×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

759 comments

Oh Yeah! (5, Funny)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216373)

The more you tighten your grip, Jobs, the more star systems will slip through your fingers!

Re:Oh Yeah! (5, Funny)

s0litaire (1205168) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216413)

Should that not be "The more you tighten your grip, Jobs, the more psystar systems will slip through your fingers!" :D

Re:Oh Yeah! (5, Funny)

nacturation (646836) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216487)

Should that not be "The more you tighten your grip, Jobs, the more psystar systems will slip through your fingers!" :D

Yes, it should be... assuming you're a fan of explaining the joke within the joke itself, thereby rendering it unfunny.
 

IBM PC (5, Funny)

fictionpuss (1136565) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216479)

Apple have no choice - if only IBM had retained such control over the IBM PC. And where are IBM now?

Re:IBM PC (5, Insightful)

PlatyPaul (690601) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216539)

Showing a remarkably high trading value [google.com]?

Yes, IBM "got out of the game". No, it was not necessarily bad for them.

into a different game... Re:IBM PC (3, Informative)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216631)

If you look around next time your out shopping, you'll see (part of) how IBM is doing so well. They got back into the BM (no, not bowel movement) part of IBM. A very significant portion of all point of sale terminals (amongst other things) are made by IBM. Whether or not Apple could pull the same move is hard to say.

Re:IBM PC (1, Insightful)

fictionpuss (1136565) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216637)

Precisely. But since Apple is just brand image, they really do have no choice.

Re:IBM PC (3, Insightful)

PlatyPaul (690601) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216777)

I'll try not to pull a "fanboi" moment here, but you're leaving out their decision to make innovation-heavy niche market items as well.

iPhone anyone?

Re:IBM PC (5, Insightful)

fictionpuss (1136565) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216971)

I'll try not to pull a troll moment here either, but I don't find anything particularly innovative about either the iPhone or iPod apart from the concept of marketing high-tech to a non-geek demographic. To a massive extent that concept alone determines the direction which the technology has to follow.

Re:IBM PC (2, Insightful)

PlatyPaul (690601) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217101)

Call it what you like, but handheld multitouch is fairly novel, and the automatic screen-turning isn't too shabby either.

These things aside, with other nearly-iPhones that are around (such as by LG [lge.com] and Meizu [engadget.com]), Apple still seems to be doing quite well on that end. Maybe there's something to be said about brand name (and, as some say, attention to detail)? By restricting the realm of what is an Apple device, this can be seen as an attempt to guarantee consistent quality.

Re:IBM PC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24217063)

>>iPhone anyone?

No thanks. I don't belong to any cult anymore. Also, I would like a real keyboard.

Re:IBM PC (4, Insightful)

omeomi (675045) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216837)

Since Apple's entire legal argument hinges on the fact that their EULA states that OSX can only be installed on Apple-branded hardware, it will be interesting to see if the courts uphold such restrictions in EULA's, or the existence of EULA's at all. Psystar makes an interesting argument that Honda can't make you sign a EULA telling you that you can only drive on Honda-approved roads, so why should Apple be able to control what systems OSX is installed on? Is there any precedent here? Has the legality of EULA's ever been put to the test in court?

Re:IBM PC (3, Interesting)

Timothy Brownawell (627747) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217017)

See this other comment [slashdot.org]. The precedent they likely want to use is the WoW / Glider case that we discussed yesterday, if you don't follow the EULA then the copy-to-ram that's part of running the software is apparently a copyright violation.

Re:IBM PC (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24217031)

VERY interesting. So this is a win-win lawsuit for Apple. If they win, they keep their control of hardware for OSX. If they lose, they potentially weaken Micro$oft EULAs. :-)

Re:IBM PC (4, Insightful)

History's Coming To (1059484) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217105)

I think that in legal terms it's the fact that the software is pre-installed. If they just sold the hardware and it happened to be OSX compatible then there's absolutely nothing Apple could do (presuming they've not infringed any patents in the process). They're effectively reselling the OS and using it to advertise another product (the hardware). To stick with the car analogy, it'd be like selling a tiny little car with a Bugatti Veyron engine and advertising it on that basis. Bugatti would (probably quite rightly) complain that the cooling systems etc simply weren't designed to work with a small car, and the engine would probably break down, damaging their reputation in the process.

Re:IBM PC (4, Insightful)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216625)

IBM only produced the hardware, Microsoft produced the software and look where they are now...
Apple produce both, by your reckoning Apple would be selling about the same level of hardware that they are now, but selling millions of units of software.

