digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Meet The Mac-Clone Mystery Man

forbes.com — How's this for a deal. At a fraction of the cost of a comparably equipped machine from Apple, a Web-based company dubbed Psystar is offering a computer you can have loaded up with just about any operating system you choose, including Apple's OS X Leopard.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Reaktor5, on 04/20/2008, -2/+13Deal... or lawsuit?
    • rayray14, on 04/20/2008, -0/+8Both.
    • Labourer, on 04/20/2008, -12/+4neither . apple will be laughing at this. apple users will never go for this. the thing has no aesthetic sexy quality that they crave. mac users do not buy the computer only to run the operating system.
      • bigbadgoat, on 04/20/2008, -4/+6funny... that's what I did.

        I really don't give a toss what my laptop looks like, as long as I dont have to run vista on it.
        • LunaticFringe, on 04/20/2008, -2/+6I paid $300 for a Black Friday Compaq and loaded Ubuntu on it.
          If I had bought a comparable computer from Apple? About $1200.
          • Charlotte_Web, on 04/20/2008, -1/+4So, the Black Friday ad had the Compaq for $300 and the Mac for $1200?

            Or are you comparing a Black Friday deeply-discounted sale price to Apple's retail price?
        • bigbadgoat, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2I'll pass on linux, I am too busy to spend time tweaking and constantly ***** around with it.
      • flashback99, on 04/20/2008, -1/+8What makes you think this product is aimed at Apple users? People who use Windows but cannot afford to shell out for Apple hardware are clearly the target here.
      • rootbeerinacan, on 04/20/2008, -11/+1Agreed, let's see how quickly Apple can kill this one. Hopefully before it gets out of hand. I REALLY don't want to see a *****-ton of Mac Clones out on the market: This originality is the reason I got a Mac in the first place.
        • Natfly, on 04/20/2008, -1/+10Please go back to sniffing your farts
      • inkswamp, on 04/20/2008, -1/+5> apple users will never go for this

        Speak for yourself.

        I've been using and buying Macs for 15+ years, and I *would* buy a non-Apple computer if it suited my needs. In fact, I may have to do exactly that to get what I want. For the first time in 15 years, Apple offers nothing that suits my needs. Look at their line-up right now. They have been gaining mind and market share and their offerings are pathetic. I have my choice between an overpriced collection of leftover circa 2006 components called the Mac Mini or a more reasonably priced all-in-one iMac that comes with a low-quality, annoyingly glossy screen and hasn't been updated in 9 months, neither of which is acceptable to me. Since Apple offers no built-to-order options for the iMac's awful display and since they have no headless Macs that won't drain my bank account, I might have to look elsewhere.
        • MacParrot, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1We talked about this on the MyMac podcast on Thursday (google it if you give a *****) and my feelings were that I didn't care if it was made by Apple or whoever. I wanted a tower, not to change out video cards (not too many made for OS X), or swap processors (though I suppose that could be a benefit eventually...whatever), but to have more internal storage. Make the frigging thing paper thin, I don't care as long as I can stick a couple of drives in it, I'm good.
          Apple doesn't make anything like that other than the Mac Pro and I don't need a machine like that especially at that price. Just through the motherboard, graphics cards, Airport, and the rest into some case I drop some extra hard drives into and I'm sold.
    • streak, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2(1) Pshyster is confirmed to have shipped non-Apple computers with Mac OS X installed
      (2) Apple requests and obtains injunction against Pshyster to halt production and shipping
      (3) Apple files suit
      • Labourer, on 04/21/2008, -2/+0dugg for comical play on psystar (pshyster)
    • raynar, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1From the article: "Nor will he say how the new computer works."
      Read his webpage. he says its running the OSx86 version. Even says not to do updates when they first come out...
  • shuckl4k, on 04/20/2008, -3/+21shenanigans.
    • streak, on 04/20/2008, -4/+2Pshyster

      I don't get it. If Linux is installed free, then why do customers have to pay Pshyster $150 for Mac OS X? I mean, by tossing a small bone to Apple for all their risk and effort, does it somehow make it legal to install Mac OS X on a non-Apple computer? $150 is even more than the $129 retail for Leopard. Does Pshyster even ship a legit Leopard DVD with their systems to demonstrate they pay Apple anything?
      • Macskeeball, on 04/20/2008, -3/+2It's Psystar.
      • MacParrot, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3According to Psystar's site, they include not only a retail copy of OS X (which presumably is the one they installed), but also a Restore Disk (that has God knows what on it).
        If all they were doing was imaging OS X onto a bunch of drives without legal licenses, then Apple wold have absolutely no problem shutting them down. Since they are including a legal purchased copy of OS X, Apple has little other than their EULA and refusing to support any machine with OS X on it not from Apple to stand on. Chances are their EULA won't stand up in court and Apple knows it and therefore won't bother. What they probably WILL do is adjust 10.5.3 to kill the existing hack that lets you install it most likely completely pissing off the OSX86 group who's work Psystar is using.
        • streak, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1"Chances are their EULA won't stand up in court and Apple knows it and therefore won't bother."

          Sorry, but chances aren't. If this was happening in a foreign country, like China, I'd say "chances are," but this is the U.S. and Apple's is a U.S. business. Nowhere does Apple give the right to copy their copyrighted software onto the hard disk of a computer--unless of course said computer is manufactured by Apple. Pshyster is violating copyright. Even if Pshyster never read the EULA, copyright is assumed under the law and, therefore, Pshyster should assume they lack permission to copy the software to the HD unless such action has been explicitly granted to them. The EULA is actually irrelevant.

          BTW: IANAL
    • streak, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1I really should have worded it more strongly than above.
      Unless copyright is expressly waived by the copyright owner, the presence of copyright *must* be assumed and *must* be adhered to under the law. Pshyster must therefore assume they lack permission to copy the software from a retail DVD onto the hard disk of a non-Apple computer, unless Apple explicitly granted permission to Pshyster. It doesn't matter what the EULA says in the Leopard retail box: Apple owns the copyright to the software and Pshyster does not (it would seem) have express, written permission from Apple to copy the software.

