# New Clones



## Timotheos (Apr 15, 2008)

Im suprised no one has meantioned this yet: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10504244


----------



## khehr (Apr 15, 2008)

it is going to be sued out of the water.  If in fact they can sell the machines, the users CAN'T install any Mac OS on them as outlined in the EULA. This was tried before, and the same thing will happen.


----------



## Qion (Apr 15, 2008)

They better get sued so far up shit creek they have to close doors...


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 15, 2008)

Would it even be worth suing them?  They might just end up obliterating themselves to bankruptcy if this is their only business model.  OSx86 is hard enough to get installed and maintained from what I've heard, even if the hardware matches what is somewhat inside the Intel Macs.  No way that someone like Joe User who might want to buy a Mac but can't because he can't afford it is going to take the time to run a Hackintosh.  Seems like it was doomed to fail from its inception.


----------



## CaribbeanOS-X (Apr 15, 2008)

Hackintosh --- lol --- sue them!  

More clones might equal more cracked versions of 10.5(watch for the rise of 10.5 torrents); leading to more vulnerabilities,  in turn subjecting the people to malevolence that respect and appreciate the value of the proprietary Apple system.  (Little Windows gremlins are already bored with sabotaging Vista... is that it?)


----------



## Qion (Apr 15, 2008)

CaribbeanOS-X said:


> More clones might equal more cracked versions of 10.5(watch for the rise of 10.5 torrents); leading to more vulnerabilities,  in turn subjecting the people to malevolence that respect and appreciate the value of the proprietary Apple system.  (Little Windows gremlins are already bored with sabotaging Vista... is that it?)



This is exactly my sentiment as well. It's not that I want Apple to "go through the effort" of suing them, it's that a danger to the brand is a danger to the brand.


----------



## MisterMe (Apr 15, 2008)

nixgeek said:


> Would it even be worth suing them?  ...


Yes. A company has a legal obligation to take reasonable measures to protect its property. If Apple allows this company to violate its EULA, then it will substantially weaken any future claims against others.


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 15, 2008)

MisterMe said:


> Yes. A company has a legal obligation to take reasonable measures to protect its property. If Apple allows this company to violate its EULA, then it will substantially weaken any future claims against others.



I understand that and I agree that they should, but my question was regarding the viability for Apple.  Yes, Apple should sue them.  But I wonder if this company is going to do most of the work of putting themselves out of business before Apple puts any effort and money into suing them out of existence, you know what I mean?

From the looks of it, this is just a crackpot company (and I'm from Miami....I should know! ).  They are already claiming that Apple is a monopoly because of their tight integration with their own hardware and software.  Personally, I don't see it this way and I don't think the rest of the market does either.  Apple is only affecting its users, not affecting ALL computer users in the way that MS does.  And from the looks of it, Apple users are mostly content with Apple having control of the hardware and software.  If not, then they can easily switch to a PC and continue doing what they want.  So I have to wonder if since this company is already doomed to failure, why should Apple bother wasting time litigating when all that might need to be done is a cease and desist letter?


----------



## arninetyes (Apr 15, 2008)

nixgeek said:


> So I have to wonder if since this company is already doomed to failure, why should Apple bother wasting time litigating when all that might need to be done is a cease and desist letter?


I'd be surprised if they haven't done so already.


----------



## sgould (Apr 16, 2008)

I'm not sure that these computers come with OSX installed.  So, unless there's some hardware copyright, it won't be the computer manufacturer breaking the EULA.  So there will be nothing for Apple to contest.

On the other hand, will Apple track down an sue every person who buys a retail copy of OSX and installs it on that machine?


----------



## arninetyes (Apr 16, 2008)

Here's another take on it.  This might be a sticky situation for Apple.

http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2008/04/apple_psystar


----------



## MisterMe (Apr 16, 2008)

sgould said:


> I'm not sure that these computers come with OSX installed.  ...


