Apple wants Psystar out of business

Theo - one of the court's rulings was that Psystar did, infact, make copies of OSX and distribute them. If true, then tehy're a bunch of dumb bastards.

they've been selling bits of code stolen from hackint0sh community. just bunch of thieves with no respect to someone's R&D whether it's apple or hackint0sh community.

This is not so very different from burning heretics at the stake in the Middle Ages.

According to Apple, they are "defiling" Apple by daring to run OSX on hardware that has not been officially sanctified by Saint Jobs Himself (whereas the Psystar hardware was probably more reliable and user-repairable than the Chinese sweatshop junk that Apple sells).

They could of come to a licensing agreement that Psystar would have to pay some fee per unit, and continued to profit from the sales of OSX, but this was not Acceptable, apparently due to the aforementioned religious issues. The heretics had to be burned at the stake and sent to financial hell for all to see.

Psystar will just declare bankruptcy, with little damage done to them financially (and the employees will go on to make money in some other manner). However, the real damage has already been done to Apple - snotty, control-freak zealotry has been displayed to the public in all its glory. And who wants to be subjugated to the whims of a company or group of people who think this way? And I am NOT advocating people should use Microsoft products instead, as they are no better in this respect (and less secure). But Google-OS looks interesting, and there is always Linux...

last thing the world needs is more apple anything.

Apple has terrible policies and is more closed source and proprietary than anybody in the industry. They make shiny things to attract people who like shiny things and charge a lot for them. And if something goes wrong they show you the door. They engage in ridiculous advertising. From their mac is 10x faster a pc garbage they used to throw around (until they switched to intel and started saying how much faster the new macs were than the old ones)... to their current Mac vs PC advertising that used to be clever but now is blatant pc bashing, without actually getting specific about anything. Upgrade to 10.6 so it will delete your user account? Time machine that corrupts your backups... I think you'll find you've left one set of problems and got a whole new set of them.....

haven't pystar gotten the Number 1 rule with apple?DO NOT ANGER THEM BY REPRODUCING / MODIFYING THEIR PRODUCTS. Dont they get why communities like hackintosh, osx86 project, etc DO NOT provide links for downloads of mac??

seriously-a company like that deserves to be sued and fined.

and RE Pent. There's nothing wrong with apple. They arent snoty zealots. They just dont want other people to pirate their products. its against the law, and its their products, thats why they're reacting like that.

If MS or Linux are happy no matter on what hardware in what ppl run. Who is Apple to dictate people whose own core is Linux/Unix. Just that "their" rules/EULA doesnt permit!?! people/HTC run Vista on smartphones, Win-3.1 and Win-98 on ARM, MS is not bothered. Just like they are packaging AV like code, licking what what they spat "Mac is secure" Soon they'll be licking this own spit as well silencing when more people might start runing Mac in other devices. Suddenly their line will change to "And the Mac cameth downth from the heaven to to enable thee runth on whatever hardware thy shelth please, so bow to thy false idol Jobs".

"Who is Apple to dictate people whose own core is Linux/Unix." - do some research then comment

@mi1400: OS X's core is the XNU kernel, derived from NextStep, a sort of hybrid Mach microkernel with BSD-alike sycalls and ABI. It's their own kernel and has about as much in common with Linux as the Windows kernel. A lot of the userland is BSD. If you want the open source bits, you can have Darwin. The rest is Apple IP.

I can see why this is damaging to Apple. OS X is intended for a narrow range of hardware, which is certified to run flawlessly with the OS. Add more and more chipsets, processors and peripherals into the mix with their associated hacked kexts and you end up with something about as reliable as Windows ME with shoddy Taiwanese webcams attached to it. Apple doesn't want this associated with their brand and I can't say I blame them.

I'm not a fan of Apple: They're too controlling for my liking. That, however, is no excuse to appropriate their IP and, in my opinion, Psystar is doing just that, a parasite business built on the efforts of others.

