Well, it really seems as if Psystar is committed to continue its business, no matter what. The company entered chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in May, and many wondered if this meant the end of the clone maker and the legal case between Apple and Psystar. Well, today the clone maker announced that it is emerging from chapter 11, and while they're at it, they also introduce a new "Mac".
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
Can someone please, for once and for all, give me ANY proof to substantiate the claim that Mac OS X is sold at a loss?
Please...?
This statement is as old as the sun, yet I've never seen ANYONE back it up. It must be one of the most oft-repeated proofless claims out there.
Edited 2009-07-03 00:00 UTC
Member since:2005-11-21
Can someone please, for once and for all, give me ANY proof to substantiate the claim that Mac OS X is sold at a loss?
Please...?
This statement is as old as the sun, yet I've never seen ANYONE back it up. It must be one of the most oft-repeated proofless claims out there. "
If I had access to the Engineering staff annual salaries, combining that with the R&D overall cost related to OS X, plus the mass production cost all subtracted from the Total Sales I could get close.
Unfortunately, I doubt Apple is going to do that.
Member since:2006-05-26
He never mentioned Apple losing money: just that, with the OS being partially costed with the hardware purchase, that the natural price of the OS without the hardware associated with it (Apple-made hardware, for the TUE) would naturally cost more: Psystar is living off the back of Apple with their shenanigans, and that's the crux of the matter, and if, for some weird reason, despite all the European legal "rights" claimed that you believe make sense (but, this is the US, and we don't do things in exactly the same way here, so what goes in Europe, unless the laws are identical, means absolutely nothing) somehow get into this case in the US and forces Apple to ignore what Psystar is doing, then Apple would want to do what the OP is stating: raise the price for those that purchase it for non-Apple-made machines, and reward legitimate Mac owners with a price discount for upgrade copies. Since Apple is in no way close to having a monopoly in PC hardware anywhere in the world that I'm aware of, there's no chance that they wouldn't be able to do this, if, for some reason, the court ruled that Psystar had a legal leg to stand on in the US.
Microsoft has always wanted to sell their OS for every Tom, Dick and Harry machine, as they've never been a PC manufacturer selling their own PC hardware: that's just their business model, and it seems for the most part, that has worked out rather well for them, regardless of whatever things they've done in the past. It's very unlikely that any court is going to force Microsoft to abandon their business model and tell them they can only sell their OS to run on a machine that they manufacture, not even getting into other things that could pop up.
By the same token, Apple's model is to do an all-included model of hardware + software, and that's how they're competing against everyone else: it is also similarly unlikely that (at least in the US, not sure about the idiot EU authorities) the court is going to order them to change their business model. What Psystar is attempting to do is force Apple to change their business model, with no agreement of Apple of wanting to do that, by reselling OS X as though they were acting as general third parties for Microsoft's OS for generic hardware.
Of course, I realize this is all rehashing the issue, but it is apparent that it has failed to sink in as to how things really are. All the evidence from the past indicates to me that Psystar is going to end up on the losing end of this battle, and deservedly so. Why on earth should any company want to have their brand tarnished by having part of their product associated with officially unsupported, officially unrecognized machines, where Apple may find themselves the brunt of complaints for resolving functionality issues between the part that they create (OS X) not working with the part they have no control of (the PC that Psystar provides) and that's not remotely right. There's more to this whole thing than just whether or not Apple makes money or as much money on the sale of the OS that they develop, when used by a third party without their permission: there's also the dilution of brand and related things, and it seems you're conveniently ignoring this, pointedly.
Member since:2005-12-02
That would be interesting to see. OEM pricing for Windows, to real OEM's, is only like USD $25 or so. You have to remember that OEM's like Dell, HP, Toshiba, IBM, etc. are where most people get their computers from, and they get the best deal. SO as an OEM, Psystar is paying much more for OS X than they would for Microsoft products. Do not confuse the hobbiest OEM pricing, such as is found at retail sites, with what OEM's actually get.
Member since:2006-01-27
Correct. Current OEM prices for Windows XP is something like $15 (or so I've heard) for large-scale OEM builders. Retail so-called "OEM" prices are around $90.
Full version clean install OSX prices are currently $109.
I'd also point out that OSX outsells Vista or XP at Amazon, perhaps the largest online retailer on the entire planet.
My point, Apple is making a fortune selling stand-alone OSX copies to system builders and hobbiests, like myself and Pystar.
Member since:2006-01-27
OEMs sign agreements with software manufacturers in order to qualify for volume pricing. Pystar does not receive nor has asked for any such pricing agreement with Apple.
Secondly, you don't need a signed or negotiated agreement with Microsoft in order buy copies of Windows for installed resale. I would actually guess that most small-scale builders, on the scale of Pystar, have no such agreement.
Edited 2009-07-03 04:45 UTC
Member since:
2006-04-03
The thing is that Pystar are really paying OEM / Upgrade pricing because Apple's model has allowed them to keep the retail price at something that resembles Microsoft's OEM / Upgrade price. Pystar are not an Apple OEM, they have signed no agreements that bind them to anything as per Microsoft's OEM agreements, yet they are purchasing the product at OEM equivalent pricing levels.
I've said this before but if Apple were to lose this case its really a simple proposition for them anyway. They whack the retail price up to match Microsoft's retail pricing for "Windows Ultimate Makes Your Coffee And Massages Your Feet Edition" and provide "loyalty discounts" that bring that price back down to the current retail price for registered owners of Apple manufactured Macs. That way Pystar have to pay more for the OS so Apple still make their profit whether they are selling the hardware or not.
As for how Pystar came out of Chapter 11... :S