Mac OS X seller (not Apple) disappears after reports
This bare-bones desktop may not look like much, but for a while, you could get it with Leopard preinstalled.
(Credit: Psystar [via Ars Technica])An entrepreneurial Mac vendor has gone offline just hours after it was discovered selling Mac OS X Leopard desktops from a company not named Apple.
MacRumors.com, along with many others, noted one of those too-good-to-be-true deals from a company called Psystar on Sunday night and Monday morning. Psystar, until just now, had been offering $554 "Open Mac" desktops on its Web site with Intel processors, 2GB of memory, a DVD drive, and a copy of Mac OS X Leopard.
The thing is, Apple's software license for Leopard, and any version of Mac OS X, requires that the operating system only run on Apple hardware. Psytar acknowledged the OSx86 project was the inspiration for the Open Mac, and noted their systems require "minimal patching" to run Leopard, according to MacRumors. By the time I got in this morning Psystar's Web site was offline, and the company is likely considering its legal options at this hour. A Google-cached copy may or may not be available here, it was loading very, very slowly when I tried it.
For years PC DIYers and companies like Dell have begged Apple to offer a copy of Mac OS X up for licensing on non-Apple hardware, but Apple hasn't even entertained the idea, as far as we can tell. As much as the hardware industry might want another alternative to Windows, many of the reasons that Leopard is attractive might have a lot to do with the fact that it's designed to work on a limited number of hardware configurations.
Windows is designed to work on any computer with a chip from Intel or AMD, and that's both a blessing and a curse. On the plus side, you can build a pretty decent system for a couple hundred bucks, but the code base required to handle all the possible permutations of chips and peripherals devices makes Windows an extremely complex beast that grows larger and larger with each release.
If you bought a Psystar desktop, you're probably going to be stuck with a Leopard 10.5.2 system for life. As John Gruber of Daring Fireball notes, Psystar warns its customers that Leopard updates might force them to reinstall Mac OS X unless the updates are "not non-safe," a truly cringe-worthy phrase.
It seems that people would like a really low-cost Mac, although the Mac Mini doesn't appear to have taken the Mac universe by storm. I wonder if OS X, the iPhone operating system, could run a low-cost Mac akin to Asus' Eee PC, and keep healthy profit margins intact if Apple decides to jump on board with Intel's low-cost Atom processor. Then, if you want the full Mac experience, Apple can upsell you to the MacBook or iMac.
UPDATED 1:45pm PT: As noted below in the comments, Psystar's site seems to be back up, although it's still taking an awfully long time to load.
Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, online advertising, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom. 
%20disappears%20after%20reports%20%7C%20Apple%20-%20CNET%20News&srcUrl=http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-9918069-37.html;){kind=small}
IIRC, the Apple OSX EULA states specifically "Apple branded hardware", which carries a distinct legal difference from "Apple hardware".
While either would've still prevented a third party from selling generic machines with OSX installed (else trademark infringement would ensue), there is nothing stopping a home user from building a Hackintosh on his or her own, then slapping an Apple sticker on the side (which would pretty much take care of that bit o' legalese).
/P
Here's the exact quote: This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. You agree not to install, use
or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so. (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf)
I don't think it really matters; I doubt slapping an Apple sticker on the side of a Mac white box would circumvent that provision, but IANAL. Still, I also doubt Apple would come after you and me if we built a pirated (that's what it is) Mac for our own use. They would obviously deny us support or troubleshooting help, like they do with jailbroken iPhones.
Sure Macs are expensive, but so are Mercedes, playstation 3, etc.
You want one, you have to pay; otherwise, I don't see how so many
people make a big deal about Apple doing their business. More
than 95% are satisfied with Windows. You want a Mac, get a better
job or work overtime or even 1 job.
The reason 95% of people are satisfied with windows is specifically because it does not require some proprietary hardware that is over priced on purpose. You can get the same hardware and build a computer yourself and put windows on it for 1/2 to 2/3 the price. OSX is a crappy OS that runs on only 1% of the available computer hardware out there, not to mention the complete lack of software support.
As for Apple, don't quite understand how it can monopolize its hardware and software and no one cries foul. Both EU and US penalize Windoze for hoggin' up all the PC market. Tell me who else in WORLD sells a MAC? NO ONE! well, almost no one... short and still birth Pystar. Like it's name, die peacefully! Hopefully, maybe the next one will make it out alive.
None of this iMac crap. I like my dual display and I don't want to pay the extra for their displays. The Mac Mini is too underpowered, doesn't have dual displays. The Mac Pro is too expensive.
I want my mini-tower T_T.
It would be nice if the low end macs supported four screens.
