG LONG time ago.
While OS X is like using Linux with Gnome or KDE, OS 9 and earlier versions were decidedly unfriendly to noobs and the cybernetically inept - who make up most of the home user market.


The UI isn't the reason that Apple has a smaller market share. It's price and compatibility. At one time, Apple's UI was, in fact, much more innovative than anything offered by Microsoft. While some would argue that the Apple UI stagnated up to OS9, they've done a great job revamping the UI for OS X.

Reply Parent Score: 2