Slashdot Log In
Apple Believes Someone Is Behind Psystar
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Thu Dec 04, 2008 10:47 AM
from the put-on-your-foil-hats dept.
from the put-on-your-foil-hats dept.
rgraham writes "From the article on Growler: 'Apple apparently believes that somebody else is behind Psystar, which might help to explain why a major law firm would take on what seems like a fly-by-night's case; also why Psystar has been so bold in continuing to sell its products. I knew this thing felt funny. As Alice in Wonderland might put it, "It gets interestinger and interestinger."'"
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Folowing the money (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Folowing the money (Score:5, Funny)
I bet Wozniak finally snapped and is doing this out of spite.
Parent
Apple is behind it! (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple probably hired pystar to create a weak but precedent setting test case they could smash.
More seriously,
one can claim pystar is somehow a good value or something but this takes sheer cognative dissonance since it's impossibly far from the truth.
THat is to say, if you are buying an apple it's either for aethetics, ease of use for grandma or the volunteers at your non-profit, or compatibility, or the relatively low cost of tech support, set up, and training.
Now let's think about this. Does pystar meet any of those features? uh.... No. not one. they are loud, highly idiosyncratic, hard to keep updated, and a support nightmare, and many softwares and hardware devices won't work.
What's the market? cheapness? well certainly not at the low end. And at the high end--well it you want performance and dont care about comptibility then get a PC or a linux machine?
it's the OJ simpson defense: it does not fit.
But Apples implication that it's just a loss leader. Shove anything out the door so you can get a foot in the door makes a lot more sense.
Parent
Re:LOUD, Crazy Loud (Score:5, Funny)
Interesting... pasting from the article (something alien to many slashdotters) apparently makes your comments 'off-topic'.
Parent
It's true. (Score:5, Funny)
Off with OP's head! (Score:5, Insightful)
From the OP, it's actually "curiouser and curiouser" cried Alice, not "interestinger"
Sheesh.
Parent
Re:It's true. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:It's true. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:It's true. (Score:5, Funny)
Yes! He's Spartacus! Get him!
Parent
Re:It's true. (Score:5, Informative)
I'm Spartacus and so's my wife!
Parent
Growler Groklaw (Score:5, Funny)
"From the article on Growler" ? Rob, you turned on spell check? That coudln't be!
Re:Growler Groklaw (Score:5, Funny)
For those who wonder WTF "growler" is, they meant "Greplaw"
And for those who wonder WTF "Greplaw" is, mcgrew meant "Groklaw".
Parent
Re:Growler Groklaw (Score:5, Funny)
For those who wonder WTF "growler" is, they meant "Greplaw"
And for those who wonder WTF "Greplaw" is, mcgrew meant "Groklaw".
Personally, I prefer Awklaw and Sedlaw for most of my shell prompt legal needs.
Parent
Re:Growler Groklaw (Score:5, Informative)
For those who wonder WTF "growler" is, they meant "Greplaw"
Erm, you mean Groklaw [groklaw.com] right? That's where the article from the Slashdot submission is from.
Greplaw [harvard.edu] is a different, if similar, site.
Parent
If it's true I bet I can guess who it is... (Score:5, Interesting)
These are pretty serious allegations, but if it's true it wouldn't be the first time this has happend.
Hmmm... I wonder who would have the most to gain by undermining Apple. Could it possibly be a major corporation with an infamous [linux.com] track record of attacking [boycottnovell.com] its competition by proxy [channelregister.co.uk]?
Re:If it's true I bet I can guess who it is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah right! Microsoft can't wait till everybody can buy MacOS X for their PC!
And what joy it would be to them if Psystar could invalidate the EULA so that Dell could then ship their PCs with MacOS X!
Parent
Re:If it's true I bet I can guess who it is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:If it's true I bet I can guess who it is... (Score:5, Funny)
I wonder who would have the most to gain by undermining Apple
Isn't it obvious? The Pear has been looking for vindication ever since the William Tell incident. And don't even get them started on the whole "discovery of gravity" thing...
Parent
Re:If it's true I bet I can guess who it is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well... The last time Mac OS had a licence for 3rd party use. Apple almost died from it. But also it can be a case to discredit the value of OS X. By opening the legal floodgates for having OS X compete on the same level that MS does gives MS and advantage as Windows tends to run better on Crappy (not necessarily slow but 3rd party rip off, or the product that do not have full functionality, eg. celerons ) hardware. And being that OS X doesn't have drivers for all the different platform options and the hardware makers already grudgingly make the drivers for Microsoft. Will make OS X run more unstable and flakier then Windows. Thus having Apple to loose a competitive advantage. However this is rather a complex marketing strategy. I would suspect the funding for the law suits were probably from companies like Dell, HP, Lenovo who just want to be able to ship OS X on their platforms so they can be Hip and Trendy too. Also not be stuck with Windows.