Maybe they take a MacBook and modify it instead of building it from scratch. How does that not void the Apple warranty though?
They've been around for quite some time.
That's just guessing of course, but since their website claims they were at MacWorld Expo 2008 and Steve Jobs didn't torch their booth the second he saw it, I'd say that guess is pretty accurate.
Warranty-wise, it does void Apple's warranty. Axiotron takes up that slack by providing their own warranty:
Warranty and Warranty Extensions
The Axiotron Modbook is exclusively assembled and manufactured by an Axiotron Authorized System Manufacturer (AASM). Every complete Modbook solution includes a one-year Axiotron Authorized System Manufacturer limited hardware warranty that can be extended to up to three years.
This does mean, though, that you're not likely to get service from most friendly neighborhood Applecare providers under any warranty (though Axiotron may allow you to pay for service and get reimbursed, if the option is available to you).
Give it another year and the Modbook's market penetration will indicate whether or not there will be a full-size Apple Tablet in the future (ie. not an iPod Touch, something with a minimum 13" screen.)
Just my opinion.
I think Apple should bundle with 19" monitor, kbd and mouse for the same price now.
as a first time MAC user I am extremely happy with it. Almost 2 years old Vista UltimateCrap sucks!
Apple says here it is with the sofware & hardware they think you should utilize and that's it!
PC's blow Mac's away, the only people purchasing Macs are those idiot ipod or iphone users, no wonder Apple has an 8% market share!
you even knew what one was. That is the only explanation I can
think of for the utter and complete drivel you posted.
Fact: I can run OS X, Linux or Windows on an Intel based Mac.
Fact: Many UNIX programs are ported for the Mac.
Fact: There are many 3rd party software programs for the Mac.
Fact: There are many 3rd party HW makers for the Mac.
Add that all up and I can run a wider variety of programs on a
Mac than you can on your PC. The only really valid reason for
buying a PC instead of a Mac is price and that is the one
argument you did not mention.
And yes, I do use a Mac. I also use a PC. The reason my PC does
not suck is because I run BSD instead of Windows. And for your
further information my PC does not blow my Mac away. Even
though the PC has a faster processor speed than my Mac it did
not outperform it until I wiped Windows and replaced it with
BSD and occasionally Linux.
Apple is evil and a million times worst than ms.
I don't see steve giving his money to the poor or doing any good for anyone else, apple does blow.
Yeah, I can talk 12-year-old MSN'eze too.
seamless experience. It provides users with hardware that just
works no need for an ass load of drivers made by other
companies clogging up your system and slowing it down. No
need to search for drivers that work with your new OS like what
happened with vista. Go figure that people would buy something
that just worked as it was intended to and 8% is now 12% and
most of the new laptops on college campuses (at least the three
near me are macs) go to a coffee shop look around most of the
machines are macs! the only place pc's still have major pull is in
the offices of big corporations why cause they are cheap
(emphasis on cheap) oh and by the way I can run windows on
my mac (not vista it is horrible even on an engineering marvel
like a mac) and yes I have an ipod and no I am not an idiot I have
a degree in computer science and robotics engineering (and I
still use a mac)
of all, Macs had about half that market share only a few years
ago, and furthermore, It's not as if both started at 0% market
share and Windows gained 92% based on its merits. The Mac
was designed and released from the ground up as a new system
(before Windows). Windows was an attempt to copy the Mac OS
and it ran on the huge then IBM userbase that was already
installed and running DOS. Their (slowly shrinking) dominance of
the marketplace is due to several things such as: IT techs
fighting any changes to ensure that they still have jobs fixing
Windows' constant problems, and the sheer expense to a
company to buy new comps, new software, train employees in
the new software, etc. Macs are non versatile? I suppose that's
why most video editing, audio production, computer animation,
etc. is done on Macs. And if I so desire, I can run a crappy OS
like Windows on one. Seems like the only people who still vehemently against Mac are the zomg im so l33tz0rz cause I
can build my own pc to play CS jr. high kids. Have fun with your
PC but read a computer history book before you make
uneducated comments. :0)
leave this article from last fall regarding the fastest laptop running
windows Vista. Enjoy!!
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,135062-page,1-
c,notebooks/article.html#
On the other hand they're super-awesome because you can case-mod one into a steampunked R2-D2 and program it to clean your underwear and vacuum the frito crumbs off your shirt.
The market that apple is missing, and I think Psystar was going for, is the group that wants less power (and expense) than a Mac Pro, more power than a Mac Mini, don't want to pay for a built in monitor because maybe they already have a nice monitor, and want to be able to crack it open and upgrade the flux capacitor or whatever.
Right now the Psystar folks are probably out in the back alley meeting Steve Jobs and his Apple-branded baseball bat.
I agree that the mini is an "odd bird" because it seemed to have sacrificied a lot of hardware ability in order to make that laptop-esque form factor...that trade-off simply doesn't appeal to tinkering enthusiasts.
The "Headless iMac" or mini-tower is a form factor that does get a lot of online advocacy, particularly by these same 'tinkerers'.
However, what we don't realize is that (1) we are disproportionately over-represented here, and (2) what we really want is simply a better bang for the buck because of our willingness to crack open the case and do incremental hardware upgrades.
What we've overlooked is what's been happening in the consumer marketplace while we've had our heads stuck in our towers - - the less geek work has been migrating very strongly to notebooks, which are as NON-upgradable as the mini or iMac. The facts of the matter are that regardless of how loud we might shout for an easily modded minitower, the general Apple consumer DOES NOT CARE about our desire for DIY upgrades.
As such, what this all means is that as for issue (1), the demand for the upgradable cheapie-tower is becoming a "Niche of a Niche", and as per issue (2), our preoccupation with value means that it won't be a profitable product for Apple to build because we'll forever be whining about how it should be another $50 cheaper.
Thus, the market that Apple's "missing out" on is one that would not be profitable for them.
If you want a sub-$1000 tower, then your options are exactly the same as a sub-$20,000 Porsche: you simply buy used. Don't foolishly expect charity from any manufacturer.
-hh
memory, or HD space. It's specifically designed to work with, or
replace an existing computer (PC, or Mac). That's why you can
connect it to a VGA monitor to an HDTV.
It has wireless, bluetooth, usb, firewire so connectivity isn't a
problem. OSX does not require the same footprint as the
Windows, and runs far more efficiently. It comes with a full set
of software, so you don't need to make additional purchases. If
you need, or want off, depending on the version, you may spend
more on Microsoft software than you would on the computer
system over the course of a year or two.
If OSX "needed" more memory, and storage space, then I would
have to agree with you. But is simply does not. As you put it,
"Do the math".
As far as this article is concerned, it is a myth, that OSX can
simply run on any system. There is a reason for the hardware,
and software design. Changing processors didn't change that
fact.
Apple did, at one time license their operating system. They
found out real fast how much control they lost in not only how
the OS was used, but in how they could even develop it. Over-
clocked systems, designs using addresses designated for future
purposes screwed the pooch. Apple found out these
manufacturers, once given an inch, took more than a mile, and
hence affected research, design, and development.
Try a valid comparison.
And don't forget the quality OS, applications, no need for AV and AS, etc, when you make a reasonable hardware comparison.
A legitimate comparison is very close in terms of price and when you add in the high quality bundled apple software to the crappy software bundled on PC's and the extra cycles OSX gives you because it is more efficient than Vista or XP and no AV/AS software, the comparison is very much in Apples favor.
replace an aging PC. Due to the _known_ Apple tax on RAM and
larger HDs, I opted to skip those. But I priced the Dual Quad
Core 2.8 Xeon against the same exact specs from Dell and HP...
Guess what?
It was $1500 LESS!!!
For that money, I bought a 2nd HD, the additional 4 GB of RAM I
wanted, and VMWare, AND a Windows XP Pro License - and I
STILL Had $1000 to spare! I can dual boot, I can run WIndows in
a VM, etc - and I got WELL made hardware....
This clone, which costs $400 - well, that 400 has parts I do not
know, has no firewire, bluetooth, wifi, remote IR, and only the
FW can be added preconfigured, the Wifi and BT you must do
yourself, as with the IR --- but more important?
NO MAC OS, NO iLIFE (add another 155 for the "free" Leopard
preinstalled [how is it free if they are charging you $26 to
preinstall it?], and another $79 at retail for iLife and $50 for FW
- you are at $684 for twice the RAM, twice the HD, but no BT
nor WiFi nor IR receiver) -and the biggest?
No guarantee it will work with the next OS update or even the
company will be around...
Get off it
If Apple did ONE thing, price their RAM and HDs like the rest of
the industry does for upgrades, people like you would not be
able to pull out these silly price comparisons. Bottom line, you
have 1 friend who knows the Mac, and they will always tell you
the same thing - buy the stock configuration, and that is it...
add everything else yourself! They even tell you that at the
store!
I DID the Math, and all Apple really has to do is price their
UPGRADES more competitively, or just not even offer them and
send them to 3rd party for that....
13:30 UTC -7
If I hack OSX to run on something other than a Mac will I get sued? What if I rewrite the BIOS in a Mac will they knock down my door?
