MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Apr 15, 08 - 12:14 pm Comment from: JadisOne

They are about to lose all their money paying legal fees trying to fight Apple over selling unlicensed intellectual and trade property developed by and belonging to Apple Inc.

Apr 15, 08 - 12:15 pm Comment from: Jim - TIV

Checked out their site yesterday... the $399 is a lost leader. I priced out a base model at $799. I can get an iMac refurb for that.

Apr 15, 08 - 12:19 pm Comment from: Randian

MDN's take is absolutely spot on. This is nothing more than an upstart company saying, "Here we are! Look at us! We're the good guys!" They, too, will either become PC uglybox assemblers, or they will simply disappear into the ephemera of wannabe's.

"which has similar internal hardware as Apple's $2000 Mac Pro."

??? Yeah right!

Sounds intriguing... sort of like for all the people who don't want to go through all of the time and effort to hack their Dell to run os x.

Okay, whoever owns this "company" is either the biggest idiot on the planet or the most brilliant.

There's no middle ground here.

In other words, it's either the obvious (they have no right and will be shut down immediately) or they found some legal loophole that nobody ever saw coming.

Apr 15, 08 - 12:27 pm Comment from: Buster

I call bullshit on this unless you are the type of person that doesn't want wheels when buying a car.
You have to pay to add stuff (at a cost to make it work) like the OS? How about a DVD-burner? Firewire? A reasonable graphics card?

Funny how the costs go up and at the end, it may not work with the next Leopard upgrade.

Oh yeah...I want one.....

will this site ever give balanced views on apple, im not saying what psystar is doing is right just that MDN should point out the positives of this situation as well as the negatives.

So i will add one or two

1)a product like this could bring OS X to the masses, the masses of people that want to try apple but dont feel they can afford to take the risk

2)it shows how badly overpriced apple hardware is

3)it may push apple into upgrading its mac mini line and show apple that if handled correctly it could be a soarway success

yes build em cheap stack em high is not the apple way you say, so what exactly have they done with the ipod line then??? they have products at every price point and to achieve mass market as apple must surely wish then they need to do the same with the mac. The ipod mini/nano story shows that apple can do this without damaging its brand.

Apr 15, 08 - 12:29 pm Comment from: HMCIV

Psystar will come and go like those before it. In the meantime enjoy the sensationalism!

More power to them. If that's what it takes for Apple to get the message that we want more choices than the all-in-one iMac or the non-upgradeable mac mini. Give us a mini tower or allow us to buuild our own systems and ran OSX.

sounds like the ultimate gift for the mother-in-law you really love!!!

Apr 15, 08 - 12:34 pm Comment from: FreddyThePig

@macattack

I accept that you actually believe what you wrote, therefore; you're an idiot.

"Now Psystar has come out of the gates swinging..."

That's a mixed metaphor isn't it? Who comes out of a "gate" while "swinging"?

@macattack,

1) There is more risk with one of these than a true Mac. One of these might not work at all after the next update.

2) How is Apple hardware badly overpriced when it is roughly the same price as comparable systems. Apple's lack of low cost systems isn't the same as what they do offer being overpriced.

3) It's likely this will be crushed so quickly no information will be generated regarding demand. If Apple adjusts their stable at all in response to this, it is more likely they develop the missing mini-tower.

Apr 15, 08 - 12:46 pm Comment from: V-Train

Yesterday, their address was 10645 SW 112th St, Miami, FL. Someone noted in their forum that the location is a residence. Suddenly, today their address is 10481 NW 28th St, Miami, FL, which is an industrial area.

Sounds like Psystar is a load of BS.

There is no doubt that these guys don't have a leg to stand on...MDN is absolutely correct in their assessment...For PC World to claim that $399 is the true price of the computer (that doesn't even include an OS), or that it's similar to the Mac Pro's hardware is embarrassing for a tech rag. People are trying to create hit traffic and portray Apple as the bad guy...De rigeur of late...Go to Psystar's site and it's full of jabs at Apple's pricing...pathetic. Magic Word: "coming"...As in "OpenMac: NOT coming to a desk near you".

you completely miss macattacks point, he is neither purporting the psystar computer nor decrying it, he is balancing up MDN's biased journalism for them,

also name calling without explanation of why you think that is evidence of the dumbed down world we are living in

