LOL.. For people around in the Amiga days. Amiga has a emu for the mac and people had to buy a apple chip for the emu to run(faster then the software emu version)
So apple made it hard to buy these replacement chips. Also BeOS was attacked by apple because they did the same thing..

How long can apple stop innovation?

Just a note...Scully and the BeOS were not really the same thing...as the BeOS never ran Mac software. But you could conceivable install the BeOS environment on a PPC Mac.

I don't think Apple is stopping innovation. I think Jobs and his need to control everything has simply stifled their entry into additional markets where they could otherwise capitalize upon and expand their sphere of influence.

Apple is Apple's biggest enemy to further expanding their niche - just as they aggressively undercut the independent Mac integrators. who were so incredibly successful in getting the Mac into areas that Apple could not, when they decided to open the Apple stores staffed with lots of iPod wearing tweens.

...Just load the gun and hand it over to Apple and let them shoot themselves again.

How long can apple stop innovation?

Innovation?

I think you mean "Brand Suicide".

"Apple has suffered and will continue to suffer lost sales and profits in an amount not yet fully ascertained..."

Sure they will, and not because of Pystar.

They will continue to lose the larger market of Windows and Linux users who are not willing to buy a new boutique machine simply to try OSX.

And Apple could easily put Pystar out of business by simply leveraging their buying power and their economies of scale by simply offering a model that ignored the investment in exotic styling and that simply used quality generic commodity components from manufacturers with the largest economies of scale and offered a basic functional computer for those in the marketplace who are not simply driven to have the trendiest chicest machine, but who simply wanted the base functionality in lieu of the exotic.

In other words, for the same price as the trendy Mac mini, they could offer a utilitarian 'whitebox' Mac for the rest of the market that Dell is now going after - the $700-800 market desktop segment of which they now currently lose out on. And these could also invade the SOHO and enterprise market as well.

Just another lost opportunity.

Pystar isn't the real problem here - they are just a symptom of the market niche Apple continues to ignore and for which there is a pent up desire. Apple is its own worst enemy!

oh give me a break. Sue them out of existence, Fine, but a freaking recall!!?? Piss off Jobs!!

Hell I have your piece of garbage OS on a cloned image myself. So what? Only reason to have it is if some moron calls for support and I have to go into it to find what they need or whatever...

Its an operating system that operates in a number of machines. Don't want it to operate in other machines, Don't code for it. You used to be that way but NO, you wanted to try to take over the wintel market... You were stupid enough to open up your tight standards and bingo your OS worked on Intel chip sets. Now deal with it, or take an about face and crawl back into your 1 computer 1 OS 1 company for everything at twice the price hole!

Sorry I don't have a lot of pity for apple considering the fact that there is little for it STILL years later and could have Blown Windows out of the water decades ago if it would have been done properly with open standards so the OS worked with everything from the beginning. Allowing people to build their own Apple super machines, and had people coding for them from the beginning...

Thing is Jobs is just a mini Gates without the nerve to take chances, or the attitude to steal what he wants, and buy them out of existence later.

Lets face it IF Jobs got all th publishers to write for His software and publish TOP hits for it as they do for the PC market. Not just Games that are 10 years old already; AND made them as inexpensive as the Wintel machines are, Some less the $300, for an older one that is still up to par for most PC games... Then Apple Would be the absolute supreme system in existence and everyone would be like Microwhat?

But lets faces it Jobs Simply doesn't know how to do that, and quite frankly even if he does, probably doesn't want to be top dog anyway. He has too much fun being the quirky underdog.

Man... you and foxfyre are mirroring my own sentiments exactly.

You're not leaving me much to add. :)

You're not leaving me much to add. :)

Try numbers. Those usually work well. ;)

What?? apple would blow windows out of the Water decades ago?? If your talking about OSx server and it's verison of Active Directory and robust enterprise offerings like iExchange etc.... come on.. there is really one success story in the enterprise and it's not apple.. Look at the big picture. Not just someone creating a website and an ad for the local paper..

OSx is just a home computer to copy iTunes to you iPod..

I'm surprised that they have any feet left at Apple since they've been shooting themselves in them so often.

Amen to that!

And That is what truly p!sses me off about Apple! They eat their own!

After so many years of watching episode after episode of this, there is almost a masochistic delight in seeing Jobs both eschew and 'go after' those who want to use the platform.

He only wants them to use it under HIS terms.....

I don't get it. What is a Mac? Nowadays it's just a PC clone (maybe we should draw IBM's attention, btw). You can run MacOS X on any PC, you don't need any MacIntel.

Or is Psystar building Mac PPC clones? I can see why Apple is feeling threatened... NOT.

The Mac is NOT a PC clone. It IS a PC. It is no more a clone than any other branded PC that adheres to the Intel Roadmap...which by definition makes it a PC.

My sister has an Intel Mac laptop and she runs Windows XP on it.

You can run MacOS X on any PC, you don't need any MacIntel.

