What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Geek Squad employee sings for Best Buy in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Valerie DeAngelo explains the moment she got the casting call.
111 Comments
- lonewolfe, on 12/04/2008, -15/+36Bury me then...but sometimes I think Steve Jobs is a total douche.
Not saying Psystar is 100% right, but I think that rule about OSX not being allowed to be run on machines other than Macs is just the classic move of the anti-opensource *****.
(correct me if Apple changed that rule)
Edit: Apple didn't change it. - Onetrack, on 12/04/2008, -5/+21Yeesh..
So sick of hearing about Psystar.. they're a couple guys who read the Hardware Compatibility on the OSX86Project page and made some compatible computers.
People think Psystar is some amazingly great manufacturing plant making their own clones, but in reality they're just a couple dudes.
The rest of the community behind osx86 obviously is non-too happy with them, as they freely gave their code to the community and these guys are making a profit from it.
They exploited a niche, thats it. There are much better solutions out there if you want OSX on common pc hardware - Efi-X, Boot132, or the dozens of installation dvds that are out.
You can pretty much install OSX on near any PC, near any Netbook, a great number of laptops... yer friggin toaster.. - cadmiumpaint, on 12/04/2008, -8/+22apple has no obligation to make their software open source. Its a private company that spent millions of dollars in shareholder money to develop a great Operating system. Why should they give it out for free and make it possible for any two bit hack to come along and steal their work?
Being a good businessman who protects his shareholders and his companies trade secrets its not being a douche...its called being responsible. - nickceleb, on 12/04/2008, -5/+19My money is on Apple. Any takers?
- utnow, on 12/04/2008, -4/+17"anti-opensource *****" is another way of saying "HE WON'T GIVE ME HIS TOYS FOR FREE!!!!!! WHAAAAAHHAAAAAA"
Grow up. - absurdist, on 12/04/2008, -1/+12Hmmm... so you're saying that the OS86 community wrote this code, put it out there as GPL (I assume, or other free license), and now is getting upset that someone is actually using it to turn a profit? Anyone else see anything wrong with this logic?
- MisterMajusty, on 12/04/2008, -6/+15I installed Vista on my toaster. It runs slower and curiously pops out blueberry waffles before short circuiting forcing me to flip the circuit breaker.
- Captj, on 12/04/2008, -0/+9Not if you get the "Still waiting for root devices..." error and no one knows how to fix it/none of the suggestions work...yeah...it sucks.
- tinus, on 12/04/2008, -1/+9Maybe Psystar is a subsidiary of the SCO Group?
- Herolint, on 12/04/2008, -3/+11Well, at least Apple is going after the right people and not suing customers; yet.
- pixeldust, on 12/04/2008, -4/+11Apple sells OS X for ~$120 because it's assumed that you have previously purchased a Mac computer which they have profited from, effectively making any copy of OS X you buy an upgrade of sorts. A better analogy would be Dell cracking Windows upgrade CD's to install the full version on computers they sell.
- pixeldust, on 12/04/2008, -5/+11Anti-opensource? http://www.apple.com/opensource/
- Solkre, on 12/04/2008, -1/+6Maybe they aren't upset it's being used for profit as them eventually being targeted by Apple because of it?
- Balanced, on 12/04/2008, -0/+5Unix isn't necessarily open source.
- evilrobot, on 12/04/2008, -0/+5"And plus, Apple's from UNIX, which is truly open source, in virtually all aspects."
Well, no - not at all.
OSX is a BSD based OS (very much unix like) - but NOT UNIX.
UNIX - was developed by AT&T employees at Bell Labs many, many moons ago... and most certainly was NOT open source.. the major UNIX OS's around right now are Solaris, HP-UX, and AIX. - also, NOT "truly open source" products.
LINUX is a KERNEL, not really a complete system - but yes - is Open source and was built as a clone of the closed source software....
"and yet Apple charges us customers much more (much more than Microsoft, in fact, and Microsoft's Windows isn't UNIX)."
...um....
