Slashdot Mirror
Psystar Will Countersue Apple
An anonymous reader sends us to CNet for news that Apple clone maker Pystar plans to countersue Apple. We discussed Apple's suit last month. "Mac clone maker Psystar plans to file its answer to Apple's copyright infringement lawsuit Tuesday as well as a countersuit of its own, alleging that Apple engages in anticompetitive business practices. Miami-based Psystar... will sue Apple under two federal laws designed to discourage monopolies and cartels, the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Antitrust Act, saying Apple's tying of the Mac OS to Apple-labeled hardware is 'an anticompetitive restraint of trade,' according to [an] attorney... Psystar is requesting that the court find Apple's EULA void, and is asking for unspecified damages."
XServe is hardware.... not software moron.
I think you mean "You'd be able to straight-up install and RUN OS X Server".
Bad example, as the Xserve costs pretty much what a comparable server from Dell costs, it just includes a Server OS. Your Dell server needs a separate license for Windows Server. When you add in CALs, an Exchange/file server can easily cost more in software than it does in hardware.
I did a comparison last year and found that a Dell PowerEdge with similar specs to the Xserve cost less than 10% more:
Dell $6506 vs Apple $5495
but when you add in Windows Server, Exchange Standard, and the required CALs to support 100 users, the Dell ends up well over $10,000 more. The Xserve comes with an unlimited license to Mac OS X Server.
Dell $17,206 vs Apple $5495.
I'm sure you can spec out a DIY PC box that saves you a few hundred in hardware, but you can't make Windows server licensing cost less.
Of course, you can also use Linux or other free software, but if that was your intent, you don't need to steal Apple's software in the first place. Even so, Apple's Xserve hardware is attractive enough that buyers do get it and install YDL.
Apple's Open Calendar Server vs Microsoft Exchange
Will Google's Android Play DOS to Apple's iPhone?
Your argument would have more weight if you stated one.
What are these "horrid tactics," licensing software for less than Microsoft does? Trying to get iTunes users to try Safari on Windows? Releasing software updates faster than most rivals? Processing hundreds of vulnerability reports within a couple months? Lay it on the line if you have a grief, don't just suggest evil lurking were none does.
What's Next from Apple: New iPods Sept 22, iPhone OS 2.1, iTunes 8.0
Apple is really pushing it once they moved to the Intel platform, now that Apple PC's are identical to IBM Clone PC's (minus some smbios work + openfirmware) they no longer have the "Power Architecture excuse" Their hardware is WAY over priced for what it is ($599 for a base macmini which compares to a $200 pc these days.) and Apple rides it's hardware sales on it's great OS. OS X is wonderful compared to Microsoft, and Apple could easily beat out Microsoft on the home desktop environment. Alternatively, Pystar will never win. Opening up the OS X license to all systems would be a MASSIVE cut to Apple's revenue stream... and Apple will fight tooth and nail to prevent it. Pystar is tiny compared to Apple.. big money always wins.
OK well this "monopolistic actions" have created a great product for the past 10 years at least. Psystar should lose this case. Apple is more than far away from a monopoly. They are at like 11% of pc market. Maybe my stats are wrong but psystar should lose and I hope they do. Unfortunately these practices have helped created a superior product.
Nope, it says "Apple-labeled," not "Macintosh." You could install OS X on an Apple II (if you could get it to run) and still comply with the EULA.
Of course, "Apple labeled" is a stupid term: as far as I'm concerned, if I stuck an Apple sticker (a couple of them come with OS X, by the way) on my Thinkpad then I think it ought to qualify!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Since when is Apple anything other than a Parasite? They built an OS with open source software as a base, repeatedly refuse to deal with security issues, and built a full scale monopoly around selling music that won't work on standard hardware, or for that matter, any hardware that doesn't pay Apple protection money to be AAC compatible.
Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
At $500 a license.
Because if you're forcing them to let you undermine their hardware sales, then you're going to PAY for development and PAY to have your hardware supported.
Don't go thinking that if Psystar wins AND forces Apple to sell that the price is going to stay anywhere around $120 a copy. It'll go way, way up.
Except that at $500, that'll double the price of the $500 machine the slashbots want to buy. And I doubt Apple will cut any sort of deal.
Tell me how this makes sense.
bollocks of steel
in your face
ha
Leopard is not equivalent to "Vista Home Premium."
Start with Vista Ultimate ($183 on Amazon), and then look up the Enterprise or 64-bit edition so you can address more than 4GB of RAM.
Apple has released over 70 free updates to Mac OS X during which Microsoft has released 7. Windows Mobile gets an update a year if you're lucky, while the iPhone has received eleven.
Apple has a right to sue anyone, even "bloggers" who it thinks it should reveal its industrial spies. Apple lost its case, bringing a legitimate legal case to the courts is a right, not an affront to society.
And "silencing criticism" - shit, Apple is not a country jackass. It's a free market, you can leave if you don't like their products. Your attempts to turn being a customer in being a political prisoner suffering human rights abuses is ridiculous.
Also, I can post whatever the "fuck" I want. Why are you "silencing my criticism"? Waa.
Grow up and learn how to handle facts rather than throw tantrums.
Microsoft's Mojave Attempts to Wet Vista's Desert
Microsoft's Mojave Experiment Exposes Serious Vista Problems
The language is ambiguous: does "Apple-labeled" mean "labeled by Apple" or "labeled with an Apple logo?" I choose to believe it means the latter; the fact that Apple supplies Apple logo stickers in the OS X package supports this position. I mean, what else are they supposed to be used for, if not to "Apple-label" the computer you're installing the OS on?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Apple knows that the moment their OS becomes avaliable on general x86 hardware Microsoft will be all over them. Rather than to take the fight they pick up the crumbs left over by Microsoft. They are just youre average cowards at Apple.
I think they have a huge windows of opportunity here because of the Windows Vista mess that they wilfully let slip by.
HTTP/1.1 400
And your definition is an equally meaningless 31 word assertion that the acronym "PC" implies IBM-descended hardware with an Intel/x86 CPU. And that's been complete bullshit for almost twenty-five years, ever since the AMSTRAD PC hit the market. PC stands for Personal/Professional Computer, and the buck stops there. It is no less ambiguous than that in this modern age. Drop your crotchety geek-cred one-upmanship and roll into the 21st century already.
The obvious solution to that would be to stop selling copies of OSX and only bundling them with a new Macintosh.
If Apple wanted its users to buy upgrades, it wouldn't be able to do that.
Then they can live without selling users upgrades. They sell hardware, not software, right? So it won't hurt their business model all that much.
Oh, wait... the whole "we sell hardware thing" is only a convenient line Apple trots out to defend their monopolistic practices, and has no basis in reality. My bad. It would hurt their (unfair) business model.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
I really will not be sorry for them if they lose this case. Oh, you mean you can't use a EULA to artificially limit what type of hardware your OS gets installed on just so you can push more of your hardware? Tough shit, Apple. Maybe its time they have a meeting with the RIAA about updating their business model. Maybe they shouldn't have moved to Intel chips and made 99% of their hardware identical to PC hardware. Maybe then they would be able to maintain complete dictatorial control over their OS, hardware, and customer base. It amazes me how many of you people bitch about freedom of choice and how artificial restrictions are blasphemous, except when Apple does it.
No one cares what your captcha was
Houston TX, USA
You mean like selling a copy with an altered kernel to allow it to run on non-Apple hardware?
Yeah, see, even if we accept your interpretation of that legal language, the argument still doesn't work.
Wrong it's the BIOS on the motherboard that's altered so OS X runs without modifications. But nice try there!
Open Source, Open Standards, Open Minds
I was kind thinking along the same lines, if they force Apple to make OS X run on commodity hardware can MS then be forced to make windows run on oh say, IBMs power processors? Sounds like a dangerous precedent to me. Its companies like psystar that are running America into the ground. Next thing you know you will be seeing Sorny sold at Best Buy.
Once again, your clear error in the discussion is simply not correctable. Your language and ignorance simply bear no weight.
which means that those words that Apple claims represent an EULA have no legal weight.
Not a single court agrees with you.
WTF? USING MY OWN FUCKING PROPERTY most certainly IS a right that I possess!
Yes, but your property does not extend one inch beyond what was purchased. Since what you describe is not within your property, it is a moot point.
That's not true. See Wikipedia
Unsurprisingly, your reading comprehension is as robust as your rhetorical skills. No court has ever ruled EULAs categorically unenforceable. Thanks for playing.
Better luck with your trolling in the future.