Um...no, you can't.

lol that was a huge waste of her money. She could have very easily gotten a IBM PC and spent a faction what she prolly spent on that Mac POS

Hey tool, yes you can use OS X on a Pc or vmware. Yes some changes need to be made.
Legal or not it is done all the time now.

hxxp://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Vmware_how_to

*laughing*

You can run MacOS X on any PC

Read that again.

Let's break it down:

Can: Are allowed to.

Run: Everything works, just as it would on a "Mac".

Any: All makes, models, brands, builds, hardware.

PC: A physical IBM compatible, x86, commodity parts computer.

Wanna check those osx86 project forums and run that "Yes you can" by me again?

Right....

If she is a geek and wants to hack the trusted computing module.

If she is that computer literate why isn't she already using Linux or already have OSX running on her PC?

Besides, her even bigger obstacle will be to find an "IBM PC".

"Can: are allowed to"

should be

"May: are allowed to"

Actually, you
"Can: are ABLE to"
provided you are willing to hack the trusted computing module that authenticates the hardware to OSX.

But if my mom wanted to do that, she would already have built her own machine and installed Linux on top of VMWare...or had OSX running on her rad gaming rig. ;-)

Heh...

Still can't.

Updates will break it anyway.

Can't run Mac OSX updates? Kind of a required feature.

The point is, the guy was claiming that it will run on anything, as though it were a pice of cake.

It is anything but.

The Dell D630 lappy, for example, is decently supported by the latest builds.

Still: No wireless, no updates, limited graphics functionality...

You get the desktop and that's about it. Not what I'd call, "Can run it on any PC!"

Would you?

You are right, it is not as I would like to see it!

I seriously think that Apple can have it both ways: both Mac HW & SW, as well as an unsupported OSX for non-Mac HW, and use the arrangement to feed its own machines as well as its derivative SW market.

Make it competitive and why would someone intentionally want to limit their options, while others would love the flexibility provided by their choice based upon their needs rather than the dictates of he machine...

I was just having a bit of fun with the "can" versus "may" distinction... ;-)

See, as I see it, they live and breathe the "It just works" mantra.

That goes out the window the *second* they start depending on third parties for drivers and hardware compatibility.

All of the sudden it no longer "just works" and the end-user ends up having to deal with driver issues, hardware incompatibility, you name it.

I suppose they could get by modifying it slightly; "It just works (but only really well on Apple certified hardware).

...as an aside, I really wish folks would stop using the terms Mac hardware and Apple Hardware. There really is no such thing now.

Poor Poor Apple. If they had taken a more enlightened view they might be where Microsoft is instead of a niche computer company crying because someone else sells a few dozen computers. Mabe Psystar should put an apple from the tree in each box, would this be a copyright infringement?

If I have already bought a unit, Apple proposes coming to my house and having it seized (even if they offer a compensation)?

Yo' mama!

Psystar should just sell the unit as is, tested and without the OSX OS. They could simply load Linux on it with the understanding that the customer can load whatever OS(es) they like.

Let the customer buy OSX or Windows.

I like the Mac and especially OSX, but its this same control-freak, closed system mentality that got Jobs tossed out the first time with his opposition to opening up the MacII and which he also reimplemented when he returned to Apple that drives me up a wall. Its his company, but I really question the validity and especially the paranoid necessity to keep OSX closed to the rest of the computing world UNLESS he feels unable to build a machine that is competitive and compelling to the broader market.And I fully believe they can while also significantly enlarging their market base - as OSX is a very real potential desktop Linux killer that not only has developers and a wealth of quality product, but that your mom can use it.

While I don't question Steve's creative vision, I seriously question Steve's marketing acumen that is so shaded with paranoia (and a history of problems relating to this), and I hate his historical attempt to dictate how we use the computer going back to the beginning where he literally almost killed the math and science markets where the Mac had excelled due to independent system integrators it excelled and where the Mac took over shops left and right as it came in through the 'back door' (witness the national labs and Lawrence berkeley where we were) as Apple fought us at every step as the Mac succeeded in spite of Apple's efforts while at every step TELLING us that it was a desktop publishing platform rather than simply supporting and enabling us!

While it was a nice strategic marketing advantage for the first 2 years to 'reintroduce ' the redesigned x86 based Mac to the market, its #%$&@ time to open OSX in an unsupported form to the masses of PC users who are not about to buy a Mac just to try OSX!

Steve, get off the @$#%$ phone and release OSX for the PC! And if you can't compete in the hardware market, get out of the business. I think they CAN! Just as there are incredible opportunities for the platform in the enterprise arena that Apple is oblivious to!

Its amazing to me that Steve feels they can't! And in that, Steve's personal issues are the most telling problem!

remember that he was a hippie and a stoner

Well I did a bit of research as opposed to you. The PCs Pystar are selling are apparently very shoddy. It's not like they work perfectly because they don't. It makes sense to pull them because they'd undoubtedly give Apple a bad name. Whether it should be made available on a PC or not is for another discussion. But for the purposes of this one, Pystar are out of order because they don't deliver what they promise.

"are apparently very shoddy."

If a competitor's quality is shoddy it gives their competition a bad name?!?