I think the think that's doing irreparable harm to Apple's reputation is their increasingly dodgy yet still way overpriced hardware.

please refer to the original article on groklaw.net, everything is explained there.

bits relevant to your comment:

"And finally, to those who are inclined to think Apple is just a big, whining control freak, another expert for Apple, Carol Scott, tells the court [PDF] about some surveys she did, and the results may surprise you and help you to understand what the problem is with Psystar's business plan:
3. In preparation for my testimony in this case, between July and August 2009, I conducted three surveys of approximately 300 respondents each in order to determine, among other things, the likelihood of confusion as to the relationship between Psystar and Apple. Based on a survey of consumers who viewed Psystar’s website, I concluded that consumers are highly likely to be confused and wrongly believe that there must be some relationship between Psystar and Apple. The survey indicated, among other things, that (1) consumers are likely to believe that Psystar received permission from Apple to offer Mac OS X® on Psystar computers; (2) consumers who experience problems when using Psystar computers are likely to believe they are entitled to technical service and support from Apple; and (3) to the extent that consumers experience problems with Psystar computers, they are likely to blame those problems on Apple regardless of the true source of the problems.
4. In one survey, I tested whether consumers would blame problems with Psystar computers running Mac OS X on Psystar or Apple. This survey asked respondents to imagine that they had purchased a Psystar computer and experienced the following four types of computer problems: (1) some of the software programs designed for Mac OS X would not work; (2) the computer froze or crashed often; (3) the computer ran very slowly; and (4) the computer would not turn on. For each of these problems, respondents were asked whether they thought the problem was due to Psystar’s hardware, Mac OS X or both. For the first three problems, a majority of the respondents blamed either Mac OS X, or both Mac OS X and the Psystar hardware. For the fourth problem, where the computer simply would not turn on, 53.1% of consumers blamed Psystar and not Mac OS X. Nonetheless, 28.4% of the respondents thought that the problem resulted from both Psystar hardware and Mac OS X.

5. Apple has established one of the world’s most famous brands through substantial and consistent brand-building activities that have been studied in university classrooms, including mine, as a textbook example of how to create a strong reputation that resonates with customers. Apple has built a reputation for the highest level of customer satisfaction, innovative and high quality products, and excellent customer service and support. As shown by my study, problems with Psystar computers likely will be associated with Mac OS X and Apple. Technical problems with Psystar computers therefore will undermine the reputations of both Apple and its products and, as a result, have an adverse effect on Apple’s brand and goodwill. For example, Apple produced records of telephone calls and written requests consumers made to Apple’s customer support group, AppleCare®, regarding problems with Psystar computers and/or Mac OS X on those computers. Those inquiries to AppleCare and the results from my study confirm the harm that problems with Psystar computers have caused and will likely cause Apple's brand.

6. From my review of the deposition testimony of Rodolfo Pedraza, documents produced by Psystar, and the Psystar Website, I understand that Psystar relies heavily on the use of Apple's trademarks and trade names in its advertising. To the extent that consumers viewing these ads, like the consumers in my surveys, recognize and associate these trademarks and trade names with Apple, then these consumers may also believe that Apple has sponsored or gives Psystar permission to sell Apple products. It is therefore my opinion that Apple's brand image and corporate reputation for reliable, high quality products will be harmed should consumers be unhappy with Psystar's computers and other products."

@Hexx After Buying a Imac and keeping up on Apple news I do not agree with your statement of "high quality products"
It is obvious you work for apple.

I have mixed feelings about Psystar but I believe Applle just makes over priced middle of the road computers. I do how ever like OS X. Apples products are to restrictive in there ability to work with other hardware and there insight to be innovative is long gone.Now they just make overpriced and low quality plastics cases that crack and nice looking aluminum laptops with the starting price range choice of hardware more in line with a netbook. The hdd did finaly go up from 160gb to 250gb.
I just orderd a backup laptop form Dell, a 15 inch laptop for $449. It has about the same specs as the macbook 13 inch, and the big difference if the apple tax.So please spare me with the High quality products line, that is a myth.

it doesn't matter if you agree with me or not. that's the fact taken from groklaw's page.

i do own macbook pro, i do own quad with 4870x2 and win7 box, i do own a hackint0sh box.