Also when you talk of retaining control, look at the absolutely farcical situation with AmigaOS 4. They are trying so hard to retain control that they've pushed away any customers they might have ever had.

Re:IBM PC (1)

Techguy666 (759128) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216781)

Apple have no choice - if only IBM had retained such control over the IBM PC. And where are IBM now?

In a position where they don't have to overstock inventory and cater to the whims of fickle Joe Consumer, competing for decreasing revenue; where they can choose to work with their former PC competitors (or not), offering relatively platform agnostic solutions to their enterprise level clients (and thereby making money as everyone else's middle man).

Palm held on to their technology too tightly and were also overtaken.

Retaining intellectual property is only useful if you can leverage that advantage to be the only game in town. If other competitors start muscling into your game, it might be time to switch games.

Re:IBM PC (1)

i.r.id10t (595143) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216921)

I'm sure the tooling equipment for the M1 Carbines they built during WW2 is in a warehouse somewhere still... they could of course go back to building truly international business machines...

really? (3, Funny)

cavtroop (859432) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216381)

It seems that Steve Jobs is out to totally sink Psystar and put an end to Mac clones.

um, you THINK?

first post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216385)

about time.

pp4l

Is today Gay Pride day or something? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216395)

What, with all these Mac stories.

Re:Is today Gay Pride day or something? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216993)

You dream of getting your colon irrigated by Steve Ballmer instead, do you? Come out of the closet already.

Seriously? (3, Funny)

Mistah Bunny (1256566) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216401)

Be honest - who didn't see this coming?

Re:Seriously? (2, Insightful)

MoonBuggy (611105) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216429)

To be fair, I wasn't expecting them to try and make Pystar take back the systems that they'd already sold.

Re:Seriously? (1)

Rinisari (521266) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216915)

Can they legally do this? Can Psystar owners be legally required to return their systems, obviously getting their money back?

Re:Seriously? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216633)

anybody who didn't read the article yesterday? Seriously, this was reported on yesterday and not some top secret provision. Seems like it would be hard to enforce specific performance like that if the purchasers (there can't be that many) don't want to return it.

Hmmph. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216409)

That megalomaniacal bitch can pry mine from my cold, dead hands -- but judging from the looks of ol' Steve lately, looks like he'll kick the bucket a lot sooner than I will.

Great Idea! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216421)

and while they are at it maybe they can get a unicorn!

Apple particularly doesn't like things like this, (2, Insightful)

base3 (539820) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216445)

because it exposes the fact that today's Mac desktops are just commodity hardware with an extra $1,000 charge for an OS X dongle (TPM).

Re:Apple particularly doesn't like things like thi (5, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216595)

Has the price changed that much? Last I looked, Apple was actually competitive (within $100, sometimes cheaper) with commodity hardware. The only difference is, you can't get a Mac without the bells and whistles.

In other words, you get exactly what you pay for, which includes $1k of hardware you don't actually need.

Re:Apple particularly doesn't like things like thi (1)

electrosoccertux (874415) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217141)

No way. Apple will charge you $1k for their lowest end laptop with 1GB of RAM and perhaps 160GB HDD space. You can get that from Dell/HP for $700, except the Dell/HP one you buy that you see in your local newspaper ads for Office Max will have 3GB of RAM and a 250GB harddrive, and will still have a dual core processor.

Re:Apple particularly doesn't like things like thi (5, Informative)

f8l_0e (775982) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216623)

That's not accurate. OSX does not use the TPM chip for hardware authentication. The reason OSX does not run without modification is that it requires EFI firmware instead of BIOS. Pystar uses an open source EFI emulator to boot.

There is no TPM. (5, Informative)

danaris (525051) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216673)

Cribbed shamelessly from an Ars Technica discussion on the same issue:

"TPM DRM" In Mac OS X: A Myth That Won't Die

Amit Singh

http://www.osxbook.com/book/bo...chapter7/tpmdrmmyth/

Beating a Dead Horse

"In October 2006, I wrote about the TPM and its "use" in Mac OS X. Since Apple provided no software or firmware drivers for the TPM ...

"Apple's TPM Keys"

"The media has been discussing "Apple's use of TPM" for a long time now. There have been numerous reports of system attackers bypassing "Apple's TPM protection" and finding "Apple's TPM keys." Nevertheless, it is important to note that Apple does not use the TPM."

