Want to eliminate Psystar? License Mac OS X
License if you want to kill Psystar
(Credit: Psystar)Psystar, the homegrown computer vendor selling its brand of Open Computers with Mac OS X installed, is back in the news this week, thanks to another court filing claiming that it can do whatever it wants, courtesy of the first-sale doctrine.
Psystar contends that because it bought copies of Mac OS X from Apple and its partners, it has every right to install that software into its own brand of computers and sell the hardware to its customers.
Does it make sense? Not really. Much like Psystar's contention that Apple was operating a monopoly and abusing its copyright, the small firm's pleas to courts have been suspect, at best.
And yet Apple continues to play the legal game with Psystar and pay its lawyers to engage this annoyance in court when Steve Jobs has more pressing issues (like running a public company) to address.
Say what you will about the Psystar's court battle with Apple, but there's really an easy solution to all this, if you're Apple: license Mac OS X.
Before I get into why Apple should license Mac OS X to eliminate Psystar and change its strategy, I should mention that Steve Jobs has consistently said licensing Mac OS X is out of the question, since he considers the software a competitive advantage. I should also note that Apple licensed Mac OS while Steve Jobs wasn't at the company and that the licensing strategy almost led to its ruin at that point.
But everything is different today. Licensing Mac OS X would make sense on a number of levels, and if you ask me, it would probably help Apple's bottom line.
Let's face it: Apple isn't happy that it needs to deal with Psystar. And why should it be? The company is a costly nuisance that needs to be dealt with swiftly. But if the court battle lasts too long--or worse, if Psystar finds a way to win, Apple will be forced to deal with a slew of similar Mac clones that will only make maintaining its stranglehold on Mac OS X that much harder.
That's why Apple should license Mac OS X to Hewlett-Packard and Dell, the world's top PC manufacturers. By doing so, it will be able to eliminate the threat Psystar and its clones create, since no one will trust an Open Computer from a no-name compared to Dell and HP. More importantly, it will expand its presence in the PC business and finally get to a place where it can compete on the same level as Microsoft.
Why would HP and Dell accept such an idea? It's simple: both companies are extremely displeased with Microsoft, after the Vista fiasco, and their enterprise customers don't want anything to do with their computers, if Vista is installed.
Worse, consumers don't trust Vista, which is why HP and Dell were forced to "downgrade" customer operating systems to XP. Beyond that, both HP and Dell know how highly regarded Apple is, and just having the opportunity to sell Apple software on their own computers would be enough for them to offer Apple a sweetheart deal.
And that's how Apple can capitalize. I'm not saying the company should license Mac OS X to every single hardware vendor in the business--that would be a mistake. Instead, Apple can play HP and Dell off of each other and engage both companies in a software-licensing deal that would prove extremely beneficial. I don't doubt for a second that HP and Dell would be willing to give Apple a meaningful portion of their income, just for the chance to sell Mac OS X.
That said, Apple needs to hurry. With Windows 7 around the corner, promising a much better experience and curb appeal than Vista, Apple's advantages over HP and Dell could significantly diminish, once Microsoft's latest operating system hits store shelves.
As I mentioned, Steve Jobs believes that licensing Mac OS X would mean that Apple would lose its competitive advantage. I disagree.
Years ago, that sentiment would probably hold true, but today, we're living in a much different environment, and Apple is widely considered the most appealing company in the industry. In other words, more than enough consumers are buying Apple products simply because they're from Apple. What makes anyone think that just because HP and Dell have Mac OS X running on their own machines, suddenly all of Apple's customers will move to competing hardware?
Would Apple lose some hardware customers in the process? Sure. But I believe that it can make even more money than what it would lose by licensing OS X to HP and Dell, so the net effect puts the company even further into the black.
So what does Apple gain by licensing Mac OS X? It gets its software in front of millions of new customers, it has the opportunity to take a slice of the profits from its competitors, it will be able to compete more effectively against Microsoft, and it finally kills off Psystar and any other Apple clones that may be in the works.
For all that good, it loses Mac OS X exclusivity. Big deal.
Check out Don's Digital Home podcast, Twitter feed, and FriendFeed.
Don Reisinger is a technology columnist who has written about everything from HDTVs to computers to Flowbee Haircut Systems. Don is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and posts at The Digital Home. He is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.





The author is correct about limiting the licenses, but I think companies like Acer and Sony should be included in the short list. Can you imagine how tremendously ecstatic and enthusiastic Sony would be about selling Viao systems with Mac OS X?
Can you imagine how fast Apple would be out of business if they let Sony make the money off the hardware?
Steve Jobs never said anything about OS X being a competitive advantage, he said that it would not work as good on PC's because Apple builds the software + hardware together work together from the get go. Michael Dell I have read would be pleased if he could get OS X on his machines but his pleas have gone unanswered. HP I am sure probably have tried but got the big no from SJ.
If Apple were to really support PC OEMs such as Dell and HP, they would also have to work on the hardware, probably a different brand from their traditional offerings that run Windows today. Also, that copy of OS X would have to very secured so it can't be reverse engineered to work on white boxes, meaning, it would have to work on Apple Dell and HP certified machines and not just any Dell or HP machines.
http://www.crackdancinginthestreets.com/applevshp.jpg
You'll see that you can buy an HP computer with equal or BETTER hardware for $1200+ where the macbook pro is $2799..
If you could legally install osx on that HP, why would you EVER consider buying the apple?
you can install osx on it, and it runs the same, but apple wants to tell you that it's illegal to do so.
oh.. and Don, you're simply wrong about the connection to first-sale. By your logic, a large portion of commerce in this world would be illegal. If I buy Buffy the Vampire Slayer on DVD from target.. I can't resell it?
One only needs to look back to IBM and OS/2 to see what happens when you go head-to-head with Microsoft for OEM sales: you lose. The company is an 800-lb gorilla and would no doubt intimidate any OEM into dropping the Apple OS. (Most operating systems are sold with a computer, so that's where you need the sales.) Then Apple's hardware sales dry up, and only a handful of consumers will buy it at retail due to its poor support from third party OEMs (drivers and such).
The other thing is that Apple wouldn't have the control over the user experience it does now, which is part of the selling point. Going to one company for support instead of playing pass the buck has its advantages.
Microsoft may be an 800 lb gorilla but now its standing on the interstate and as it plows into semi trailor after semi trailor, it just does not impress like it did when everyone was riding on a bike. :-)
Apple is now the 3rd-4th largest seller of computer hardware in the USA. And while it only sells 10-12 percent of computer systems, ........ (wait for it) it is sellling 60-70 percent of the high end laptop systems.
Yep thats right, the upper level systems are going major Apple. And that is where the profit is. Apple sold 1/2 the dollars as Dell last reporting quarter, yet made 4x the profit. It ain't good if you lose money on everything,,,,, no matter how much you sell.
Just ask mega company NORTEL. The major leader in Telco equipment, just fined Bankruptcy papers.
The bigger they are, the bigger the hole as they fall. :-)
Just a thouight.
en
As for Microsoft intimidating anyone, HP sells Linux machine do they not?
Without Mac OS, Apple would probably be out of the hardware business. The licensing fees would not make up for the non-existent or much lower profits from hardware sales. Less profit means less money to innovate and come up with things like an iPhone. And I do not mean "oh wow, those Apple guys are geniuses." They pull in higher profits and naturally have more money to use in making new things, due to their non-licensing of their OS.
Plus, c'mon -- Apple consists of control freaks (not always a bad thing!). :-)
Now, Sony could really put a dent in home PC sales. They have the money and marketing to not be intimidated by Microsoft (they're one of Microsoft's two direct competitors to the Xbox) and they already offer their own PC and component manufacturing infrastructure anyway; so MS intimidating OEMs isn't going to hurt their OS adoption all that much. And if any company could build a sleek, streamlined OS geared for the best gaming experience ever on a home PC, it'd be Sony.