The company sells computers both with and without MacOS X. If it preinstalls the software, then the company is in violation of Apple's EULA. Even if it does not sell computers with preinstalled MacOS X, then it is inducing its customers to violate Apple's EULA. No matter how you slice it, these people are bad news.


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 16, 2008)

Like I said, doomed to failure...

http://gizmodo.com/380488/psystar-exposed-looks-like-a-hoax


----------



## fryke (Apr 17, 2008)

This'll blow over without so much as a lawsuit, even if it isn't a hoax. They're simply selling PCs that are "close" to a real Mac's hardware. Like nixgeek's said, it's not a very simple task to install OS X on a PC and keep it up to date, not an enduser task, anyway.
Installing OS X on "the any-PC" has been possible since before the first release of the original intel iMac and the original intel MacBook Pro with hacked versions of the intel developer kit. This is no different. However: It's basically bad for everyone:

1.) Apple's image is not helped by this "news".
2.) The quite original and helpful OSX86 scene gets too much unwanted attention.
3.) Psystar will probably be bankrupt before long (if it ain't a complete hoax).


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 17, 2008)

fryke said:


> ...Installing OS X on "the any-PC" has been possible since ...



Interesting.....I _must_ find this PC.  Maybe it will _finally_ have that specific key that I'm always told to press in order to continue....


----------



## alra111 (Apr 18, 2008)

Guys, the company is located in Miami and has already relocated.



> This Psystar meets Mac clone saga gets more curious by the minute. Psystar, which has received a ton of press for offering Mac clones loaded with OS X, said its not a sham. Instead, the company notes that its merchant gateway dropped the ball on us and refused to process any more transactions from the company.


  (http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=8518&tag=nl.e539).

Miami is full of curruption, including law enforcement officers themselves.

What?  They don't take Visa?  





> Is this company (all resources) run by high school kids? How about taking Visa like most legit vendors?


  (same link as above).  This is preposterous.  I would not buy aspirin from a company that won't accept Visa.

Psystar should be moribund in a few days or even hours.  Let us not worry so much about them.  I already sent them an e-mail to their "Contact us" link and, of course, it was never replied to.  Perhaps they failed to pay their Internet bill.  What a bunch of losers!

-Alra111


----------



## alra111 (Apr 18, 2008)

I wrote the company (it's like my third e-mail gone unanswered) and recommended they change their name to Psyche Star.  This little clone of theirs will never see the light of day.  As I was saying, they're in Miami, and already changed addresses.

http://government.zdnet.com/?p=3762

I saw we bet on how many hours/days it will take Psystar to vanish off the face of the planet.

I give them 96 hours.  What about you all?



nixgeek said:


> I understand that and I agree that they should, but my question was regarding the viability for Apple.  Yes, Apple should sue them.  But I wonder if this company is going to do most of the work of putting themselves out of business before Apple puts any effort and money into suing them out of existence, you know what I mean?
> 
> From the looks of it, this is just a crackpot company (and I'm from Miami....I should know! ).  They are already claiming that Apple is a monopoly because of their tight integration with their own hardware and software.  Personally, I don't see it this way and I don't think the rest of the market does either.  Apple is only affecting its users, not affecting ALL computer users in the way that MS does.  And from the looks of it, Apple users are mostly content with Apple having control of the hardware and software.  If not, then they can easily switch to a PC and continue doing what they want.  So I have to wonder if since this company is already doomed to failure, why should Apple bother wasting time litigating when all that might need to be done is a cease and desist letter?


----------



## alra111 (Apr 18, 2008)

Old news for most of you I'm sure, but...

http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-9921271-37.html

These bastards are about a 25-minute drive from my house.  I have a good mind to drive by and ask to speak to someone in charge, and videotape the conversation.

Mark my words, they are going down quicker than Lewinski went down on Bill Clinton.


----------



## alra111 (Apr 18, 2008)

I'm sure Apple was already aware of this infringement upon their products, but I personally called Apple Customer Relations to report the issue and give them all the information about Psystar that I had.