In short, while there was a TPM chip in some of the early shipping Intel systems, there were no drivers for it, and Apple did not use it. Current shipping Macintel systems don't even have the TPM chip, so there's no possible way for them to use one.

Dan Aris

Re:There is no TPM. (1)

danaris (525051) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216855)

...And now that I've turned my brain on, I realize that I b0rked the link.

Let's try that again, shall we?

http://www.osxbook.com/book/bonus/chapter7/tpmdrmmyth/

Dan Aris

Re:Apple particularly doesn't like things like thi (1)

k2enemy (555744) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216705)

because it exposes the fact that today's Mac desktops are just commodity hardware with an extra $1,000 charge for an OS X dongle (TPM).

Are you sure about that? [osxbook.com]

Re:Apple particularly doesn't like things like thi (2, Insightful)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216929)

because it exposes the fact that today's Mac desktops are just commodity hardware with an extra $1,000 charge for an OS X dongle (TPM).

Let's not get out of hand here. $1000 premium is a bit of a stretch when you compare pure hardware specs between vendors. Maybe a couple hundred, but certainly not $1000. Besides, I'll gladly pay a small premium for stability.

If you really want to bitch about premiums, then let's stop bullshitting here and talk about Vista MSRP. Those prices make OSX look like a bargain.

Re:Apple particularly doesn't like things like thi (1)

moosesocks (264553) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216945)

Again, no no no no. That's simply not true.

Apple Hardware is typically comparable to hardware from other vendors at the same price point. There sure as heck isn't a $1,000 markup.

Whether or not it's necessary for Apple to use Xeon processors and server-grade components in the Mac Pro is an entirely different debate. However, you're paying for more than just OS X.

In my own unqualified and unscientific opinion, I've found Apple hardware (back in the PPC days) to generally outlive its PC counterparts by a good margin. It's anecdotal evidence, sure, but I think that most other users claims back me up. I have a 450 Mhz G4 tower that's still running nearly unmodified, and still generally useful, nearly 10 years after its original purchase.

EULA w/ full force of law (4, Insightful)

transporter_ii (986545) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216459)

Notice that Apple filed approx a day after the WoW copyright decision. If there was some doubt on Psystar beating Apple on the validity of of the EULA...it is pretty safe to say that Psystar is about to get slapped down.

Re:EULA w/ full force of law (1)

Relic of the Future (118669) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216565)

That is the most logical reason I've heard for why they hadn't filed earlier. Excellent deduction!

Re:EULA w/ full force of law (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216691)

i too hadn't thought of this..

i was sure that the reason they didn't do it right away was if they lost then there would be an overnight startup every night doing this - and that is much worse than a single gutsy shady company doing it.

now that the WoW case set presendce the risk of loss for Apple in this case has dropped to near 0%.. makes sence that they would do it now.

and why they didn't do it before.

Re:EULA w/ full force of law (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216845)

IAALS (I am a Law Student). Having worked with litigators, I can gurantee that yesterday's ruling (which actually sets almost no precedent because it relied on existing copyright doctrines despite what Slashdotters thought) had exactly 0 to do with the filing date.
      I know this because:
          1. If there had been any real precedent set, the litigators would have taken at least several weeks to analyze the decision, make an educated guess as to whether the decision will survive appeals, recraft the complaint, and make sure all of this was OK with the client (Apple) before proceeding. Litigation takes time.

          2. The actual filing date of the lawsuit was July 3rd, and the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field is strong, but it does not enable time travel.

I think this is the first time I've heard... (4, Funny)

greenguy (162630) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216463)

...Steve Jobs called a "suit."

Re:I think this is the first time I've heard... (1)

oahazmatt (868057) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216531)

That's because calling him "a Turtleneck" sounds like an insult to his age.

Re:I think this is the first time I've heard... (4, Funny)

ettlz (639203) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217079)

Well, the "u" and "h" keys are right next to each other...

Lame (3, Interesting)

Mr2001 (90979) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216483)

This was probably inevitable, but it's a shame to see Psystar brought down. Without any competition in the computers-that-run-OS-X market, Apple just keeps getting more obnoxious.

(If this kind of thing bothers you and you want to take a swipe back at Apple, I recommend passing up that shiny new iPhone 3G and looking at the equally shiny LG Dare instead. The screen is smaller but it's actually easier to type on.)

