Filed under: Hardware, OS, Software, Apple
Psystar alienates the Hackintosh community, too
Say what you will about Psystar, the community that continues to sell computers running OS X, despite bankruptcy, constant legal problems with Apple, and a case so slim even their own legal team gave up. Sure, they're out of reason, out of room, and way out of line, but at least they've got plenty of cojones, as the locals say. Why else would they say the things they do in this Miami Times article? Our friends at Engadget lay out just what's wrong with that piece, from Robert and Rudy's Pedraza's claims that they "cracked the code" behind OS X, to the suggestions and hints that what they're doing just might not be a contract violation. Whether or not Apple's EULA is enforceable is, of course, one of the arguments at issue in Psystar's case, even though plenty of shrinkwrap licenses have been upheld in court before. Apple's also got a copyright infringement claim against Psystar; this will be one of the topics at today's summary judgement hearing in California.
But the kicker in all this is the statement that Rudy Pedraza makes about the famed Hackintosh scene -- a community of people who persist in running OS X on hardware and devices that it wasn't supposed to run on (not nearly as much of a problem to Apple, as they don't sell the capability like Psystar does, but still not technically allowed by the license agreement). Surely, you might think, this is where the Pedrazas could find friends; surely, despite all of the commotion they're causing, this is the place where they could find a kind ear and a helping hand. Nope. From the article: "The first thing you have to do is unlearn everything you've read online about how to make this work," Rudy says, "because it's all wrong."
Nice. Way to alienate the one group, the one community that might still support your cause. I wish Psystar the best of luck -- not, mind you, because I need to buy or run any of their machines (I buy Apple because I appreciate both the hardware and the software), but just because their story continues to be so darn entertaining.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
PookieBadMuffin said 10:15AM on 11-12-2009
And yet still not quite as petty as breaking Atom support with a software update...
Reply
ProfessorDex said 10:21AM on 11-12-2009
It's not "petty" at all to enforce their own EULA by means of a software update. Get your head out of your a$$.
Ned Scott said 10:49AM on 11-12-2009
not supporting going out of their way to support processors they don't use is petty?
Toby said 1:22PM on 11-12-2009
Obviously no one expected Apple to go out of their way to support Atom CPUs, since they're not shipping anything that has one. The "pettiness" accusation comes from the nagging sense that support was intentionally removed to tweak the noses of the hackintosh netbook crowd. I'd say it's just as likely that it was unintentional.
S. Martin said 3:04PM on 11-12-2009
Seeing as how "support" (support makes it sound active, which it probably wasn't) was in one build, then out, then back in, then out for the release, I'd say it was intentional.
Do they have the right to enforce the EULA? Yes.
Was it petty? Yes, as well.
ack154 said 10:18AM on 11-12-2009
Did we really need this same story again? I mean that quote was most definitely in the last article... seems just like you're rehashing the exact same story just for another line in the story...
Reply
Jordan said 10:20AM on 11-12-2009
As they're becoming more popular Apple is going to learn that their closed ecosystem way of doing things is going to be their biggest downfall and bag of hurt.
Reply
ProfessorDex said 10:22AM on 11-12-2009
Yeah, because Apple's stock and cash flow are sure suffering!
-10 points for the bad "bag of hurt" reference.
milkmage said 10:49AM on 11-12-2009
yep. the only paid commercial OS to withstand the MS onslaught for 25 years. closed almost the entire time, yet they own the PMP market, and as of today, 17% of the global smartphone market.
make that a dime bag o' hurt.
Jordan said 11:25AM on 11-12-2009
Sorry guys, but PMP and phones are completely different than computers. If this devices didn't support Windows, do you think they would have sold?
Luigi193 said 10:21AM on 11-12-2009
I know it is grammatically correct, but I loathe the comma before "too."
Just sayin'… ;)
Reply
Spaz said 11:03AM on 11-12-2009
I guess the HP desktop I'm running 10.5 on doesn't really work. And hasn't worked since it had 10.4.2 on it. Damn. That sucks for me!
Oh, and before anyone gets all mad at me, yes, I'm just using it until I get the funds to purchase an iMac.