OS X 10.5.4 Leopard - $129.00
Windows Vista Ultimate w/ SP1 - $339.00
.....
so.... lonewolfe; your statement is patently incorrect. - digitalpencil, on 12/04/2008, -1/+6this is the one thing that confuses me about people's reactions to Psystar and Apple's supposedly anti-competitive behaviour in not licensing OS X to run on 3rd party hardware..
Imagine if you will, HP were to create their own OS in an attempt to better personalize the brand and provide a custom experience for their userbase. After investing several million dollars into R&D and a lot of man hours into building their own custom HP OS from the ground up, they have a fully-fledged operating system they can call their own and ship with their PCs. After receiving rave reviews, they have a new niche market, something for potential customers to try out, something to spark new interest in the whole HP brand.
Sounds fair doesn't it? Well what if, after investing all that money and time developing this new OS Dell, Acer, Gateway and Joe Blogs at home start whinging as to why this OS isn't compatible with their own hardware, why is this OS not available for sale to 3rd parties? On the digital shelves of Newegg?
Now imagine, someone reverse engineers the measures designed to ensure that HP's OS only runs on their hardware and not only provides a means to install it on any compatible hardware setup, but actually starts manufacturing their own line of 'compatible' PCs, intentionally designed and marketed to circumvent HP's IP.
I'd say in that situation, HP would have a fair position to be pretty pissed off. Especially when said 3rd parties all start crying to the judge citing 'anti-competitive behaviour' which, basically boils down to 'they won't let me play with their toys!'
The long and the short is, what's the point in going to all that effort if you have to sell your product to your competitors so they can play too? They didn't develop it. They didn't spend the time and money researching it.
What Psystar have done is to buy Coke in vats, decant it into their own bottle, stick on a label and call it 'pseudo-coke' which, isn't a legally grey area, it's just illegal.. In this situation Apple have not only the right, but the responsibility to their shareholders and employees to actively protect their IP by all legal means possible. - dajuggernaut, on 12/04/2008, -2/+7I'm for opensource, but then again I'm a little bit more towards making a few bucks.
- Platypus3333, on 12/04/2008, -0/+4You realize, however, that Apple is highly unlikely to permit such competition?
- seanmc303, on 12/04/2008, -2/+6Pystar are not hardware innovators or super geniuses, but they are willing to ship a product that many people want and stand up to Apple while doing so. Hell even I was able to get a computer setup with OSX86, but it was not something that any consumer could easily achieve. Pystar also uses very nice hardware in the machines they build so if you buy a Pystar with OSX, if the machine is bricked at least you will still have a good machine.
- MacParrot, on 12/04/2008, -1/+5@lonewolf
Are you going to compare retail prices of either OS to the other? Both XP and Vista are more expensive than OS X. Since Microsoft doesn't make computers, you can't honestly compare the two. - Denodster, on 12/04/2008, -0/+4The only thing I am surprised about here is that this didn't happen sooner.
- EarlOfLade, on 12/04/2008, -7/+11Apple is no better than Microsoft or any of the other similar companies. It's a company I have never and will never buy anything from. Not a single product.
I can not stand Apple's attitudes, nor do I have any interest in wasting money on these douchebags. My money and hope is on Paystar, heck I'll even contribute to their defense fund if necessary. - roxics, on 12/04/2008, -6/+10One word DELL.
I bet Michael Dell is the money behind the law firm. He's been wanting MacOS on Dell systems for a while now. If he can test the waters with a puppet company like Psystar without sticking Dells neck out there, all the better. If Psystar wins it opens the gates for Dell, if they lose, while it was only a little money out of pocket for the gamble. - HonoredMule, on 12/04/2008, -0/+4Aw man--I wish I had blueberry waffles.