I can just see the headlines: "GM trembles as Toyota's quality sucks!"
GM wishes they had is so 'bad'! LOL!

Great logic there, genius!
Go back and do a bit more market research! More companies wish their competition was shoddy!

So now Apple is protecting us from ourselves by not allowing us to buy and run OSX on potentially inferior whiteboxes and owner built computers!

But you contend that is another issue!

Instead Apple is simply and altruistically protecting us from buying a competitor's machine with which we might have problems.
It all makes sense now.

LOL!

In that case, they might want to get MS and the Linux folks to join in the suit as well! Anyone else know of a brand of computer that they want to label "shoddy"? Let's go after them too! Heck, we don't want our market share compromised by poorly performing competitors!

MS sues Sony over poorly performing PS3s! LOL!

MS sues Pystar over poorly performing computers as they worry that the performance of OSX may be compromised!
ROFLMAO!

The Mac is simply the latest incarnation of INTEL'S ROADMAP with a TCM! OH!

And now Apple should sue them because you say they do not run OSX.

Which is it? They are in violation of the law because the run OSX, or they are in violation of the law because they do not run OSX?

And if it is the latter, according to your logic, why doesn't Apple sue the entire industry to remove all computers that do not run OSX perfectly well 'out of the box'?

Or, why doesn't the rest of the industry file a class action suit against Apple for infringing upon the Intel Roadmap and require Apple to pull all machines that were not equipped natively with BootCamp as they lacked a proprietary 32 bit BIOS to run Windows and instead came standard with Intel's 64 bit EFI BIOS that is still incompatible with Windows?

If Apple wants to prevent Psystar from bundling and selling OSX with the computer as it violates their OS' terms of service, fine. Let Pystar sell the machines and let the users assume responsibility for loading whatever they like on the machine.

And as far as anyone going into homes to remove machines that have already been legally sold....LOL!...

Head on down to Texas and let them remind you of what the law says about what THEY can legally do to folks who encroach upon their property for the purpose of taking that which thay have heretofore legally purchased!

With illogic such as this, are you sure you aren't an adviser to Steve?

Im sure what he meant was... Anything attached to the MAC name that is shoddy is going to give Apple a bad name.

EXACTLY what happened to Vista. Driver makers and app developers gave Vista a bad name. Because they are for Windows.

Whatever. You seem very bothered by something that means very little to either of us. [shrugs]

Nope, I find your illogic hilarious!

Apple makes a good machine and a fine OS.

But Jobs and Apple are in the process of alienating the very people they should be courting.

And while Jobs is preoccupied with image and elitism, they could stifle this entire issue and simultaneously capture the market share by simply offering a plain Jane based desktop model based upon commodity components that forego the Pina Farina, Porsche, Italian or California studio, whatever stylings that just provide the basic functionality for a few hundred bucks less for those who are not trying to impress their friends and colleagues with the trendiest and hippest and thinnest cutting edge model.

I realize that Bono may not buy it, but there are plenty out there who would. Of course, simply releasing an unsupported version of OSX that is certified compliant with the latest Intel Roadmap (as it already is) would do the same and capture Apple a huge increase in market share and future sales that they currently lose to MS and Linux.

But who wants increased market share and sales when we can ignore the mass market and solely cater to the elitist market niche instead.

The tragic aspect of this is that they are not pissing off the Windows and Linux folks who are simply laughing at this - nope, instead they are shooting those who already like or who want to try OSX!

One can almost wonder if Jobs didn't study and emulate the Chinese strategy for capturing the hearts and minds of the Tibetans...

Sorta like how MS, after XP went 'gold', still made changes that broke so many printer drivers?

MS did that to themselves!
Because the peripheral makers refused to go back and invest more money and resources into fixing MS' screwup, that is not the fault of the peripheral makers.

And 64 bit Vista still has a huge problem with regards to peripheral drivers in the enterprise space. And who cares about Vista on the desktop unless you have been stuck with it due to having bought a new PC?

"And 64 bit Vista still has a huge problem with regards to peripheral drivers in the enterprise space."

Exactly. We've been seeing more and more laptops from the likes of HP and Toshiba come preinstalled with Vista 64-bit recently. During the past month, I've had to "downgrade" 3 different laptops to Vista 32-bit simply because either Cisco has yet to release a 64-bit version of their VPN client, or there are still compatibility issues with applications such as QuickBooks and certain printers.

Who precisely are the people you think they are alienating?

--->But Jobs and Apple are in the process of alienating the very people they should be courting.

It seems pretty easy to figure that out...

If the customers who bought psystar pcs because they want a affordable version of OSX and then Apple says

"Yeah, we know you paid for it but you are going to have to give it back"

Those would be the people they are alienating and psystar is still not very well known, Apple just gave them a boost and free publicity.

Not to mention the average consumer is going to look at Apple as "evil" which will also bring in the question why can MS and Linux (which at the core OSX really is) support thousands upon thousands of pc configurations and OSX can only support a few.

Does it mean if they open it up its not as safe as a wintel box? What is the sole reason Apple has to keep the software and hardware together. (Mind you the parts that are used on Apple pcs are no different then PC parts they are just certified by Apple to work)

If you open your Apple box up you will see the same name brands everyone else sees...Nvidia, ATI, Seagate, Western Digital, Asus etcetc.

Maybe, they lose but I have a feeling things will be changing for Apple.

How long has Vista been out for now?

I work for a hospital. Not only can I not log in from home to check enterprise e-mail, but I can't install the drug book software provided by the hospital, and I can't view my paycheck what-so-ever all because they don't support Vista.

Just wait. He's gonna 'talk' any sense out of you...

Possibly those users who have held off the switch due to the perception of arrogance. Recalling non Apple machines puuulleeease.

ANYONE who has wanted to try OSX but who cannot justify going out and paying $1000+ on a machine just to try it.

That is an exorbitantly steep price of entry just for an additional option when you already have a Windows or Linux environment that you are at least familiar with, if not totally enamored with, just to TRY OSX!

The fact is, for many, if they just have the opportunity to adjust and get over the awkward period of confusion as they adjust to the new environment (and if you have used Windows 'forever', it IS an adjustment as you unlearn trying to make it perform(sic;-) like a Windows box!), they will actually prefer OSX and what UNIX brings to the table and find they end up living primarily in the OSX world as their personal space and using Windows as needed for business or compatibility purposes.

What is amazing is to watch Jobs lack the trust in the superiority of the OSX user environment. And if that is the case, why should they be marketing the Mac in the first place?

OSX is at the very least a desktop Linux killer and a product that the average person can use as an alternative to Windows - without having to be a Linux geek who can live without applications! And not only would the Linux geek power users benefit, the average person could too for a $129 price of entry to try it.

The funny thing is that they are in a great place with te most POSIX compliant 64 bit UNIX that can communicate 'natively' with both UNIX and Windows - something that neither Windows nor the other UNIX variants can do.

They are at the point where they should be able to make incredible headroads into the desktop and enterprise segments - in spite of the boneheaded decisions of Apple's strategic planners.

If Apple would just get out of the way!

Way back when, Compaq cloned the IBM and it ended up helping them. IBM's hold on the industry became complete as they had set the standard. This is one of the strengths of open source software now: by making it very easy to get on board, they very often set the standard. Apache, MySQL, PHP and other technologies have become the standard without any corporate backing.

Apple made moves towards this when they adopted Darwin, an open operating system based on FreeBSD. With their hardware agreements, they are slowly closing up more and more and becoming a niche market company that depends entirely on Microsoft's failures.

You never know -- Apple may be hurting itself by not allowing competing hardware.

I thought I took care of this Psystar issue yesterday? Ok, let me address this a second time. See this is why you guys need to stop using Vista. It's slow and bloated performance makes you act and think slow and bloated. :)

Everybody has their own opinion but the only opinion that matters is Steve Jobs and mine. And we feel that knock off companies like Psystar who attempt to put OS X on crappy PC's cheapen the Mac experience.

An Apple OS belongs on Apple hardware. End of story.

Did you guys catch that this time? END OF STORY. END OF STORY. END OF STORY. END OF STORY!!!!!!!!

"cheapen the Mac experience"

That is hilarious!

You must live in a world where those insufferable "I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" ads are real.

I suppose in your world the "Mac experience" is better than falling in love or the birth of your first child.

Wow, that's pretty sad. You have my sympathies.

what "apple" hardware ?

LOL wut apple hardware?

Ahhh, I forgot. The "apple" experience is better than sex. Thanks for setting me straight.

yeah and on what do you think mac os x runs on? also i would like to note that i'm currently running mac os leopard on a custom pc and hey it only costed me $1120 and no i dont catch you and never will you kiddo, im also running windows vista ultimate on this custom pc and i have not had a problem and it runs fast, really fast, faster than the mac and hey kiddo why don't you just go argue with your father or "friends"(if any) about this article

no its not... never will... =]

I'm curious to know exactly what is your relationship, if any, with Mr. Jobs that puts you on the same "opinion bassed" level as he is?

Are you on the Apple board of directors? Close relation of Mr. Jobs? Was in the same building as him once durring a Mac World Expo, and you think you might have seen the top of his head from a distance while he was walking away from you?

Just a little bit of clarification would be nice.

This is coming from someone who uses OSX and Windows everyday.

Sarcasm cescam..lol

Insanity and megalomania.

As Lewis Black said, I'm gonna go with 'Personal Ball Washer'.

...and as we so generously informed you yesterday....

There is no such thing as "Apple Hardware".

Thanks for playing.

There isn't? I wonder what silver thingy beside me that says MacBook Pro is, then?

We call those cases...

It's called a "laptop".

That specific laptop has various Intel and ATi commodity PC hardware in it.

People use these things as mobile computers.

It is no different (aside from the mentioned "case" and an *Intel* EFI BIOS chip) than any other laptop on Earth.

..but you knew that. ;)

Just like mine says, "HP" on it right next to me. Same difference. It's a COMPANY. The only difference b/t Apple and MS is that Apple picks and chooses what hardware they want, and because of that charge exorbitantly larger amounts of money than the machines are actually worth.

I want to know what some of these "AWESOME" computers would go for if they were simply built from pieces.

Guarantee a desktop wouldn't cost $4000 like the Mac Desktop (or whatever they call their stupid f***ing computer line up for desktops)

I didn't know this company existed...Thanks for pointing that out to me Apple. :)

Heh.
Well they were on BetaNews when they first released the product.

If you'd wanted one you should have got one then.

"Apple is also asking for a recall of Psystar machines."

Good luck with that one.

""Apple has never authorized Psystar to install, use, or sell the Mac OS software on any non-Apple labeled hardware.""

I don't remember Intel chips/motherboards being Apple-labeled (I know they mean the case, I'm just being pedantic).

There's been talk of being able to get around that by simply slapping an "Apple" sticker on these things...

Heh...

It'd be hilarious if the case failed because of something absurd like that.

"By Paul Skinner
posted Jul 16, 2008 - 6:12 PM

I don't remember Intel chips/motherboards being Apple-labeled (I know they mean the case, I'm just being a tool). "

Truth

The owners better not cave and give back their computers..

Actually this doesnt follow any different then when Microsoft successfully sued many MOD chip manufacturers selling Xbox's with mod chips. except this time, It's OS X can not be installed on anything but Apple's Hardware. Their entire machine is Apple's Hardware, regardless of who made individual parts. They own the rights to it. which gives them the right to call it "Apples Hardware" Open the Xbox or any other console, think the makers made very piece of "Hardware" inside them? No but they still own intellectual rights to the entire piece of hardware. Hardware in today's terms in video cards, mobo's, sound cards, but you also must remember that the entire piece put together to make a system is also labeled "hardware".

You can't actually be serious..?
They'd just get sued for using a registered trademark instead.

They hand out Apple logo stickers with every purchase of OS X.

Yes, yes, I know this. I was being silly.

Which particular tool? ^_^

I'll go with Monkey Wrench.

So the answer is that Pystar doesn't sell OSX with the machine and users are free to buy OSX as anyone can and they can assume responsibility for loading on anything they like.

I want to see Apple try to chase folks around who have legally purchased OSX and who may have loaded it onto a machine that Apple does not like.

That will convert the masses!

"But we are only trying to protect them from themselves as we are worried that OSX may not perform up to our expectations, regardless of what the end user deems acceptable. We care so much about their welfare that we will have them declared criminals."

I like OSX, but Jobs is a paranoid wacko.

Me!

If they have legally purchased OS X then they have agreed to use it only on Apple hardware, according to the license agreement.

I don't see what your problem is? If you don't like what Apple is doing, don't buy their hardware and their OS X.

I don't see for one moment why Apple (or any company in fact) is not entitled to license their software to work any way they want. They are entitled to try and make money in any legal manner they can.

They are not forcing you to buy their systems so if you don't like what they're doing, just don't buy their stuff.

WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?

there is NO such thing as apple hardware, its been certified by Apple kinda like what Vista has for their compatibility site.

The hardware is not "apple" labeled. But the software is. Its all about the TOS, Terms of Service. It states specifically in aggreement when you open up your copy of OSX. This software can only be installed on Apple branded hardware. These days you don't own software your rent it. Theoretically any provider can revoke your license and not allow you to use it. Microsoft does this with Genuine Advantage BS.

Look, I know. I was being silly.

As was just mentioned, the Mac is simply a PC! The latest incarnation of INTEL'S ROADMAP with a #$@% Apple logo on it and, in many cases, elegant styling. The ONLY thing that makes the hardware a Mac is the Apple logo.

The ONLY unique thing that Apple has done is to use the trusted computing module to authenticate the machine to OSX upon attempts to install it.

If someone wants to buy OSX and on their own time without expecting any support wants to install it on their own machine in their own house, they have every right. I don't care who you or they are, if I want to do something for which I am totally responsible in the privacy of my own home with something I have legally purchased without any expectation of assistance or commercial gain, so be it!

In this case Apple is like the wackos who have historically mandated that the only legal method of intercourse in your house between consenting adults is the missionary position!!!

Just TRY to come by my house and enforce THAT statute!

somebodies got anger issues... or maybe he just can't stand be told what to do with his 'licensed' but not owned software ;)

No, he just can't understand why people are having such a problem realizing that since Apple went Intel, there ceased to be "Apple Hardware".

It's not really that hard a concept, but some people just cannot seem to grasp it.

And people call Microsoft evil. Apple reigns supreme in that category.

Amen :)

Smart=Evil?

Ah....it all makes sense now.

Why does everyone simply assume Apple controls the platform purely to "be evil"?

Don't you think some thought and, oh...I don't know, actual business planning might have gone into the whole thing?

MSFT is publicly failing miserably right now because of the lack of driver and third-party support of Vista. Do you *honestly* think Apple wants a piece of that nightmare??

They control everything but that is not a monopoly. If MS did this people would cry bloody murder but since its Apple its ok.

Umm, PC_tool.. The driver and third party problems are over.. Are you stuck in 2006-7?

why would it be ok? i dont get it.. why?

There's a difference between trying to control every aspect of the computing experience YOU have developed (ie. by tying the hardware to the software) and trying to control the market you're at. Not that Apple is good and MS is evil. There's no good or bad in that (except maybe for Sony who happens to be sheer evil) - they are just businesses looking to make the most profit out of their business.

lol NOT. Only if you went and got a new peripheral, which most have that have been unfortunate enough to have to deal with Vista on teh upgrade path that should NEVER have been offered in teh first place.

Vista should have been for New machines and new machines ALONE. Machines Specifically designed for the greater required Specs, and MS should have just admitted outright that anythign from teh prior generation was most likely NOT going to work. I would have had more respect for them if they had...

Apple on the other hand is so restricted by the Only on this machine with this peripheral mentality, that its crippled their general acceptance from publishers and developers.

So Is MS Not admitting enough to stand up to stricter standards for new gen OSes, and Apple taking it overboard and not allowing developers and peripheral designers to flourish in their environment...

Somewhere in between it where most end users tend to be, scratching their heads and having to just get new stuff all the time anyway to make some new OS work.

I have had Vista installed since 2005 with beta releases and release candidates. I have not once replaced any periheral that I was using on XP.

The first time I installed Vista it was called longhorn and it was on a computer that had a 768mhz celeron process and only 368mb of ram. Of course it was slow, but I did not have any driver issues.

I could probably bet and win if I said more than half of all complaints about vista were user error. One person does something wrong and tell someone else and it snowballs as VISTA IS BAD.. KILL IT. And when it snowballs a million times when only a few occasions when there was actually a problem. Of course everyone is going to think the worst of Vista.

Now granted there were some driver/3rd party issues with Vista but that wasn't Vista's fault. Alot of ISVs just dragged their feet on getting RELIABLE vista compatible drivers and apps developed in time.

Now everyone go ahead troll me but I am right.

Apple is a monopoly?

LOL!

Just because you can toss around a big emotionally loaded term doesn't make it so!

Says the guy who's obviously never installed Vista x64.

Try again, sparky.

I don't care... Glad you had such a wonderful experience with Vista. Good for you. Me personally, I didn't, and didn't feel like spending another $600 or more to get it up to par so it would. Namely HP scanners HP Laser printers, Several different laser mice in the office that didnt work, MS joysticks that ceased to work. SCSI cards that would not configure in vista. Software that would not run in Vista without $100s to update them...

Point was for me and many others that complain about vista, THAT was the problem.

Sure if all you do is play games on th thing, Knock yourself out, and enjoy. But why bother? Honestly Why? if you were just playing games and it was working great on XP, why even look at something else. Its like saying, Oh gee I been breathing air for all my life, Lets now breath IDK water instead. Oh Ouch that hurts. But lets keep doing it till It works. YEA!!

When it came to businesses I simipily told them the truth. If they have stuff they got now and its working without flaw, Don't upgrade till you ok now EVERYTHING you have will work in vista as seamlessly. When businesses look at that and then see they may well have to spend 3 to 4 times their IT budget for the upgrade, Just to get the software and equipment up to par with what they have RIGHT NOW. They say, thanks but no thanks to Microsoft when it comes to Vista.

And thats why MS has a Earning issue with their stocks. They project numbers thinking the world will embrace it, and when they do not They fall on their face a little and rethink what they are offering. This is the case today. They dont it before, and will do it again... ME, 98 original, XP HOME.

Windows 7, At least should be so Different in design that it will be a given that you will need everything new to handle it. As its 100% touch oriented. Goodbye mouse, goodbye keyboard. Maybe 2 generations after that it will be down to Flexi interfaces. Lets hope so.

Sorry to disappoint you.. But Win7 is not the Vista haters saving grace.. Win7 is just Vista R2. The UI isnt changing much. Just pretty much adding to Vista, refining it.

Windows 7, At least should be so Different in design that it will be a given that you will need everything new to handle it. As its 100% touch oriented. Goodbye mouse, goodbye keyboard. Maybe 2 generations after that it will be down to Flexi interfaces. Lets hope so.

Where on Earth did you hear this????

Last I heard, Win7 was going to be Vista with some tweaks, fixes, etc.. Basically Version 2 of the Vista platform.

They just started a new platform with Vitsa....why would they do it all over again? They usually have 2 or 3 releases based upon any given platform (95/98/ME) (NT, 2000, XP)....

I don't understand why a law suit is necessary.
Psystar is simply breaking the law and should be prosecuted at no expense to apple.

I disagree. If Psystar paid for each OS that goes on each system, they should have the right to install it on non Apple hardware.

If MS put a restriction that people could only install Windows on Dell hardware, you would hear people yelling bloody murder.

I'd love to hear someone yelling "BLOODY MURDER".

It would make my day.

If Psystar paid for each OS that goes on each system, they should have the right to install it on non Apple hardware.

...upon what law are you basing that "right"??

"no expense to apple" So who is this benevolent band of lawyers that defend intellectual property out of the goodness of their hearts? I don't think you are going to find very many IP attorneys that are going to do pro-bono work especially not for a large corporation like Apple.

Your comment also seems contradictory you state that a lawsuit is unnecessary yet you encourage Psystar to be prosecuted. I am not sure what you were trying to say but your comment makes no sense.

I agree that screaming "Bloody Murder" would be something worth our attention. The point is that Microsoft locked themselves out of limiting the OS to specific hardware a long time ago. This is why they have been so successful, they wanted everyone to use the OS and made sure it was distributed widely, even on crappy hardware. And it is also why they are hated throughout the world. Apple on the other hand wants to maintain a reputation for providing a solid system. And for the most part they have even though they have had problems lately. So the reality of this situation is that Apple has never wanted to be number one in the market, just number one among its users. Microsoft does not care if they are liked, just used like a cheap you know what...but I digress. Just think if Microsoft adopted the same model of testing every hardware configuration against its OS before it hit the market. The PC world would be a much nicer place.

Apple should have no right to dictate where their software can be installed AFTER they have been paid for it.

When you buy software, you (according to the license to which you agree--right?--before installing it) are not really buying the software and giving yourself the right to do whatever you want with it; you are buying a license to use the software under the terms specified therein.

For example, both Windows and OS X permit you only to install it on one computer (family pack aside). Additionally, OS X permits you to install it only on Apple-labeled hardware.

This case will be useful for seeing just how enforceable that latter term of the license is.

Sigh....

Because they aren't breaking any LAWS, they're breaking a CONTRACT. Specifically, the terms of use clause in the Apple install contract. This is COMPLETELY different then what the RIAA has been doing. There is no theft in this case. All software is bought and paid for. A contract dispute is a civil offence, not a criminal one and as such must be persued through civil courts. If a really gung-ho public prosecuter wanted to sue them, he or she could, but only in civil court. IMHO, Apple can do what it wants, but I don't want my taxes going to the legal expenses of multi-billion dollar corporations.

Yes you buy the licence I realize that.. MS also realizes that the consumer deserves the right to install Windows anywhere they want as long as its only one place at a time.

So MS does not dictate where you can install it. Apple does and that is wrong IMHO.

Yea as much as I agree that thats how they SHOULD be allowed to deal with somethign they purchased, the fact is All software is not ours to do with as we please. Not one line of code. We are all, every one of us, FOOLS for purchasing anythign from any company when it comes to software, cause we are not allowed to do ANYTHING with it in all reality except a very very narrow option to install it on 1 machine, and only in 1 certain way.

Do you realize that a company COULD actually write into a EULA that you purchased this piece of software but you are NOT allowed to install it on any machine EVER unless first call a number and give them a credit card so they can bill you for updates and stuff... If you do not you have in your hands a completely lovely piece of plastic with some paper scribblings corresponding to it... Take a guess what this business model is? Yep, MMORPGs...

And its the next thing MS is pushing for in their OS / Office business model. Subscriptions for updates, and if no subscription, sorry not allowed to have the OS anymore.

Trust me they have been trying to figure out how to get the public to fall for this for years now. And once it starts there will be NO going back. Not unless the world revolts against it. which they very well may.

Apple has every right to do so.

But it is a stupid business decision the way Apple is doing it as they eschew opportunities to capture otherwise un-captured sales and market share rather than capturing it.

The song is the same, its just a new verse.

You don't grow a business by telling those who are interested in buying your product that they cannot buy it.

WHY should they have no right? I would agree with your argument if you were FORCED to buy their product but you don't have to buy it if you don't want it!

Doesn't seem that stupid --- their marketshare is growing quite nicely

If the average user knew they were basically paying 1000+ to use OSX - I think that would change.

One thing that most people forget is that Apple is not a software company like Microsoft. They are rooted in hardware. They want to sell ipods, iphones, Macbooks, etc. They just make the software to allow you to use that hardware. Both Microsoft and "linux" companies have designed their software to run on different types of hardware. Even though it looks the same, their motives are completely different.

Yup, all of the Windows and Linux users are falling over themselves to spend $1000+ (the price of the small MacBook) JUST to try OSX!

A few Windows folks are buying a Mac for this as they upgrade, but more Mac folks are buying them to run Windows!

Lower the price of entry and you will have MANY Windows users trying OSX to discover what all the fuss is about, and you will have the Linux folks who can't find applications but who wrestle with Linux simply because it is the only viable alternative on the x86 platform that is an alternative to Windows running to try OSX as they maintain their Windows compatibility.

The funny thing is the Jobs is fearful of OSX and the Mac branded machines not being compelling enough to keep the users instead of being confident enough that they will try it and like it!!!

Jobs is Apple's least convinced user.

No Apple does not have the right.. You pay to use something. I better beable to use it reasonably any way I choose the same way that I can with Windows. Because Im giving them money..

But you also must adhere to the agreement when you buy something. If you don't like the agreement don't buy the product. They have every right if the purchaser is not adhereing to the agreement. Although i also agree it's shooting themselves in the foot to NOT make the OS open to all PCs but thats their choice.

This is pure Steve Jobs. He has to have control of everything. EVERYTHING.

As long as he is in charge at Apple, OS X will never be allowed on non-sanctioned, non-Apple hardware.

Anyone who dares do what Psystar has done will suffer the wrath of Jobs' attorneys.

We'll have to wait for the megalomaniac's pancreatic cancer to kick back in before we're free to tinker with legally purchased copies of OS X.

So your hoping for his cancer to come back so your free to tinker with legally purchased copies of OSX. People like you make me sick.

Well sycophantic Apple cultists like you make me a bit queasy.

Even the thought of Steve not being around to tell you what to think and how to feel must be frightening.

This is pure ignorance. You assume you know everything. EVERYTHING.

Control of the entire platform from top to bottom = drastically smaller support costs. More of the profit from sale can thus go *directly* to the bottom line.

It is not about control. It is about profit.

Say what you want about Jobs, there is a reason he does what he does, and it isn't megalomania.

(This, coming from someone many have called an MSFT fanboy.)

"You assume you know everything. EVERYTHING."

Come on, even you have to laugh at that. If anyone on this forum was ever guilty of that it is you.

I agree it is also profit motivated too. But don't count out ego and control. More money may not mean as much once one is a billionaire, (I can only imagine) but you can never have enough power and control.

you can never have enough money.

There, fixed that for ya. ;)

"You assume you know everything. EVERYTHING."

Come on, even you have to laugh at that.

I was...as I was typing it. ;)

I honestly think what apple is doing is wrong. They don't like competition? I think that the EU and the DOJ might need to look at this as anti competitive and a possible monopoly just like they did with MS.

I don't. Apple came up with something that makes it unique from other computer manufactures. That is OSX. They shouldn't be forced by anyone (IE the EU or DOJ) to let other companies use it on their machines too.

How is OSX unique? it's an OS just like Windows and Linux. In fact it's based of the Unix architecture. You can install any of those OS on most hardware out there with no restrictions.

Do you know what monopoly means? There is NO way 4% of the computer hardware market counts as a monopoly.

iPods maybe. PCs? No.

Think I have to disagree here. Although I use/own Apple products-for various reasons, I am in no way a fanboy, nor do I appreciate the 'fanboy' mentalitly that some do have for Apple at large. This isn't to say that you are, however your deduction of Apple creating something so unique that it warrants exclusivity on hardware is more of that kind of person's comment.

Apple hasn't created anything so unique in its OS that would warrant it not being available for 3rd party hardware. For as stable as OSX is, based on it's native Unix back end, the near bulletproof secret is the combination of strong software AND hardware. Smart business for their own interests, but it also does begin to explain their reluctance to release OSX to other hardware platforms. 'Possible weakness in the armor' can be unveiled if it's not paired with the Apple hardware we've come to know. That could be damaging to Apple's reputation. Potentially being separated from the hardware it can become 'just another OS with problems' so to speak. I think it is wise for them to be prudent on that for their sakes....I disagree from an end consumer perspective, because we should be allowed to have our own choices whether it could potentially weaken public perspective or not, but I don't think it's because OSX is so unique that Jobs should snub any potential hardware manufacturers that could possibly cover a market he's yet to even attempt to entice aside from the mediocre Mac-mini.

That's not the issue here, Psystar is redistributing copies of OSX without the consent of Apple. They're basically pirating. And what does MS have to say about pirating software? Ask Ernie Ball. Yeah it sucks that Apple is trying to make an example of them, but this is what power-hungry corporations do...

That depends. If he is purchasing the Mac OS for each system and turning over all disks to the person(s) who purchase from him, then he is not pirating the software. On the other hand, if Psystar is just installing the same copy over and over, I agree that they are the ones who are doing something wrong.

In the US:

Monopoly: 75% market share. To be considered for anti-Trust action, you must also be using that market share to make gains in other markets.

In the EU: 39% market share and you can be required to open your trade secrets regardless of your competitive practices.

...As you can likely see, Apple, at least as far as their computers are concerned, are in *no* danger of being called a monopoly in either.

If he is purchasing the Mac OS for each system and turning over all disks to the person(s) who purchase from him, then he is not pirating the software.

That actually depends on how the judge decides to apply the First Sale doctrine. Is the Software his to distribute, or just the media? Is it licensed or owned?

Exactly hat rights transfer upon sale of the Disc? Is re-distribution one of them?

i bet that if the creators of Unix had licensed their software, OS X wouldnt exist at all(i said at all, not "wouldnt exist")

What?????????

"If the creators of UNIX had licensed their software"??????

LOL!!!!
Yup, those folks at Bell Labs sure were stupid!
IT was, and IS!

If you are this confused on THIS point, you need to sit this discussion out!

ROFLMAO..."if (only the creators of UNIX had licensed their software".... thanks! this actually made me chuckle!

"'Apple has suffered and continues to suffer injury to its business reputation and goodwill for which no adequate remedy exists at law...'"

Yah, thats a bunch of BS. They have hardly suffered a loss.

Apparently losing even a cent is lost to their business... Oh boo hoo hoo poor billionaires..