Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Sep 2010 22:09 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems There's this hole here at OSNews, a hole left when Psystar was dealt a devastating blow by Apple's legal team. That whole saga provided a nice steady stream of news articles that's been dried up for a while. However, Psystar was not the only clone maker out there - what happened to Quo Computer, that clone maker with an actual real-world store front? They're still here, and just launched a new product.
Thread beginning with comment 439951
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Good luck...
by tupp on Thu 9th Sep 2010 01:19 UTC in reply to "Good luck..."
tupp
Member since:
2006-11-12

... those who want the benefits of a Mac but don't believe they should have to pay Apple for it.

But the end user is paying Apple full retail for the OS -- that's the only part that is Apple.

Please, fanboys. In such situations, nobody is pirating anything nor doing anything that is wrong. Apple is getting paid fairly at the price it sets, in every instance.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Good luck...
by tylerdurden on Thu 9th Sep 2010 01:33 in reply to "RE: Good luck..."
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

"... nobody is pirating anything nor doing anything that is wrong..."

Well, they are technically breaking the EULA for a profit. So it is an "iffy" proposition at best.

The main problem IMHO is that these sort of vendors have little value proposition, the prices/configs in their website aren't that exciting ($1K for a configuration with an ATI 3000 series GFX?). So the hardcore geeks seeking a hackintosh can probably get a better deal in the HW elsewhere, and since they can't provide that much support for the OS... neophyte customers will probably go directly to apple.

Alas, best of luck I guess...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Good luck...
by tupp on Thu 9th Sep 2010 04:36 in reply to "RE[2]: Good luck..."
tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

Well, they are technically breaking the EULA for a profit. So it is an "iffy" proposition at best.

Making a profit and going against the EULA are two separate topics.

First of all, where does it say that any manufacturers have marked-up OSX? I'm pretty sure that they are selling OSX at cost. In such a case, the manufacturer is purchasing OSX at the end user's behest.

Even if the manufacture were not buying OSX directly at the user's behest and were marking-up the price and making a profit, that would be their rightful prerogative. Once they've bought a copy of OSX, that copy is theirs to sell at any price they can get. Right of ownership has been a basic principle of western trade for several millennia.

Now, an EULA is merely a declaration by a manufacturer. Just because something is declared in an EULA doesn't make that declaration right nor "legal."

Indeed, the OSX EULA includes some doosies. For instance, one part of the EULA states, "You also agree that you will not use the Apple Software for any purposes prohibited by United States law, including, without limitation, the development, design, manufacture or production of missiles, nuclear, chemical or biological weapons." This clause means that some engineer at Lockheed is prohibited from using his Macbook to compose a memo reminding personnel to use sunscreen before they attend an upcoming flight test in the Mohave. Pretty silly, and definitely not legally binding.

Remember that Psystar lost it's case because Apple convinced a judge that Psystar had violated the very questionable DMCA, by circumventing Apple's "technology" designed to prevent OSX from being installed on non-Apple computers. The EULA had nothing to do with the rulings.

So, Psystar and Quo are not doing anything wrong by buying copies of OSX at the user's and/or buying OSX and marking it up.

Likewise, going against an EULA is neither illegal nor unethical.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Good luck...
by Soulbender on Thu 9th Sep 2010 07:36 in reply to "RE[2]: Good luck..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Just because it's in the UELA doesn't mean it's a legal contract clause.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Good luck...
by NeoX on Thu 9th Sep 2010 05:35 in reply to "RE: Good luck..."
NeoX Member since:
2006-02-19


Please, fanboys. In such situations, nobody is pirating anything nor doing anything that is wrong. Apple is getting paid fairly at the price it sets, in every instance.

Except that Apple sells OS X only for Apple customers that have bought Apple products. It was never intended for clone makers to buy and users installing it on a clone are breaking the EULA. I know, I know, big whoop right? Some people do obey laws I guess... And even if Apple gets the money for the OS X disc they are still possibly losing money on the sell of an actual Apple Mac.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[3]: Good luck...
by tupp on Thu 9th Sep 2010 06:06 in reply to "RE[2]: Good luck..."
tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

Except that Apple sells OS X only for Apple customers that have bought Apple products.

