I hope Apple does set OS X free. The rest of the computing world needs an alternative to windows. If Apple don't Linux will and Apple and Microsoft Loose. apple only has a limited line of computers some need more variety
I hope Apple does set OS X free. The rest of the computing world needs an alternative to windows. If Apple don't Linux will and Apple and Microsoft Loose. apple only has a limited line of computers some need more vairety
I agreed with mrbit10 - Just looked at Pystar and it's very sad people got ripped off. Apple could sell the OS as OEM for 299 without no support thereafter and let the Hack community resolve their own systems. It's clear to me Apple have forsaken developers and just think web browser/itunes students are their target audience. I would like to see a mac tower sell for 1000 quid with an i5, 6 gb of ram , 1TG drive - people have monitors - apple need to give people a better Mac range.
Apple won't loose money Licensing their OS they can charge more if they wanted to for their OS also if you think that Apple hardware sales will drop significantly if Mac OS is allowed to be on a PC then you have a very poor opinion on Apple hardware
Apple won't approve their system to be installed on a PC, because they lose money from that. Not being able to sell their computers they won't earn much, because a good version of Windows is $300+ and Mac OS X is $40-50. Apple gather the best hardware so customers can have the best performing computers; they want to sell their Macs, not the OS. Also, not every PC can have Mac OS X running, and various driver problems come up on one that runs it. I personally made a Hackintosh, and faced problems
Apple will never give up their operating system....They are smart. Gates prostituted windows so much that Apple bought the right to install it on their SUPERIOR operating system. Now, an Apple is both an Apple and a PC....A PC will always be just that...A PC.
Great vid, all I would suggest is to not be so dry in establishing that you are an avid developer. Simply say, kindly, that you are a developer and quickly show all of your software packages.
Apple states in it's agreement running OSX on any non-apple authorized computer is illegal. Pystar is selling OSX along with their computers without informing Apple or paying them a share of the profits. Microsoft licences their OS to Dell, HP, etc and MS get paid. Pystar is selling Hackintoshes and profiting from it.
You may not see hardware sales declining, perhaps because you fail to understand Apple's business model. Several companies utilize exclusivity and singularity to define their products. Apple claims better products because they have vertical control of it's manufacture. Mac OS is less vulnerable to viruses in part BECAUSE of its low market share. They are very successful as is, and need not complicate matters with by growing in 'market share'.
What they are doing is NOT legal. Everyone computer manufacturer that sells their product with Windows pre-installed PAYS ROYALTIES. Why would it be different with Apple?
Yes, it is illegal; violating the EULA is NOT illegal (although Apple can still file for legal actions), but violating the DMCA is illegal, which is what Psystar have done.
The difference is that Apple doesn't license their OS to other manufacturers, Microsoft does. The company is in charge of who gets licenses, who doesn't.
I agree. I think it would be a good thing to see OS X become more widely available, and with Microsoft's near monopoly on operating systems, OS X would provide even more competition with Windows if it could be installed on any PC.
I think Windows actually runs fairly well, considering that there is so much hardware and so many different PCs out there. I don't know why it would be so hard for Apple to support different hardware.
Should any government agency request our files on this company, your complaint will also be included. If you have settled this complaint directly with the company, would you please email us to let us know that, as well as any other comments you might have. Your help in doing this is important to ensure that our report to the public on this company is accurate. Thank you for using the Better Business Bureau.
Complaint Details Psystar Corporation10475 NW 28th St.Miami, FL 33172 Contact: Guernsey, Maria Phone: (305) 356-6666 In the absence of any response from the company this complaint despite our two requests to them, we are closing our file on this complaint. This unanswered complaint will become part of the information we report to the public on this company for the next three years.
I made the mistake of purchasing it last November, they always answered the phone when I was thinking about buying one. When I first had problems, I had some real nasty little kids putting me on hold for 1 hour at a time, one time they accidentally left it on and I could hear them laughing about how stupid customers were, there is no accountability for companies today. You? tell us more?
why dose this sound fake i have 2 psystar computers in my house 1 on them broke cuz i was installing a kext that was OSX86 (Leo4all) only and would not start up right i called them up and they could not be anymore help-full better then Apple Costumer supprot
I made (really) 100s of calls, 100s of emails, I filed a complaint with the Florida Better Business Bureau, The BBB could not even get PSYSTAR to answer the complaint. Go to my channel and watch the video they kicked out of their youtube contest.
True, the arguments against PC are largely attacks on Windows. Most of those arguments are dated. This decade has seen huge strides in the security architecture, reliability, and functionality of Windows. Apple's strategy of dredging up old, irrelevant stereotypes of Windows seems to reflect complacency. They're setting themselves up for a huge fall if they keep invoking the malware argument.
I've encountered the opinion that EULAs are legally weak and have not been significantly challenged largely because the interests for them have concentrated legal resources while the interests against them have dispersed legal resources.
I sympathize with the arguments for opening OSX from a software advocate's point of view, but it's hard to see the current arrangement changing as long as Apple uses the OS to sell its hardware at high markup. The pressure to decrease the markup would increase with competition from other OEMs. I agree that Apple could remain profitable, thrive even, if OSX were opened, but as long as they see maximum profit with the current path, they're unlikely to change.
I think that apple doesnt want 3rd party hardware to run Mac OS X because apple cant have any kind of supervision over those 3rd party hardware companies. thus, just like in windows, every1 will get tons of stupid errors because some sort of hardware is missing. notice that the slowest mac in sells is 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo just so that apple's software will run flawlessly. if that psystar company starts selling macs, some ppl will buy cheaper macs, and thus, affect apples great reputation.
the only problem i have with setting osx free is that then many people will pirate the software i know plenty of people who borrow other peoples copy of windows and install it unlisenced . i am not a mac owner yet and am therefore not a "fanboy"
but even though i am only 13 i have spent many years saving money for a macbook pro 13" i did want a macbook originaly but wanted a pro for personal reasons
I do appreciate apple's subtle and powerful innovations but I'm not a power user, I just need a reliable machine for music, video, family photos, email and internet shopping. For you to bring up the word "poser" indicates that you're the one who's preoccupied with the mac self-image. So who pressured you to get a mac? Hackintosh, everyone, HACKINTOSH! HE HE!
if u can't afford an apple, save up for an apple, get a PC, get a hackintosh, but apple will NEVER license their OS to anyone or anything so stop dreaming.
You're fucking retarded dude. APPLE is the brand name. MAC was used when the original MACINTOSH came out in the 80s. People just kept using the term MAC to mean any apple system. You can use the two words, whichever one you want. Why do you need to be nit picky about a fucking word? "ooh, it's a mac, not an apple!" GOOD FOR YOU!!! WOW you're so smart!!! GO FUCKING TELL SOMEONE WHO CARES!!!
i was simply stating a point, the mac is a computer and apple is a company. just because you dont care doesnt mean no body cares. and why do most people on youtube need to force their opinion on others by cussing them out?
It's not an opinion, it's a fact. Some people refer to their Apple computers as MACS, some refer to them as Apples. Why does this matter? Why do people on youtube ask stupid questions? I cussed you out because your last statement was really unneccessary. I mean who cares if people want to call it an apple or a mac. god! Go do something useful like masturbating to internet porn or smoking weed or something.