Hopefully this will expedite the downfall of Psyche Star.

May they downfall be painful, costly, and embarassing.

-Alra111


----------



## Qion (Apr 18, 2008)

alra111 said:


> I wrote the company (it's like my third e-mail gone unanswered) and recommended they change their name to Psyche Star.  This little clone of theirs will never see the light of day.  As I was saying, they're in Miami, and already changed addresses.
> 
> http://government.zdnet.com/?p=3762
> 
> ...



This is great entertainment. In this age, you can't pull bullshit like this without getting international news.


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 18, 2008)

Alra111, I knew they were a scam the second I heard they were from Miami.  How, you might ask?  Well, I live there too!  So yeah, you and I are two people with first hand experience on how things run here.  Let's not forget how TigerDirect tried to come after Apple some years back because they said that the use of the name "Tiger" as a description for 10.4 was going to cause brand confusion and hurt their sales.  As it is, their Grade-B products were already hurting their sales for them. ::ha::


----------



## Captain Code (Apr 18, 2008)

It now seems this company is a hoax or scam as their address keeps changing on their website.

EDIT: merged 3 threads together.  Let's try to keep this all in one place.


----------



## alra111 (Apr 18, 2008)

From http://www.psystar.com:



> We're in the process of moving to a new location which is now listed on our contact page. The first new address posted (10481) was in error and our correct address is 10475 NW 28th Street. PSYSTAR was, prior to this past week, not ready to handle the enormous production capacity demanded by the online community. Due to the incredible response we have now expanded to a larger commercial unit to handle the supplies and assembly of Open Computers. THANK YOU for all of your orders.
> 
> Midday yesterday our store was not receiving any orders. This was due to the fact that our merchant gateway, Powerpay, dropped the ball on us and refused to process any more transactions from our company. We have reverted to Paypal until we can find a high-volume merchant. Apparently Powerpay was not ready to handle the community's demand for Open Computing.



Paypal?  These mofos are accepting payment via PayPal?  No friggin' way!!  They are so ridiculous.  I really, really want to drive by there and take some pictures.  I want to get to the point where they think I'm about to buy one of their Mac clones, then, as they're about to sell it to me, tell them that they're violating Apple's EULA, and they I am heading to contact the Better Business Bureau.  What a$$holes!!


----------



## Viro (Apr 19, 2008)

What's funny is seeing all the PC people over at places like OSNews debating on the merits of the EULA and denouncing EULAs as evil.


----------



## eric2006 (Apr 19, 2008)

It won't be long now..


----------



## chevy (Apr 19, 2008)

alra111 said:


> From http://www.psystar.com:
> 
> 
> 
> Paypal?  These mofos are accepting payment via PayPal?  No friggin' way!!  They are so ridiculous.  I really, really want to drive by there and take some pictures.  I want to get to the point where they think I'm about to buy one of their Mac clones, then, as they're about to sell it to me, tell them that they're violating Apple's EULA, and they I am heading to contact the Better Business Bureau.  What a$$holes!!



What is your problem with PayPal ? That's simple and efficient for small orders in small quantities.


----------



## bbloke (Apr 20, 2008)

Well, possible plans by PayPal to block Safari won't endear the organization to many Mac users, regardless of the details.


----------



## fryke (Apr 21, 2008)

That's already been refuted, bbloke. Paypal's said they won't block any of the current big browsers like IE, Firefox, Opera or Safari.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=1590


----------



## Rhisiart (Apr 21, 2008)

chevy said:


> What is your problem with PayPal ? That's simple and efficient for small orders in small quantities.


I agree. Fine and safe enough with small amounts.


----------



## amit.srivastava (Jun 1, 2008)

If you beleive that MS is ruling the world then you have mistaken bcoz Apple is the next big thing happening.


----------



## fryke (Jun 1, 2008)

Word.


----------

