Psystar countersues Apple

Yes, I think it is wrong Apple is not letting their software run on only their hardware, but they have 100% rights to it considering they made it and have the right to do as they wish with it.

Apple should win and Psystar shouldn't try because you can't sue someone for not letting their ideas be taken and used for someone else's gain. That is like, inventing electricity and having someone else get the credit, sure the idea of electricity was shared, but I think you get my point.


I agree with the fact that apple is wrong by only allowing their hardware on only their software but they shouldn't be penalized for it, just frowned upon.

Yes, I think it is wrong Apple is not letting their software run on only their hardware, but they have 100% rights to it considering they made it and have the right to do as they wish with it.

Apple should win and Psystar shouldn't try because you can't sue someone for not letting their ideas be taken and used for someone else's gain. That is like, inventing electricity and having someone else get the credit, sure the idea of electricity was shared, but I think you get my point.


I agree with the fact that apple is wrong by only allowing their hardware on only their software but they shouldn't be penalized for it, just frowned upon.

Well I must say this is an interesting development. This could also (if the government of the US was so inclined) lead to an anti trust suit by the DOJ.

When you buy a computer, you make significant investment in peripherals, but most of all: Software.

Thousands of pounds for the creative suite and Quark... Until recently, neither Quark or Adobe allowed cross platform upgrades... So you were, in effect locked into the Apple platform unless you re-purchased all your software.

The only way you can get a faster computer that runs your software, is to buy another Mac.

I simply could not continue to use my non-apple purchases, without another Apple purchase... There is no choice but to get a Mac. That's a monopoly. (I do love my Apple machine, and wouldn't switch, but yes, it's still a monopoly, limiting my choice of computer and potentially, best value for money)

Does Psystar even have enough moolah for lawyers???

They are going to get Pwned!

They don't sell retail copies of the OS. They sell licenses that allow you to run the OS on specified systems. While you as an individual can choose to ignore the license and likely not face consequences, a buisness can't profit by breaking the law and expect to get away with it.

Anti-competitive? You bet. With the 360 or PS3, you can't go into a computer store and buy the operating system. 90% of the personal computer market knows little to nothing about Macs, so here's a simpler scenario than the car analogy: A person walks into the Apple Store or Best Buy, buys a retail copy of Leopard, and gets home only to find out that in order to run it legally, they have spend an additional minimum of $600 USD to buy "An Apple Computer" even though the hardware, albeit BIOS or EFI, is the SAME as Dell, Gateway, etc. I love Apple, but their decision to sell retail copies was a big NO NO. OS upgrades should never have been sold separately after they switched from PowerPC.

This is lose-lose for Psystar.

If they lose the case; they lose, obvisouly.

If they win the case and Apple is forced to allow OS X to be installed on other x86 hardware (doesn't mean Apple has to support it, but if they are forced to remove the checks that prevent its installation), Psystar still loses because companies like Dell will put them out of business.

Psystar virtually has no case.

I hate the car analogy here but let's roll with it for a second here... Imagine Ferrari (Intel) makes engines for everyone else to use. Apple (Mercedes) and Yugo (Psystar) each sell their own brand of car and Yugo just happens to use the same engine Mercedes uses in their own car. Mercedes has a special OS which controls engine management, cooling, upgraded nav system, stereo, etc. And now they're offering an upgrade for their older cars to get some of the same features and braking performance as in their newer cars. Yugo finds a way to put that OS in its own cars and claims its like running a Mercedes for less. The engine is the same, the tires are the same, and a lot of other components are similar, but it's not as well designed and it's certainly not as luxurious as the "complete". Mercedes doesn't make a sedan version of its popular coupe model and Yugo claims they're in the right because Mercedes is being anticompetitive by not offering its OS in a car Yugo wants to buy.

I hope Apple's team of lawyers takes them down brutally.