I speced out the OpenPro to about $1000 less than a comparable mac pro. But the mac pro has a xeon chip so you gotta add that extra cost to the OpenPro to match exactly... then there is no firewire.... lame, now I need to go out and buy a firewire card, Keyboard and mouse??? does it even come with one? If not ... add that to the OpenPro cost. Firewire 800? nope.. add that too...iLife already on the mac... add that to the cost. So when it comes down to it.... They aren't that far off at all and the mac pro looks a shit load better. To top it off as someone mentioned.. will it even work with the new leopard release??

sorry yes the poster above is quite correct, i am not for or against this system, i was actually making a point about the quality of the writing on this site, its one sided cult like to the point of propaganda.

Good journalism is about balance and reason. I made those remarks simply to try and engage the readers brains a little more than the article did.

Apr 15, 08 - 01:01 pm Comment from: Ampar

" . . . come out of the gates swinging..."

I think it's "come out of Gates swigging" and getting blind drunk afterwards because you can't believe what you just did.

"similar internal hardware as Apple's $2000 Mac Pro"

This is so off-base. Looking at the specs it appears closer to the Mini.

Apr 15, 08 - 01:06 pm Comment from: John

@Raymond:

My thoughts exactly: that's like saying "a new Hyundai, with similar specs to a Ferrari..."

These guys need to be careful and research what they say before spewing stuff like this!

John

Wow, Psystar.com opens almost as fast as MDN...

Good journalism is NOT about balance. It is about truth and accuracy.

Apr 15, 08 - 01:10 pm Comment from: Macromancer

@ Jim:

It's not 'lost' leader' and its not that its just MISleading.

They are picking the wrong fight.
Their product is not worth investing in...
- no guaranty that would run future Mac OS releases
- cheap parts
- little chance that they will be around to support their product
- the few who really need to explore this option have already installed Mac OS X on their non-Apple boxes.

Apr 15, 08 - 01:15 pm Comment from: Ampar

Macromancer:

It's not and it's just, as in "it is".

I am willing to pay for a Mac to get a Mac.
Who's with me?

http://www.psystar.com/contact.html

Check it out, they're right next to the Miami Airport to make their quick getaway!!!!

Apr 15, 08 - 01:21 pm Comment from: HolyMackerel

But Psystar raises an interesting issue. I know that Apple says you aren't allowed to run Leopard on non-Apple equipment. So Apple have a right not to support it. But company warranty is not government law.

Do I have the governmental legal right to try to put any OS on my Mac, given I purchased the copy of Leopard legally?

I know that Apple will threaten them, but may not sue since if Apple looses the case then much more will be at stake for Apple (and ironically MS).

Apr 15, 08 - 01:25 pm Comment from: Real IT Guy

There are no antitrust issues.

Antitrust law involves collusion between multiple companies to substantially control a market. Apple is a single company that can legally have complete control over their own product.

These morons must be getting the same legal advice SCO has been getting...

Not quite the same spec as the Mac Pro, but more evidence that Apple needs a lower-end tower. If these were sold exclusively outside of the US without an OS, they'd probably sell a lot of them.

Most people could get by just fine with 10.4.11 anyway.

Apr 15, 08 - 01:32 pm Comment from: Ampar

"If these were sold exclusively outside of the US without an OS, they'd probably sell a lot of them."


Like a certain unlocked cellphone (swap carrier for OS)? Hmmm.

im sorry arent truth and accuracy the same thing with regard to an article, i mean if it wasnt accurate it wouldnt be the truth right?

you can tell parts of a story that are true/accurate, but unless you give the whole balanced picture it isnt good journalism

Apr 15, 08 - 01:33 pm Comment from: ron

"Most people could get by just fine with 10.4.11 anyway."

Until 10.6 changes the world.

@brocktoon

sounds like you have been watching too much Fox news

i mean you could tell a story that a woman killed a man and that would be truthful and accurate but completely neglect to mention that it was inself defence, to be accurate you must tell the whole balanced story and good journalism often asks questions to engage its reader/viewer.

I have to agree with other posters that I would like to see more balanced views given by MDN, with more questions asked of apple, i have come away from this often feeling that I have been told what to think rather than make up my own mind. Opinion pieces are great but have to be a written a bit more from a neutral standpoint than we are getting.

Lot's of new posters, probably all very close to Miami.

