Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 16th Oct 2009 22:50 UTC
Remember the motions for a summary judgement filed by Apple and Psystar earlier this week? Large parts of them were censored per Apple's request. These censored parts detailed the protection measures Apple put in place in Leopard to prevent it from being installed on non-Apple labelled computers. Psystar filed a motion a few days ago asking the judge to uncensor the information.
Thread beginning with comment 389965
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Your assumptions are wrong
by KingRocky on Sun 18th Oct 2009 21:15
in reply to "RE: Your assumptions are wrong"
Member since:2009-07-30
Wrong. Apple makes a fortune selling software (check the Amazon software sales rankings and the Apple financial reports to see for yourself). Apple does not 'make' hardware. A few components, cases and motherboards for example, are designed by Apple and custom-made for them.
Wrong. Apple does the design and engineering for every one of their computers. The manufacturing of those computers is handed off to a third party, a practice done my most computer companies.
And retail copies don't have to be labeled as "upgrades," as there is no other computer that the customer can legally install the software on, except a Mac - which came with the software from the factory.
If people were running out to the Apple store and purchasing OS X with the understanding that the could install it on their HP, then you'd have an argument. But this is not the case.
RE[3]: Your assumptions are wrong
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 18th Oct 2009 21:36
in reply to "RE[2]: Your assumptions are wrong"
Member since:2005-06-29
Wrong. Apple does the design and engineering for every one of their computers. The manufacturing of those computers is handed off to a third party, a practice done my most computer companies.
Every OEM designs and engineers their hardware, only to have it built by contractors in the Far East. Apple is not special.
And retail copies don't have to be labeled as "upgrades," as there is no other computer that the customer can legally install the software on, except a Mac - which came with the software from the factory.
Wrong again. Even if Apple's EULA will be upheld in court - a very big "if" - it still would not be illegal. Breaking an EULA would only be breach of contract, which is decidedly not illegal.
It is clear now that you have no idea what you are talking about, and are just regurgitating the drivel you see on MacDailyNews and the likes.
RE[3]: Your assumptions are wrong
by Bobthearch on Mon 19th Oct 2009 02:02
in reply to "RE[2]: Your assumptions are wrong"
Member since:2006-01-27
Wrong. Apple does the design and engineering for every one of their computers. The manufacturing of those computers is handed off to a third party, a practice done my most computer companies.
Exactly what hardware does Apple design and engineer, other than the case and motherboard mods that I mentioned above?
The hard drive? Nope.
Graphics? Nope.
Sound? Nope.
Processor? Memory? Optical drives? Nope. Nope. Nope.
What Apple really designs is software. The operating system, drivers, applications...
Not that has anything to do with the Psystar case one way or the other...
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-01-27
Wrong. Apple makes a fortune selling software (check the Amazon software sales rankings and the Apple financial reports to see for yourself). Apple does not 'make' hardware. A few components, cases and motherboards for example, are designed by Apple and custom-made for them. But most of the parts are standard off-the-shelf components that anyone can purchase.
Wrong again. OSX retail copies are stand-alone versions of the operating system, and are not labeled nor advertised as "Upgrades."