My PB G4 15" 1.6GHz took a poop just this week for the 3rd time. First overheating fried the Logic Board. Then, Lower Memory Slot Failure. 3rd, again, Lower Memory Slot Failure. 2nd & 3rd time out of warranty ! Then Geniuses are going to try sell me Apple Care for a laptop that was supposed to be bullet proof in the first place? As a disgruntled G4 Money Pit owner, I have to say that Apple will not set OSX free, reason being is that Apple hardware is going down the toilet with Made In China poop
The only hardware issues they have are THERMAL related. Jobs is too concerned w/wanting to fans to be as quiet as possible & maybe doesn't realize that a logic board should never get above 140 degrees ferenheit. I use SMCfancontrol on my macbook and always keep the temp below 130. Then there might be too much thermal grease. Other than that, apple makes an EXCELLENT operating system which comes in a compact shiny aluminum case. I also use a small portable fan that sits on top of my keyboard.
Hi manic. I've grown gray hair from the stress of migrating from Win to Mac and reached the point of no return although I still have my faithful NEC XP machine for back-up. I believe this whole PB fiasco is a sign for me to check on the status of the Hackintosh WOW it's now so much easier! MackinToshiba anyone? Dellintosh? HA HA *gloat @ Jobs* :p
If I'm going to do anything illegal I'll just stick to smoking weed. Hackintoshes are illegal. They're also a way of saying, "I know the mac os x is better than windows, but I'm too poor and too much of a poser to get the real deal." It's like putting a BMW engine inside of an acura, which isn't illegal, but is still a very poser thing to do.
I was never attracted to using a mac, XP worked for me & migrating to mac was a pain. It was my wifes idea to buy a mac because she works in a pretentious arty-fartsy environment full of mac zealots who brainwashed her that she's just not hip without a mac. I was attracted to using Logic so I agreed to waste $3k.I didn't even see those pretentious"Get a Mac"ads with attractive hipsters that stand confidently lying with slogans like "It just works" until a few years after we bought this money-pit
im a poor pc user making my videos using windows music maker. i respect apple macs 100%, they're so sexy, i just can't afford one. if i could afford a mac, i would be making HD videos on a macbook using iMovie
Unfortunately it was a mistake for Apple to go with the Intel platform. It was a can of worms just waiting to be opened. What's happening with Phystar is just the tip of the iceberg. Apple is already loosing because of their decision. The OSX86 movement is getting stronger without Phystar's help. For under $300 any geek can build a Mac clone.
Apple has what 8% market share in computers? Yet they still get a revenue of about $4billion off Macintosh's alone? Apple's macbook pros and mac pros are selling at over 100% profit, so yes licensing out OS X will cause a huge drop in hardware sales. OS X is the only thing that makes an $1000 macbook pro able to sell for $2800+.
if apple released their OS then apple would die.. why cant people understand that when a company has something to lure their customer (apples OS) they are not gonna give that away cuz they will loose business!! stop complaining... if you cant afford then just buy a pc..
I believe it could be. If Linux developers focused on a single distro instead of using their efforts on hundreds of different ones, they could build something as robust and reliable as OS X, with a new desktop, new features, better compatibility, less bugs e.t.c and could start to use the full power of the Linux kernel. MrBit10, your views on this please?
Maybe...the only way I see Linux getting even close to becoming "the future" is if it becomes easier to use for the everyday person. Hell, people complain that Windows is too complicated...let alone Linux. The everyday user isn't going to want to use terminal every 5 seconds.
mac users are just pissed because they spent so much money on something they coulda got cheaper with psystar, and more powerful.
i have a pystar and im loving it, i have a macbook pro, and the psystar is for a fact, stronger than the macbook pro. i regret spending the 2800, after only spending 1300 on the psystar.
First off Apple does not make the hardware. They simply put together parts they buy from others. They are no different than Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. Apple is a PC maker that puts OS X instead of another OS.
Second Apple users are thoroughly brainwashed. Apple is like some kind of cult with their iWhatever stuff.
watch my other vids on this series, it states exactly that: for apple to use a pool of hardware from vendors that are certified, if they do not want to free all together.
Thank you for pointing that out. Back in the day, Apple built there own computers. Today everything is made in China, and now because of their decision to go with Intel, practically any Intel based motherboard (the 945 chipset for instance) will run OSX.
haahaha i cant wait this is the funnest fucking thing ever lol. all you mac tards are gonna cry when i build a pc 10x the spec of your shitty assed mac and put your little baby os on it lol. hahal.
Man you take forever to get to the point holy crap. You like apple, you like their hardware and software, you hope it gets out there on non macs since your a developer. Bam done. Doesn't take almost 10 min lol
I think if Mac OS X was released to work on non-Apple PCs then their OS X sales would explode. People like OS X, including me, but there is no way in hell I'm paying $1,200 for a mid-level computer. If you ask me, it's only a matter of time. If Apple market share keeps growing at the rate it is now, then the supreme court will eventually have to intervene and make them unlock Mac OS X to work on non-Apple PCs so that hundreds of hardware companies don't go out of business.
If you are confused, I cannot help you. It's very easy to understand. And Apple will never become bigger than Microsoft. Apple is not that type of company. And if Apple did, they'd become the new Microsoft. You can't run a company that large easily and with great stability.
What if I don't want to use their hardware? If they go around marketing it as an OS, then it should run on my computer. Otherwise, they might as well just call it Mac Firmware, because that's what it is now.
If you don't want their hardware, then don't buy it. It is an operating system. It's an operating system designed for Apple computers. If you want something more open then try Linux. Linux makes great stuff. I understand where you are getting at: you want to run their software on your hardware.
I *kind of* want their hardware (even if it only has a one button mouse), but I'm not willing to overpay for it. They're casings look nice (at least they do now, now that they switched away from all white plastic). I've tried Linux; not user friendly enough for me yet, no enough support. I'll keep my eye on it though.
I can't really defend imacs. I don't have one. I hate desktops. But, the Macbook is nice. It is a lot of money, but well worth it. The total cost of ownership for an Apple computer is less than a pc.
Higher resale value, several hundred dollars worth of software bundled with the machine, OS that is more user centric and increases productivity, nicer design, probably much thinner and lighter aiding portability, nice strong aluminium shell, backlit keyboard, glass trackpad with multitouch, best customer support in the industry.
You might want to sell it after five years of use, why not?
There may be $90 worth of software, but to find Windows equivalents costs several hundreds of dollars.
Zero PC's look better than the Mac. And the ones that do cost a lot more. Find me a 13.3" laptop which is less than an inch thin for the price of the Macbook, you pay for portability.
Multi touch as in a touch screen has no purpose other than public kiosks, schools perhaps etc.
Again back on the point of portability, you pay dearly for it. If you can get a HP for less money, it will have a larger screen, be far thicker and far heavier, all this makes it cheaper to create. This is why products like the Macbook Air cost so much, but they are well priced in comparison to what else is on the market like Sony's ultraportables.