      IANAL
  • monkeyrun, on 04/20/2008, -17/+23errr .. it's slightly cheaper, but it's hardly "fraction of the cost".
    • ttfadia, on 04/20/2008, -9/+36Isn't any price other than Apple's (even higher) a "fraction" of it?
      • saxreturns, on 04/20/2008, -5/+8Technically, but that's not how people would understand the phrase in terms of common usage.
      • manitoba98xp, on 04/20/2008, -0/+26If you want to be that technical, 1/1 is also a fraction.
      • lex0nyc, on 04/20/2008, -2/+399997/100000
    • ZombieSociety, on 04/20/2008, -4/+11Sure it is. A large fraction.
      • fiveholecamper, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Yeah. Like 199/200 is a fraction.
    • EtherGnat, on 04/20/2008, -5/+8An Open Computer w/ 2GB of RAM, 2.2GHz C2D processor, 250GB 7200 RPM hard drive, Firewire, and Leopard installed is $605. Add iLife, bluetooth, and a remote and you're looking at about $750. A Mac Mini with a 2GHz processor, 2GB RAM, 160GB 4200RPM HD, Firewire, DVD/RW, and Leopard is $950. That means the OpenPC is 15/19 (a fraction) the price of a Mac Mini, and is both faster and more upgradable. Of course the Open Computer has its own trade-offs. At any rate I'm not sure $200 (and I'm being generous in my price comparison) qualifies as slightly cheaper.
      • Lyph5, on 04/20/2008, -2/+13But the OpenPC will probably break on every single patch to Leo.
        • leamanc, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2Very true, and Psystar even acknowledges this on their site:
          http://www.psystar.com/can_i_run_updates_on_my_ope ...
          They're going to post updates to Leopard on their own site? Yet another thing to get them a date in court with Apple.
          I also like how they changed the name of the PC from OpenMac to Open Computer, but haven't changed the name in the URL of the FAQ listed above.
        • flashback99, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3Yeah it's a bit of an amateur job. I wonder how long this will last.
        • PueSi, on 04/20/2008, -7/+5Why would you need to patch OS X? I thought OS X was perfect, "it just works" right?
          • MacParrot, on 04/20/2008, -3/+2Oh just shut up if you have nothing to contribute than a lame troll joke
          • zongamin, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1Maybe you should consider suicide?
      • blackjack75, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2And call me gay if you want but I still think my mini is beautifully designed machine and well worth an ugly pc box with an Apple sticker on it.

        I guess if I wanted a gaming PC, then I just would not get a mac.
        • EtherGnat, on 04/20/2008, -1/+5I couldn't care less what you like. I don't mean to sound rude, but your preferences are none of my business. The point is everybody has different needs, and Apple supplies a very limited number of choices. Apple has huge holes in their product offerings, and if third parties can fill those holes more power to them.
          • MacParrot, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2I don't think I'd call them "huge" holes. Really the only hole that makes sense for them to fill is a relatively low-cost C2D with some storage options. Since ATI and NVidea don't make many OS X compatible graphics cards worth spending a lot of money to upgrade and the performance difference between a say 2.4 C2D and a 2.8 is hardly worth spending a lot of money on, the real reason would be for more internal storage and being able to NOT use a laptop drive like the mini currently does.
        • Tenoq, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2The boxes they're using aren't ugly though - P180/182 is actually a fairly decent case (as long as you don't get a warped door).
      • streak, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1The Open Pro seems like a terrible deal. Maximum of 4-2.6 GHz cores in it with maximum 8 GB memory, compared to a few hundred dollars more for 8-2.8 GHz cores in the standard Mac Pro configuration and configurable up to 32 GB (3rd party memory recommended!) Add the lack of Pshyster support and hassles--not to mention the illegalities--with every Mac OS X security and OS update and you've got a system that no sane person should buy.
    • Rizmaster, on 04/20/2008, -2/+5Slightly cheaper can make you bigger than the Encyclopedia Galactica.
      • OpaqueMurdock, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Words of wisdom that have been proven time and time again...

        I know your reference to it was intended to be funny, but I can't help thinking about how Mr. Adams commentary on peoples habits and what makes something popular relates directly to why people use the computers and computer services they do. He was a brilliant and insightful guy. I think he was saying that it is a hilarious behavior of ours that ultimately something doesn't have to be "as good" as long as its perceived as being cheaper and we are willing to suffer countless flaws in order to save on those up front costs.

        He used macs by the way. : )
    • chikara8, on 04/20/2008, -3/+7Maxing out Psystar's top model makes it come close to the specs of the Mac Pro i just bought and it comes to half the price of what I paid...refurbished.
      • raisputin3, on 04/20/2008, -7/+1And your Mac Pro will happily take every update that Apple offers as well as Whatever comes after Leopard, whereas there is no Guarantee that the Psystar box will do that. Hel, it is basically a generic PC. It will probably have a hardware failure before the Mac you bought as well.
        • JeffD, on 04/20/2008, -2/+3Its also half the ***** price.
        • OpaqueMurdock, on 04/20/2008, -2/+4@JeffD

          I am not a rich guy, but after many many years of using computers as tools for my work and play. Its just not worth it to me so spend time screwing with them if I don't have to. I would MUCH rather have to wait a bit longer and upgrade less often so that I can afford a top of the line Apple As opposed to getting cheaper computers that may or may not be stable more often. I have a long history of using Macs and they are like little tanks. Many Windows PCs I have dad to deal with found their way to an early grave.

          Hell, I still have a WORKING Lisa.

          Some people enjoy computers as if they were puzzles, they like trouble shooting them... I CAN do that stuff, but like many people, I would prefer not to have to. If you enjoy the experience of tinkering around with your computer when something goes wrong, then you may be a better candidate for one of these. Personally, I get more satisfaction out of solidly working computers. The fact that the company itself can't guarantee forward computability with OS updates puts that in doubt.