Parent
I'm positive (Score:5, Funny)
In some ways, it makes a lot of sense (Score:5, Insightful)
There are lots of PC companies that probably see Windows as a bit of a stumbling block to future sales. Dell has definitely said that it would like to sell machines with OS X. Should a court rule that Apple does not have the right to restrict OS X to its own hardware, that would open the floodgates to major manufacturers including Dell and HP to selling machines with OS X. It's not that hard to imagine one of those companies throwing money at a legally separate LLC/Inc that could bring the issue before a court. Should they [Psystar] loose, small loss. Should they win, those companies get a new product to sell in a market clamoring for Apple stuff.
Re:In some ways, it makes a lot of sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Or maybe by someone who wants to save us from Apple's ridiculous and limiting EULA shrinkwrap nonsense.
>Should they win, those companies get a new product to sell in a market clamoring for Apple stuff.
That's true, but we also get a whole hell of a lot more consumer rights. Imagine being able to return software for a refund! Or running the software you paid for on anything you like. Or selling it. You know, the basic consumer rights we take for granted for everything except software.
Freedom to tinker and freedom to use is bigger than Apple. Much bigger.
Parent
Re:In some ways, it makes a lot of sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Psystar does not have permissions to modify OS X and resell it.
Psystar was never given permission to redistribute OS X.
Whether Apple should be forced to sell to their competitors is another matter. As it stands now, legally Apple has a case.
Parent
Re:In some ways, it makes a lot of sense (Score:5, Insightful)
I do believe a little ruling a few years ago basically said no, Microsoft CANT do that. This is why Dell and HP have been able to sell Linux and Unix systems on top of their Microsoft OEM products.
No, Microsoft couldn't contractually force them to sell only Windows. That doesn't mean they can't just say "we're not giving you a discount anymore and we're not saying why." You think people that are fired for being gay are ever told that's why? Or people that are profiled by the police are told "We pulled you over because you're black"? There's always been ways around laws that say you can't do X for reason Y, because there's always reason Z, which is what everyone will claim was the reason, never Y.
Parent
The logical suspect (Score:5, Funny)
It can only be Amiga.
Hmm (Score:5, Funny)
I think Jobs has been hitting the egg nog a bit early this year. Wizard of Oz stuff and backroom deals is really more the providence of large corporations like the one he's a member of, not small businesses that are trying to find a niche to grow in. But at least the fanboys who go along with this line of thinking will look even more ridiculous than usual, which is a nice stocking stuffer for those of us that have gotten about as sick of these "Hi, I'm a PC" commercials as the whistling guy on about "natural male enhancement". Heh. "Mystery men out to ruin Jobs!" Really, sometimes the right hand (marketing) doesn't know what the left (legal) is doing with that company...
I had to see da wiki (Score:5, Informative)
I haven't heard of this particular bruhaha or indeed, Psystar itself. TFA had few clues, it was apparently not its first blog about Psystar. So if anyone else is curious, I'll quote and link [wikipedia.org]
This is a common practice (Score:5, Insightful)
Who would want to support this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Do you suppose it might be someone like Dell interested in testing the waters anonymously?
Not saying it's Dell or HP but I know they are in a bit of a pinch lately and I'd bet they believe they could out-compete Apple on margins and use their name-recognition to get the unwashed masses to switch. Imagine a Dell that could run Linux, Windows and OS X out of the box for $500.00. People would be switching left and right. Many Windows users could give a crap about aesthetics or build-quality so they'd not hesitate to go with Dell. Also, Pystar is selling servers, which is another area Dell is big in that could benefit from a broader selection. Apple would lose for sure unless they started selling OS X client for $500.00 a pop and server for $1000.00. But Dell would never risk "testing the waters" themselves, so when they see this little upstart come along, it's in their best interests to support them and help them succeed.
Biased much? (Score:5, Insightful)
which might help to explain why a major law firm would take on what seems like a fly-by-night's case
I have no interest in Psystar's products but that doesn't mean they're illegitimate. The biggest allegation I've heard on Slashdot is of them pirating OS X, but I've seen no proof that they've sold more copies than they've bought. I don't get the double standard of why Compaq's cloning of the PC was good while Psystar's cloning of the Mac is bad, other than Steve's reality distortion field.
Re:Biased much? (Score:5, Informative)
The deal is that Compaq reversed engineered IBM's BIOS -- the only part of the design that was a trade secret. Everything else with the PC was very well documented and easily reproduced. The BIOS calls were already well documented. All Compaq needed to do was come up with a fully compatible BIOS without using IBM's code. Compaq came up with workalike BIOS using clean room techniques (or was it Phoenix technologies or some other shop -- I don't remember). I'm sure IBM fought tooth and nail, but they obviously weren't successful.
As for Apple vs. Psystar, it's quite different, the issue is that Psystar is violating Apple's software license agreement (that the OSX software will only be used on Apple-branded hardware). There are software checks in OSX to verify the hardware is Apple's, which means that Psystar would have to patch OSX to bypass those checks, and then distribute the modified code as their own OS.
Had Psystar somehow reverse engineered OSX with clean-room techniques to produce their own fully compatible workalike, this might be a very different case.
Also, copyright laws have changed quite a bit since 1981. I don't know if Compaq would have been able to legally clone the PC with today's laws.
Parent
Power Computing (Score:5, Funny)
That's right, Power Computing. They thought they could force their way back into the 3rd party Apple market. And they would have done it, too, if it weren't for those meddling Cupertino lawyers.