Well, a PC would last longer because it's more customizable and Windows supports more hardware drivers. Windows equivalent software is already included for free, except for garage band, which wouldn't cost more than $90. My HP Pavilion looks better than the Mac.
I don't see the point in paying $1,700 for a laptop with the specs from a 2003 computer. And if Apple came out with a multitouch MacBook Tablet, you would be all over it, so don't even trip. Fanboy.
This guy is like Paris Hilton: "I don't understand why people doesn't buy Ferraris, I have three and they're cool".
Man, if you can afford a 4000$ MAC G5 with the 8000$ Protools HD and an 8000$ KORG Oasys that's your problem. But if I can use MAC OS for 500$, Reason 4 for 300$ and a Cheap 15$ Yamaha Motif ES Refill.
Would you put a Jet engine in a Yugo? On the other hand maybe open it up and not give tech support unless its on an Apple. I understand that there are people that enjoy putting together computers, its alot like legos for big kids.
Apple would not be hit hard, because serious users still would rather have Apple hardware instead of Toys to play with?\.
That's insulting "lego for big kids"? You think building a computer labels it as a "Toy" and you have to actually buy a pre-built one for it to be "serious"? that's ridiculous. They both perform exactly the same...
Jet engine in a Yugo? That would be if you compare an 8-core G5 with a Pentium III, but a Quad Core PC owns a Dual Core IMAC. You must now that MACs have the same components as the PCs, the only difference is the BIOS.
Apple could really really have their hopes of crushing Microsoft like they did IBM by opening up the hardware market. On legal issues, I support OpenMac, knowing the licensing agreement is being broken with these machines, but let's not forget that Apple is breaking legal issues on their hardware monopoly. I really don't think you should have to buy Apple hardware in order to have OS X. I think OS X is superior to Windows, but Steve Jobs needs to end his feud and crush Microsoft with OS X itself
microsoft could never be crushed , u dont understand how many systems use windows , and windows mobile , everything from phones , computers , and handheld scanners , devices , shop tills , databasing machines , they all use windows of some form , the market is too massive , and apple dont have the knowledge to even build software for all these hardware , thats why they are closed company
lol, this is a forum of discussion and people comment to discuss, thus we discuss. Sadly we are limited to 10 min Vids and 500 char comments, but thanks for watching.
Anyways, I have found PC owners to be happy at psystar, but the hardcore Apple Macintosh owners are very elitist about it. The Windows/PC owners usually bring up a better point than the elitist. Shows the insecurity of people losing what they once thought was only theirs to those that may actually need it but cannot afford it.
Oh yes it would. This guy is wrong. If OS X runs on other PCs, this will hurt the APple owner. Apple is protecting us from that. Simply put, Apple only gives you what you absolutely need. They don't give you OVERKILL. With that said, Apple would have to cover too many drivers and pieces of hardware. This would give Apple more problems, and they do not deserve that. What company has produced a vertical architecture like Apple has? No one!
I have been developing for Apple clients for a while. OSX on non-apple hardware will not hurt apple. Software always controls hardware and not the other way around. This is why Solaris and other UNIX based or like OSs run just as stable as were on SPARC, POWER, ARM chipsets, what have you. The only problem Apple would have is to manage the new incoming cash flow.
If drivers are an issue, why is it that OSX which is Nextstep MK 4 already could support PA-RISC, Intel and SPARC. Nextstep was just as kick ass then on a plethora of hardware. If you are using the exclusivity argument, that is based on consumer emotion and I cannot argue that.
Apple handpicks their hardware, so that they have to cover fewer bases for the sake of a more stable environment for their users, and this is the primary reason users love Apple. They give you exactly what you need. Not Overkill. They give you stability, simplicity, taste, culture and a sense of belonging. This would be abolished if Psystar wins, but that's not a problem anyway. Apple will defeat Psystar easily. Psystar won't last five seconds in court. I think the PC world is just jealous.
"Apple handpicks their hardware" I know emeek states this and I have corrected a few things with this. Every OEM picks its hardware. You do not realize that hardware relationship is inherent to all OEMs, that is there business. You are coming from a more consumer emotional standpoint with culture and the like. Simply put if you want Apple to kick ass beyond imagination, set OS X free.
I see what you are saying, and I agree with you on this one point: if OS X would run on every platform, other OSes would die immediately. I have no doubt. However, Apple would not then be forced to back up all devices. All sound cards. All graphics cards. Not just one. Look at Microsoft Windows. This is primarily one of the reasons Windows will never run as well as a Mac.
Right, if OS X were set free it would not have the issue Windows created for itself. It would still control what it would allow to be run which is an improvement of hardware choice, but one that is still limited.
Also, I don't even have to point out that Ubuntu Linux has problems with different hardware and also doesn't even cover the majority of the driver bases. I know. I ran Ubuntu on my Mac. They have far too few drivers to run on every PC equally well. This is one of the problems Dell had with Ubuntu users. Drivers. Ubuntu couldn't get them out in time, an still doesn't cover every piece of hardware equally well.
That is because you are forcing a system to run what it does not. Ubuntu is stable per supported layers. However Ubuntu is free and open source and has no logistics in place to tell people what and what not to do.
The true story: The PC world is heaving and hoeing, because Mac users can run Vista better than a PC, and still run OS X natively, and PCs can't do crap, because they are junk. Now that Apple is gaining an immense edge with iPod, future servers and total domination of the Vista junk OS, the PC world is mad. I hope there's a sea of PCs with junked up Vista out there and we can use them all for recycling to make a real computer. An Apple computer.
That is also not true. That emeek vid was older but the MBP did have a victory dance. Quite simply you contradict yourself when you 1. say that the hardware is optimized for OS X but yet can run windows better than say ASUS, when the ROM, RAM and etc are very different systems between OS X & WIndows. Hardware is hardware in function but there are different quality levels. I for one would argue logic boards and older Mac Pros were slow via bus speed to handle the bus of the chips efficiently
mrbit10, the reason Macs run Vista faster than a PC is because Microsoft tested Vista on the Apple platform and had to remove the sticker. From what I hear, they wanted a more stable platform to run it on. And... I'm not joking either. Look it up.
1. there is no common apple platform. The logic boards differ from each system and so on. I know of the MBP and that Microsoft did certify many apple hardware parts. that does not however say that Microsoft on Apple hardware = faster period. There are too many variables to consider.
But, you're dead on about that EFI Rom for OSx86 project. Psystar stole it. I heard EFI was suing them, too. We both know EFI and Apple are booty buddies.
mrbit10, that's not true. If OS X ran on every platform, it would still not be able to run all hardware equally well. Do you know how many drivers there are? I am also certified and have written software. I've done it all. Over twenty years. I am telling you that people who owned copies of OS X and non-Apple hardware would be lost without Apple support, and Apple's reputation would suffer due to a less stable operating system. Period.
I am sorry, you do not quite understand the architecture. The OS controls what it will run not the other way around. The problem is you are projecting Windows flaws on to a relationship that will simply not exist. Solaris is just as stable BSD, Linux, you name it. They all control what drivers will be allowed. Again do not project Windows Faults on the rest of the world. This is not opinion. Nextstep has already been run on non-apple hardware and kicked ass as did solaris.