          Half the price is something to consider for sure, but I would never risk my business on it. Having a workstation fail in the middle of a big job with a tight deadline would be very bad for me.

          I hope lots of people buy these actually, I see that as a good thing. Just remember, running the OS on a true Mac may give you a bit better results as far a stability is concerned. A bunch of open computer users complaining that OSX crashes, will be a bit annoying.
          • melat0nin, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1You could just buy quality PC parts, because, believe it or not, they do exist. And they are still cheaper than the Mac equivalents.
      • blackjack75, on 04/20/2008, -0/+4Actually I don't think you know how to compare the specs fairly. Mac Pros only come with Xeons processors which have a much larger cache and are horribly expensive (and not worth it to me). If you take the exact same hardware specs and compare them with say Dell machines you'll find the Apple machines are more expensive indeed but by a rather reasonable margin.

        I still think Apple should offer the possiblity to buy a plain "mac" tower. I want a simple Core Duo CPU, not a Xeon, a upgradeable box that could be used for gaming and still run OSX legally and look as nice as a real mac does.
      • monkeyrun, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2I just configured a bottom of the line Apple Mac Pro for $2,299.
        A "comparable" Psystar is $1,554.99.
        The difference is $744.01.
        The Mac Pro's comes with more software also processor is a Xeon and has a higher clock speed. Psystar has a larger Harddrive.

        I am not sure what you've bought, but you would be better off buying a brand new bottom of the line Mac Pro.
  • tsctsc, on 04/20/2008, -6/+12Pending lawsuit in 3, 2...
    • bitcloud, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Still, there's not much they can do... the hardware's not apples and the software is legal to buy...

      i'm not sure what their lawsuit is going to consist of (and I'm pretty sure apple is aware of this and was just counting their lucky stars it didn't happen sooner)
  • rosenblut, on 04/20/2008, -10/+27I am so sick of all this Psystar babbling - If you want to get OS X on a PC do it the "hard" way using Kalyway and all the other "Hackintosh" possibilities or better yet.

    Or if you don't want any hassle - save up and get a "normal" Mac of you choice.


    • silentdragoon, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Or iatkos. Which works. And it's hardly hard.
    • dickardwa, on 04/20/2008, -12/+15Why are Mac people so opposed to choice?
      • rosenblut, on 04/20/2008, -3/+23I have nothing against choice - but against this company. I am totally for osx86 etc etc. but heck you can do it for free and don't need this company to do so.

        But again - once you put OS X on a "normal" PC you will run into probs sooner or later, simply because the updates will brake it some day. The reason Steve doesn't release OSX to the "world" is simply. Macs have limited components - just imagine what would happen if OSX would have to cope with millions of different configs. It would probably have alot of the same probs that Windows has.


        • clclark33, on 04/20/2008, -1/+5Or better yet, put a list together of "Apple Certified Vendors" that Apple WILL support and keep it limited while allowing people to build their own systems. I love my G5 PowerMac, but I'd love the option of a tower that doesn't cost $2300 to start. The ideal computer for most people is a mid-price tower that can be upgraded as needs change. I think Psystar's $1000 computer is about right and it's a market that Steve clearly either hasn't seen a need for or is totally ignoring. Those things said, I'd avoid a non-Apple system for the time being because I use my system for client work and I can't take the chance on the occasional update causing any issues.
        • Lyph5, on 04/20/2008, -0/+4I actually was introduced to OS X through OSX86. I ran Tiger on a Dell laptop that had issues with XP. If I still had it, it would probably run Vista, but not much else. It was a P4-m 1.7 (I think) with 2 gigs of RAM. I installed Tiger on it and was blown away by how well the OS ran on hardware it wasn't designed for. 3 months later I bought a Macbook Pro and now I'm saving up to replace my desktop (that I built, C2D 1.86, 4 gigs of RAM, over 1.25TB and an 8800GTS) with a Mac Pro. I do run Leopard on it, so I'm not in a huge hurry, though.
          • mrBitch, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1out of interest, did the wireless work on your Dell / OS X combo laptop ?
        • mntbikeracer1, on 04/20/2008, -4/+2True but at least Windows and Linux do a pretty damn good job of covering everyone. The fact that the Mac OS only works with their predetermined hardware is annoying but even more annoying are commercials touting how it never crashes. If you are only dealing with a small fraction of the hardware Microsoft and Linux are dealing with it damn sure well better not crash.
        • bitcloud, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1maybe people want OSX on their own hardware because they DON'T want to have to be confused by technical *****?

          (seriously, you ask my mother to install osx on her PC again and there'll be trouble :P)
      • Qumahlin, on 04/20/2008, -3/+5Rosenblut is correct, one of the things that makes OSX so stable is that there is little variation in expected hardware. Ask any programmer what the most common cause of OS lock ups is and they will tell you its device drivers. Its also one of the reasons why console games can be so detailed even if they lack the power of their pc counterparts...its much much easier to program and streamline if you know EXACTLY what hardware is going to be in the device

