Slashdot Mirror
Beige Box Apple Clone?
steve.m writes "Finally it looks like I'll be able to get a cheap box to run MacOSX on, but not from Apple! John Fraser is (sort of) getting into the clone business 5 years after Apple shut down their 3 year long 'experiment' in licensing the hardware. Based on off the shelf apple components in a custom pizza box style case with no bolted on display, a barebones 'iBox' will be around 300 USD and require a processor, disk and memory (and the OS). Complete systems (again, without the OS) should start at around 650 USD."
My first power mac was a umax 600 - its great to see someone picking up the 'mac clone' business again. maybe it will help apple's overall marketshare... and w/ marketshare comes more users, w/ more users comes more software, w/ all of that comes reduced prices & improved performance, etc etc. All good stuff.
hopefully steve jobs won't try to shut him down out of fear that this will siphon sales away from 'proper' macs...
He's using spare parts manufactured by Apple and sold to repair shops. Why do I have a funny feeling that there's language in the repair parts purchase agreement that prohibits them from being used in just this fashion? IANAL, and IANAACT, but that would be the obvious way to prevent this.
I can already see Mike Tyson in the Switch ad:
"I was looking at this lolita sight and all of a sudden beep... beep... beep. I was like, bummer. It was a good sight.
I'm Mike Tyson and iBox."
I claim full responsibility for this development - after all, I spent £2500+ on a powerbook last week (which I really can't afford but you know, mmm, titanium...) so of course a cheaper option is going to be just around the corner...
- Welcome the coming of the New World Odour
In other news the iBox company mysteriously dissapeared after being sued in over 300 different lawsuits by an entity described as "a powerful fruit-based technology company" ...film at 11
"I think he would be wise to talk to a patent attorney before he does anything else,"
Apple isn't exactly known for their kindness to "clone" makers..
Will the price of spare parts remain the same if they are used (eventually in large quantities) for building iBoxes?
The free market has some laws.
Bye!
"But I want to get Apple's full support. I want to make sure I'm on the up and up. I'm an Apple supporter. It's not something I want to clash with them about. I want to make sure what I'm doing is legal."
How is creating a low cost box that will cut into Apple's hardware sales (where they make the MAJORITY of their revenue) "supporting" Apple?
Sure sounds like "clashing" to me.
apple legal is going to go after him for creating brand confusion and misleading the consumer into thinking the "ibox" is an apple product.
I wish him luck, but I bet he's going to get squashed by apple legal.
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
... a group of lawyers in Cupertino, CA. have gathered together and are finializing their cease and desist letter.
I guess in a couple of days we'll be reading about how this guy is no longer making these.
Good-Luck John Fraser, you're going to need it!
So I'm not sure what you are gaining over a regular Mac
What you are gaining? Not having to spend all the cash you'd pay for an Apple for a start...
- Welcome the coming of the New World Odour
A clone market would either a) drive Apple out of business, or b) take away the one unique factor which sets them apart in the industry: vertical integration. Either way, the platform and the entire industry loses big.
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
What is so bad about clones? I don't believe there is any money to be made from hardware sales. The profit margin is too small. Apple should follow in Microsoft's footsteps and make an OS only. They should allow the hardware manufacturers to worry about the chips and motherboards. Can you imagine if Apple released an version of their OS that could run on standard Intel/AMD chips? They would be competing head to head with Microsoft for market share. Apple's market share right now is so small there is no way it could shrink. I think if the cost of entry (expensive, slow proprietary Apple brand hardware) for switching to Apple's OS was cheap, many more people would be willing to give it a shot.
Apparently nobody is aware that Mac OS X CAN'T BE RUN (legally) on non-Apple hardware?
Apparently you're not aware that he is using Apple hardware. Apple motherboards to be precise.
Now, I'm not saying this guy's going to have a booming business: Apple may go after him for using the iBox name or try to cut off his motherboard supply, but others have done this before (Marathon Computers springs to mind).
Even if Apple does cut off his motherboard supply he may still eek out a niche business selling the enclosures (i.e. "add your own motherboard")
This kid has about a zero chance of succeeding. I'm not even sure why he deserves this much press coverage. It sounds like a story from The Onion.com.
Local Boy Discusses Cool Idea with Friends
Local boy has great idea to make his own macs. "Sure, it's been tried before but failed miserably due to Apple's licensing restrictions, but it sure would be cool to try," he says. "Just think of all the press coverage I'd get! It's guaranteed to make the frontpage at Slashdot. Maybe I'll even get some venture capitalists to invest mass amounts of money that I'll launder to a swiss bank account before succumbing to legal pressure and declaring bankrupcy. I can't go wrong!"
The article states the motherboards from Apple have the Apple ROMS that allows OS X to boot. I would assume the Terrasoft boards don't contain an Apple ROM chip.
"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
This is not really a Mac "clone". It's simply using used Mac parts and repackaging them. It's not like the PC market where you can build a NEW and current pc. Hardly a beige box like clone. People have been doing this for years, I have a repackaged Mac SE (it's in a rack mount case) from way back when.
John Fraser, if you read this, I would sure as heck not call this thing the i-box! Let everybody else call it that, but not you.
Apple will jump hard on you for that. It's going to be very difficult to convince a judge that you're not trying to fit this in with the i-mac and the i-book. In fact, I'd say it will be impossible.
The only way to win this lawsuit is to have deeper legal pockets than Apple. Don't try.
Name it something else like: TINAA. It stands for This Is Not An Apple. It sounds good to me, though I haven't researched the IP issues. A quick Google only turned up Finish and apparently one proper name.
Good luck!
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
Apple's ROMs have always been the key reason that their machine hasn't been cloned.
I've always wondered why they don't use the same technique that the original BIOS cloners used to make a working IBM clone BIOS that was 100% legal.
I don't remember the specifics on the technique, but it involved two completely seperate groups of engineers within the same company who had strictly limited contact with eachother governing how one group reverse-engineered the BIOS, and how the other group created a new BIOS based solely on descriptions of how it operated, without having any specific copyright information that the first group had access to.
I remember being somewhat fascinated when I originally heard about it. Of course now, it's probably illegal due to the DMCA (which probably would've killed the PC revolution had it been on the books 20 years ago).
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
Only the lower parts of the OS are open source. As a result, the other parts are binary form only and that is compiled for PPC.
From the article:
Fraser will build full-featured configurations to customers' specifications. A fully loaded iBox will cost between $650 and $2,000, depending on the speed of the chip, the size of the hard drive and other features. He plans to offer configurations with dual processors, just as Apple does in its current line of PowerMacs.
So, yes, he will supply CPUs, but if you can get PPCs direct from Motorola / IBM, or a reseller cheaper, then you can plug your own one in.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
...new Apple computers are way too fast to run MacOSX. I'd much rather have an older slower one.
No. It really wouldn't be very sensible. The PPC is a nice chip, but it's not sufficiently better than x86 to justify using it to run Linux. Linux runs just fine on x86 hardware. If you need a really fast box, run a Power4, or a Sun SuperDuperSparcXII (or whatever), although you should probably run a 'real' UN*X on that kind of kit, rather than Linux. If you don't need that kind of power then stick with x86. I suspect most of your software will ship as binaries for x86. Sure, you can compile from source, but as anyone who's installed Gentoo will tell you, this may take a while...
The advantage of the iPizza is that it will run OS X, which doesn't run on x86. If OS X ran on x86, then this would be a bit of a silly thing to do, since none of the software out there for OS X runs on x86, and so it would have to be compiled, and if all you're doing is running Open Source apps that run under X11 on OS X, then you may as well just run FreeBSD.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
... to include a $120 copy of OS X, then why on earth would I buy it? I can get a brand new machine with far better reliability and reputation by spending $999.
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
Apple has NOTHING to worry about from young Mr. Fraser. As discussed in the article, Fraser said he doesn't have any grand plans for building the iBox business into the next Dell or Gateway. "I'm not doing it for profit," he said. "I'm doing it for a hobby.
On the contrary, those who purchase these systems could be in for some serious headaches if they ever need tech support. I can't see Mr. Fraser being able to take his hobby seriously if he's personally getting phone calls from nebie users in Dallas, Topeka, and Seattle. Don't get me wrong, I wish Mr. Fraser much happiness and little frustration in his hobby. He has very little hope (and, it appears, no desire) to make this in any way a threat to Apple's business model.
Apple's best strategy in this case is to ignore the close and 2khappyware give a real-world example of the differences between a small-time clone and a bona fide Apple.
The cure for cancer is coming: Reovirus
Had this guy owned an Atari ST way-back-when, he'd know the problems of relying upon Apple parts meant for repairs. Many Atari ST owners bought the MagicSac and SpectreGCR Mac emulators which consisted of a cartridge that you bought and plugged in Apple Mac OS Rom chips, and then slid it into the Atari ST's cartridge port. They were great. You could have a far more powerful Macintosh (and the ST was more powerful to begin with) at a savings of more than half the cost of an actual Macintosh. When Atari brought out its laptop (the STacy), with the emulators, it became the first Macintosh laptop. This infuriated Apple, and they threatened to sue any Mac repair shop/dealership that actually sold Mac Roms to people not actually requiring repairs... The better route to a Mac clone is to get IBM and Nvidia to produce an NForce type mobo chipset for the PowerPC 970 under the guise of having another platform to run Linux on with a 64bit chip and no chance of Palladium being placed in the BIOS (since AMD and Intel are both vying for the Microsoft payments). Then someone could come out with a hack for OS X Panther to run on it without shutting down due to not detecting an Apple BIOS or whatever protection scheme they have cooked up... It would be pretty funny; IBM turning the clone strategy on some other company. But then again, this would cater to the PC enthusiast market who do not normally buy Apple anyways, and as long as they actually purchased the OS and didn't pirate it, this would benefit Apple tremendously...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
On December 19, 2002, Tech TV's The Screen Savers aired an episode in which Kevin Rose built a G4 in an ATX case. Most of the parts came from Mac Resq and others. It's an interesting article for anyone who wishes to tackle the project by themselves.
The segment was inspired by an aricle on MacOpz Web Site. I urge all to check it out.
Though this might end up costing a little more, there are benefits: You get to choose your own case (which must be slightly modified), and get the pleasure of building a computer that normally isn't built by anyone except Apple and the pizza box guy.
Mr. Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time is enemy action.
The whole point of Apple is that THERE IS NO 3rd party. Yes the Mac is expensive upfront, but look at it this way : if you buy a PC, either assembled or part-by-part, you know you're going to spend hours, no, days tweaking it and stamping out the zillions of compatibility issues and hardware glitches. If you buy a Mac, Apple has already done all that tweaking and testing and you have a solid finished product, identical to the other millions of Macs sold all over. You don't have to futz with a Mac, it just works and works well. You have to pay for that extra effort and quality, but in the long run you save lots of time (thus money).
Now if this guy sells you a naked board, and you find a CPU somewhere, then a cheap-cheap IDE drive from your favorite asian importer, and some Kingston Value Crap Ram, well you have yourself a 1500$ iBox with an identity crisis. And it is really much cheaper than a 'true' Mac ? Not that much.
If you want a cheap Mac, buy it used or get a lower-end model. If you just want the cheapest computer, then go grab a 500$ PC from Walmart. The bottom line is that a fully-equipped PC that works as well as a Mac, costs as much as a Mac.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
BTW Microsoft makes more than Apple for each Mac sold. The profit margin on MS Office is larger than the profit margin on the hardware and OSX (or OS9, or OS10.2).
Galium Arsenide is the material of the future, and always will be.
Why do they need help? It isn't the customer's job to keep a company in business. It is the company's job to keep themselves in business. If the computer "for the rest of us" is too expensive for "the rest of us" to purchase, Apple gets what they deserve. By the way what is Apple's retained earnings? Go read their financial statements sometime. They are interesting reading, if you know what it is you are looking at. Jobs & co. are skinning apple users on a regular basis.
Same thing could have been said about Intel's chips in 1997-98 when the PowerPC chip was way further ahead in MHz and raw speed.
The industry fluctuates. Just because one company leads doesn't mean they will forever. Quit being so short sighted.
sin(6cos(r)+5A)
...drive to Texas and wash your car. I wouldn't mind some rain. ;)
-C
Corollary to Clarke's Third Law: Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
Umm. They can write a contract that says we sell you this hardware and you may never use it for any purpose and if you don't agree to these terms, return the hardware. Now, you the End User can argue that the contract is one where there's unequal bargaining power, it's a contract of adhesion or unconscionable, but people write contracts regarding hardware all the time [see Licitra v. Gateway 2000 in NYS]
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain with all your metadata.
Actualy I think that Gateway is trying to target the market that wants a "trendy" looking computer but all the benefits of a PC. In other words, anybody who looks at a Mac and goes "cool" but then goes "err, does it run Windows?"
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
He's not really building clones . . . he's simply repacking Macs . . . if he takes a Biege G3 ZIF motherboard and puts it in a box with no memory, hard drive or processor . . . what's he really doing?
Clones implies different (compatible) hardware, the original Mac clones were great becuase they actually pushed apple in areas they probably wouldn't have moved too (at least under the leadership at the time).
This guy just sounds like someone destined to go out of business.
It wasn't done with Apple because it would cost too much: Apple's BIOS was much larger than IBM's was. It contained basic code for keyboard, mouse, and windowing systems (including code to draw basic windows and icons, which were copyrighted). An original Mac with no disk could still boot to a graphical error mesage and working cursor, and there was cost/speed savings for Apple as well.
Newer Macs don't have as extensive a BIOS (and I'm not sure what is in it), but Apple now protects itself in other ways.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
I read some people here saying that they'll "finally be able to run Linux on PPC in an affordable way". Well, I wonder if there are no other cheaper alternatives.
I, for one, run basically free software only, and hate x86. I'd love to run Linux on a better-thought-out architecture, but alternatives are usually _so_ much more expensive.
If this guy can make a PPC machine costing US$ 650,00 using Apple motherboards (which I assume are more expensive than no-name PPC motherboards), does that mean I could put together a generic PPC machine for less? Is there some company out there that does that? Are there any other alternatives, ARM perhaps?
So many questions...
The filesystem is the package manager
I like his idea; if I got a Euro for every person who told me that they would like to have a Mac but couldn't afford it, I'd be able to buy a Apple branded G4.
There is also a huge crowd of very knowledgable Mac owners who have to satisfy themselves with older systems or iMacs because they can not afford to buy the luscious Apple Pro systems while they would love to tinker as much as their PC buddies can with their systems of 500-600 Euros. Some of those I know switched to PC hardware because they got fed up with Apple's stance of exploiting their customer's loyalty and keeping prices high.
There is a huge demand for low cost Apple-compatible hardware which can be expanded easily.
Apple could play this very smart by providing hardware to him and since it will be Apple hardware MacOS X will not have too many hiccups running on it.
Apple could even explicitly include a paragraph in their OS X EULA in which they state that they do not garantuee, support or claim OS X to be fit for any non-Apple branded hardware.
Their hardware sales would go up, their OS X sales would go up and -most importantly- the Apple Clones would help Apple to conquer market and credibility with MicroStuffed IT Managers.
While Apple makes good hardware in a superior design with unequated software integration, they have to dump their 'People will buy it if they see the intrinsic superiority of our systems'. People will drool, will moan and will google for an MacOS X theme for Windows.
I'd call it aBox though since the concept is lumping hardware PC style in a box. The 'a' could stand for alternative.
Using the 'i'-nomenclature for hardware would be the same as wearing a 'iGotSuedbyApple' tag
Linux or BSD on x86 offers me great software on powerful hardware.
OS X on Mac boxes offers me a beautiful case and Apple support.
What does a beige Mac offer me? None of the above? I must rush out and buy one right away.
Beep beep.
The only issue I see is apple requiring "Cores" on all repair parts like auto parts-to keep them in the family. That said, IBM tried that with AS400 parts but the courts have ruled that used/spare parts can't be completely controlled. [anti-competitive and all] It's still really hard to find IBM parts because they tie all upgrade sales to "cores" of your previous equipment for a big discount. But if you buy your system outright they can't stop you from reselling it--just try to make it worth your while not too.
If he sold just the case and bits with some "instructions" to build a system he wouldn't get in trouble and dodge the bullet. That would leave apple cracking down on their own channel which I can't see them doing--and getting some cheap marketing out of the deal too. He does need to ditch the name or change the product--way too close to an apple product names. perhaps ibox-computer case would fly though as an after market apple-related part. The courts haven't given them ieverthing yet!
Considering that anything that smells of a Mac clone will surely be squashed by Apple lawyers, why doesn't he just sell the case? As is stated on the site: " A Big thank you to Mick e (dealchatter) for him to allow us to use his iBox design. His design is the reason so many people are interested." Since it's going to be barebone anyway, the target market is already capable of finding their own parts, and buying a Gigabit motherboard is not terribly difficult. I doubt Apple would be able to stop him from selling a piece of plastic and power supply to hobbyists...
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick