Comments on: Want to eliminate Psystar? License Mac OS X

Apple is still battling the maker of a computer using its operating system. Might its conflict be resolved if it simply dumps the lawsuits in favor of a licensing plan?

[ewelch]

Author: "Yadda yadda yadda."

Translation: "I don't get it."

What the author doesn't get is Apple is growing at twice the rate of the PC makers. Apple makes 1 out of four Delll PCs being sold now. ONE OUT OF FOUR! The MacBook is now the best selling single model of laptop in the world.

And the author wants them to give up the one biggest advantage Apple has over other computer makers to do what? Cut their profit margin and lose market share for their own computers vs clones.

Sheesh, how many times can this old chestnut be brought out, roasted and then put away?

Dell is struggling. They had to lay off their production staff in Limerick, Ireland and move the manufacturing to Poland. They're hurting because their profit margin is so small. Meanwhile, Apple is more successful in real terms. They may not have what Dell does in volume, but they more than make up for it in profit margin and customer loyalty for having the best tech support around (mind you, it's far from perfect, just the best of the worst).

Apple has no debt. Does dell? Apple has $ 25 billion in cash reserves. How much does dell have? Apple's retail stores keep multiplying. Dell had to close down their Kiosks and now they sell at Best Buy (along with Macs).

Nope, the author simply does not get what many of us have known for years. Apple's success comes from NOT being like the rest. Just like Wall Street telling Costco to be more like Wal Mart. It ain't gonna happen dude. Give it up.

[RetiredMidn]

Ain't happening. Apple would have to sell huge amounts of software to offset the lost hardware sales, not to mention the greater support burden when crappy 3rd party hardware starts failing and the need to support more hardware configurations than the carefully managed number they have now.

[brian.lee]

"Can you imagine how ecstatic Sony would be about selling Viao systems with Mac OS X?"

One of the reasons why MAC run so well is because the OS knows exactly what kind of hardware it's working with. That's why we don't have so many driver compatibility issues because all the CORE important components are chosen by APPLE and drivers written by APPLE.

Have you ever installed Windows on a computer where it doesn't recognize the Ethernet or Wireless chipset?? Than you have to get another computer and download the drivers to a USB stick and copy it to your other machine so you can get on the internet and download all the other missing drivers?

Ya see we don't have that problem with OS X and Apple hardware "It just works" and it comes with a price tag. Apple hardware just works out of the box... it doesn't come with any junk out of the box that you have to uninstall

[brian.lee]

"Can you imagine how ecstatic Sony would be about selling Viao systems with Mac OS X?"

One of the reasons why MAC run so well is because the OS knows exactly what kind of hardware it's working with. That's why we don't have so many driver compatibility issues because all the CORE important components are chosen by APPLE and drivers written by APPLE.

Have you ever installed Windows on a computer where it doesn't recognize the Ethernet or Wireless chipset?? Than you have to get another computer and download the drivers to a USB stick and copy it to your other machine so you can get on the internet and download all the other missing drivers?

Ya see we don't have that problem with OS X and Apple hardware "It just works" and it comes with a price tag. Apple hardware just works out of the box... it doesn't come with any junk out of the box that you have to uninstall

[tundraboy]

This article defies logic.

If there is this great unmet demand out there for OS-X computers, why would Apple surrender that market to their competitors? They might as well capture this imaginary unmet demand themselves by having them buy Macs instead Mac clones?

Someone will then say "but the unmet demand is for low cost Macs".

Precisely, if Apple decides that selling low cost Macs will be good for business, then they could open a down market brand to sell said low cost Macs. But they've always said discount Macs don't make sense for them -basically it will damage the Mac trade mark.

So if it doesn't make sense to have a down-market Apple brand, it would make even less sense for Apple to let an independent clone maker be the down-market Mac.

Enough already.