Also I am not defending Psystar I am defending the idea of OSX on non-apple hardware or a cert program sponsored by apple. The OS must be set free or you will never gain OS market share. Just about everything is software for OS X to beat Windows, you fight fire with fire.
Apple is like Porsche, Ferari, you name it... If Pepsi was putting their juice in Coca-Cola bottles, I'm sure Coke would have a leg to stand on, too. Same goes with Apple. The software is the juice, and Psystar wants to put it in a non-Apple bottle. No way. Doesn't work like that. I wish Apple the best in the suit.
I am not defending Psystar. It is my understanding that they stole the EFI Rom for OSx86 project anyway. I however do support OS X being set free per conditions of course, say a certification program, what have you.
I'm not getting emotional. I know you would like to see OS X be the primary operating system. Yes, I see what you mean. However, do you think the OS X sales would make up for the loss in hardware sales, and what about covering other drivers and other pieces of hardware? I mean, I've witnessed some serious issues from OS X on a PC that doesn't support its own hardware. Apple would not even be responsible at that point. Do you see what I mean?
Software sales would make up for any loss 10 fold at a minimum. That is if I even agree that there would be hardware sales loss. I do not. Apple's line up is too unique not like Dell Vs HP boxes. Also Apple hardware sales have gone up since 2005 which happened to be the timeframe that windows could run on Apple. Thus meaning there is a huge % of people that like apple products.
Back to software sales, hell yes they would make it up if there even were anything to make up. But for argument sake yes. As OS X expands so does developer base and apps coming in. This means all revenue from developer, partner and business solutions increase exponentially. That is only part of what expanded OS X would bring.
Well, you might be right. That also would force Apple to make even more outrageously superior hardware with an Apple stamp on it. Hmmm. I wish I could ask Steve Jobs why they do not wish that to happen. Would be interesting to consider. I've ran all platforms over the last two decades, but I ran back to Apple, and I'm glad. I love it. :) Right down to the glowing Apple on the back.
Yes, it was a good conversation. I can't lie. Sometimes, my love for Apple since back to 1985 gets in the way of my logical reasoning. :) I owned an Apple LC back in the early 90s, and I have a 1985 Macintosh sitting in the corner here, and I'm typing on a Macbook Pro. I always root for the underdog in any game. :)
Jobs years back was willing to let clones exist but at a higher price and more conditions. The clones told him to stuff it. But there is a point to where Jobs will consider it obviously it he said it himself way back. I think I state it in one of my Psystar vids where Jobs said that.
By emotion I do not mean you as in getting emotional. No. I mean when consumers use exclusivity or culture they are non-tangible arguments that are more founded on feeling or by some loyal attachment is what I mean by emotion.
I understand the architecture perfectly well. What I'm saying is rather simple: Real Apple users - Apple's customers - deserve to feel special, because look at all the CRAP the PC world has always put them through? This is OUR TIME! This is OUR HOUR! As for Linux? The own 1% of the server market. It's because no other platform has taste, and it's mainly because of Apple's operating system. When you own an Apple, you are special today. When you own a PC, you're just another bum in the park.
Well all of this is emotion, I support apple not just for taste but to kick ass. I as a consumer do not need to feel exclusive. I want windows market share to fall and finally get a viable OS out there whether it be OS X linux or Solaris. I fight for Apple to get ahead, not for a "magical ride" of some sort.
Any manufacturer, artist, creator, whether your Walt Disney, Apple, or Joe Schmoe, has the right to copyrighted what s/he creates. If Apple says: This product is only to be installed on Apple hardware, and you hack it to run on something other than an Apple, it's no different than any other act of piracy, and, trust me, when Apple wants to, the hammer shall fall, and goodbye PissStar. Apple=hardware+software+support. It's all one. Pisstar parasitically profits off someone else's labor.
"You have a right to run Mac Software on any non-Apple computer, but you don't have the right to copy codes that are built into Apple's hardware, so you are stuck," the WOZ.
I find Woz's opinion interesting on this as Psystar from what I hear stole OSX86 EFI ROM, Apple will not pursue legal means at this point but simply write a new ROM making it very difficult for Psystar to hack Snow Leopard IMO.
mrbit10, that's not tr ue. Mac video hardware is plenty. If you want major video hardware, get a Mac Pro tower on the low end. Also, the things that a lot of PC users do not know about Apple video RAM and graphics is that Macs use video ram far better than PCs. So, you don't need as much to get the job done. I play high in games with my 256 megs of video ram. I never have problems, and I'm running on a Macbook Pro 17" with the 8600M and 256 megs of VRAM. Research it. It's all true.
You make excellent points. I would like to buy an apple, but the affordable ones have weak video hardware and are not upgradeable, thus making it very hard to purchase for me. That is a price argument for me, so I therefor spend 0$ on Apple software/hardware. At least with Psystar I'd be giving Apple $155 for the software. Last time I checked, $155 is better than $0. Wake up Apple.
Strange my version of Leopard didn't come with a license agreement. Do think that may because I got it for free. If Apple were to release an os that could run on PCs with no problem guess what I would buy it. But they don't so I'll have to take it.
Hmm, it would be idealistic if Apple was to license out Mac OS X which would gain a large market share, but given that I've seen a bit of history regarding OS volume licensing, I still feel doubtful that alot of positive things could come out of it. However, I do see if there was a way to eat cake and have. An OEM that manufactures a computer to be able to run Mac OS X must take the approach that Apple does for its hardware, meaning they must tie in their software with the OS.
Well, that would be a good thing for Mac OS X to remain designed as if was meant to run on Macs, unlike Windows that has to become generic. As far I can see, if clone manufacturers were able to get away with selling computers with the operating system but does a crappy job on their end, I see two possible outcomes. Mac OS X's reputation might get ruined because it won't become reliable as it used to be and people will associate the OS as crap, or...
(cont'd) it might boost Apple's Mac sales because people may actually see the truth as to why Apple keeps Mac OS X tied to their computer hardware and realize it may not be worth trying to install the OS on a non-Apple machine.
Mr.bit you make such a valid point because lots of people are loyal to certain products. A company might swear to only use Dell's because thats what they've always used. I, myself, is quite loyal to ATI video cards because I've used them for so long.
You take OSX off a Mac, it's just hardware, it doesn't mean anything, has no purpose. You put an OS on it and suddenly it's useful. What I'm saying here is that an OS or application has a greater purpose than what type of hardware it runs.
I'm for both OS's for doing well, but more toward having universal applications. I'm sure some Windows users wouldn't mind certain Mac specific applications to work on Windows and vice-versa...
Is what's holding Apple back to release OSX to PC is that they would need to support all the different types of hardware?
You made a great point when you said People that buy apple hardware will buy it regardless cause that is what they want even if it was on a non apple computer. I think that is very true.
