Psystar releases Mac clone software
Psystar, the clone company Apple is suing for selling generic hardware with the Mac OS pre-installed, is expanding its business to include selling software that will allow anyone to install Apple's operating system.
(Credit:
Psystar)
Psystar said on Thursday that its Rebel EFI suite is available for download from its Web site. The software will allow anyone to install any modern operating system on their computer, including Apple's Mac OS X Snow Leopard.
According to the company, the software is compatible with the Intel Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad, i7 or machines running the Xeon Nehalem CPU.
A demo version of the software is available for download so users can "test-drive" it before they buy. Psystar says the demo would allow users to install Mac OS X, but with "limited hardware functionality as compared with the full version."
Psystar said after downloading the software, users just need to burn it to a CD and follow the onscreen instructions. The full version of the Rebel EFI suite, removing any hardware limitations, costs $49.99.
Microsoft's Windows 7, released today, is also compatible with the Rebel EFI suite, according to Psystar.
Psystar is best known for selling clone computers and being sued by Apple for copyright infringement. A trial date has been set for January 11, 2010.
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. A guitar player for 20 years, Jim also writes about the professional audio market, examining the best ways to write and record songs on a Macintosh with Logic Pro and Pro Tools. Jim is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. 
It's not illegal to sell tools. What you do with those tools are completely up to you.
Apple computers can be used to hack into networks. Does that mean Apple can be sued for selling computers?
It's like selling lock picks.
No need. There is opensource software to do similar things. Once those guys get their hands on this and pick up a few tips the open source stuff should get a big boost. I've had my Hackintosh up to booting ot the apple. I need to do more legwork to figure out the ketch files (or whatever they are in OS X land) needed to get past that point.
I really hope this doesn't drive Apple into having to resort to a MS-like activation scheme. One of the nice things about having a Mac is that you don't have to worry about activation issues.
Look for really nasty hardware DRM in the near future. It will make MS activation seem downright friendly.
Apple can't survive as a software company. They never have been able, and most likely never will.
I wonder what MS would say if someone came up with a piece of software that allowed people to install Windows 7 while bypassing the activation system?
Not the same thing...What Psystar is doing is saying if you buy a copy of snow leopard you should be able to use it on what you want as there is NOTHING different on a Apple PC other then only allowing certain hardware to work with it.
What you are saying is if someone uses a torrented copy of Windows 7 without paying for it.
How it is used is not up to Psystar, it is Apple who licenses the software.
...or the end user.
A middle-man commercial entity however has no legal say w/o a license from the manufacturer.
This tool breaks no copy protection as OSX has non. What it does allow is the machine to pretend to be a real Apple system and thus allowing Apples software to load, decrypt and run.
I've been wondering one thing now that I haven't read elsewhere - how will Psystar's owners feel when their software gets hacked and passed around on the internet's black market? If they whine about it, it'll just seem like hypocrisy to me.
"A legal version of OS X" is one that is on Apple hardware.
What you have written is also piracy.
Read before you post BS.
No, piracy refers to theft of software or other intellectually protected media. What Psystar is doing in this instance is providing software that allows users to bypass certain restrictions of the Mac OS X operating system. They fully pay for each and every copy of OS X they sell with their computers, and they fully intend for users of their new software to do the same.
Whether or not the actual use of Mac OS X on non-Apple labelled hardware is legal, and if the EULA holds up in court we will see that it is not, it is also relatively unenforceable in this case as Psystar is not directly infringing upon it. They are reverse engineering EFI, an Intel technology, to run on top of regular old BIOS, tricking Mac OS X into thinking it's actually a Mac.
There is a large difference between piracy and what Psystar is doing.
You sound like Psystar lawyer -- and that is not a compliment -- sorry!
Have you even been following the case?
I will keep it simple: Psystar is going to hell fast!
You CANNOT put OSX on anything other than a Mac and call it legal - this has been written in the fine print of every Mac OS document - AND One agrees to it when installing Mac OS X!
They made it. They funded it. They get to tell us how to use it. Simple. If you do not like. go get something else.
"You CANNOT put OSX on anything other than a Mac and call it legal - this has been written in the fine print of every Mac OS document - AND One agrees to it when installing Mac OS X!"
So wouldn't that mean, the USER that installs the Mac OS (on non-Mac computer) is committing the illegal activity and not Psystar, since they are not installing the Mac OS (in regards to the Rebel EFI software only)? In this case, Psystar is just providing a means to an end.
I guess the courts will have to decide if the software is illegal too.
A legal version of OS X is one you have bought and paid for. Where you use it, and on what machine is your own choice and none of Apples Business. I don't expect them to support it, nor do I expect them to chase me down with a DMCA Take down notice on my own hackintosh.
Copyright isn't about limiting what I can do with your content for my own enjoyment. It's about protecting your right to sell it. Where the two dont' conflict there is no issue unless folks you like decide to meddle with my hobby.
The EULA leaves an out for OS X on apple branded computers. That's legally unclear. Apple doesn't make their own computers thus others can and do "brand apple computers" I've wondered if I put that Apple sticker on my ThinkPad if it's now Apple BRanded? Regardless since I paid for OS X and I want it on that ThinkPad at some point that's where it's going.
A bootloader is a type of virtual machine. Virtual machines are legal, and supported by the industry and by Apple (Bootcamp isn't quite a VM but it does use boot elements to help windows boot)
I'm sorry you are incorrect. A legal copy of MacOS X is one that is installed on apple branded hardware. This statement is very clear in the Apple EULA for the software. To install the software, you have to agree.
As for whomever mentioned the doctrine of first sale, that's all well and good if the item was actually sold to you, but it has not been. Apple clearly licenses your use of their OS and the license is given under the terms of the EULA.
That said, I have to admit that I have installed MacOS (a legitimately purchased copy) on a non-apple product and use it regularly. Technically I am in violation of the EULA but I did not steal the software, Apple has been paid for it.
You're against open competition, freedom of choice, and allowing end users to actually follow the first sale doctrine?
I'd rather decide what I do with software I buy- not let Apple dictate my life for me.
A coupla suckers pony up $50 each and each dollar allows them to more fully extend the middle finger to Apple as they fall into a burning lake of lava.
Hell, I WANT one of the Psystar machines. I like the oddball systems like this as a historical footnote.
As for the hack software, the fact that the site is down tells me there are a lot more lemmings out there than we originally thought. Given the performance of their machines, I am fairly certain there will be a BOATLOAD of issues with this "patching' software, and Apple will get the blame for it.
I would expect to see the "cease and desist" order within the next 24 hours.
So not only is this likely to anger Apple, but also a lot of people who might support the concept. And unlike Apple, some of those people might find it appropriate to express their anger with a bit of website hacking.
Is there anyone who doesn't hate them at this point?
ahahaha ,nice one
- by casanegro October 22, 2009 6:07 PM PDT
- Pystar is probably secretly funded by Micro$oft.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by Perry_Clease October 22, 2009 7:41 PM PDT
- I doubt that, more likely one of the PC manufacturers.
- Like this
-
- by Vegaman_Dan October 22, 2009 9:28 PM PDT
- Doubtful for if the courts that are examining this start taking a closer look at the EULA that Apple is using to defend their actions, then it may come to pass that the EULA is invalidated- which is something Microsoft woudln't want to have happen as their own EULA is pretty dracnoic as well.
- Like this
-
- by veggiedude--2008 October 22, 2009 9:51 PM PDT
- This is Micro$oft's worse nightmare. They do not want a competing OS against its Windows 7. If Apple allowed this to happen, it would be declaring war on MS. The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if Apple is secretly allowing this to happen!
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (93 Comments)