        Hence why psystar is even possible...all your doing is buying a computer that has essentially the same guts as a mac you would buy.
        • Wesside, on 04/20/2008, -3/+3At a fraction of the cost that apple charges you.
        • Lyph5, on 04/20/2008, -2/+4Without any technical support. Or patches for your OS.
        • and303, on 04/20/2008, -6/+4I disagree, OSX isn't any more stable than a healthy Windows system. There should be no excuse for instability on a proprietary setup.
        • raisputin3, on 04/20/2008, -3/+4@and303
          You ARE kidding I hope. The brand new Dell system that was just purchased at work (I have no choice, that is what we use for desktops) is the biggest pile of rubbage i have ever used. We reformatted the machine, installed XP Pro and after 3 months, the machine just keeps getting ***** and *****. In contrast, my little Mac Mini (G4, 1.42) is solid as a rock running Leopard with so much 3rd party and beta software on it that I am expecting a catastrophic failure every day, hasn't crashed yet. I constantly bring the drive to 0kb free as well and the machine just marches on.
          • and303, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2I don't know what to tell you. You have to be doing something wrong since endless amounts of people seem to have no problem at all with XP. I've ran both platforms side by side in many different setups for a decade now, and neither XP or OSX is superior in stability in my experiences.
            To be honest the most truly stable OS I've used is Vista 64. The problem is that you have to build your hardware around the OS to achieve that stability.
            If you honestly think OSX is more stable than Windows, then you're simply a little bit too susceptible to clever advertising.
      • thewump, on 04/20/2008, -2/+9What do you mean opposed to choice? You can get macbooks in different colors now.. how much more choice do you need?
      • chevyorange, on 05/18/2008, -0/+1They're not. What choice is missing from the Mac lineup other than a "cheap ass" model or "free" model? I'll give you the midrange box and dirt cheap box... but Apple will never even waste resources trying to make money in this category.
    • TrevorPace, on 04/20/2008, -7/+3Or you know you could spend a day learning about how a computer works and go to Linux.
      • Steeple, on 04/20/2008, -1/+5more work, missing 3rd party support.
        osx86 is linux for guys who want photoshop
        • mrBitch, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3Sheer genius quote : " osx86 is linux for guys who want photoshop "
      • bitcloud, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3Or YOU could spend a day learning about how a computer works and *write a ***** stable driver to run popular windows/mac software on linux so people can actually use it*
  • heliox, on 04/20/2008, -16/+42FTA: "He says his credit card processor, PowerPay, locked down his account for processing too many credit cards. When he turned to PayPal, Pedraza says Psystar's account with the online payments specialist was quickly overloaded, too"

    I am thinking there is more to this than what is written. A credit card company not letting him process charges because there are too many? I don't think so. Credit card process or make money on each sale. I bet there were too many charge-backs.
    • dood, on 04/20/2008, -1/+27When you get a merchant account, you're only allowed to charge up to a certain amount. You can request more, of course, and they'll review and probably grant the request, but they won't set you up with an unlimited account.
      Some relevant blog post: http://www.businessknowhow.com/blog/2005/11/check_ ...
      • exxon, on 04/20/2008, -0/+8Merchant fraud is the biggest problem there is in credit card processing a merchant like Psystar can take a processor for millions in a couple of days
      • RunningRabbit, on 04/20/2008, -10/+2Actually there are NO LIMITS on the amount of transactions that PayPal can do as long as your account is verified (easy to do), and they will NEVER shut your account down due to that. Imagine, this company processes a big majority of all eBay transactions... that's HUGE. Him saying that his account got shut down by PayPal is total *****. Transactions is how PayPal makes their money, the more they process the more they make, so there is absolutely no reason to shut down anyone's account. The only good reason? A huge amount of charge backs.
        • Wesside, on 04/20/2008, -1/+5Actually thats for personal accounts, business accounts do have some limits.
        • Matt2k, on 04/20/2008, -0/+19You have no idea what you are talking about. A newly started business that starts charging hundreds of thousands of dollars on their merchant account out of the door is going to throw up every fraudulent red flag you can imagine.
          • heliox, on 04/20/2008, -5/+1But a simple phone call and check will cure that. Imagine a credit card company throttling business because it is too good?!?
        • Raveler1, on 04/20/2008, -8/+0And... read closer. It's not PayPal, it's PowerPay, a completely different company
        • brion182, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3He said he switched to PayPal after PowerPay could not support him, then subsequently they shut him down as well.
        • MLisa, on 04/20/2008, -0/+6Sorry Raveler - It is you who needs to read closer.
    • Orng, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1For precedent, may I refer you to the unhappy case of Blue Moon Fiber Arts? After hitting on a golden idea that received an alarmingly positive response from knitters (who are even more enthusiastic than Mac users), their bank cut them off, sent the tens of thousands of dollars they made back to the people who had paid $200 apiece, and informed Blue Moon that they were assuming the transactions were fraudulent, because they believed that it was not possible that so many people could be interested in sock yarn.

      Blue Moon doesn't have a lot of details on their site, but the saga is related at the link below (caution:knitting blog), including the text of the letter Blue Moon sent out to affected customers.
      http://www.yarnharlot.ca/blog/archives/2007/01/11/ ...
    • stix213, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1There is always a risk of a scammer setting up a CC merchant account and then the processor could get stuck paying back swindled customers. Generally a startup won't hit the ceiling this early, so most people don't even know of the limitation. If he had a track record of ever increasing charges and minimal charge backs then this would not be an issue, but since he has gone from $0 to supposedly crazy money then there is a trust issue from the processors perspective.
  • nebkiwi, on 04/20/2008, -6/+8Good luck in caught, as much as I want these guys to win this, there's not a chance they will :(
    • arizonagroove, on 04/20/2008, -0/+6Get court, go to caught...?
    • DesireCampbell, on 04/20/2008, -0/+14'Caught'? Is that supposed to be 'court'? That is the thickest Boston accent ever.
  • copesc, on 04/20/2008, -8/+6Yeah, but.. who's gonna buy it? Any official support for it? I don't think this will do.

    Apple made it because they ship their products on their hardware, this is why they "just run".
    • PhillipJFry, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2This is an excellent point guys, I don't know why you're digging him down.

      A Mac Mini is cheaper and has a one year Apple Guarantee. They'll fix anything that breaks. Will these guys do that?
  • iamanorange, on 04/20/2008, -1/+14It's really not that hard to do yourself
    • PueSi, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Indeed, I don't know why people think it's that hard, if you can assemble a piece of furniture you can build your own PC. Takes 30 minutes tops.
      Nothing beats being able to choose the components YOU want.
      • clclark33, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Indeed, the OS install usually takes MUCH longer than the physical assembly of a custom built system.
      • bitcloud, on 04/20/2008, -2/+1ah yeah, but no...

        you can't install OSX on every configuration of hardware... you can't expect someone who's chief motto when deciding upon an operating system is "I want something simple.. something that just works" to take a $2000 risk only to find they can't figure out how to install OSX on their machine.
  • Lanage, on 04/20/2008, -13/+4Cheaper, but 200+% the size of a mac mini...
    • daviddiaz, on 04/20/2008, -1/+8it's more than just twice as big.
    • logandurand, on 04/20/2008, -3/+4And if computers were judged on size alone, you might have a point; however, some people take other factors into account when making a purchase, such as performance, expandability, and value.
    • bitcloud, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1true... i was going to buy a mac air too but they're still too big... i'm thinking they should remove the screen...
  • snuffop, on 04/20/2008, -8/+5Anything less that the whole price is a fraction nit wit. So many people know how to level to 70 and the spec needed for a boss fight yet.. can't read or comprehend their native language
    • purzzzell, on 04/20/2008, -1/+4RIght, but the IMPLICATION of the phrase "fraction of the cost" is that it's significantly lower in pricethan the original.