If I strip out the bulk of crap of Windows XP, and make it run on a 486, will M$ be coming after me? (they have not yet, but I don't connect those systems to the outside network either.)
Pathetic what these Multi-Million dollar companies will resort to, to keep raking in money, besides actual, value added, productive work done by actual, directly paid employees of their company.
It seems this basic, essential truth has been eliminated from the business textbooks: the only real value is created from productive work. Everything else is either Materials, or Marketing and Management BS.
Actual Work is something these companies seem to try desparately to avoid doing, let alone paying for by outsourcing, offshoring, subcontracting, etc.
Basically they just want their fat salaries to continue while they do nothing, but flap their lips, and give motivation speeches to their peers on how to flaps their lips for more money. How to inflate the perception of value without actually adding value, thats the new way of doing business....how they expect the American consumers to continue to afford their lousy products, when they have eliminated all of our jobs, and won't pay decent wages to those of us remaining, is way beyond me.
Damn it, I am too young to feel this old now...back to actual work while I still have a job.
If you find BIOS on your Mac... then you don't have a Mac...
It was great for playing LORD on the BBS's, but not great for watching YouTube.
I'm sick of reading articles on CNET where you provide links to every little side blog mentioned in the article, but nowhere is there a link the main web site that the article is about.
Sure, I might be able to guess the URL correctly, and can definitely Google it, but why should I have to go that extra step? JUST LINK TO THE WEBSITE YOUR WRITING ABOUT!!!!!!
I did link to a Google cache of the site, if you noticed.
Stupid *******.
Apple relies on a cycle in which software usability and hardware styling combine to drive sales of both. How many PC users stay loyal to their brand? Not many.
So Apple never became Microsoft. Maybe that should go in the "Good Thing" column.
I made two predictions in 1988 about Windows and the Mac OS:
#1) Eventually they would run on the same hardware.
This is obvious. As the computer industry becomes more and more mature, the supplier options become less and less. It was obvious that, eventually, Macs and PCs would be using the same underlying components. Combine this with the fact that Apple can now leverage the manufacturing advantage the PC market has (the more of something you produce, generally the cheaper it becomes) and it was truly an obvious choice.
#2) My second prediction was that, despite Macs and PCs using the same hardware, they would still not be compatible.
What would happen if they were compatible? You'd buy the cheapest because it wouldn't really matter... (Let's face it, it's the programs you run that really matter.) Why would a company want to foster that sort of competition? The last thing MS wants is a serious competitor.
People like to make a big deal over the fact that Apple doesn't want to support the huge array of devices that Windows has to support... and that's the main reason behind Apple's decision to control it's hardware.
This is really a non-issue. Apple could easily list a subset of the hardware it's compatible with... or just copy it from the lists that are widely available from the "hackintosh" forums. Problem solved.
Why doesn't Apple do this? Steve Jobs doesn't like that business model. He didn't like it at Apples beginning... he didn't like it when he started Next... he didn't like it with iPod or iPhone... It leads to more competition and less control. Why would he want either of those?
You know what, I really like Quicken! I need it to do my finances. Too bad I'm forced to be so loyal, but there's no way I'm going through a transition to something else. Same with Mac users - unlike PC users who can buy whatever manufacturer has the best sale (or roll your own), Mac users have the benefit of enforced "loyalty."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Computing
Apple can't survive with head-to-head competition, and they know it. The profit margin on their overinflated hardware prices is the company's bread and butter.
But I do concede, Apple is more expensive for the same hardware - and it is a shame they don't develop something to run on select PC platforms as an option to Windows.
It will be interesting, however, if psystar found a way around the Apple proprietary legal issues...
If Apple tries to sue Psystar for reselling the software as installed on their own product, then that opens Apple up to all sorts of nasty issues. If they succeed, it means no owner of a Macintosh could *ever* sell their Mac on the used market. The same situation applies.
Once you buy the product, is it yours to do with as you want? Apple's legal case could change the nature of ownership for software and hardware purchases. I'm not really sure they have a leg to stand on.
If I decided to buy 100 copies of OS X and because I don't care about making a profit- maybe I'm feeling generous, decided then to sell all of them at 50% off the retail price, can Apple sue me for that? They already made their money, so there is no loss of income there. Hmm.
This could affect the iPhone as well soon. It comes down to the same issue- do you control the product you bought or not?
- not even one dollar
- by Guru Master April 14, 2008 9:38 PM PDT
- I would not even pay one dollar for a MAC clone as it would come with a MAC OS.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- Not even one brain cell
- by silenzisgolden April 15, 2008 2:42 AM PDT
- Then you are an idiot.
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (149 Comments)