Totally agree which is rare but I believe that the future is open and the big companies will be left fighting for office space. As soon as you can play games without the need for a certain OS then why would you buy them unless you were a company.
mrbit. you are a devloper who would like to develop for Apple? so, don't you have an ulterior motive for osx to be on as many computers as possible? i am not criticizing you. just clarifying a bit.
i can see how that can be seen and is why i brought it up in my vid, but no that is not my intention although it is an effect. I truly believe that licensing out OSX conditionally of course as that would be the reality would help OS X grow and move faster to getting more market share, more apps and more dependence.
but i don't think Mr. Jobs, and hence, Apple, are strictly concerned with increasing their os marketshare, overnight! having a 10% increase in about 2 years is fairly significant.
Hey dude, i just realized that ur from H-town! Me too! unfortunately i've moved to pittsburgh a year ago. what part u from, i used to live in clear lake.
ah I see so mainly database driven. So do you develop mainly on Mac platform? I guess in the US mac's are much more pervasive compare to the UK. sorry for being nosy.
switching is just too costly for the co. Not because the machine cost much more, its all the training you need to provide the staff that uses and maintain those machine and also its easier for co to find employee that has MS experience. This is what I think keep the co from bothering to switch. Apple need to release the OSx to the mass before you'll see swaying happening.
I agree with your point on allowing OSX on the other hardwares. The only way to compete with software like window is to target the mass market of hardware out there. I mean Apple is just one company how can they compete with several large companies such as Sony, Dell, Hp, etc at producing hardware. I must admit MS marketing is very clever even thu they have a weaker product. If OSx is made for the other hardwares it would be Apple that would dominate the personal computer market.
I hope Apple does set OS X free. The rest of the computing world needs an alternative to windows. If Apple don't Linux will and Apple and Microsoft Loose. apple only has a limited line of computers some need more variety
dsFDFAHAHAHH 1 year ago
I hope Apple does set OS X free. The rest of the computing world needs an alternative to windows. If Apple don't Linux will and Apple and Microsoft Loose. apple only has a limited line of computers some need more vairety
dsFDFAHAHAHH 1 year ago
I agreed with mrbit10 - Just looked at Pystar and it's very sad people got ripped off. Apple could sell the OS as OEM for 299 without no support thereafter and let the Hack community resolve their own systems. It's clear to me Apple have forsaken developers and just think web browser/itunes students are their target audience. I would like to see a mac tower sell for 1000 quid with an i5, 6 gb of ram , 1TG drive - people have monitors - apple need to give people a better Mac range.
theapeman10 1 year ago
Apple won't loose money Licensing their OS they can charge more if they wanted to for their OS also if you think that Apple hardware sales will drop significantly if Mac OS is allowed to be on a PC then you have a very poor opinion on Apple hardware
dsFDFAHAHAHH 1 year ago
@dsFDFAHAHAHH very well said.
mrbit10 1 year ago
Apple won't approve their system to be installed on a PC, because they lose money from that. Not being able to sell their computers they won't earn much, because a good version of Windows is $300+ and Mac OS X is $40-50. Apple gather the best hardware so customers can have the best performing computers; they want to sell their Macs, not the OS. Also, not every PC can have Mac OS X running, and various driver problems come up on one that runs it. I personally made a Hackintosh, and faced problems
martomcuser 1 year ago
thank you for not being a fanboy :D
tehepicasian 1 year ago
Apple will never give up their operating system....They are smart. Gates prostituted windows so much that Apple bought the right to install it on their SUPERIOR operating system. Now, an Apple is both an Apple and a PC....A PC will always be just that...A PC.
mattersofsize 2 years ago
If osx is out in the open it will become popular and when stuff become more popular virus are made
MrSaamman 2 years ago
Great vid, all I would suggest is to not be so dry in establishing that you are an avid developer. Simply say, kindly, that you are a developer and quickly show all of your software packages.
SCJohnson77 2 years ago
Psystar is just a hack to get the Apple Mac OSX disk to run on a computer,
You did not say that mrbit10,
I Think Apple needs to NOW think about letting PC hardware user's have a Mac OSX, OS,
As of Psystar have done this for them
I think this is going to kill Windows if this happens,
Apple need this, not all of us can pay out for Mac hardware, but i'm now thinking about it as apple have not done what Psystar did for them
signedadam 2 years ago 2
Apple states in it's agreement running OSX on any non-apple authorized computer is illegal. Pystar is selling OSX along with their computers without informing Apple or paying them a share of the profits. Microsoft licences their OS to Dell, HP, etc and MS get paid. Pystar is selling Hackintoshes and profiting from it.
jamie9230 2 years ago
Look up the video called " Steve Jobs doesn't want Apple to Succeed! " the puppet is right...
maw88ify 2 years ago
You may not see hardware sales declining, perhaps because you fail to understand Apple's business model. Several companies utilize exclusivity and singularity to define their products. Apple claims better products because they have vertical control of it's manufacture. Mac OS is less vulnerable to viruses in part BECAUSE of its low market share. They are very successful as is, and need not complicate matters with by growing in 'market share'.
nelsonmars 2 years ago
What they are doing is NOT legal. Everyone computer manufacturer that sells their product with Windows pre-installed PAYS ROYALTIES. Why would it be different with Apple?
nelsonmars 2 years ago
Yes, it is illegal; violating the EULA is NOT illegal (although Apple can still file for legal actions), but violating the DMCA is illegal, which is what Psystar have done.
The difference is that Apple doesn't license their OS to other manufacturers, Microsoft does. The company is in charge of who gets licenses, who doesn't.
Eggyrocks1 2 years ago
I agree. I think it would be a good thing to see OS X become more widely available, and with Microsoft's near monopoly on operating systems, OS X would provide even more competition with Windows if it could be installed on any PC.
jadetraveler 2 years ago
The problem is not if one should let Psystar sell PC's with OSX on them ,its should Psystar sell JUNK PC's with no support.
I would like Apple to make a PC version of OSX.
knightterror1 2 years ago
if they do it.. it will be full of bugs and errors..
too many hardware !!
batezippi 2 years ago
I think Windows actually runs fairly well, considering that there is so much hardware and so many different PCs out there. I don't know why it would be so hard for Apple to support different hardware.
jadetraveler 2 years ago
damn.. the new imac 27" has some CPU problems.. i think..
batezippi 2 years ago
You have to open the packaging on the OS X software in order to read the EULA. By opening it, you cannot return it, so how would you know?
wankelcrazy 2 years ago
All the above is copied from the BBB reply.
striketeamblood 2 years ago
Should any government agency request our files on this company, your complaint will also be included. If you have settled this complaint directly with the company, would you please email us to let us know that, as well as any other comments you might have. Your help in doing this is important to ensure that our report to the public on this company is accurate. Thank you for using the Better Business Bureau.
striketeamblood 2 years ago
Complaint Details Psystar Corporation10475 NW 28th St.Miami, FL 33172 Contact: Guernsey, Maria Phone: (305) 356-6666 In the absence of any response from the company this complaint despite our two requests to them, we are closing our file on this complaint. This unanswered complaint will become part of the information we report to the public on this company for the next three years.
striketeamblood 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
please visit my channel see my video and make comments.
striketeamblood 2 years ago
I made the mistake of purchasing it last November, they always answered the phone when I was thinking about buying one. When I first had problems, I had some real nasty little kids putting me on hold for 1 hour at a time, one time they accidentally left it on and I could hear them laughing about how stupid customers were, there is no accountability for companies today. You? tell us more?