      So many people know how to insult others without taking simple euphemisms into consideration.
      • Lyph5, on 04/20/2008, -2/+299/100 is a fraction of 100. If you made an assumption that it would be 1/10, you're a jackass. Hell, even "pennies on the dollar" can be used for $0.99/$1.00.
        • Hollowpoint, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3No, you making an assumption that people aren't going to make assumptions concerning a phrase commonly used to denote a small portion of something makes you a jackass.
    • Matt2k, on 04/20/2008, -0/+4"What's up?" is actually a question about what is above your head
      And "Turn of phrase" means you actually write down what you said and flip it around
      And "arming the system" means you use your arm

      >can't read or comprehend their native language
      And people who pretend they're clever by intentionally being obtuse are annoying
  • psylence, on 04/20/2008, -11/+9Ahahah, shut down for processing too many cards? That's a brilliant strategy for a processing company. LIES.
    • dood, on 04/20/2008, -0/+5It happens all the time. Banks put limits on merchant accounts for the same reason they put limits on credit cards, to limit their exposure to risk. However, you usually just ask for a higher limit. I don't know why they'd deny you, unless there are other factors not yet disclosed in the media.
    • RunningRabbit, on 04/20/2008, -2/+3Yea exactly, especially PayPal. How the hell does Forbes end up with such a crappy reporter and report anyway? Not only is that article all over the place and has holes like swiss cheese, there were spelling and grammar mistakes to match.
    • Funkly, on 04/20/2008, -0/+5rember paypal shut down somethingawful for raising to much money too quick for katrina Victims..

      /or something like that
  • digitallysick, on 04/20/2008, -1/+16Well if they can do it, maybe i should start my own "hackintosh company" considering i built mine for under $500.00 and its far better than those specs
    • noloveIII, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2yeah but did you buy leopard?
      Their prices are pretty low
    • bitcloud, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1yeah maybe you should? chuck a guarantee and some after sales support on that and I'll be your first customer...
  • scubajim, on 04/20/2008, -1/+17I wouldn't buy from them. They changed their address on their web site 4 times in less than 4 days. Very strange. I think it is a scam. Just my opinion.
  • RawCoyote, on 04/20/2008, -1/+8Not your typical new product roll-out. Smells kinda scammy to me. Smart money will wait on the sidelines.
  • catachip, on 04/20/2008, -14/+13"Pedraza, adding that he's paying retail price for Apple's software every time he installs it on a new machine. "I just want to help Steve Jobs make more money."

    This would be true IF Apple made it's money on software. They don't. There is a reason you can get OS X Leopard for $100-$130, and iLife (arguable the best collection of consumer multimedia applications on the market) for a mere $79. Apple's profit margins are in the hardware. They are in the Macs, in the iPods, and in the iPhones.

    This company is doing no service to Apple, expect for tarnish whatever reputation it has for stability by loading OS X on varied or untested hardware. What about when they release a 10.5.x upgrade, the consumer could crash the whole system. What if they try to add X internal hardware component thinking it will just work with Leopard? No, all this really does is create headaches for Apple as people question the "stability" of a OS on hardware it was never designed to run on, with drivers not certified by the OS manufacturer. That is fine for the Windows ecosystem, but not for OS X or the Mac.
    • Labourer, on 04/20/2008, -9/+4that is their problem that they cant make money on the software. just a thought but do you think the reason they dont make money on the software is that they only have 5% market share. how about they enter the operating system market for real, hell they could still subsidise the os when bought with a 'real mac' and let people choose what they want.
      • Lyph5, on 04/20/2008, -0/+7Because that's not their business strategy? They choose to do it the way they do it, and it's working for them. Not making a sizable profit on the software isn't a bad thing, since you generally need to purchase their hardware to run the software. And, I'm a good example of this, running OS X on a hackintosh tends to lead people towards purchasing actual Apple hardware.
        • Niels, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1I agree, i made the switch from winblows xp and vista to hackintosh... its been working great, now i most have i real mac... i´m about to get one

      • catachip, on 04/20/2008, -2/+9The argument at first makes sense, but, isn't really valid. Firstly, Apple's software and hardware market share are both relatively small (about 8% world wide, or closer to 15% in the U.S.), yet they manage to make billions of dollars in profit (record revenues and sales increases in the last quarter actually). Secondly, Apple is not about creating a mass market, run-on-anything, operating system. Their philosophy is a top to bottom "lifestyle solution" to computing. It is very different from other PC manufacturers and companies such as Microsoft, which are all about mix and match consumer choice. Apple is able to maintain quality control and stability of its platform by tying hardware to software.

        Jobs will never allow OS X to be ported to non Apple machines. It wouldn't be aesthetically consistent with the ecosystem Apple tries to convey. That is, software and hardware that uses elegant solutions to solve problems, running on elegant-looking hardware. This is not what many consumers want - that is, a box that will run whatever they want whenever they want, regardless of the hiccups that may occur along the way. Jobs is fine being a boutique computer manufacturer, and by sales and market share growth, many consumers are too.
        • Labourer, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1you present a valid argument here. I cant help but wonder though if it is inevitable now whether apple like it or not that this is the way forward. Sure they are doing fine and they would like it to stay that way but events happen that change things. This could be good for them though. If they can maintain the image and ecosystem and all the rest of their bonafide products but exist parallel with compatibles that would have the effect of more software developers producing macintosh products in addition as someone has pointed out clone users may make the jump to bona fide.
      • OpaqueMurdock, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Not sure people should be digging you down, Its a valid question. But here is one point to consider. with the way things stand at the moment, no other OS can really compete if they "enter the operating system market for real". We all know that MS has such a firm choke hold on the market that its just not going to happen at this time. Apple is doing exactly what they need to do. They are making small grabs at market share and building a really good OS that is unburdened by a lot of crap. The time is not right to go full scale. Ask yourself the question, would you compete head to head against MS right now?