Re:Lame (1)

PunkOfLinux (870955) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216551)

First off LG sucks. Second, it's their OS, they *do* have a legal right to decide what hardware their creation will be allowed to run on.*

*as long as it is contained in the EULA.

Re:Lame (1)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216717)

Under what law is a EULA legal?

I see first Sale Doctrine trumping that crap, yet other judges saying EULAs are legal documents. What kind of legal documents are they?

Reoccurring services, I can understand. Boxed software that you PAY for, I think not.

Re:Lame (1)

Jasonjk74 (1104789) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216933)

First off LG sucks. Second, it's their OS, they *do* have a legal right to decide what hardware their creation will be allowed to run on.*

*as long as it is contained in the EULA.

If Microsoft did the same thing, would that be as well-received?

Re:Lame (1)

theelectron (973857) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217037)

It may be legal, but it still stinks (and I think there may be others who agree). If I lease you a station wagon, do I get to decide where you can drive it? I could put a limit on the number of miles (roughly equivalent to number of installs in this analogy) but not on where you can drive it.

Re:Lame (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216659)

What do you work for LG?
Apple has not gone after the sites that tell you how to get OS/X running on a PC.
If you don't like Apple then don't use their products. Or learn to code and make Linux a better desktop than OSX

Re:Lame (3, Funny)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216661)

I agree. This morning my Dualcore G5 booted, installed and update and then insulted me on how I was dressed and dissed me for not buying a new iPhone already.

I'm getting tired of how condescending OSX keeps getting after each release.

Re:Lame (1)

jeiler (1106393) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216713)

This was probably inevitable, but it's a shame to see Psystar brought down.

It's both a shame, and inevitable. I can see Jobs' argument--that Psystar dilutes the Apple "brand"--even though I have some disagreements with how far the concept of "branding" has gone.

OSx86 [wikipedia.org] demonstrates that Apple's not completely alone in the "Runs OSX" crowd, though it's certainly not a project I'd give to my wife or my non-geekish friends.

Clone Wars II (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216497)

kiss innovation and creativity goodby kiddies... /. has been so wrapped up in it's M$ hatewagon ride, it overlooked the real assholes out there.

I for one will NEVER by a MAC or any other APPLE product just over this alone.

Re:Clone Wars II (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216675)

kiss innovation and creativity goodby kiddies.

Are you serious? Psystar is a white-box screwdriver shop. They have nothing at all to do with innovation.

-jcr

Apple demands? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216571)

Ok, how about the thousands of us who demand a headless, non-pro, non-laptop computer, with actual desktop/decent parts in it?

Mac mini: piss-poor GPU and low-capacity/slow LAPTOP 2.5" drive in a DESKTOP computer?

iMac: fuckin' all-in-one computer with stupid glossy screens and low quality LCDs with not even average GPU choices.

Mac Pro: are you fucking insane? I don't need that much power (and even the GPU options for that one are ridiculous).

Make the Mac mini taller/bigger, put a 3.5" drive and a half-decent GPU in it (the ability to run Starcraft II and Diablo III at medium settings) and it WILL sell. A lot. You have no fuckin' idea how much people loathe all-in-one computers.

I love my Mac Pro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216621)

It's so hard, and metal, and full of POWER! It even keeps me warm at night.

There is something pretty amusing about setting up distributed.net on and ending up in the top 100 participants immediately.

Re:Apple demands? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216905)

You have no fuckin' idea how much people loathe all-in-one computers.

I think Apple's sales record over the past few years would have more than a few disagreements with that...

Re:Apple demands? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24217023)

But they don't have the numbers for how many people would buy a headless iMac (i.e. exact same specs, without the LCD), so your point is moot.

If you go by "sales record" then Apple has less than 8% marketshare anyway, which means that pratically nobody wants a Mac to begin with.

End of a Story (3, Insightful)

lord_rob the only on (859100) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216589)

If Psystar were rich enough, they could win their case against Apple and we could see Mac clones on the market like we saw IBM PC clones in the 80's. But still, what would be the point in having Mac clones ? We'd start to see an OS (Mac OS) that crashes all the time because the hardware is "not supported officially". So we would be forced to install an alternative OS on the machine, like Linux or BSD. Ok it could work great but it works as great on PCs.

Really I'm not trying to troll/start a flamewar, I'm just wondering.

Re:End of a Story (1, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216665)

And yet, Linux and BSD run great on a wide variety of hardware. If Mac OS couldn't, that just proves either a) they have some talentless hacks for programmers, or b) they're deliberately making it run badly on non-Apple hardware, which they probably couldn't do if they lost this suit.

What would be the point? (2, Insightful)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217177)

But still, what would be the point in having Mac clones ?

Well, let's see... people looking for something that Apple doesn't currently produce could get a computer with OS X on it that fit those requirements.

Like... a conventional desktop with expansion slots.

Like... a laptop with a two-button trackpad and a decent keyboard.

Like... a laptop with a swappable drive bay. Or multiple hard drives.

Like... a compact Mac with a high performance hard drive and a real GPU.

Or, Apple could just quit being so damn insistent on making everything subservient to "style", and cut the market out from under the would-be clone makers by adding a couple of products to their product line... a "Mac mini Pro" for the desktop (it could even be cubical!) and a Thinkpad-equivalent laptop.

Begun it has... (3, Interesting)

Ngarrang (1023425) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216619)

...the clone war.

What are the odds of people actually returning their much-less-costly Mac clone?

Yup, they're taking the money & running... (4, Insightful)

BUL2294 (1081735) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216627)

Looks like I was right in my comments from yesterday [slashdot.org]--but I never figured they would fall apart so quickly! Build a product that might infringe but would definitely piss someone off, make & deliver a bunch of orders, pay bonuses, declare bankruptcy (how long until Psystar does this???), and disappear... Take the money & run. The funny thing is that if they fulfilled their orders, they might be in the clear from criminal prosecution and their customers are the ones that got exactly what they paid for (sans warranty once they file for bankruptcy)... Excluding the execs, who might be sitting on a beach somewhere, everybody loses--including Apple.

Re:Yup, they're taking the money & running... (0)

theblondebrunette (1315661) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217075)

Why would Apple loose? If I bought one of these and got shafted, I'd just go and buy an original Apple. Maybe I'd be able to afford less, but I'd still buy an Apple.. Recently, I found a bike on the street with a sign free.. I took it and was thinking to fix it.. It turned out it was going to be too much trouble and expense, so I went and bought a new one from a local bike shop, a relatively inexpensive quality bike, but more expensive than what Walmart sells. The people who bought the psystart are determined to get an Apple machine, so they'll get one.

website works just fine .. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216649)

dont know what this hullaboo is all bout but was able to reach the psystar website just fine ..

Regardless of the legalities (-1, Flamebait)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216679)

I don't consider the people who bought these things to be the brightest bulbs in the world.

Hey, wanna buy a watch? It's a genuine ROMEX

Re:Regardless of the legalities (2, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217045)

Cool, it's gonna fit right in with my Panaphonic plasma TV and Somy PS3!

Re:Regardless of the legalities (1)

BalmyBrute (1322643) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217055)

Its the same as buying a Dell, except Microsoft doesn't complain when you use the product you bought in the way that you want.

Dear President Medvedev (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216723)

Please provide Russian funding and Mig-29 (world's most
agile plane ) technology for Psystar.

Patriotically,
Kilgore Trout

Let's be honest here (3, Insightful)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216783)

Who here would expect Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft to NOT do anything if a competitor suddenly started to sell compatible systems or even just emulators for their own systems?

Remember that Apple sells systems, not computers. This may be an alien concept to kids today, but at the beginning, all companies were selling computer+OS systems and they were all proprietary (Apple II, Mac, Atari ST, Amiga, CoCo2+OS9, C64+GeOS, etc).

Also, don't be two-faced about this: you don't like it when companies don't follow GPL and other similar licenses, but when it's Apple or Microsoft, why wouldn't they be allowed to do the same?

I hope there's one good thing to come out of this mess: Apple selling a headless, iMac-specs computer (i.e. ATI/nVidia GPU with a 3.5" desktop hard drive). Heck, why don't they just make a case for the actual iMac motherboard to lower R&D costs?

apple will continue to suffer lost sales and profi (0)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216793)

apple will continue to suffer lost sales and profits in till they come out with a real desktop mid-tower and they update the mini it is a joke at the price that it is at right now.

The mac pro is ok for it's price but the video card in a $2300 needs to be a little better.

Where is the system that is priced at the $1200 to $2100 power mac g4 and g5 levels?

Why dose a $1500 laptop come with a 13" screen and intel GMA video?

Why do you have pay $2000 for a 15" screen and $2800 for a 17" screen?

The imacs need to have more screen choice with out be forced to pay more for other parts just to get a bigger screen / better screen.

Re:apple will continue to suffer lost sales and pr (2, Insightful)

faedle (114018) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217043)

Funny. This [yahoo.com] would almost make it seem like Apple is a very profitable company, who's investors seem quite pleased at the ROI they get from owning stock.

In fact, in almost every category that would define investor confidence AAPL outperforms MSFT, and leaves DELL and HPQ in the dust.

I fail to see any lost sales and profits in this equation. If I was a shareholder in AAPL, I'd be happy as punch right now.

Re:apple will continue to suffer lost sales and pr (2, Insightful)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217089)

apple will continue to suffer lost sales and profits in till they come out with a real desktop mid-tower and they update the mini it is a joke at the price that it is at right now.

Er, have you stepped foot inside an Apple store lately? It's rather busy, which is a LOT more than I can say for 95% of the other stores in the area in this morbid economy. I don't exactly see their stock price slipping either. In fact, it's one of the few that have rebounded rather nicely so far this year.

All that being said, it's simple why you don't see more hardware options. Their hardware serves the same purpose as their software. Simplicity. It's a niche market, one they are marketing fairly well.

If The Shoe Were on the Other Foot... (5, Interesting)

Jasonjk74 (1104789) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216849)

If this were a story about Microsoft trying to stop vendors from building machines that can run their OS, there would be a million typical comments about them being an evil monopoly, etc. Since it's Apple, I'm sure it's somehow ok, in a shiny, trendy, hip way.

Re:If The Shoe Were on the Other Foot... (2, Funny)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217137)

I'm pretty sure that someone who tried to clone the X-Box 360 would be looked down upon for other reasons, so it balances out.

Re:If The Shoe Were on the Other Foot... (2, Insightful)

ninjapiratemonkey (968710) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217173)

it's not somehow ok in a shiny, trendy, hip way, but it is evil, in a shiny, trendy, hip, way. and it's not really a monopoly anymore for microsoft either.

Apple is... (4, Insightful)

Drasil (580067) | more than 5 years ago | (#24216881)

I suspect Apple is every bit as evil as Microsoft, just less successful.

Re:Apple is... (4, Insightful)

faedle (114018) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217099)

"Success" can be relative.

If I was an investor right now, I'd argue AAPL is more successful than MSFT.

MSFT has a gazillion bucks, but the ROI for their stockholders has suffered recently. Whereas AAPL under Jobs just keeps making stockholders money. Good money. If you bought AAPL and MSFT one year ago, you would have made 24% on AAPL, and lost 10% of MSFT.

So we all donate our PCs to Tipper's Pigopolists (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216927)

And how is apple gonna get all those buyers to give up da goods? And how about the cash buyers who never 'registered'. How about foreign buyers who tell Apple to go screw, and add that the police in those countries will cut off the arms of any agents of apple who dare show up in their countries? And how many American soldiers will have to get injured or worse militarily intervening in, say, China to get at those 'errant machines'?

Good luck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24216943)

You can't force Pystar customers to recall their machines after the point of purchase. You can fine the hell out of them if they refuse, but nothing stops them from just taking the fine.

Its amazing.... (1)

mlwmohawk (801821) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217003)

I think we need to change the expression "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" to "Success corrupts, real success creates real evil."

Jobs is just as evil as Bill Gates ever was, Bill just had the advantage of wealth.

How is that going to work? (5, Insightful)

caseih (160668) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217009)

If I bought something, it's now mine (the hardware anyway). I doubt Pystar can actually repossess any of the boxes. The entire demand by Apple is pretty silly. Apple's copyright claims can't possibly cover the possession of physical hardware. Very bizarre. I think Apple only has a claim against Psystar itself over copyright infringement (the distribution of hacked Apple patches). Personal use of OS X in breach of Apple's license would have to be an issue that Apple would have to deal with on a per user basis, which I doubt they are willing to do.

Quick question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24217111)

What do you guys suppose the outcome would be had OSX not come pre-installed? Perhaps Psystar decided to sell blank boxes that just so happen to run a copy of OSX that they also just so happen to sell along with the box.

Restraint of Trade.... (0, Flamebait)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 5 years ago | (#24217161)

The emasculated, non-functional FTC should jump in the middle of this and do a slapdown on Apple. What's wrong with the fundamental morality in the computer biz? Has it just evaporated? Apple has no injury here, just a monopoly.

Oh, right.....

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...