striketeamblood 2 years ago
psystar ripped me off, $1,640.00 and it does not work and they will not help me, psystar sucks.
striketeamblood 2 years ago
thanks for sharing, please make a vid on this consumers need to know how shady they may be so that they do not buy it and have the same experience.
mrbit10 2 years ago
why dose this sound fake i have 2 psystar computers in my house 1 on them broke cuz i was installing a kext that was OSX86 (Leo4all) only and would not start up right i called them up and they could not be anymore help-full better then Apple Costumer supprot
cocobean772 2 years ago
I made (really) 100s of calls, 100s of emails, I filed a complaint with the Florida Better Business Bureau, The BBB could not even get PSYSTAR to answer the complaint. Go to my channel and watch the video they kicked out of their youtube contest.
striketeamblood 2 years ago
How long ago was that
cocobean772 2 years ago
u want apple buy apple dumb dumb fuk fukstar.....
artc1967 1 year ago
True, the arguments against PC are largely attacks on Windows. Most of those arguments are dated. This decade has seen huge strides in the security architecture, reliability, and functionality of Windows. Apple's strategy of dredging up old, irrelevant stereotypes of Windows seems to reflect complacency. They're setting themselves up for a huge fall if they keep invoking the malware argument.
gcrav 2 years ago
I've encountered the opinion that EULAs are legally weak and have not been significantly challenged largely because the interests for them have concentrated legal resources while the interests against them have dispersed legal resources.
gcrav 2 years ago
I sympathize with the arguments for opening OSX from a software advocate's point of view, but it's hard to see the current arrangement changing as long as Apple uses the OS to sell its hardware at high markup. The pressure to decrease the markup would increase with competition from other OEMs. I agree that Apple could remain profitable, thrive even, if OSX were opened, but as long as they see maximum profit with the current path, they're unlikely to change.
gcrav 2 years ago
I think that apple doesnt want 3rd party hardware to run Mac OS X because apple cant have any kind of supervision over those 3rd party hardware companies. thus, just like in windows, every1 will get tons of stupid errors because some sort of hardware is missing. notice that the slowest mac in sells is 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo just so that apple's software will run flawlessly. if that psystar company starts selling macs, some ppl will buy cheaper macs, and thus, affect apples great reputation.
Meta221 2 years ago
the only problem i have with setting osx free is that then many people will pirate the software i know plenty of people who borrow other peoples copy of windows and install it unlisenced . i am not a mac owner yet and am therefore not a "fanboy"
but even though i am only 13 i have spent many years saving money for a macbook pro 13" i did want a macbook originaly but wanted a pro for personal reasons
heshoots9999 2 years ago
I do appreciate apple's subtle and powerful innovations but I'm not a power user, I just need a reliable machine for music, video, family photos, email and internet shopping. For you to bring up the word "poser" indicates that you're the one who's preoccupied with the mac self-image. So who pressured you to get a mac? Hackintosh, everyone, HACKINTOSH! HE HE!
Gokibarry 2 years ago
if u can't afford an apple, save up for an apple, get a PC, get a hackintosh, but apple will NEVER license their OS to anyone or anything so stop dreaming.
manicjupiterflute 2 years ago
its not "an apple" its a mac
gurioper 2 years ago
You're fucking retarded dude. APPLE is the brand name. MAC was used when the original MACINTOSH came out in the 80s. People just kept using the term MAC to mean any apple system. You can use the two words, whichever one you want. Why do you need to be nit picky about a fucking word? "ooh, it's a mac, not an apple!" GOOD FOR YOU!!! WOW you're so smart!!! GO FUCKING TELL SOMEONE WHO CARES!!!
manicjupiterflute 2 years ago
i was simply stating a point, the mac is a computer and apple is a company. just because you dont care doesnt mean no body cares. and why do most people on youtube need to force their opinion on others by cussing them out?
gurioper 2 years ago
It's not an opinion, it's a fact. Some people refer to their Apple computers as MACS, some refer to them as Apples. Why does this matter? Why do people on youtube ask stupid questions? I cussed you out because your last statement was really unneccessary. I mean who cares if people want to call it an apple or a mac. god! Go do something useful like masturbating to internet porn or smoking weed or something.
manicjupiterflute 2 years ago
it is your opinion that i should not have said what i did. i was simply stating a point. i dont see why you are taking such offense to this.
gurioper 2 years ago
WHO THE FUCK CARES?
Windows446 2 years ago
My PB G4 15" 1.6GHz took a poop just this week for the 3rd time. First overheating fried the Logic Board. Then, Lower Memory Slot Failure. 3rd, again, Lower Memory Slot Failure. 2nd & 3rd time out of warranty ! Then Geniuses are going to try sell me Apple Care for a laptop that was supposed to be bullet proof in the first place? As a disgruntled G4 Money Pit owner, I have to say that Apple will not set OSX free, reason being is that Apple hardware is going down the toilet with Made In China poop
Gokibarry 2 years ago
The only hardware issues they have are THERMAL related. Jobs is too concerned w/wanting to fans to be as quiet as possible & maybe doesn't realize that a logic board should never get above 140 degrees ferenheit. I use SMCfancontrol on my macbook and always keep the temp below 130. Then there might be too much thermal grease. Other than that, apple makes an EXCELLENT operating system which comes in a compact shiny aluminum case. I also use a small portable fan that sits on top of my keyboard.
manicjupiterflute 2 years ago
Hi manic. I've grown gray hair from the stress of migrating from Win to Mac and reached the point of no return although I still have my faithful NEC XP machine for back-up. I believe this whole PB fiasco is a sign for me to check on the status of the Hackintosh WOW it's now so much easier! MackinToshiba anyone? Dellintosh? HA HA *gloat @ Jobs* :p
Gokibarry 2 years ago
If I'm going to do anything illegal I'll just stick to smoking weed. Hackintoshes are illegal. They're also a way of saying, "I know the mac os x is better than windows, but I'm too poor and too much of a poser to get the real deal." It's like putting a BMW engine inside of an acura, which isn't illegal, but is still a very poser thing to do.
manicjupiterflute 2 years ago
I was never attracted to using a mac, XP worked for me & migrating to mac was a pain. It was my wifes idea to buy a mac because she works in a pretentious arty-fartsy environment full of mac zealots who brainwashed her that she's just not hip without a mac. I was attracted to using Logic so I agreed to waste $3k.I didn't even see those pretentious"Get a Mac"ads with attractive hipsters that stand confidently lying with slogans like "It just works" until a few years after we bought this money-pit
Gokibarry 2 years ago
im a poor pc user making my videos using windows music maker. i respect apple macs 100%, they're so sexy, i just can't afford one. if i could afford a mac, i would be making HD videos on a macbook using iMovie
arielcjr 2 years ago
Well, Mac can get Vista/XP/Win7, but we can't get MAC OS :/
m3t4lm4n222 2 years ago
apple=hardware company
microsoft=software company
AllStarDeal79 2 years ago
Unfortunately it was a mistake for Apple to go with the Intel platform. It was a can of worms just waiting to be opened. What's happening with Phystar is just the tip of the iceberg. Apple is already loosing because of their decision. The OSX86 movement is getting stronger without Phystar's help. For under $300 any geek can build a Mac clone.