        Give it 5 years, Then I think we might see some action. : )
    • cypherz, on 04/20/2008, -3/+4Why is this being dugg down? catachip is absolutely correct. Apple is a hardware company. They make money off computers, not software. Because Apple is a hardware company, they do not compete directly with Microsoft (contrary to what most people think). If they sell the OS without the Mac, then Apple is competing directly with MS and that's not going to work.
    • PueSi, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Who cares, you paid for the damn license you should be allowed to install it on whatever you want.
      • Smoozle, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Funny you should be talking about licenses, since said license explicitly states that you can only install Mac OS X on Apple branded hardware, and people like you usually claim that the EULA is not enforceable.
    • SmileyChris, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Apple can't be making a *loss* on software being purchased, and the minor percentage of people buying clones is hardly going to hurt them. Your argument tends towards the "music piracy = stealing" conclusion, replacing music piracy with "buying Apple software without hardware".
  • Booalready, on 04/20/2008, -6/+3It might not last but it is a good idea. I want to get OS X on an Eee PC myself. But if Apple made something like that it would have to cost 2-3K. With recession continuing, Apple would do well to take heed of the growing interest in things like this and maybe do something kind and responsible. Their perceived obsolescence mastery is only going to go so far when the purse straps get even tighter.
  • Willravel, on 04/20/2008, -7/+9Scam + breach of EULA? Give me a ***** break. Go buy a Mac Mini. It's got Panther pre-installed ($155), Firewire ($50), and it won't require you pay a hefty fine to Apple if you're caught.
    • catachip, on 04/20/2008, -1/+13Yikes, Panther was released like 5 years ago. OS 10.3

      Of course, you meant Leopard. Kind of like me writing a check with April 16, 2007 the other day. We've got to stop living in the past.
      • Willravel, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Hahaha... wow, yeah that was a brain fart. I did indeed mean Leopard.
    • DesireCampbell, on 04/20/2008, -1/+4"Pay a hefty fine"? There's no way a consumer would ever be forced to pay a fine for using legitimately purchased software. That is just ***** up.
      • OpaqueMurdock, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Yeah, won't ever happen. Breaking a licensing agreement in this way really becomes a choice about wether you are willing to lie and break a promise to a company. I cant imagine a future were Apple would ever come after an individual over installing OSX on a non-Apple product. TH bad PR would be crushing.
    • szSouthernWolf, on 04/20/2008, -0/+0Actually, there are at least two possible strategies to attack "piracy": one of them is to go after the guys who make it/sell it and the second one i'm thinking of is to go after the guys who buy it. As far as I know, it has been done in the past, so it actually is possible that you have to "pay a hefty fine"... I think it's not too likely, anyway.
      • OpaqueMurdock, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1The person buying the Open Computer isn't buying a illegal copy of the OS, they are buying a full retail version and giving these guys permission to install it for them.

        Apple would have to come after a person that paid for the OS on the ground that they fibbed to them. I don't ever see that happening. Apple will make things hot for the seller first.
  • CheeseburgerBro, on 04/20/2008, -2/+15As soon as the first box of the first generation is delivered Apple will cripple it in the subsequent OS update.

    Mark my ASCII, mofos.
  • purzzzell, on 04/20/2008, -4/+19How am I this far down in the comments and no one has yet mentioned the Gizmodo article that was FRONT-PAGED only TWO DAYS AGO about the frequently changing address of the headquarters of this company?
  • Labourer, on 04/20/2008, -0/+9This smells to me like , some 20 something guy has seen that you can load leopard onto a pc and has thought yeah ill sell these, without thinking too much about anything else. it is feasible that he has had problems with payment processing ,if that is the case then it shows the lack of organisation or forethought involved in the venture. more likely that he has severe cash flow problems and or is trying to build these things himself or with 'his brother' and can only turn out 20-50 a day.
  • shadowspawn, on 04/20/2008, -0/+5That happened with us also. The problem is that the merchant account will have to handle "charge-backs", and they simply want to make sure you are legit first. BIG merchant accounts usually go with companies that do volume for years (or online porn, offshore accounts that take a huge cut in order to keep their mouth shut).
    It's completely believable.
  • djjuice, on 04/20/2008, -0/+8I'll believe it when they start shipping. Anyone here remember CherryOS?
  • rowlodge, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3wow, wonder how this keeps going, for something that doesn't exist.
  • dmcbride6, on 04/20/2008, -1/+6Dont know why this is 'news' to anyone.
    This guy can't legally sell these machines...I believe there is a clause in the osx eula that states osx can only be installed on apple computers.
    To make it worse, this is still a hacintosh and based on the osx86 project (I believe) so to upgrade to a point release (or even a service pack I believe) means more hacking. So...is this still worth the low cost?
    The only people who would want to buy these are the ones lacking the knowledge to do it themselves - so how does one expect to maintain it?
  • Lyph5, on 04/20/2008, -0/+5Yeah, when Apple is forced to crack down on the Hackintosh community because these jackasses are making a profit off of it, you'll know where to send your thank you letters. Unless they keep changing their address twice a week.
  • and303, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1I guess it was just a matter of time before someone cashed in on it.
  • Legolover64, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1I'm pretty sure it's got Leopard, not Panther. I'm pretty sure no Mac Mini in history has ever shipped with Panther.
  • cerealjynx, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Didn't Gizmondo just do an article where they visited the Psystar HQ and it was ...crap?
  • AzMegladon, on 04/20/2008, -12/+4lol @ mactards gett'n mad over this : )
    • monkeyrun, on 04/20/2008, -2/+3O trust me, by the end of the day, it's the hackintosh community who's going to be very pissed.
      • OpaqueMurdock, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1I think he includes you under the umbrella of that colorful nickname. I.E. "anyone using anything Apple = mactard"

        It's a bit sad to me that just because I use the hardware that you don't seem to think of us as brothers in arms to some degree. : (
  • simX, on 04/20/2008, -2/+6"At a fraction of the cost of a comparably equipped machine from Apple [...]"

    Sigh. Apparently Forbes didn't actually do any research. The Psystar computer is not that much cheaper compared to a Mac mini directly from Apple, and it's pretty comparable except that the Psystar offering has twice as much RAM. If you add in the cost of Leopard and iLife (which are included with a Mac mini, but *not* with a Psystar computer), it comes out to $607 compared to $799 for a similar Mac mini.

    So the "fraction" is 3/4, but when you write "at a fraction of the cost", it usually implies a fraction of "1/4" or so. It's pretty misleading. Also, for the difference, you lose the ability to have reliable Software Updates that won't break your machine.
    • catachip, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3Thank you. Also, don't forget that the Mac Mini also includes an Apple remote, a DVI connector and VGA adaptor, gigabit ethernet, and optical audio output/input. Not to mention that the whole thing fits in that incredibly small enclosure.

      Can someone add the cost of those added features, along with the firewire, iLife, and Leopard mentioned above, to the Psystar "Open Computer", and come back with a revised price?

      Seems to me people are trying to compare non-feature equivalent hardware in order to come up with their prices.
    • EtherGnat, on 04/20/2008, -3/+4The OpenComputer is at least $200 cheaper than the most comparatively configured Mini, but that isn't really the biggest factor. The OpenComputer gives you the ability to configure your computer that are currently only available on the Mac Pro. I looked at buying Macs for some of our graphic design at work. Neither the Mini or the iMac suited our needs, so we would have been stuck with the Mac Pro which starts at $2,300 I think (out of our price range). The OpenComputer is as much about tapping an unfilled market as it is about being low cost. If you're only comparing it to the Mini you're missing the point.
    • DesireCampbell, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Actually, hit up the Psystar website, max-out the pro model, and then try and get a Mac Pro for that price. Don't even worry about keeping stats the same, a bottom-of-the-line MacPro costs $170 than a top-of-the-line "OpenComputer".

      And a similarly speced MacPro (The CPU is different, but very close) comes in at $4450, compared to the OpenComputer's $2130. At less-than-half-price, it IS a fraction of the cost.
  • MrViklund, on 04/20/2008, -2/+4He will get sued. And Apple has all the right to.
    • PueSi, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Why? If you pay for the license to use something you should be allowed to use it on whatever you want, it's not like they're asking for support or anything. Just because it's on the EULA doesn't mean it will hold on court.
      By your logic, printer manufacturers should be allowed to sue people who use generic ink.
      • Algan, on 04/20/2008, -2/+0No, as much as a reasonable person would think so, when you pay for a software license, you don't own the product. You are licensed to use it according to the terms of the EULA. Printers are physical objects and ink is a consumable, which is an entirely different story, there are laws that cover this situation. Even so, some printer companies attempted to prevent the use of third party ink in their printers and failed.
        Note: I am not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt
  • kurtwinter, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3Will Apple step up and give us something like the before feature Mac Pro Mini (http://www.applegazette.com/mac-mini/mac-mini-mac- ... but real? All I want is one lousy PCI express slot. Just one. This company proves there is plenty of interest for a Core Duo 2 based system with discrete graphics.
    • blackjack75, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Hell I'd wish Apple would understand that. How hard is it to understand that:
      a) I have a mac mini under my tv (typing from it)
      b) I have a macbook pro for work
      c) my gaming PC is well... a PC for only one reason. I can't get a mac desktop suitable for gaming at a reasonable price. I'd gladly pay 20% more than a 'noname' pc if I could get the same hardware, running OSX legally (and windows of course, since it's a gaming pc).
  • Anijake, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1I always figured that allowing OSX to run on PC's would be Jobs ace in the hole. If Apple ever got into trouble or when it is the right time they would release a PC version and make millions
    • Labourer, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1makes you wonder what the long game is. one of the selling points of mac is that they make the computer and operating system and so the thing has a reputation for stability for this reason. so if they have the choice of exactly what components they use then why would they build it to be so easy that the os ran on any pc doesnt make sense unless they want this to happen.
    • noloveIII, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Apple tried that in the 90s and they almost went bankrupt so I think they wont try it again
  • Onetrack, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3Yes.. and it runs phenominally well - my rig is currently a core2duo e6600 @ 3ghz, 8 gig ddr2-800 ram, 1.5 tb sata drive space, dfi blood iron p35 motherboard, thermaltake soprano rs case, 850 watt ocz gamestream psu, pioneer 212d sata optical, nvidia 7950gt, multiple monitor/ qe/ci works like a charm, one going to a 22" lcd, the other to a 42" plasma for movies. Running 10.5.2/9.2.2 vanilla leopard with strings.

    Theres your shopping list, go have fun.

    If anything I hope that apple actually sits up and takes notice of these psystar guys and makes the ' missing ' mac. A shuttle sized, headless unit thats upgradeable with some common pc parts, If not we're just going to make hackintosh's for ourselves.