Granted, you could argue that that's what a PS3 is for, but gaming on a PC is really a whole different experience than a console hooked up to your TV. Games with a great amount of detail in the combat mechanics just don't work on a console and a joystick. You really do need a keyboard and mouse to play WoW. Plus, to the extent of mods, addons, and such that WoW and similar games employ, you can't really do that on a console platform either.
In summary: Sony should give us a dedicated gaming OS for desktop PCs. No embedded web browser. No embedded movie making crapware. No nonsense. I call it... EvolutionOS. The way gaming on a PC was meant to be experienced. (I think nVidia might have that tag line already, though.. .)
-Summer Glau
p.s. Look for me on Fox's new series, The Sarah Connor Chronicles!
Just one small set of problems with regard to Sony: They seem to be incapable of building a PC or laptop without charging a price for the product that defies common sense (see also their Vaio line). They also can't seem to stop themselves from loading a ton of crapware into their existing PC/laptop line (again, Vaio). They're also in lust with DRM like you wouldn't believe...
Don't get me wrong - I'd play games on their gear, but I'm not so sure I'd trust my data to it without a complete hard disk flush and re-isntall (which I did with my old Vaio when I first got it - flushed the HDD completely and re-installed the OS).
/P
I think that if sony wanted to get into the OS's business they should at least look at linux first before developing their own OS or at least offer it for free. They have a long way to catch up but it would be cool to see some new Competition when the OS hits the market.
Just my opinion of course but it would be nice to have a new player.
Done and done.
it is as easy as ever these days
Apple runs a tight ship, always have done. They aren't about to blow it now for the sake of eradicating some pissy little company liky Psystar.
http://www.crackdancinginthestreets.com/applevshp.jpg
The hp uses ALL THE SAME HARDWARE as the apple, except is has a bigger screen.
Uhh.. and next wee need only blonde haired blue eyed soldiers...
I therefore do not agree with this column. There is more to this than meets the eye.
Just a thought.
en
Apple is an OEM that makes its own OS, it is NOT a hardware company.
Apple designs to motherboard and chipsets for their computers. Even if they just modify them from previous designs that makes them a hardware company, not just a assembler.
Did I say anything about software? No. I said they design their mobos to go with the processors. With intel and ppc.
Clearly you are confused
Sorry OS X, can you read it now or shall I retype the whole thing?
Anyway... You just made my point for me. Rather than buying a $2000-$3000 computer, now you will just buy a $200(?) piece of software. Or just pirate it.
Their hardware, even spare parts that don't have the apple brand on them, cost 2-3x as much as anywhere else
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MA989G/A?fnode=MTY1NDA0Nw&mco=MjE0NzM5MQ&p=2&s=topSellers
750gb sata drive seagate 7200.11= $250
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148298
750GB sata drive seagate 7200.11 = $80
This example tends to hold true for mac products across the board.
The problem wth tdreher's statement is that it USED to be that the only way to get mac hardware was from apple. ALL of the hardware inside a mac today is able to purchased SOMEWHERE ELSE, at 1/2 to 1/3rd the price.
When I speak of hardware, I am omitting things like "shiny logo" and "specially curved metal covers"
I mean
Processors
Harddrives
Video cards
Motherboards
Ram
Sound Cards
optical drives
networking cards
Screens
(The 30" Apple cinema display uses the exact same PANEL as the 30" Dell)
If you take the logo off that apple macbook pro, (in my link) and un-case it (the metal shell around it which is an AESTHETIC feature) the guts of the machine cost about $800
Apple is an OEM that makes its own OS, it is NOT a hardware company.
Apple is a consumer products company - hardware, software, the works. They build *computers*, not just software.
Until they design their own processors, hard drives, mobos, video cards, etc, they are not a hardware company. Unless you actually think they designed the Intel Xeon.
Trust me, corporate accounts have not stopped purchasing PC's from HP or Dell. Vista is not a disaster, no matter how many times you Apple clowns repeat the mantra.