jwd0808 2 years ago
Apple has what 8% market share in computers? Yet they still get a revenue of about $4billion off Macintosh's alone? Apple's macbook pros and mac pros are selling at over 100% profit, so yes licensing out OS X will cause a huge drop in hardware sales. OS X is the only thing that makes an $1000 macbook pro able to sell for $2800+.
bobperson 2 years ago
if apple released their OS then apple would die.. why cant people understand that when a company has something to lure their customer (apples OS) they are not gonna give that away cuz they will loose business!! stop complaining... if you cant afford then just buy a pc..
luiecontreras1212 2 years ago
I believe it could be. If Linux developers focused on a single distro instead of using their efforts on hundreds of different ones, they could build something as robust and reliable as OS X, with a new desktop, new features, better compatibility, less bugs e.t.c and could start to use the full power of the Linux kernel. MrBit10, your views on this please?
matthew376 2 years ago
Maybe...the only way I see Linux getting even close to becoming "the future" is if it becomes easier to use for the everyday person. Hell, people complain that Windows is too complicated...let alone Linux. The everyday user isn't going to want to use terminal every 5 seconds.
vonfeldt7 2 years ago
mac users are just pissed because they spent so much money on something they coulda got cheaper with psystar, and more powerful.
i have a pystar and im loving it, i have a macbook pro, and the psystar is for a fact, stronger than the macbook pro. i regret spending the 2800, after only spending 1300 on the psystar.
lilaznballaz1022 2 years ago
The macbook pro is a fucking laptop man. Of course it's not going to be as powerful as a desktop.
And you're a dumbass for buying a psystar, just download OSX and do it yourself, it's easy as shit.
vonfeldt7 2 years ago
im gona try and get a pystar bef4 apple compltly sues the ballz off the company
darrenc12pdg123 2 years ago 2
First off Apple does not make the hardware. They simply put together parts they buy from others. They are no different than Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. Apple is a PC maker that puts OS X instead of another OS.
Second Apple users are thoroughly brainwashed. Apple is like some kind of cult with their iWhatever stuff.
stchman 2 years ago 5
watch my other vids on this series, it states exactly that: for apple to use a pool of hardware from vendors that are certified, if they do not want to free all together.
mrbit10 2 years ago
Thank you for pointing that out. Back in the day, Apple built there own computers. Today everything is made in China, and now because of their decision to go with Intel, practically any Intel based motherboard (the 945 chipset for instance) will run OSX.
jwd0808 2 years ago
ur using vista on the moniters behind u
apocali3 2 years ago
yes, I have several PCs and Win2k ADV serv to XP to Vista.
mrbit10 2 years ago
i love Linux i think its better than any Microsoft pc i removed XP from the one pc i am currently using web browsing is allot faster
apocali3 2 years ago
haahaha i cant wait this is the funnest fucking thing ever lol. all you mac tards are gonna cry when i build a pc 10x the spec of your shitty assed mac and put your little baby os on it lol. hahal.
1xxxDre4mxxx1 2 years ago
well you have to give a credit to Apple for building a real high performance "Mac's" or "PC's" still all this power for what? linux is the future
nitr0ix 2 years ago
Man you take forever to get to the point holy crap. You like apple, you like their hardware and software, you hope it gets out there on non macs since your a developer. Bam done. Doesn't take almost 10 min lol
STLFANSS 2 years ago
hope mac loose. psystar for the win.
1xxxxxxdreamxxxxxx1 3 years ago
I think if Mac OS X was released to work on non-Apple PCs then their OS X sales would explode. People like OS X, including me, but there is no way in hell I'm paying $1,200 for a mid-level computer. If you ask me, it's only a matter of time. If Apple market share keeps growing at the rate it is now, then the supreme court will eventually have to intervene and make them unlock Mac OS X to work on non-Apple PCs so that hundreds of hardware companies don't go out of business.
TherapudicCaffeine 3 years ago
I don't see how you came to that conclusion. You don't have to buy Apple products. If you do you agree to their terms and conditions.
09AUTUMNUS22 3 years ago
Um, what?
TherapudicCaffeine 3 years ago
If you are confused, I cannot help you. It's very easy to understand. And Apple will never become bigger than Microsoft. Apple is not that type of company. And if Apple did, they'd become the new Microsoft. You can't run a company that large easily and with great stability.
09AUTUMNUS22 3 years ago
What if I don't want to use their hardware? If they go around marketing it as an OS, then it should run on my computer. Otherwise, they might as well just call it Mac Firmware, because that's what it is now.
TherapudicCaffeine 3 years ago
If you don't want their hardware, then don't buy it. It is an operating system. It's an operating system designed for Apple computers. If you want something more open then try Linux. Linux makes great stuff. I understand where you are getting at: you want to run their software on your hardware.
09AUTUMNUS22 3 years ago
I *kind of* want their hardware (even if it only has a one button mouse), but I'm not willing to overpay for it. They're casings look nice (at least they do now, now that they switched away from all white plastic). I've tried Linux; not user friendly enough for me yet, no enough support. I'll keep my eye on it though.
TherapudicCaffeine 3 years ago
I can't really defend imacs. I don't have one. I hate desktops. But, the Macbook is nice. It is a lot of money, but well worth it. The total cost of ownership for an Apple computer is less than a pc.
09AUTUMNUS22 3 years ago
Tell me in what way is it "worth it" to pay $1,500 for a $900 laptop? I'm just curious.
TherapudicCaffeine 3 years ago 2
Higher resale value, several hundred dollars worth of software bundled with the machine, OS that is more user centric and increases productivity, nicer design, probably much thinner and lighter aiding portability, nice strong aluminium shell, backlit keyboard, glass trackpad with multitouch, best customer support in the industry.
niveceritt 3 years ago
Nope, not worth $1,500. And there are some fallacies in your comment:
1.) I bought the computer to use it, not sell it.
2.) There is only $90 worth of bundled software, that is iLife.
3. Windows XP pioneered the user centric OS, Mac OS X didn't get it until Panther.
4. Many PCs look better than the Mac, are thinner and lighter, and have backlit keyboards at 1/2 the price.
5. Windows 7 will have *true* multitouch built into the APIs, not just a driver implementation.
TherapudicCaffeine 3 years ago
You might want to sell it after five years of use, why not?
There may be $90 worth of software, but to find Windows equivalents costs several hundreds of dollars.
Zero PC's look better than the Mac. And the ones that do cost a lot more. Find me a 13.3" laptop which is less than an inch thin for the price of the Macbook, you pay for portability.
Multi touch as in a touch screen has no purpose other than public kiosks, schools perhaps etc.
niveceritt 3 years ago
Again back on the point of portability, you pay dearly for it. If you can get a HP for less money, it will have a larger screen, be far thicker and far heavier, all this makes it cheaper to create. This is why products like the Macbook Air cost so much, but they are well priced in comparison to what else is on the market like Sony's ultraportables.
niveceritt 3 years ago
Well, a PC would last longer because it's more customizable and Windows supports more hardware drivers. Windows equivalent software is already included for free, except for garage band, which wouldn't cost more than $90. My HP Pavilion looks better than the Mac.
