Apple still wants to get Psystar into court
Apple is not giving up on its desire to get Psystar into a courtoom.
Apple filed a motion on June 5 asking the court to modify a stay of proceedings and to compel Mac clone-maker Psystar to show up in court in November as previously scheduled.
Psystar got an automatic stay of proceedings when it filed for bankruptcy in May, but Apple doesn't think the company should be able to use the bankruptcy laws to do so.
Apple points out in the court documents that Psystar filed for bankruptcy in May, after a motion was granted compelling Psystar to give Apple additional documents. The bankruptcy filing also came just before a scheduled deposition from Psystar.
At the heart of Apple's new motion is that despite Psystar's bankruptcy, the company is still in business and continues to sell its computers with Mac OS X pre-installed. The latter is what prompted Apple to file a copyright infringement lawsuit in the first place.
It's clear from the court documents that Apple is looking for a judgment in the case, not monetary damages. The company said in the filing that it understands that it can't collect against Psystar except through bankruptcy proceedings.
Psystar is just one of the clone companies Apple has to contend with. RussianMac and PearC have also started selling Mac clones in Russia and Germany, respectively.
One of the biggest Mac clone stories to come along in recent months is Quo Computer, a California-based company that has opened a retail store in Los Angeles.
Jim Dalrymple has followed Apple and the Mac industry for the last 15 years, first as part of MacCentral and then in various positions at Macworld. Jim also writes about the professional audio market, examining the best ways to record music using a Macintosh. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. He currently runs The Loop. You can follow him on Twitter @jdalrymple. 
When making PCs, most manufacturers use the cheapest parts they can find, since there is no real margin in making higher quality PCs using better components, except for servers and high end gaming systems.
But the cheapest components are likely to be the least reliable. And, would people like to run an Apple clone which crashed sometimes, because, say, some memory was unstable?
I think, if Apple were to allow clone manufacturers, the resulting clones wouldn't be reliable. The only option would be if Apple certified the quality of the hardware components the OEMs used.
While I like the idea of a cheaper PC or Mac, I don't want a machine which isn't reliable.
You have a very cloudy view on how OEM's do things.
I have yet to buy a OEM machine thats falling apart whether it be a laptop or a desktop.
The OEM's deliver bad quality holds about as much water as the myth that there will never be viruses for OSX.
Anything to keep the FUD train rolling I guess though...
1. It is about quality and quality control.
2. Apple has a great deal of development costs that come with putting together a great Operating system. They do not charge the full cost of the OS to users because all Mac users paid part of the OS cost when they purchased Mac Hardware.
Apple does not get that upset when a hobbyist makes a Hackintosh. Apple was founded by hobbyists working in their garage. Apple does get quite upset when companies sell products using Apple proprietary code. The company does not have Apple's expense of creating the operating system, thus by stealing Apples IP they can sell at a lower cost than Apple can.
Let me paraphrase Ben Franklin - He who chooses security over freedom deserves neither. That's why I'll never sell my soul at the Altar of Steve.
"Funny, I can get both (security and freedom) with a Linux machine. I can get security and relative freedom with a Mac box. I can't get either one in Windows... "
Then that says a lot about your technical competence right there alone. Billions of people around the world have figured it out on Windows already. It's not terribly difficult, I'm sure you could figure it out if you tried.
Brilliant idea! Get yourself a Chrysler auto too."
What exactly is your point. I understand the humor of it but, just to throw it in there, Chrysler is exiting bankruptcy with the Fiat deal. Psystar is not.
I think Perry is referring to one of the consequences of the Chrysler bankruptcy and sale to a 'new' Chrysler is that any and all prior legal obligations are now null and void. This means all car warranties, service plans, promotions, and legal litigation against the old company are voided.
What does that really mean?
The new car warranty you bought last week on your new Chrysler is now worth zip- It was issued by a company that no longer exists. Now the new Chrysler is going to good faith honor it, but they don't have to and I expect in cases where it may start getting expensive (like your engine blows up) that they will claim that hole card and tell you that you're stuck, sorry, try again next time.
Remember the promotion a year or so ago for free gas if you bought a new Chrysler? Gone. That promotion is dead. Again, some may still honor it as a good faith, but it's not required by law and is the sort of thing that gets axed quickly.
Suppose you had a lawsuit against Chrysler because yourJeep rolled and people were ejected due to bad seat belt designs. You had an open lawsuit for millions. Now that lawsuit is void and you have no legal recourse at all. Seriously, it's true.
That's the danger of buying any product while a company is in financial limbo like this. That's Perry's point I believe. I may be wrong, but that's how I see it.
Good idea! I can find a killer deal on Chrysler right now.
BTW, I don't have to worry if Psystar goes out of business, because if a part fails, I can just replace it myself. I have assembled my own PCs in past and didn't have much trouble maintaining them without a vendor warranty.
I hope Apple is still around to provide software updates though
Apple will be around for quite some time. After Paystar is gone, Apple updates will no longer work on Paystar computers. From what I understand, Paystar patches their crack of OS-X each time Apple updates the OS. If you have no Paystar, you have no patches to the OS crack. If you have no patches, you can't run Apple updates.
The hacks used by Psystar are developed by an open source project. That project existed before Psystar and will exist after Psystar is gone.
Not exactly the image you want for a company, but that's what it is.
Now if they had simply bought the company off for a few grand at the beginning, they would have avoided this whole mess.
Apple is doing what it should do. Actually the stay in the copyright case should not be valid since it permits one to continue committing the crime without any disposition.
Is this I Can't Be Bothered to Read Day on CNET?
Microsoft does and has.
Most every country has copyright laws. Not that it would necessarily be easy to bring the EULA thieves to court in Russia.
To be fair, I always said that Psystar would be toast in this case, win or lose, but I didn't expect it to happen before the end.
hmmm, didn't think so.
point 2) why on earth would Apple give up control of what hardware that THEIR operating system would work with (or work well with) - then you'd get Windows and Linux all over again (and it took the varioud Linux flavors years to build up a respectible drivers base).
Of course, this will be a win for consumers and be extremely damaging to MS.
- by RompStar_420 June 15, 2009 3:53 PM PDT
- This company should have been called PsychoStar, stealing others OS and then talking garbage to defend them self.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(53 Comments)