so much for Psystar/OpenMac
- Thread starter Baron Squirrel
- Start date
Man, what took them so long? They should have been on this months ago.
man someone isnt editorializing a headline >.>
thats really too bad, whatever monopoly apple has they want to keep it.
vibrokatana
New Member
In order for them to be a monopoly then there would have to be no competing products. If they had a 90% market share (*cough* microsoft) then there would be an issue.
well its a monopoly in osx ways lol
Hescominsoon
CGA\TOJ Hosting Manager
OSX is actually BSD so they will never have a monopoly on their OS...the power of open source.
vibrokatana
New Member
How so? Are you going to argue that because TIVO doesn't allow you to install their OS on any hardware that it is a "monopoly". Platform seclusion is up to the company, apple (and many other vendors) choose to design and manufacture their own hardware to ensure QA and 100% compatibility.
They can enforce it because they own the rights to the software. Nobody can decree that they have to support all the platforms available. If so then I would hassle microsoft into supporting PPC and Sparc and force adobe to give me 64bit flash and CS3 on linux.
It isn't unlawful, it is just the company's decision. Thus far I haven't really seen anything hostile from apple about OSx86 other then the encouragement for them to pirate OSX. Chances are if people bought valid licenses and hacked the OS to run on their machine then apple wouldn't care as they are a customer.
Baron Squirrel
New Member
honestly, i don't blame them.
if someone got one of my pictures off Flickr, and Photoshopped it, and started selling prints of it, I'd be fairly angry.
I know the analogy isn't quite right, but it's basically a case of Psystar buying MacOS licenses, hacking the OS to run on their (evidently) sub-par machines, and selling them, with Apple not getting anything except competition for their own OS and machines.
if someone got one of my pictures off Flickr, and Photoshopped it, and started selling prints of it, I'd be fairly angry.
I know the analogy isn't quite right, but it's basically a case of Psystar buying MacOS licenses, hacking the OS to run on their (evidently) sub-par machines, and selling them, with Apple not getting anything except competition for their own OS and machines.
yes, but the problem is Psystar is selling the hacked OS. that's where the legality(or Illegality) comes in.
Last edited:
what i meant was - apple is sure gonna make it so no one else can make profit from stuff that looks and acts or was hacked from them.
vibrokatana
New Member
Any legally aware company will. That comes with the turf of protecting your intellectual property.