That point is irrelevant. Anyone buying a boxed version of OSX is an Apple customer.

Furthermore, Apple sells OSX openly, and Apple sets its price.


It was never intended for clone makers to buy and users installing it on a clone are breaking the EULA.

Again, two irrelevant points.

The manufacturer's intentions are meaningless the moment the product is sold. Chevrolet never intended for it's pick-up trucks to be modified, but, nonetheless, Chevrolet can do nothing to prevent this: http://www.4x4truckstrailers.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/jacked-... The person who bought the truck is free to do with it as he/she sees fit.

Also, an EULA is just a declaration by the manufacturer. No part of an EULA is law, and, often, provisions in EULAs are ruled invalid.


I know, I know, big whoop right? Some people do obey laws I guess...

Please name the government statute that one is violating by installing OSX on a non-Apple computer.


And even if Apple gets the money for the OS X disc they are still possibly losing money on the sell of an actual Apple Mac.

Apple sets the price for the retail box. If Apples sets it too low, who's fault is that?

Secondly, How could Apple be losing money by selling extra copies of OSX?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Good luck...
by Neolander on Thu 9th Sep 2010 06:16 in reply to "RE[2]: Good luck..."
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Except that Apple sells OS X only for Apple customers that have bought Apple products. It was never intended for clone makers to buy and users installing it on a clone are breaking the EULA. I know, I know, big whoop right? Some people do obey laws I guess... And even if Apple gets the money for the OS X disc they are still possibly losing money on the sell of an actual Apple Mac.

At least here in France, it is illegal to sell two distinct products in a linked fashion. OSX and the Mac are distinct products, since OSX is sold separately from the Mac. So Apple can't force someone to buy a Mac along with OSX, if I'm not wrong. And in that case, this EULA clause is just invalid.

Edited 2010-09-09 06:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Good luck...
by Soulbender on Thu 9th Sep 2010 07:47 in reply to "RE[2]: Good luck..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Except that Apple sells OS X only for Apple customers that have bought Apple products.


If I have purchased a copy of OSX then I am obviously an Apple customer who has purchased an Apple product.

Some people do obey laws I guess...


What law? A EULA is not law. Apple does not make laws, they sell products. Whatever the consumer do with the products after they're purchased is none of Apple's business. Apple can not dictate what a consumer do with their produts after purchase. In fact, if there's any law to be broken here it is broken by Apple trying to dictate post-sale restrictions.

And even if Apple gets the money for the OS X disc they are still possibly losing money on the sell of an actual Apple Mac.


Who cares? It's not illegal to not buy a Mac.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Good luck...
by BallmerKnowsBest on Fri 10th Sep 2010 01:14 in reply to "RE[2]: Good luck..."
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

Except that Apple sells OS X only for Apple customers that have bought Apple products.


Ah, so Apple requires you to provide some sort of proof-of-purchase for other Apple products before they'll sell you a retail copy of OS X?

Oh, wait, they don't? So much for that idea.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Good luck...
by henderson101 on Thu 9th Sep 2010 11:46 in reply to "RE: Good luck..."
henderson101 Member since:
2006-05-30

But the end user is paying Apple full retail for the OS -- that's the only part that is Apple.


Well, if they are buying the box set (Leo, Snow Leo etc in one box) they are not in the wrong. Doing so, is breaking the EULA, but that is down to interpretation. However, if they are buying Snow Leo upgrade discs without purchasing Leopard (which is technically no longer available from Apple outside of the Box set, but I guess might still be available through other channels) THAT is not on, not at all. The upgrade disc is sold as an upgrade, not a full install.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Good luck...
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 9th Sep 2010 12:01 in reply to "RE[2]: Good luck..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The upgrade disc is sold as an upgrade, not a full install.


This is a lie. It's simply not true. Grab any retail box of Snow Leopard, and you'll see it doesn't say ANYWHERE that it's an upgrade. Apple fanatics might think it is, but wishful thinking does not make it so.

I've bought more Mac OS X boxes than you can count, and not one of them has the word "upgrade" on it, and ALL of them install just fine on their own. Nor has any shop assistant ever informed me that it is, in fact, an upgrade. As such, I'm buying a normal piece of software, and I can do whatever the hell I want with it.

Reply Parent Score: 3