Apr 15, 08 - 01:50 pm Comment from: Jim - TIV

@Macromancer and Ampar... I stand corrected... it is just misleading

Apr 15, 08 - 01:51 pm Comment from: AlanAudio

Unsupported hardware is bad for Apple because if customers buy this product and then find that it stops working when the next OS update comes out, who will get blamed by the press ? Apple or Psystar ?

Apple gets no financial benefit from the sale of these computers, but if they prove to be unreliable, users will say that their Mac doesn't work properly. It's a double negative for Apple as they lose a sale and also get the blame when it goes wrong.

While I agree that there is a market for a Mac midi tower, I don't think that illicit clones are the solution. I've always felt that the way forward is for Apple to licence a few PC manufacturers to make Apple-approved computers to be sold as OS X-compatible computers, with strict controls over the exact hardware specification and the quality of the components.

Open mac is running a store bought version of OS X. It's running on an EFI emulator so OS X thinks it's a mac. Some extra kexts might have been added to the install to get audio working.

An apple update isn't going to do anything bad to an open mac install. It'll behave like a regular os x install on a real mac.

to fight ass-h&los;BRING IT ON SMALL FRY

seems like a publicity stunt if ever i heard one

I still want to know who's behind Psystar. The fact that they're vowing to "fight" strongly suggests to me that Psystar is a pawn in someone else's game to damage Apple's seemingly unstoppable Mac momentum - either directly (by forcing the issue and being able to sell PC clones that can run OS X), or indirectly (by bringing up the old "Macs are unnecessarily expensive" myth, as is already happening).

Contrary to MDN's take, I don't believe this is a "publicity stunt". Somebody means business here, and it'll be interesting to find out who that is.

Who can argue with jesus?

Apr 15, 08 - 02:07 pm Comment from: Reality Check

Only real fan boys would decry the opportunity for another company to bring competition into the market place... You don't have to buy the junk - but you might enjoy some financial benefits if other companies were able to offer competing hardware. I, for one, hope the company succeeds in its legal battle. Fat chance though.

This "company" is obviously in it for the short term gain. They may indeed sell enough of these to make a huge profit. I'm guessing that is their "business plan": sell and run.

What is the warranty? When it is found that they do not support these machines will they refund?

I feel for the people who buy these things; they should be informed that their new purchase will work minimally (that configuration is pretty weak) and for only a limited time.

To jesus et al:

I do believe that MDN can balance or not balance, but the final call belongs to MDN. MDN get their take because MDN belongs to MDN. This forum allows agreement or disagreement or, if you will, balance.

Thank you for your attention. That is all.

what a pointless post, contribute something valuable other than an insult, or at least if you are going to insult back it up with some reason

i agree that there could be loads of customer service issues with this that apple could be blamed for, however we should be talking about the points it does raise such as low cost way to entering the world of mac.

Apple has achieved it with the Ipod, why not the mac?

and i cant comment on america but here in Britain we do seem to pay a hefty premium for apple goods compared to similarly specced windows machines, i recently asked a friend what she was planning to upgrade her ageing desktop to, she said id like a mac but i cant afford it so im going to have to stick with windows. I think a lot of people are in the same position.

i dont think they were questioning the right of MDN to provide almost hysterical goebells like reporting, just the fact that it isnt good journalism

thank you, that is all

Personally, I think Apple's EULA violates quite a bit of other laws/human rights. Imagine that Sony would sell music that plays anywhere and the EULA would only allow you to play it on Sony players.
It would be Sony's good right to engineer their music downloads such that it is hard to play on another player, but that is not the same as "forbidding" something that is quite easy to do.
It looks like this world uses double standards for music and Software.

What if software vendors would prohibit running Windows executables under Wine?
What if the entire software industry would issue such restrictive EULA's?

What would come of such excellent products such as VMware?

In a time of virtualization, it also sounds inappropriate to prevent people to run software on whatever processor, emulator, than one cares to choose. The distinction between hardware/firmware/emulation/virtualization is getting more and more blurry.

If M$ wants to prohibit running Windows under virtualization, everybody hollers this can't be done. Apparently Apple can do this without much controversy.
In my opinion, Apple is welcome continue to make it difficult for others to run their OS, but it should strike the restriction in their EULA.

Goebbels-like reporting... Really. Really?
That is all.