Slashdot Mirror
First Psystar Mac Clones Ship
An anonymous reader writes "According to Gizmodo, Psystar has begun shipping its Macintosh clones, thus proving that the company is not a hoax. Initial impressions seem to be positive, though Software Update does not work."
I think that honestly if Software Update doesn't work, the machine can't be considered to be a successful model. If you downloaded windows or Linux and could never update, would you consider it a successful install?
Yikes! Who brought the vacuum cleaner to the party! Wow, that video is loud!
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Annoying over-used buzzwords aside, my guess is that the update situation on these will be just like other hackintosh setups, where you can update, but you have to obtain a hacked update installer, or go through a very manual process to do it.
My original hackintosh setup for example was running 10.4.8 and couldn't use software updates, but I was able to move it over to 10.4.10 eventually (though I'm now running on 10.5.1).
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
That way if I need to reinstall, which does happen now and then, I don't need to download again.
There's no serial number check on manual downloads, but I expect that soon we'll be seeing the Apple version of Windows Genuine Advantage.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
I hear you there. It's sad that a hacked box is an attractive purchase option for a Mac not really because of price (well, in a way), but rather because it's a reasonable config that Apple doesn't make: a consumer level expandable desktop. The Mac Pro is full of undeeded workstation grade parts that the home user doesn't need. The iMac is not expandable AND has an unneeded LCD duct-taped on. The Mac Mini is just plain non-expandable (which MIGHT be acceptable as the base specs aren't bad, expect for the insanely crippled graphics chip). The laptops are, well, laptops (I have a laptop that I like for traveling, but no way I'd ever use one for home use).
Plop the mini's hardware into a mini-tower case, and tack on 1 PCI-E x16 slot, 1 PCI-E x1 slot, and 1 regular PCI slot, and then we'd have a machine worthy of my purchase. Until that point I'll keep on using my hacked up generic "mac" and my old PowerMac G4.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
On what grounds? Psystar is installing a retail boxed product of MacOS X on Psystar hardware. There's no copyright violation, so none of the extreme remedies in the Copyright Act apply. Any legal restriction Apple seeks to impose that their software can only be run on their hardware runs afoul of "tying" restrictions in antitrust law. Apple would have to win an antitrust case before they could get a cease and desist order.
What we'll probably see is heavily restrictive DRM in future Macs to prevent this. Or an end to retail sales of MacOS.
LOL. My Hackintosh supports software updates from Apple. Can't they at least install PC EFI? They're a fuckin integrator, they could BUY EFI boards. Morons.
Making laws based on opinions that stem up from false informations leads to witch hunts.
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
Most consumers simply don't need or want what you want.
First, I distinguished between "need" and "want". The desires you chose to ridicule were not in the "needs". You didn't ask what our "needs" were, you asked what we would do with expandability. If you asked "what do you need expandability for" you'd get a different answer.
So once you eliminate that straw man, what I need is an adequate GPU, an adequate hard drive, and no integrated display... and a consumer price. Maybe 40% over what Psystar is asking for their box? That would give Apple their usual markup.
The argument that "most consumers don't need" those features is a bit circular, since they're not available from Apple and haven't been available from Apple at a consumer price since Steve Jobs took over. On the other hand, they *are* available from Wintel box shippers, and most consumers are still buying Wintel boxes.
Don't assume you know all the reasons why they do that. I know I'm regularly surprised by people's answers to why they still use Windows after they express desire for my desktop.
And do consider that you'll never find out if you just ask Mac users, because that's a sample that's pre-selected to only include people for whom the current line of Macs is at least minimally acceptable.
BUT, Apple is still being paid for their OS, which is the only item that many people are interested in. Their EULA says that you can only install it on their hardware, but it's a clause that is QUITE likely to be shot down in court.
As to "profiting off someone else's work", EVERYBODY does that to some extent. ISP's are "profiting" off of Google, Ebay, etc because people buy internet access because of those items. Gas stations are profiting off of car manufaturers because they supply fuel for something that someone else made. Paper companies profit from fax/copier manufacturers because they generate a need for their product.
The bottom line is that Apple sells an operating system. They have a legally questionable clause in there stating that when you buy it you can't install it except on computers that they deem appropriate (namely, ones they made themselves). If that clause is successfully shot down, things will likely return to a semblance of fairness: people who purchase software from a company can install it wherever and on whatever they want to.
I mean seriously: if Microsoft came out with EULA stipulations tomorrow that stated that regardless of how well it worked, you couldn't install MS Office (even a legally purchased copy) on a WINE-equipped Linux machine, Slashdot would shit a jagged brick coated in hot sauce. Apple does the same though and it's reasonable behavior.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
I still find it amusing that so many people think that if you put OSX on a OC you'll get the same experience as you do on Mac hardware... You folks know that if Mac ran on anything it would be just a buggy and fucked up as windows right? The only reason it runs smoothly now is because Apple controls the hardware. The day you can run it on any machine in the world will be the day that Mac zealots finally shut the fuck up about how superior their shit ass OS is. The world will one day learn that Linux is the true way through. Until then clever marketing will sell hunks of shit, and create a cult around them. iFag.
no matter how you configure it it still has a quad core xeon processor and buffered ECC memory which is overkill for most, and hideously overpriced compared to the consumer grade equivalents.
lets just say that the cheapest configured mac pro with edu discount is $2k (it's more, but lets stick with round numbers), and lets say that the psystar clone is $500 (it's less, but again round numbers). I can handle paying an apple premium, sometimes as much as 30-40% extra for the exact same components because it's from apple, but 300% extra is pushing it a little far. what's that I hear? the specs arent comparable? that's exactly my point. dont want or need a mac pro, it's complete overkill when I just want a graphics card and an extra internal drive. I'd be completely happy with an expandable mini
TIAEAE!