HP and Dell have as much desire to sell Mac clones as they do selling Linux desktop PC's. Sure it is a nice side project, but the bulk of their revenue comes from corporate Windows PC sales and retail Windows PC sales.
"Apple clowns"???? What kind of nut job are you?? Maybe just an MS troll that takes every chance to pop at Apple??
This article is actually anti-Apple, in case you did not read it. It talks of cheap hardware and great software.. Hmmm, like buying a Vista capable system... LOL
Apple controls both sides of the equation to better user experience. MS just sells stuff to make money. "Monetize the customer experience"??? And HP and Dell are in a race to see who can produce the cheapest crap.
If you like tinkering with your system all the time, fine, go MS, or better linux and Acer.
Just a thought.
en
And trust me, this dude knows as much about Apple as he does about Windows, which is to say, he has an opinion that is based on experience, but that experience didn't scratch the surface too much. My eyeballs burn whenever I see an advertisement on CNET, because I know that a small part of my soul has just been ripped out to contribute to this guy's paycheque.
As for Vista being a disaster, I haven't tried it besides purposely freezing up a demo at Best Buy (open 12 apps, then fire up the flip 3D thing - locked up solid) so I can't really speak on the matter, but our IT guy has been swearing a lot more since he got a new Vista laptop last year. He's trying really hard to like it, but we have to close his office door during client visits now.
What everyone else said makes sense, maybe you should take a lesson from one of them. As for why they're selling Linux desktop PCs, they wanted a change after the Vista crapfest MS sent out. Before that there really wasn't a call for something different and now there is. When MS loses ground, everyone else wins that much more. So far, the only OS that really doesn't coexist peacefully is Windows and the only users who tend not to coexist peacefully with others (on this particular thread) are certain Windows users (in other words, you). Vista was a disaster, is a disaster and will continue to be a disaster. First impressions count, especially in the software world. If something sucked the first time, you have to find a way to make it give a second first impression, if it sucks a second time, third first impression, if it still sucks give it up already. MS tried giving it a second first impression with their "mojave experiments". Notice the quotes? Still haven't seen any documentation for those so for all the hype, it was a publicity stunt only. They gave up after that and started sending out Windows 7 hype and you still want to say it wasn't a miserable failure. The only bad press I can see involved with Windows 7 so far is that they slipped up and connected the kernel with Vista. Now every time someone points to Windows 7 in a negative light, they're rehashing Vista arguments and they can simply point out that MS said it was Vista 2.0.
Is it any wonder people want change? I switched over to Ubuntu, others switched to Apple. We're all much happier, try joining our world.
Apple is a hardware company.
- by stefanvolos January 14, 2009 10:15 AM PST
- Don,
- Reply to this comment
-
-
- by MSSlayer January 14, 2009 11:23 AM PST
- The problem is you can't by a competitive PC for $500-$800 then an Apple. Good luck finding a dual core xeon machine from Dell or HP that is not $500+ more then the high end Mac. Of course that Dell or HP is going to have substandard software from the OS down to the included apps.
-
-
- by stefanvolos January 14, 2009 11:39 AM PST
- Dell:
-
-
- by Kev_Orng January 14, 2009 12:01 PM PST
- @stefanvolos
-
-
- by cracm January 14, 2009 12:33 PM PST
- the i7 has been out for a while now, no need for a xeon, plus the new phenom x4 .. both have comparable if not better performance in a single chip than dual xeons. also the new dual gpu 2900's .. photoshop seriously flies with this $1100 rig off newegg..
-
-
- by umbrae January 14, 2009 1:03 PM PST
- Buying an proprietary system is bad whether it is HP, DELL or Apple. All these vendors are 3x times more expensive than the parts are, and they do tricks to ensure you cannot upgrade the unit yourself. You are basically over paying for equipment that you will have to throw away.
