One reason Apple may not have wished to sue Psystar is; They are operating a monopoly by demanding that users only use Apple hardware to run their software, OS, etc..

Since as mentioned above MS has been sued for same and lost.

It could also very well be a stunt, since no one has received a machine that is verifiable. If these were out there. People would have them. Not just one guy [poster] since april 2008.

Either scenario is perfectly plausible. Probably a few others as well. Speculation is exactly that. Only speculation.

Or the consumer market is far more shrewd than anyone gives them credit for [about which I seriously have my doubts].

peace,

haans :)

MS gets sued for bundling Windoze Meida Srewer, yet Apple get away with forcing you to use their own hardware andnothing else.

Why are they not getting sued? Becasue money, not anti-competitive practice law, is all that the US cares about.

Apple insists upon selling computers high priced computers when if it simply became a software company it would probably succeed wildly. A second (ok third) choice to Microsoft's monopoly.

PC users consider Apple users an eccentric bunch clinging desperately to "Apple has a better graphics capability". Duh multi-core GPU! Nvidia sez the CPU's dead anyway so does that mean Apple is too?

Apple's software updates work on most Hackentoshes without any problem, with the sole exception of the operating system (kernel) updates, such as: 10.5.1 to 10.5.2. A compatible kernel update was soon available on various torrent sites. All of the other Apple software updates, including Safari, iTunes, QT, Airport, Security Updates, etc. install without problem. My Hackentosh machine ran fine after a 20 minute installation, using a modified 10.5.1 install DVD. (The onboard audio required the obtaining of an audio configuration file, while temporarily booted from an Ubuntu Linux live CD). That being said, I still prefer the (somewhat more intelligent) file organization of a Windows operating system.

I dont believe for a second thats the real Dr. drashek, M.D.! 
I mean, the comment was, dare i say it, lucid, insightful, and readable....if it is really him, i just have to say, i dont know if theres drugs you're taking, or drugs you need to be taking, but please,stick to it!
But I still suspect its a copy cat....how did the illustrious Ed. overlook this?
Chem C

It's pretty obvious. If these people along with their ghost company that doesn't seem to exist physically were not Apple's own employees playing a role, acting to create marketing hype and as a marketing test to see if OSX Mac clones would sell... well then Apple would have sued them immediately. No chance that Steve Jobs wouldn't have done that already. 
The whole "hacked" OSX versions "appeared" on the 'net must obviously come from Apple itself as well. 
This is just viral marketing tactics and nothing more than that. It's a way marketeers are used to follow in order to create hype.

Apparently you have not been following the sad history of Apple Software Updates, and the frequency with which they break on Apple's own hardware. 

For that matter, the frequency with which Apple's own hardware breaks -- often within days of the warranty expiring. Check out the G5 threads on macintouch.com for a good beginning on this subject. Research? We've heard of it.

Do you still feel Psystar customers are gambling? 

Perhaps so, but the stakes are commensurately lower...

Apple stole name Apple & Now Apple whines about effect of expanding its system to take in Windows & have CPU made by Intel? well result is their own fault.

If you Pay $29 for leopard, you paid for follow up support as much as anyone. However, it mush be tough to run computer with cpu wrapped in plastic bag? Could be Big Money there.
drashek


"Apple insists upon selling computers high priced computers when if it simply became a software company it would probably succeed wildly. A second (ok third) choice to Microsoft's monopoly."

Wow. Let me see - the company is making so much money that they have 18 BILLION dollars in the bank, and they aren't successful? You have a very strange definition of successful. I know a lot of companies that wish they were that unsuccessful.


Why in god's name would anyone want to deal with that kind of unfriendly consumerism garbage? Windows can be a bit of a pain to deal with sometimes, just like the government, but Apple sounds like trying to deal with Hitler's government.

Hitler is Jobs in this case I imagine. ;)