Apple wins permanent injunction against Mac clone maker, Psystar

[Justin]

Curtains may be in Psystar's future, following a recent legal victory by Apple. Cupertino has obtained a permanent injunction against the Mac clone builder, making it illegal for them to continue doing business starting the end of this year.

Psystar has two weeks to come into "compliance", and the terms of the injunction make their options very limited. They may be still able to sell clone hardware, but they won't be able to distribute Mac OS X, the Rebel EFI or any mechanism to help people put OS X on unsanctioned systems. As it was such a core part of their business, it is easy to assume they are now destined to fall.

Psystar's fate was easily predicted. Apple is a vigorous defender of their technology. Now it may be time to analyze how attitudes have changed toward hardware that is interoperable with the Mac, as well as Psystar's impact on Apple -- if any. If Psystar crumbles next year, will they have made a positive influence on the Mac community?

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/37363-apple-wins-permanent-injunction-against-mac-clone-maker-psystar.html

 

[compdata]

Lack of competition = higher prices for all. Way to go apple

 

[tengeta]

Congratulations Apple, 25 years after making your name from a commercial against IBM, you are now the new IBM.

 

[CrisisDog]

I liked it when there were Mac clones available back in the '90s, but Steve killed that upon his return to Apple, just as Psystar has been killed this year. I still like my Macs, but I have begun to inch over to the realm of Windows lately, more so since the release of Snow Leopard, the death of PowerPC, and the continuing crappy support for gamers.

 

[treeski]

The article said:
If Psystar crumbles next year, will they have made a positive influence on the Mac community?

How do you mean? Somehow I doubt that even a sliver of the Mac community even knows about Psystar.

 

[guyver1]

I think one of the reasons Apple dont get much public support/empathy is the fact that they are not 'technically' a hardware manufacturer like they like to claim they are.

Since the Intel switch over an Apple machine is nothing more than generic 'IBM PC' hardware with ECC memory wrapped up in a glossy case.

They do not make any of this hardware themselves and the hardware as it stands now is NOT specific to the 'platform'.

They then make far fetched and outlandish claims on 'stability/compatibility' if non apple hardware is used and then charge a quite obviously '£LOL' amount for this 'package'.

If their 'platform' was even remotely genuinely proprietary then i doubt there'd be as much apple bashing.

for power users who want to try out different OS's, the hardware 'argument' put forth by Apple is simply BS marketing schpiel.

 

[LNCPapa]

I really like how guyver1 put it in his last post. It actually made me genuinely smile And what do you mean crappy game support CD? Photoshop has been running flawlessly for years!

 

[Guest]

Once upon a time, IBM's PC was as proprietary machine. Poor, poor IBM's "personal computer" was copied extensively by ne'er do wells, knaves and blackguards. But wait, there's a happy ending, now the PC enjoys a 90% market share, universal PnP, and not to mention legions of happy users. So boys and girls, the moral of the story is, "the tighter you hold on to something, the more it slips through your fingers". Well, actually there are several morals, but who's counting. So, Mr. Jobs is limiting his own market share by suing to maintain it. Hmmmm...!

And what do you mean crappy game support CD? Photoshop has been running flawlessly for years!

LNC, the choice to sequence these two sentences is somewhat puzzling. (?) It's a given that there are myriad more games available for the PC. It's also a given that the graphics arts and photographics community is living in the distant past when Apple's "Color Sync" was dominant in the color management field. In large part these are *****s who are still agonizing over "adobe adproxy" running in their machines, and then only after it has been pointed out to them. They spend the rest of their day wondering such deep thoughts as "do I need more than 512MB of memory to run PSE5". These mental midgets are the fertile field of minds ripe for indoctrination by everyone's favorite svengali, Stevie, the brainwasher" Jobs.

You just ask any dedicated "Apple-o-lyte", "If it runs Windows, and has an Intel CPU, then why isn't that a PC"? They'll tell you in no uncertain terms, "because"! Gee willikers,glad you cleared that up for me, yawn...!

 

[Wendig0]

Since Rebel EFI was taken from Open Source code to begin with, this is definitely not the end of OSX on "any computer". If it were me, I would send the code to an overseas website of a pirate friendly country such as the Netherlands, and post a link to them. That or just move to the Netherlands altogether, change the name of the company, and piss on the judge's orders.

 

[LNCPapa]

Okay, maybe my lightheartedness didn't transfer over in my last post but I was really being silly when I said I've had great gaming support on the Mac side for years because Photoshop has been working flawlessly. Just being goofy, that's all. I am actually a user of Windows, Mac, and linux so I feel like I can make fun of and point out weaknesses for any of those fairly. I also agree with most of the negative things said about Apple in this thread so far.

 

[Wendig0]

guyver1 said:
I think one of the reasons Apple dont get much public support/empathy is the fact that they are not 'technically' a hardware manufacturer like they like to claim they are.

Since the Intel switch over an Apple machine is nothing more than generic 'IBM PC' hardware with ECC memory wrapped up in a glossy case.

They do not make any of this hardware themselves and the hardware as it stands now is NOT specific to the 'platform'.

This brings up a valid point. Since the switch to Intel, the "Apple is a monopoly just like Microsoft" argument now seems even more valid than ever. IBM went through the same thing and lost. Good post Guyver.

 

[yukka]

Windows and Mac support here. I have a 750quid white macbook with a core2duo, 13inch screen, 120gb harddrive, 2gb ddr2 ram and nvidia 9400 graphics. My mum has a 15inch Toshiba Satelite pro with the same cpu, same amount of ram, 3 times the hard drive space. 320quid.

How does the ability to run Mac OS make the white macbook cost an extra 400 pounds? Thats one expensive operating system. They might know how to make stuff pretty but they won't get close to Microsoft if they don't wise up.

Oh, and compared to Windows, Mac OSX is archaic to use in an enterprise.