[SteveW928]

I think the faulty logic is in thinking market-share is all that important. The idea is that you have to capture the market-share to win. While having some reasonable percentage of the market is important, capturing it is unnecessary. Don's move typical of short-term thinking of quick ways to grab market-share, with long-term downside. Apple has plenty of users to make it viable platform.

[groink_hi]

@SteveW928

Bingo! You could not be any more correct. I talked about this in another Don article regarding the PS3. The Business 101 flunkies believe that there can only be one leader, and all others will fail. If we applied this form of logic to other businesses, you'd only have one maker of toilet paper, one maker of cars, one maker of coffee...

People just don't get it. As a platform, Apple has only 10-percent market share of the operating system business. HOWEVER, as a computer manufacturer, Apple sells more Apple-branded computers than any other company other than HP and Dell. Apple is beating out companies like ASUS, Toshiba, Lenovo, Sony, and dozens of other PC manufacturers. For ASUS or Lenovo to sell less Windows-based computers than Apple, I'd say that those companies are doing really bad.

It is all about perspective. I wish more people would look deeper in to what market share really means.

[SteveW928]

@ groink_hi - Thanks.... yes, and Apple adds enough computer sales EVERY QUARTER to be enough of a market for descent general software development. The only area where things get a bit tricky is in certain speciality markets where only a small percentage of the market will buy a product. But, even some of those markets have been breaking open to Apple development.

[free_bike_rider]

How many times does this argument need to be rehashed. I've seen this same article dozens of times with all of the same arguments. Nothing substantive has/ will be added to this conversation and it will be brought up again, and again. Do any of you actually think your comments are going to change the infrastructure of these companies? Speculation about the issues involved are interesting, but pointless. You like Apple, you like Windows. Fine! End of story. If you want to change anything in this debate, get a job at one of these companies and change it from the inside by the weight and merits of your arguments. Otherwise you're just a bunch of fanbois repeating arguments that no one other than yourselves care about!

[Sporlo]

u rock

[kcotham]

Psystar is violating the EULA, period. They should be fined for all court costs and court ordered to cease and desist. It's simple. Why this has dragged on, is anyone's guess, but it needs to stop.

[umbrae]

EULA is a end user agreement. It is rare that any fines are associated with this and very few EULA's hold up in court. Their main purpose is to prevent lawsuits from users that expect too much out of the software or use the software in a way it is not designed. Although, Apple could deny supporting the OS for Pystar; whether they can seek damages based on the EULA is unlikely. If Apply gets money or a cease and desist it will be based on copyright laws and not EULA.

You can still use software without agreeing to the EULA, but you can't expect anything from the vendor if you do.

[dbargen]

Want to eliminate Psystar? Hold companies to the legally binding contract that is a EULA.

But maybe a little SOONER next time...

Seriously, Psystar never had a chance in court, but the yapping dog had to be kicked down at some point. Perhaps PR played into the timing, or held it off until they couldn't stand to not enforce their contract anymore.

If you don't like Apple's business model, go someplace that doesn't bother with enforcing international contracts and sell through grey market middlemen. When you live in the nation of laws, you have to obey them or take the punishment, even if it doesn't happen immediately. If you want shock collar response, just ask before trying and see where it gets you...

[Rip_Ragged]

Don. This post is crap. Macintosh computers are better hardware than comparably priced Dells or HPs. OS X is the best commercially supported OS on the planet. You may not like it, but those are the facts.

Licensing OS X right now would kill Apple.

Get a clue.

[nicmart]

The only evidence I know of about the quality of Mac hardware is the annual survey by Consumer Reports of its readers. In the most recent survey Mac finished last (worst) in frequency-of-repair (though within the margin of error). Is there other evidence?

[SteveW928]

@nicmart

Umm... I'm not sure what you're talking about. In laptops, in the CR report, Apple was in a 3-way tie with Dell and Gateway for 2nd to last, with HP requiring more repairs... and there was only a couple point spread in total between 3 tied for best. In desktops, Apple was the best in reliability by a good margin. But, I'm not sure how good the CR data is for computers. I like CR for many things, but I don't think they do a very good job at some products... computers being one of them.