I don't see the point in paying $1,700 for a laptop with the specs from a 2003 computer. And if Apple came out with a multitouch MacBook Tablet, you would be all over it, so don't even trip. Fanboy.
TherapudicCaffeine 3 years ago
can u install logic pro
atennis55 3 years ago
This guy is like Paris Hilton: "I don't understand why people doesn't buy Ferraris, I have three and they're cool".
Man, if you can afford a 4000$ MAC G5 with the 8000$ Protools HD and an 8000$ KORG Oasys that's your problem. But if I can use MAC OS for 500$, Reason 4 for 300$ and a Cheap 15$ Yamaha Motif ES Refill.
waynegacy666 3 years ago
i am not sure what you mean, 1. the G5 is not expensive. 2. I advocate setting OS X free so it can be run on non-apple hardware.
mrbit10 3 years ago
you can buy a g5 on ebay for $500
toberichmoe 3 years ago
Would you put a Jet engine in a Yugo? On the other hand maybe open it up and not give tech support unless its on an Apple. I understand that there are people that enjoy putting together computers, its alot like legos for big kids.
Apple would not be hit hard, because serious users still would rather have Apple hardware instead of Toys to play with?\.
melenasman 3 years ago
That's insulting "lego for big kids"? You think building a computer labels it as a "Toy" and you have to actually buy a pre-built one for it to be "serious"? that's ridiculous. They both perform exactly the same...
ArcticSheep 3 years ago
Jet engine in a Yugo? That would be if you compare an 8-core G5 with a Pentium III, but a Quad Core PC owns a Dual Core IMAC. You must now that MACs have the same components as the PCs, the only difference is the BIOS.
waynegacy666 3 years ago
this guy > chris pirillo
ArcticSheep 3 years ago
Yes but I find that Chris has to much money. All he does is sit in front of a mac pro all day and review some crap that a company gives!
mockstoday 3 years ago
is this legal?
Dimitry1996 3 years ago
Apple could really really have their hopes of crushing Microsoft like they did IBM by opening up the hardware market. On legal issues, I support OpenMac, knowing the licensing agreement is being broken with these machines, but let's not forget that Apple is breaking legal issues on their hardware monopoly. I really don't think you should have to buy Apple hardware in order to have OS X. I think OS X is superior to Windows, but Steve Jobs needs to end his feud and crush Microsoft with OS X itself
skogenburzum 3 years ago
microsoft could never be crushed , u dont understand how many systems use windows , and windows mobile , everything from phones , computers , and handheld scanners , devices , shop tills , databasing machines , they all use windows of some form , the market is too massive , and apple dont have the knowledge to even build software for all these hardware , thats why they are closed company
girlsdrinkfeck 3 years ago
phystar sucks
garnet11 3 years ago
hey mrbit10 the comment page is for others to you know leave a comment
why are you apple people so EGO-HOSTILE
godscuttingyoudown 3 years ago
lol, this is a forum of discussion and people comment to discuss, thus we discuss. Sadly we are limited to 10 min Vids and 500 char comments, but thanks for watching.
mrbit10 3 years ago
I thought they extended that limit? (video)
Anyways, I have found PC owners to be happy at psystar, but the hardcore Apple Macintosh owners are very elitist about it. The Windows/PC owners usually bring up a better point than the elitist. Shows the insecurity of people losing what they once thought was only theirs to those that may actually need it but cannot afford it.
I own 3 Macs and a Psystar.
frak126 3 years ago
How is the Psystar?
TurnerKitty 3 years ago
Oh yes it would. This guy is wrong. If OS X runs on other PCs, this will hurt the APple owner. Apple is protecting us from that. Simply put, Apple only gives you what you absolutely need. They don't give you OVERKILL. With that said, Apple would have to cover too many drivers and pieces of hardware. This would give Apple more problems, and they do not deserve that. What company has produced a vertical architecture like Apple has? No one!
blicksflicks 3 years ago
I have been developing for Apple clients for a while. OSX on non-apple hardware will not hurt apple. Software always controls hardware and not the other way around. This is why Solaris and other UNIX based or like OSs run just as stable as were on SPARC, POWER, ARM chipsets, what have you. The only problem Apple would have is to manage the new incoming cash flow.
mrbit10 3 years ago
If drivers are an issue, why is it that OSX which is Nextstep MK 4 already could support PA-RISC, Intel and SPARC. Nextstep was just as kick ass then on a plethora of hardware. If you are using the exclusivity argument, that is based on consumer emotion and I cannot argue that.
mrbit10 3 years ago
Apple handpicks their hardware, so that they have to cover fewer bases for the sake of a more stable environment for their users, and this is the primary reason users love Apple. They give you exactly what you need. Not Overkill. They give you stability, simplicity, taste, culture and a sense of belonging. This would be abolished if Psystar wins, but that's not a problem anyway. Apple will defeat Psystar easily. Psystar won't last five seconds in court. I think the PC world is just jealous.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
"Apple handpicks their hardware" I know emeek states this and I have corrected a few things with this. Every OEM picks its hardware. You do not realize that hardware relationship is inherent to all OEMs, that is there business. You are coming from a more consumer emotional standpoint with culture and the like. Simply put if you want Apple to kick ass beyond imagination, set OS X free.
mrbit10 3 years ago
I see what you are saying, and I agree with you on this one point: if OS X would run on every platform, other OSes would die immediately. I have no doubt. However, Apple would not then be forced to back up all devices. All sound cards. All graphics cards. Not just one. Look at Microsoft Windows. This is primarily one of the reasons Windows will never run as well as a Mac.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
Right, if OS X were set free it would not have the issue Windows created for itself. It would still control what it would allow to be run which is an improvement of hardware choice, but one that is still limited.
mrbit10 3 years ago
Also, I don't even have to point out that Ubuntu Linux has problems with different hardware and also doesn't even cover the majority of the driver bases. I know. I ran Ubuntu on my Mac. They have far too few drivers to run on every PC equally well. This is one of the problems Dell had with Ubuntu users. Drivers. Ubuntu couldn't get them out in time, an still doesn't cover every piece of hardware equally well.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
That is because you are forcing a system to run what it does not. Ubuntu is stable per supported layers. However Ubuntu is free and open source and has no logistics in place to tell people what and what not to do.
mrbit10 3 years ago
The true story: The PC world is heaving and hoeing, because Mac users can run Vista better than a PC, and still run OS X natively, and PCs can't do crap, because they are junk. Now that Apple is gaining an immense edge with iPod, future servers and total domination of the Vista junk OS, the PC world is mad. I hope there's a sea of PCs with junked up Vista out there and we can use them all for recycling to make a real computer. An Apple computer.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
That is also not true. That emeek vid was older but the MBP did have a victory dance. Quite simply you contradict yourself when you 1. say that the hardware is optimized for OS X but yet can run windows better than say ASUS, when the ROM, RAM and etc are very different systems between OS X & WIndows. