Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mac Cloner Psystar Ships First Service Pack

Posted by kdawson on from the cloe-wars dept.

Preedit writes "Not only is Mac clone maker Psystar continuing to defy Apple's ban on third-party Leopard installations, it's supporting the hardware with updates. Psystar Mac clones shipped as of Monday will include a 'service pack' that features fixes for a range of problems, some of them inherent in Apple's own software, according to InformationWeek. The fixes address a range of troubles, from glitches in Apple's Time Machine backup feature to quirks in the Keyboard Viewer and Character Palette entries in Leopard's system preferences menu. There's also support for the latest version of Java and other updates. According to the story, by offering a full menu of support, Psystar appears to be daring Apple to attempt to enforce provisions in the Leopard license agreement that forbid third-party installations and sales." We've been discussing Psystar clones for a while.

16 of 468 comments (clear)

  1. Much as I hate to defend Apple's prices... by argent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The system is priced at $804.99. A similar, Apple-branded computer could cost more than $2,000.

    The Psystar system has a single Core 2 Duo CPU.

    They don't say what the "similar, Apple-branded computer" is, but if it's a Mac Pro it's got two four-core CPUs.

    The problem is that Apple doesn't make a similar computer. If they did, Psystar wouldn't have a market. And Apple would have a bigger one.

    1. Re:Much as I hate to defend Apple's prices... by yincrash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Apple did try to go for this market, they'd need to cut their margins by a lot to compete with the current pc market which plays in this price range.

    2. Re:Much as I hate to defend Apple's prices... by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The obvious comparison would be the iMac, as far as performance specs go.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    3. Re:Much as I hate to defend Apple's prices... by MoonBuggy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why? They wouldn't be competing with Dell, they'd be competing with themselves. People don't (and never will, I'll bet) buy a Mac because it's the cheapest, they buy it because they feel it's superior in some way and thus worth the money.

      What they would have to worry about is cannibalising the iMac sales, because a standard-tower Mac plus a third party monitor, graphics card & RAM would be cheaper than an iMac and superior in every way except form-factor, which isn't really high on most people's list for a desktop.

    4. Re:Much as I hate to defend Apple's prices... by drsmithy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What they would have to worry about is cannibalising the iMac sales, because a standard-tower Mac plus a third party monitor, graphics card & RAM would be cheaper than an iMac and superior in every way except form-factor, which isn't really high on most people's list for a desktop.

      No it wouldn't. The mythical mini-tower Mac, if it were ever made, would be priced at a little less than equivalent iMacs (if not exactly the same).

      The real threat from such a box would be to Mac Pro sales.

    5. Re:Much as I hate to defend Apple's prices... by DurendalMac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hmm, desktop hard drive? Check. Standard laptop RAM? Check. Ability to replace the video card? Technically, check. It can be replaced as it's a separate module. Upgrading...well, you'd have to have a lower-end card and find a service provider willing to order/install the better one for you. However, it's kind of a moot point. You know why? BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE DON'T GIVE A SHIT. Geeks need to get that through their obstinate skulls. The vast majority of the buying public doesn't give a shit about upgrading their video card. They just want a computer that works so they can check their email, do word processing, and organize their photos. Upgrade-happy geeks are a tiny sliver of the overall market.

  2. Re:These guys have balls by rekoil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    More likely, they're hoping to grab a quick buzz, score some venture capital, and then run off into the sunset, cash in hand, before Apple legal pulls the plug on the party...

  3. How the hell... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... are they shipping a service pack to correct problems in Apple's binaries - or are they downloading the open source portions and fixing/rebuilding/shipping those as fixes?

    In that case having open source is again working against Apple.

  4. Apple doesn't dare sue them by Animats · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple is unlikely to sue Psystar. Apple would probably lose; Apple's EULA is an "illegal tying arrangement" under antitrust law. Psystar is tiny, but a court loss would encourage bigger players to start making clones.

    More likely, Apple will stop selling their OS as a boxed product.

  5. Re:Bet ten to one by Uncle+Focker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My guess is that they will wait until the company dies. Then, if, for some reason, it fails to die, they'll sue 'em--and win, of course. Clearly, Apple has this one--this is a blatent knowing violation of the EULA by a for-profit corporation. There is no guarantee that that part of the EULA is even legally enforceable. Just because it's written in a EULA doesn't mean it has any actual force of law to back it up.
  6. Re:Slow News Day? by meadowsoft · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IANAL, but this sounds like the IBM vs. Clone lawsuits of the 80s where IBM wanted to be the only company to sell their IBM software on IBM hardware. They lost that battle, and if APple were to try to enforce their EULA they would lose that one as well. I think they aren't suing because 1) this isn't their market and 2) they wouldn't win and it would open the door for a precendent where any and all PC vendors would start selling hardware with OSX preinstalled.

  7. Maybe Apple Wants This To Happen by mkaylor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just maybe Apple is allowing this to continue to test the waters for a PC version of OS/X

    1. Re:Maybe Apple Wants This To Happen by kannibal_klown · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just maybe Apple is allowing this to continue to test the waters for a PC version of OS/X I doubt it.

      One of the main reasons Apples are stable is because the hardware they have to support comes from a very small bin. Heck, even with that they're not 100% bug free (google MBP keyboard issues).

      A lot of problems in Windows come from either poor drivers or low-quality components (which in turn often have old/poor drivers). For all of the flack we give MS, they do an alright job considering they have to support millions and millions of combinations of hardware.

      If next month they released a generic PC capable OSX it would be a disaster. Most of their problems would come from bargain-bin PCs from Joe Sixpack trying to run OSX on his $150 Walmart box.

      Linux has been dealing with this for a few years now, and though the community drivers are quite good, a lot of distros have problems with more "unique" or cruddy hardware.
  8. Re:Slow News Day? by p0tat03 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is as much "perceived value" in style and interface as there is "perceived value" in genuine performance. A computer is a tool to do something, and for the vast majority of users not running servers, the interface contributes to the tool's usefulness as much as teh megahurtz.

    Having used some truly horrible interfaces in my time, and having seen the real productivity improvements that come with superior design, I assign a pretty high value to usability. Just look at any recent Motorola phone *shudder*.

  9. Re:Slow News Day? by p0tat03 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you have any information to actually back this up or are you just making things up? Why in your view is the operation "shady"?

    Slashdot covered this before, as have other sites. In summary, the company pulled credit card orders a few short days after announcing the product. Efforts to track down the company at its real-life address turned out to be difficult, and we still have not seen any evidence that the company is legit (there was no business by its name at the address listed on its site). When confronted with this information the company changed its physical address on its website numerous times, none of which seem to reflect a real business. THAT is why it seems shady. Indeed, it looks like this is an amateur operation at best, a scam at worst.

    Apple is overpriced because they can be. They are on x86 architecture now so they don't really have an excuse. You CAN compare them to similar spec'd PC hardware to see how overpriced they are.

    Go ahead. Do it. I've done it, as have many others. When you don't make cheap excuses like "oh yeah let's leave out the Bluetooth, 'cos who uses it anyways?" you'll find that Macs are quite competitive. Yes, there's still a premium, but "as overpriced as can be" is not it. I would say Sony's are far more overpriced than Macs.

  10. FYI by mpapet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The mac market share isn't 4%. That's a dumb number that's used to make Windows appear much more dominant.

    Compare Dell's unit sales to HP's unit sales to Apple's unit sales for a given segment and you'll find Apple in the top-5 for sure on any given month. In laptops, Apple is #1 per unit and dollar and has been for a really, really long time.

    Still, I doubt there's the expertise on /. for a legitimate discussion about anti-trust.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html