- Murdats, on 12/04/2008, -0/+4"i wouldn't mind competition in hardware, but i want it done the right way. I want full support from Apple on software and hardware"
wait so if apple is still controlling the hardware and software how is it really competition and not just charging a fee to use their stuff.
oh you are selling cheaper then us, have a higher fee. - MisterMajusty, on 12/04/2008, -2/+5Don't expect to get any money out of it
- MacParrot, on 12/04/2008, -0/+3@DiscoUnderpants
Not quite right. Microsoft bought the original version of DOS, modified it and LEASED/LICENSED it to IBM while still holding all the rights. IBM thinking that not many people would buy personal computers saw this as a way to have an OS on their computers at little cost to them. Very short-sighted on their part as this lead to their BIOS being cloned new competitors popping up every other day.
Microsoft played them and made a fortune. Ironically Apple (like IBM) thought that hardware was where the money was and refused to license the Mac OS. By the time it was commonly acknowledged that this was a mistake, it was too late for Apple.
Apple attempted to have clones in the OS 7 days, but by still making computers themselves (while the cloners used cheaper, but equally as functional parts), were in essence competing with their own licensing plan. They gained very few new users and their hardware sales plummeted as a result. They did have an out though as they had only licensed OS 7 and when Jobs came back, he took what was going to be released as OS 7.7 and changed it to OS 8 and then refused to license it (as well as buying outright PowerComputing, the number one Mac clone seller). Most of the cloners went out of business almost overnight.
Too bad too. I had two clones myself. One was a great machine (A Umax C600 603e later upgraded to a G3) and one was a piece of crap (An MPower 200 604 clone based on Motorola's StarMax design).
Will Apple ever allow cloning again? Hard to say but it won't happen until Apple makes the decision to stop making Macs themselves. - DiscoUnderpants, on 12/04/2008, -1/+4I dont think it was ever a rule. MIcrosoft sold DOS to IBM and IBM released it on their hardware as PC-DOS. MS-DOS ran on IBM clones all over as well. You have to recall that back in those days the standardisation of PC equipment was not yet complete and there were PC-like clones that might have problem with say a wacky video or sound card or some such.
- form3hide, on 12/04/2008, -0/+3am I the only one who can't understand this comment?
- inactive, on 12/04/2008, -1/+4Their hardware. Their OS. Their rules. Don't like it, don't buy it.
Granted the lack of hardware choices is a downside, but hey, it's their business. You can always go support Linux. - ITAvenger, on 12/04/2008, -0/+2Monopolies are bad. Apple has a monopoly.
They broke M$ into two divisions because they said you can't have software and OS under the same roof. Now Apple has OS, hardware, and software all together and for some reason everyone is ok with this?
/facepalm - Murdats, on 12/04/2008, -3/+5opensource != free as in beer
- drlha, on 12/04/2008, -1/+3Well the sections within Apple are notorious for internal secrecy, so I don't think you can rule it out!
- ClevelandBrown, on 12/04/2008, -0/+2I don't think he actually uses one of their machines, maybe he meant that he hopes Psystar makes it out of this struggle on top.
- blatantly, on 12/04/2008, -1/+3I've always thought this company was a little fishy - why don't they simply sell Mac OS READY machines, and a sealed box of OS X? Surely that would avoid any legal dramas?
- raydeen, on 12/04/2008, -0/+2Funny, Red Hat, Cannical, Novell and countless others support many hardware platforms, have little or no trouble doing so and do a hell of a lot better of a job than MS and Apple combined. Apple could support it if they wanted to. Their hardware is now no different than that used by Sony, Dell, Acer, Asus, HP, etc. If they were smart they'd do it. Money is in software, not hardware.
- digitalpencil, on 12/04/2008, -0/+2* sobs 'bbbut.. they won't let me play with their toys!!!'
- inactive, on 12/04/2008, -1/+3You are a ***** *****.
Apple has no right to sue someone for MAKING COMPATIBLE HARDWARE. - MacParrot, on 12/04/2008, -0/+2@Murdats
Unless you get it with your computer (which is how most people get either OS initially), then the retail price is the how you measure cost. Sure you can get a Windows OEM version for less from a variety of places, but that isn't how Joe Sixpack does it. They go into Best Buy or Walmart and if that's what they want, that's where they buy it.
Something else to think about. Apple sells three versions of OS X. One server version (which few are going to buy for the home which is what we're really talking about) and two desktop versions. One is a single user ($129) and one is a five user version ($199). Self explanitory how many computers you can put in on, but since there is no license to input that is going to check against a database for it being previously installed, you can actually put the single-user version on as many computers in your home as you wish.
Say you have three computers in your home. How much are you going to pay for three OEM licenses vs either a single-user OS X disk or even the five-user version?
I have four Macs in the house (An iMac for the kids and one for me, a laptop for the wife and one for me). I go ahead and buy the 5-user version just to be on the side of the angels and because it really doesn't cost that much more to be legal. How much would four OEM versions of Vista HP be? Oh, and I have a legal version (OEM) of Vista for my desktop as well. - Murdats, on 12/04/2008, -1/+3"Both XP and Vista are more expensive than OS X"
yes but how often are you paying that retail price? - dieboldcracy, on 12/04/2008, -1/+3I think Steve Jobs has been listening to too much Alex Jones
- MacParrot, on 12/04/2008, -0/+2Apple CAN'T support non-Apple hardware. No one does that. IF they allowed cloning again they COULD however have 3-5 basic hardware sets for desktops and laptops and fully licensed manf. could make machines off that.
This would split your support between OS X (Apple) and hardware (whoever made your certified Mac clone). A small utility verifying OS X hardware complience would weed out anyone wanting support from Apple from non-authorized clones. This way Apple can still limit the hardware (making OS X less complicated to deal with from a support issue). Yes it obviously still limits hardware, but if you honestly want to use OS X, you were there already. - prodigitalson, on 12/04/2008, -3/+5Its not the same as MS. Apple is a HARDWARE MANUFACTURER. Not a software company. The Softwre is only there to support the hardware and give the user a more integrated "better" experience than that of other hardware competitors. Being mad because they wont allow thier software to be installed legally on anything but thier hardware doesnt make any sense. Thats like being angry you cant install the iPhone OS on a Treo.
- amstell, on 12/04/2008, -0/+1Sorry but it initially was open source to those who bought it. Allowing researchers and universities to adapt the code.
"The earliest distributions of Unix from Bell Labs in the 1970s included the source code to the operating system, allowing researchers at universities to modify and extend Unix."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Software_Dis ...
"Mac OS X is based on the Mach kernel and is derived from the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) and later, certain parts from FreeBSD's and NetBSD's implementation of Unix in Nextstep"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X
Yeah its wikipedia but wikipedia rocks! - inactive, on 12/04/2008, -0/+1Completely agreed.
- inactive, on 12/04/2008, -0/+1Poor/cheep people: ***** you Apple! They should give us OS X for free so we can run it on our bargain basement PCs!
Apple: Then go buy a Walmart P.O.S. and put Linux on it, see how far that gets you. Come back when you have money. Thanks.
Seriously though. Apple is a business. Pystar is trying to undermine their business not by competing but by ripping their OS off and sticking it on their own machines. If you saw someone trying to illegally rebrand and re-sell your hard work you'd sue the ***** out of them too. - RungeKutta, on 12/04/2008, -0/+1I guess my sarcasm wasn't detected.
- SOS84, on 12/04/2008, -1/+2The problem is they are not protecting their IP. They are violating federal anti-racketeering laws. Typical Apple. Gotta love em. The company that has built their business on stealing other people's ideas is at it again.
- inactive, on 12/04/2008, -0/+1What the hell are whoizthedrizzle and RungeKutta smoking? Where is this alternate bizarro world you two are talking about? And how do I get there.
It's widely accepted that Mac hardware outlasts PC hardware and maintains its resale value longer. So seriously, show me the map, I'd like to visit this alternate universe you guys live in. Is Linux the dominate desktop OS over there? - digitalpencil, on 12/04/2008, -0/+1I know! imagine the audacity.. attempting to protect one's IP like that! They must be in league with Satan himself!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 113 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is