Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 25th Oct 2009 12:51 UTC
Editorial A couple of years ago, a professor at my university had a very interesting thought exchange with the class I was in. We were a small group, and I knew most of them, they were my friends. Anyway, we had a talk about language purism - not an unimportant subject if you study English in The Netherlands.
Thread beginning with comment 391102
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by wirespot
by wirespot on Mon 26th Oct 2009 09:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by wirespot"
wirespot
Member since:
2006-06-21

You are saying that the people who pay more for Macs are not stupid, they are doing it because it is a superior product. Based on that, how would Psystar selling Mac OS to the unwashed masses who currently buy cheapo PC's hurt you?


First of all, don't assume I own a Mac, because I don't. I only own iPods. But that's somewhat irrelevant.

So let me rephrase your question. How does a cheap Mac clone hurt Apple customers? First of all, if left unchecked, it would seriously undermine Apple's bussiness model. If Psystar was left alone more cloners would follow. History has shown us that Apple can be buried by cloners since it almost happened before. I suspect that whoever is behind Psystar intends exactly that.

No, it's not a conspiracy theory. If you have any notion that Psystar is a small honest company out to make a small and honest buck, think again. Small honest companies don't engage in multi-million dollar lawsuits against the computer manufacturer with the deepest pockets around and one of the meanest legal teams. There's serious money and serious legal counsel behind Psystar (which also translates to money). And for what? Spend all this money just to gain Psystar the right to sell cheap computers? Does that make any sense? Engage in an uphill legal battle and spend tons of money for the right to enter a business with very thin returns? Wow, Psystar must be downright philantropists.

Returning to the topic: if Apple is hurt they can't keep on making the products that their customers enjoy. In fact, they'll probably stop making, or at least crippling, OS X itself, which everybody seems to be after. How does that make sense? No matter the outcome, the masses will NOT get OS X. Assuming that Apple is, for the sake of argument, forced to let anybody bundle OS X, they will cripple it, change the license, add serious protection methods and so on. OS X as we know and like it would be gone.

Secondly, there's a bigger issue here. Psystar is attacking a way of doing business that's not just Apple's, it's widely used in the IT industry today: renting software instead of selling it (not to mention SaaS). That model is based on current copyright law. A favorable decision for Psystar would have so far-reaching consequences that some legal experts say it might affect even FOSS licenses, and it would definitely impact lots of commercial software.

Thirdly, there's the principle of the thing. I have to admit when somebody is in the right or the wrong, no matter how I personally feel about them. There's rules and laws and if we're ready to give them up whenever we feel like it we might as well grab clubs and return to the caves. Psystar is wrong and breaking the law.

Reply Parent Score: 2