    Oh, btw.. netkas, dense and the rest of the osx86 community are pretty furious at psystar.
  • chesscat, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Mac-Clone man about to meet some inmates soon after Apple gets done with him.
  • macguy24, on 04/20/2008, -5/+1people don't buy expensive macs for the software, they buy them for the hardware, this "Psystar" might have the same software, but i'm sure the hardware sucks.
    • wolfboyZ, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1It's the same ***** hardware, clown!
      • cadmiumpaint, on 04/21/2008, -2/+1except that its really ugly and apple won't support it. yeah its exactly not the same thing.
  • rootbeerinacan, on 04/20/2008, -5/+3Agreed, let's see how quickly Apple can kill this one. Hopefully before it gets out of hand. I REALLY don't want to see a *****-ton of Mac Clones out on the market: This originality is the reason I got a Mac in the first place.
    • PueSi, on 04/20/2008, -2/+1Idiot, you are as original as the millions others who thought the same as you.
    • DeFex, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2Thinking different is different from actually thinking.
  • theillbehaviord, on 04/20/2008, -6/+1Anonymous is raiding blackplanet.com in celebration of Hitlers birthday, all are welcomed
  • stalker, on 04/20/2008, -3/+2Why would there be a lawsuit? the system is not hacking Mac in any way.... it is a hardware sound workstation that has all the components needed to run OSX.. quoted from the website "The Ability to run an unmodified version of OSX Leopard 10.5"
    • Smoozle, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Are you honestly this daft? Although I doubt even their ability to deliver on the promise you quoted, this is not a question of Psystar's technological prowess. This is purely a legal issue. Mac OS X's EULA explicitly forbids exactly what Psystar is trying to do - install OS X on non-Apple branded hardware. Some people want to believe that EULAs are not enforceable and, since I'm not a IP lawyer (or lawyer at all), they may be even right, but this doesn't mean that Apple are not going to fiercely fight this right to the bitter end.
  • evilrobot, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Did anyone in their right mind think that this was ever anything other than a scam????
    • DeFex, on 04/20/2008, -4/+1remember he is preying on mac fans. pre-screening for suckers has already been done.
      same reason so many scammers find their victims at churches.
      • Smoozle, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1 Mac fans, really? Don't you think that Mac fans would buy, let's say, oh I don't know, an actual Mac? As for the sucker part, I do completely agree with you, whoever sent those guys money is indeed a sucker.
  • DaysInTheDark, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3Why would this be a scam? It's just some startup building custom pc's with parts anyone can get on newegg. Big deal, do it yourself and save even more money. Plenty of tutorials out there on how to get OSX installed.

    I find their use of what looks like the Antec P180 case kinda funny.
  • peterinjapan, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Hellox, actually this problem is quite common, having a limit of what you can charge is a pain for growing businesses. I've been through it with J-List, and currently have 4+ different accounts so I can spread the love around to different banks when sales spike, and keep them from worrying that I'm doing something wrong just because I'm selling 2x the number of Domo-kun T-shirts this month than last month. Or Hello Kitty vibrators.
  • homercles337, on 04/20/2008, -5/+2Hey look! Another macophile circle jerk! Jerk, jerk, jerk it you idiot macophiles!
    • Smoozle, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1 Surely, you mean a macophobe circle jerk.
  • Labourer, on 04/20/2008, -3/+0digg effect?

    Warning: session_start() [function.session-start]: open(/tmp/sess_17a909ad2abc076003c521a7d960b69d, O_RDWR) failed: Read-only file system (30) in /var/www/vhosts/psystar.com/httpdocs/libraries/joomla/session/session.php on line 407

    Warning: session_start() [function.session-start]: Cannot send session cache limiter - headers already sent (output started at /var/www/vhosts/psystar.com/httpdocs/libraries/joomla/session/session.php:407) in /var/www/vhosts/psystar.com/httpdocs/libraries/joomla/session/session.php on line 407

    Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /var/www/vhosts/psystar.com/httpdocs/libraries/joomla/session/session.php:407) in /var/www/vhosts/psystar.com/httpdocs/libraries/joomla/session/session.php on line 410
    jtablesession::Store Failed
    DB function failed with error number 126
    Incorrect key file for table './psystar_joomla/jos_session.MYI'; try to repair it SQL=INSERT INTO jos_session ( `session_id`,`time`,`username`,`gid`,`guest`,`client_id` ) VALUES ( '17a909ad2abc076003c521a7d960b69d','1208718024','','0','1','0' )
    Warning: session_write_close() [function.session-write-close]: open(/tmp/sess_17a909ad2abc076003c521a7d960b69d, O_RDWR) failed: Read-only file system (30) in /var/www/vhosts/psystar.com/httpdocs/libraries/joomla/session/session.php on line 540

    Warning: session_write_close() [function.session-write-close]: Failed to write session data (files). Please verify that the current setting of session.save_path is correct (/tmp) in /var/www/vhosts/psystar.com/httpdocs/libraries/joomla/session/session.php on line 540
  • jeffgtr, on 04/20/2008, -1/+4I am hoping this nudges Apple to put out something in between the mac pro and the imac. I really don't need all the power of the Mac Pro, but I want to be able to use my own monitiors, upgrade the hard drive and RAM and have an extra PCI Slot.
  • dcolley, on 04/20/2008, -2/+5There are several reasons to own a Mac over a Hackintosh. First the esthetics, Mac are just better built than your average PC, they look and function better. They are supported verses no support. If I really wanted the same problems that I had with PCs for 15 years, I simply could have built a Hackintosh myself for even less money.
    • mrBitch, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2I never thought of it like that.

      Hackintosh =
      "same old PC hardware / device driver issues" + Unix O/S + Aqua Gui - Windows
  • blackjack75, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2I still don't understand why you'd buy a PC from psystar? All they do is sell you a normal beige PC which you can get anywhere near your home and Leopard DVD. The only service is they install one of the hacked versions you can download instead of installing your DVD (which I presume won't installed unless they have a magic bios that makes Leopard believe it's a true mac).

    So why would people go with them? They're not offering support , AFAIK. It's just a plain good old pc box with the promise of installing Leopard on it.
  • Jammerdelray, on 04/20/2008, -4/+3Apple should embrace the idea and make mac open
  • 3leggedHorse, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2 That is what i don't get about apple if they want to make inroads into MS domination, surly the easiest way to go is to get people first to use there OS, then if they like it next time they hardware upgrade they will buy a mac.
    Call me dumb but is there some thing being hidden here that the average consumer knows ***** all about.
    I am no I.T whizz but i know when I smell *****.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.