Reply
Jordan said 11:39AM on 11-12-2009
haha pathetic. If you need to save up forever to buy a mac, just buy a damn pc for 1/3 the cost and be more functional on higher powered hardware.
mehmet said 11:17AM on 11-12-2009
I think Apple should understand Mac OS X is a great operating system and they are unable to satisfy the users with the hardware options they currently provide, therefore they should be open to support non-apple hardware. It's very crucial for some businesses, think about it this way, in year 2009 Apple has no computer with WWAN (Sprint/AT&T Wireless cards integrated) installed, or Smart Cards or Fingerprint scanners.. I think Apple should also look in to ways to be more business ready , just because we have exchange support on our computers doesn't mean our business will allow these laptops at work. (Especially pharmaceutical companies, govt, and other business where security is a big concern)
Reply
Cameron Williams said 11:47AM on 11-12-2009
Apple isn't looking for market share dominance though; they're only interested in total profit. If they sell Mac OS separately, but lose sales on hardware, it won't be a net gain.
Jordan said 12:09PM on 11-12-2009
@Cameron: If Apple is looking for profit and market share dominance then this is what they should do.
They should dump OSx. You said yourself they dont want market share dominance so OSx should be something they don't really care all that much about. They should then start building computers and selling them with Windows. People will buy their computers because they like the look and design. They will still have complete control over the hardware, and will still be making just as much, if not more, profit.
Apple could also still remain in control of the drivers that go with the hardware they put into their computers. This control of the drivers would ensure that they worked, thus leaving people with few problems with their Windows based Apple machine.
That is, IF Apple does indeed want profit rather than market share. I tend to believe it's the other way around, Apple just won't admit it because it would be a huge embarassment that after 25 years their market share is still around 6%.
Yuusharo said 12:26PM on 11-12-2009
See, I don't agree. Yes, there is a segment who wishes Apple would release different types of products to better suit their niche needs, but that doesn't mean they're hurt by it. Quite the contrary, opening OS X to other hardware manufacturers would dramatically hurt Apple's business model, if not completely kill it.
Remember, back in the mid 90s when Steve Jobs was kicked out, Apple actually did license their OS to other manufacturers. The company sunk badly as a result of it, and one of the first things Jobs did when he returned was kill off the licensing and close it back up again. Arguably, it was the start of a series of events that made Apple as successful as it is today.
Apple is a hardware company first and a platform company second. Evidence of that can be found in a $30 Snow Leopard upgrade price, or the $299/$999 Final Cut Studio price cut (compared to $899/$2499 for Adobe Master Collection). Apple can dramatically subsidize the cost of the software into the cost of the hardware it drives.
There's a reason why Apple, despite only having a tiny fraction of the overall marketshare, has been posting record-breaking quarters year after year, while their competitors (Dell, HP...) are trying to pass off 27% loss in sales as a 'good thing,' saying they were expecting to lose more.
BDD said 2:41PM on 11-12-2009
@Jordan- that's one hell of a strawman you've set up there. Bravo.
Not only are Apple focused on high profits and high margins, but they are also focused on the experience as a whole. By making the whole widget, they are able to ensure that software and hardware are tightly integrated and relatively trouble-free. Sure, they have a smaller market share than Microsoft, but then again, MS sells their OS to any company that drags out their checkbook. Apple also prides itself on being a design company, and OS X is a large part of that. Sure, OS X is "pretty", but it's also a very powerful platform that integrates tightly with its target hardware. Design is much more than just how something looks, which is yet another thing many people don't understand and will never get. And I'm sure, with 33 billion bucks in the bank with no debt, that they're really worried about being "embarrassed" about their market share.
Another thing that Apple's detractors will never understand is that they make ZERO effort to sell to the enterprise. They dip their toes in here and there (i.e. MS Exchange support in iPhone), but their advertising hasn't touched on enterprise sales at all since Jobs returned. As Steve said in a Fortune interview long ago (and I'm paraphrasing)- "Chrysler doesn't advertise their minivans for businesses, but businesses still buy them."
So why should Apple dump OS X and start selling their systems with Windows? So Apple should just dump their OS and sell their systems with an OS that wouldn't be as tightly integrated as OS X is with Apple hardware? That would go against their design and user experience philosophies, not to mention their business model. Their sizable war-chest, stock price, and dedicated customers is all the proof needed to show that it works.
Jordan said 3:02PM on 11-12-2009
Dude get your head out of your ass. Osx isn't integrated into the hardware at all. The ONLY advantage of their system at all is they control the drivers. It's the SAME hardware pcs use. There is zero integration between the is and the hardware.
Thanh Nguyen said 8:33AM on 11-13-2009
Last I checked, most PCs don't use EFI, opting for Legacy BIOS instead. DisplayPort is a big one too, but that should come in the future.