Conspiracy (Score:5, Funny)
The Rothschild family, in order to destablize the US economy consipired with the Free Masons and the Illuminati to draw out Apple into a court case with Pystar to get anti-trust measures against Apple. The Skull and Bones and Pathagarians partnered to get the 'proper' judge and law firms involved because Steve Jobs refused to cowtow to the Grand Viceroy of the Pathagarians at a secret meeting in Prague.
Once the Osirians and Golden Dawn are placatied by Jobs with the seasonal sacrific they may interviene on behalf of Jobs but that depends if the New Dawn are not stopped by the rebel Crowley and the Keepers of the Flame. Since the New Dawn and Golden Dawn have been fighting since the 1950s after Crowley defected from the Golden Dawn!
If only the Sons of Liberty would put an end to this maddness with the help of the Neo-Templars! In the mean time we'll have to rely on government alien-hybrid psychics to try and mentally manipulate the court...
This Just In... (Score:5, Funny)
Apple realizes that companies are run by people.
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Funny)
Vista sales weren't very good, maybe Microsoft figured they could make more money selling macs.
Parent
sounds familiar (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:sounds familiar (Score:5, Interesting)
it's a baiting scam. first they sell a couple million psystars with OSX, then when justice says all of those copies must be wiped from the hardrives and returned to apple, owners will have to replace the OS with vista.
they annoy apple senselessly AND cash in a couple million sales. win-win for redmond
Parent
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Interesting)
QUESTION:
Why is it illegal to clone Apple Macintosh computers, but it was not illegal to clone the IBM PC? Why is Apple protected, but IBM was not? What's the distinction?
Parent
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Informative)
QUESTION:
Why is it illegal to clone Apple Macintosh computers, but it was not illegal to clone the IBM PC? Why is Apple protected, but IBM was not? What's the distinction?
Because IBM made the mistake of not getting an exclusive license to DOS.
Parent
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Informative)
I always thought the problem was with the software (only allowed to run on a mac) and not the hardware.
Pystar is selling software on the clones, I seem to recall that being the basis of the case.
Parent
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Insightful)
QUESTION:
Why is it illegal to clone Apple Macintosh computers, but it was not illegal to clone the IBM PC? Why is Apple protected, but IBM was not? What's the distinction?
ANSWER:
The IBM PC was generic hardware with an operating system owned by Microsoft, and Microsoft didn't have any agreement that precluded them from working with other companies. OSX is an operating system owned by Apple which Apple is not willing to license to other companies.
Parent
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Informative)
You can "clone" a Mac all you want. Hell, at this point the Mac brand is more or less a clone of a PC anyway. Copy it and sell it all you want, just don't use any Apple branding on it. The kicker here is the software. OS X has a nice friendly EULA which stipulates that the software can only legally be run on Apple brand hardware. Despite the fact that you are buying a program to do with what you please, and it only takes a minor amount of circumventing to allow it to run on non-Apple hardware, it is illegal nonetheless. That is, if you believe EULAs are binding in the first place.
No comment on that.
Parent
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Insightful)
I would think Dell, HP, Toshiba, Sony etc. not MS, whose world domination strategy still centers around Windows.
Parent
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Informative)
From an earlier Groklaw article:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20081019133549359
P.J. definitely has a point here. As such, Apple may have a point in their filing. The question is, how far abstracted from Psystar are the parties that Apple is really looking for?
Parent
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Interesting)
PJ can be a little paranoid sometimes. God bless her, she's got a good heart, but it occasionally outraces her brain.
Then again, have we seen this yet?
Parent
Re:Awwww... (Score:5, Funny)
There, fixed that for you.
~Microsoft
Parent
Re:Is it.... (Score:5, Interesting)
The Gates foundation is too busy building Doomsday seed vaults [globalresearch.ca] with the Rockefeller foundation and Monsanto and genetically engineering mosquitoes [americanscientist.org].
Parent
Re:Is it.... (Score:5, Funny)
Hmm...maybe that was Darth McBride?!? That would make sense, building a Death...err....Pystar.
Parent
Re:Yes THEY are all in on it (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously it could be any one of a number of reasons. Lawyers are like dance hall hookers - you got the money they got the time so the fact a high price firm gets involved means little really.
The size of a company's bank account is usually proportional to their size. High-priced lawyers tend to want lots more money that a small company like Psystar likely has unless they have a puppetmaster.
Parent
Re:Let the conspiracy theories fly (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but when talking PC MANUFACTURERS, Dell and HP have a serious competitor in Apple. Much of that attractiveness that Apple has compared to their offerings is in their operating system. In effect, Apple can manage to jack up the price and offer an extremely limited number of hardware options, but still pull in sales due to an advantage that Dell and HP simply don't have access to.
Eliminating that advantage would do a lot to drive some Apple customers to Dell and/or HP. At the same time, a lot of people with Windows systems that they don't want to replace might jump at the chance to replace it with a Mac(TM) by Dell or Mac(TM) by HP.
Either way, if this decision went in favor of Pystar, I don't see it being anything but good for the other major computer manufacturers.
Parent