-
-
- by protagonistic January 14, 2009 2:04 PM PST
- @stefanvolos
-
-
- by pithenumber January 17, 2009 11:42 AM PST
- @protagnostic
-
-
- by malogato April 12, 2009 6:24 PM PDT
- @MSSlayer.. your challenge is CONSIDERABLY easy to pull off.
-
-
- by malogato April 12, 2009 6:36 PM PDT
- If I do an identical match to the MacPro Below (skipping the apple specific keyboard and mouse)
-
-
Showing 1 of 4 pages (145 Comments)How would Apple justify the considerable premium it still charges for its hardware if HP and Dell are producing machines that run OS X and cost significantly less? Don't get me wrong, I would just love to buy an iMac "clone" for $500-800 less than what Apple currently charges for it's top-end model (and the "clone" would probably even have a better chip set running its graphics) but I just don't see Steve Jobs ever letting that happen!
http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/desktop-xps-a2420?c=us&cs=19&l=en&ref=dthp&s=dhs
HP:
http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/series_can.do;HHOJSID=4gY2Jn2StHYmvsspBRv9nhvSfBBGHHJR290QBrjpxpQCpGgBchKl!912238200?storeName=computer_store&landing=desktops&a1=Category&v1=All-in-One%20PCs#CTO_CAN
You can make a case for the HP. I customized one to match the $1499 iMac, and although it has lower gHz, it has more Ram. Savings: $150 (after $150 "instant rebate") compared to the $1499 iMac
But the Dell... c'mon, it doesn't even have a dedicated graphics card until it hits $1899. Don't insult me by telling me there's value in a Dell.
And don't waste your time with proper workstations (not all-in-ones). I carefully compared all my options for months while coaxing my company to buy a new video editing suite, and the Mac Pro with Final Cut was cheaper and had higher performance than anything on the Windows/Avid side. If it didn't, it wouldn't have made it past the bean counters
the problem with apple's boxes is that it's last years hardware at tomorrow's prices. no need for a xeon anymore and good luck upgrading your video card., or better yet, good luck upgrading motherboard and processor. closed o/s doesn't allow upgrade-ability. being a graphics professional, i have to upgrade my box a few times a year to stay ahead of the curve.
Build your own and you save money and can continue the upgrade process. You can do that with a PC, but not and Apple; however, these days there is no difference between an "Apple" and a "PC" besides the OS that runs on it. And unlike the commercials, not all PC's run Windows.
You might want to check that link again. But it is partly the fault of MSSlayer as the only Macs using Zeon processors is the MacPro which uses dual quad core Zeons. All the systems you linked to do not use Zeons. There is a difference. MSSlayer is correct that the Apple high end systems are very competitive and have been for some years now.
As one who is using a five year old dual processor G5, my money, come new computer time is going for a MacPro unless things change drastically in the next few months. There is no Apple premium on high end systems.
your spelled Xeon wrong
I recently priced a Dual Xeon (quad core x 2) server with 12GB ram and 4TB harddrive space that came in $4,000 less than the identical mac.
Dual Xeon Quad Core @ 2.93 Ghz (8 Cores @ 2.93Ghz)
12 GB, DDR3-1333
Dual R4870 - These are 1GB Cards, not 512mb - The mac only has 1 x 512mb card. so, 2 cards, with 2gb of ram in the pc, 1 card with 512mb ram in the mac
4 x 30" LCD panels with a faster response time than the apple cinema display
6 x 1.5 TB Sata drives (the mac can only have 4 x 1 TB) so.. 9TB in the pc, 4tb in the mac
Big honking silver aluminum case
2 x 24X DVD Burners (better than the opticals in a MacPro, only 18X)
$10,631
The mac price? $14,695
Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
12GB (6x2GB)
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
2x NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB
Two 18x SuperDrives
Apple Mighty Mouse
Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) and User's Guide
4x Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)
That's $14,645.00 @ Apple
The identical Non apple computer (except I couldn't find 18x optical drives, so I had to go with 22x)
(barring the logo on the case, screen, keyboard, and mouse)
is $9603