And i use all three, so it'd be quite hard to say i'm an apple or win or whatever fanboy.

those are just facts. psystar deserves this, bunch of thieves.

Taking Psystar and its business practices aside, the real question is this :

since Apple sells Mac OS X as a separate retail merchandise can it forbid its usage on other machines than Macs? I'm pretty sure, it can deny support and warranty, but is it illegal to install OS X legitimately bought from a retail store as a standalone product in a non Mac machine?

there's eula which says you are licenced to use it on apple badged hw. and i think that snow leo is upgrade only

Sorry Hexx I guess I cant read the first sentence you wrote. Apple is a big issue for me,I prefer OS X but don,t like there overpriced hardware. If you can BUY a copy of the OS you should be able to put ir on any computer you want. Pystars big mistake was messing with the code and that will probably due-them-in. Some of there hardware might not be up to snuff but they made a point about apples overpriced hardware.

Very easy, do not buy.

Psystar hacked Apple's software and made a profit from it.

Perhaps someone could re-edit Inquirer articles and make a profit from them. No, I guess not. No one would want to pay for this tripe.

It's hard to say if it's overpriced or not, sure there's premium on top but still , the quality of finish on macbook pro is far better than anything else i came across and bundled software is more than enough for average ppl to use their computer as it is out of the box. i only bought extra iwork and vmware.

it's about what you want to do with your computer and if you find out that all you need is already bundled with a mac you may also find it not that much more expensive than comparable computer from other manufacturers.

It's nice to see that some of you can actually swallow your pride and admit that OSX is a great operating system, and that you would like to work on it.
Your main quibble is that the box (hardware) you get from Apple costs too much, i say this:
-The entire software layer...from the kernel up to the UI is designed by Apple.
-The hardware is also designed (aesthetically) in-house. Many people would balk at this, but Apple's industrial designs are trailblazers for the entire industry. AppleII, Macintosh, iMac, iPod, iPhone, unibody, magnetic latches and power chords, backlit keyboards, widescreen displays, firewire, etc.
-the services (.Mac, AppleCare, iTunes Music Stor, etc) are maintained under a single roof.
-Many of the bundled Apps like iLife, Safari, iChat, Time Machine, Quicktime(which is the media layer for the system) and runs on Windows and most AV equipment, are developed in-house.
-Many of the technologies that many of us take for granted as "lowest common denominator"/"common concepts" were invented by scientists usually working in Cupertino.... Buttons, drop-down-menus, drag-n-drop, overlapping windows, fonts, icons, menubar, titlebar, trash, folders, LAN protocols, audio speech synthesis, adaptive voice recognition, video playback and editing on desktop systems, online content delivery (iTunes Music Store, App Store, Apple Online Store), multitouch concepts,etc.... The level of R&D and investment into such technologies/concepts/ideas/features is not cheap.
So while Ballmer might trumpet an "Apple tax" concept, only people who think computers are just hardware would agree. It's only when you broaden your concept of a 'Computer System' that you start to realize that what Apple adds to the hardware is a lot more valuable considering it's usually the first to pioneer/invent those ideas.
Looking and duplicating these ideas with reverse engineering and different implementations is magnitudes cheaper, since the idea/concept/functionality has already been researched and developed by someone else, thus making production costs much lower for derivative ideas.(A challenge: name Microsoft's firsts which were not 'inspired' by the works of others. don’t tell me that everyone copies and steals, just provide some example as i did of Apple)
MacOSX is one of the main 'value adds' for Apple. it's the main competitive advantage. if any company is allowed to profit from Apple's invention without permission, that is in violation of copy write laws imo.
If you do want to compare prices of systems from other PC manufacturers and Apple, factor in the cost of that manufacturer developing it's own OS for it's hardware and the additional software, services and support under it's roof. Then factor in the cost for a comparable industrial design process.

The "Apple Tax" is a myth... there is enough in any Apple product, hardware, design, software, support or services, that differentiate it from it's competitors (it might not be the machine's specs), and the sum of the aspects that go into the system is usually worth more than any Windows-based PC can provide, and that is what Apple users pay for.