The other thing to remember here, is that Apple users tend to be quite picky about quality, and are more likely to report problems that PC users would just put up with or expect. I've used a lot of various computers over the years and while there are problems here and there with Apple's they are clearly ahead of the pack in quality.

Apple also does a better than average job of actually taking care of problems when there is one.

[dragonsky1]

I have to say one thing about Consumer Reports. They're findings are often biased, incorrect, and based on only a small group of their subscribers. That's why so many brands, like Isuzu, are often exlcluded from their studies. They simply don't bother to find enough people for them.

Consumer reports also rates Vizio TV's quite highly, but put one next to a Samsung or Sony and you would gladly pay the extra money if you had it.

[malogato]

Again..

How is the processor stuck inside a mac and better than the processor stuck inside a dell? It's the same damn thing.
The video cards, memory chips, harddrives, are ALL MADE by SOMEONE ELSE. Seagate doesn't have a "mac harddrive production line" they just make harddrives. ATI doesn't make SPECIAL video chips for mac.. they just make the chips. There isn't a Core2Duo-Mac and a Core2Duo-Windows product line.

This entire concept that one part is BETTER hardware is ridiculous. It's the SAME. I am not arguing that mac is INFERIOR nor am I stating they are SUPERIOR. I am stating they are EQUAL, in everything but price. Mac equivalents cost between 50% to 100% MORE (see my prior examples above) than their PC twins.

If you REMOVE the OS from the equation (which we are talking about hardware here) they are IDENTICAL

[nicmart]

Licensing the OS would have worked years ago, but no longer. What Apple needs to do now is to produce modest Macs -- laptops and desktops -- at mass market price points, just it does iPods.

[Perry_Clease]

"The only evidence I know of about the quality of Mac hardware is the annual survey by Consumer Reports of its readers. In the most recent survey Mac finished last (worst) in frequency-of-repair (though within the margin of error). Is there other evidence?"

If you think that is bad take a look this survey http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2182854,00.asp

[technogeist2k6]

I've always been a big fan of Apple hardware, despite the pitiful hardware spec and the asking price of some of their products.

However, times are getting harder and they should think about a separation of desktop/workstation and server systems. If they licensed OS-X desktop/workstation versions to other vendors, maybe with a few pre-conditions to limit sub-licensing, and ensuring the hardware spec mirrors what Apple requires. They could very likely clean up on the consumer OS side, before Windows 7 gets a foot hold.
Apple has already missed one golden opportunity when Vista turned out to be a big flop. They're about to miss another.

License OS-X to a select few. ASAP

[kelmon]

I just want to say that this column on CNet just continues to get worse. Posting this nonsense is both insulting to your readers and also just a transparent attempt to generate page hits by writing something "controversial". This isn't "controversial", however, but just plain rubbish.

[Alphaman63]

Maybe next we can get Ford to sell cars without engines? That way we can build our own, or license them from GM or Tesla.

Your "legal" arguments are without merit, also, Don. Once Apple allowed one vendor to have access to OS X, they'd have set precedent and would thereby be practicing anti-competitive tactics if the didn't provide options for others to license it, too. And setting artificially high barriers to playing the game won't fly in court, either.

No, Don, your whole argument, while wishful thinking, simply wouldn't work in reality. Apple is a "solution" provider, and is not obliged to de-bundle its offering.

[Words_Matter]

The trouble with the article is that the premise ("Want to eliminate Psystar?") is flawed. Apple couldn't care less about Psystar itself. The company sells a handful of computers which are clumsy and loud. The entire suit is about NOT licensing Mac OS X. So advice to license OS X to kill Psystar is exactly backwards. Being able to AVOID licensing the OS to companies like HP and Dell is specifically the reason why Psystar must die.

Frankly, at this point in the game it's a no-brainer that Psystar will lose. The judge has already rejected the monopoly claim, which was the only claim that ever even had a prayer. Each succeeding claim has been weaker and weaker. The only reason the litigation is taking so long is so that the Psystar principals can stash the operating capital overseas out of reach of US bankruptcy courts when the judgement against them comes.

Don seems to be under the mistaken impression that Apple thinks of Microsoft as a primary competitor, but that's not the case. As Steve Jobs once famously put it, "The OS wars are over. Microsoft won." Apple competes in hardware, where industrial design and elegant software are differentiating features. Licensing the OS would turn the Mac computers into a commodity market and start a "race to the bottom" price war that Apple couldn't hope to win. Licensing the OS would make non-Apple Macs seem "good enough" to many people who would then opt for low-cost, low-quality competitors' products instead. This is the primary lesson learned in the Clone Wars of the 1990s.

Don would have Apple replace low quality clones with higher quality, but still cheap clones from other major manufacturers, and he thinks that would be good for Apple. Replacing $500+ in profits from a computer sale with even $129 from the sale of the OS to a competitor is just bad business.

[CristGarage]

Question Don. After reading your ridiculous column on more then one occasion, time which I'll never get back I'm afraid, I would like to ask a very simple question...

Are you on drugs?

[PaulMpanga]

l love it when apple boys keep on saying that Apple inc is overtaking microsoft, thats not the case at all. the world still uses windows and prefers windows. it's only here in the states where people go head over heels about an apple PC ( yes, it's a PC).

[Quest4Sanity]

For Pete's sake, another twit saying OSX should be licenses. Seriously, are you aware of what business Apple is in? They make hardware. They sell hardware. Their money comes from hardware. Licensing OSX would cause Apple to lose the single biggest advantage they have over other computer manufacturers, they have a great OS. Pystar is an ant. And you don't burn your house down just because you see a couple of ants.

Stop posting such nonsense just to drive traffic to your site. And if you actually believe what you're writing, well, wow. Good luck with that.

[ikramerica--2008]

The way to get rid of Psystar is to enforce your copyright, win in court, and sue them for all the revenues they ever made.

Which is what Apple is doing. ;)

[malogato]

ikramerica

You should actually research that first sale doctrine ....

[JimBob88--2008]

I don't know if it would kill apple or not - I don't see why.

I'm tired of them and dropping things due to obscure visions of the future ( like firewire) and purposely crippling their machines. Apple's products have increasingly become media conduits and are being tailored to that end.


OSX on an lenovo thinkpad would be pretty sweet. And just the thought might wake apple up from this itunes/mobileme mindset, and inspire them to make flexible expandable hardware that isn't rendered obsolete in 2 years because Jobs had a vision of the future that didn't happen. Or - more to the point - because Apple is tying you into their media distribution system.

[kcotham]

FireWire not taking off like it should is not Apple's fault. It's been the fault of cheap generic PC manufacturers not wanting to pay the license for the hardware controllers. It came to like $1 per machine, and has since been dropped. But these bargain basement, computer manufacturers still don't use it. It didn't gain popularity quickly enough, so the peripheral manufacturers (which were even less likely to pay the initial royalty) never used it.


Marketing aside, how is Apple's hardware "rendered obsolete in 2 years"? If that's true, then so is the rest of the PC world. Apple's hardware is little different than any other manufacturer's now. How are Apple's products "crippled"?! You keep talking about them becoming media conduits. What is inherently wrong with that? It works. You don't lose anything. You get a fully functioning (better functioning than Windows) computer, and a "media conduit". Everything works with everything else. In case you didn't know, that's a GOOD THING. And if you had been an Apple user from way back, you'd know that is how things are SUPPOSED to work. We long time Apple users are used to things working together as they should.

All you want is cheap. You want cheap hardware you can tinker with. (Why you bring up the ThinkPad if you want cheap, I'll never know). You are not the majority of computer users. Apple has actually led the development of standards. FireWire is still a superior interface for quickly moving data than USB.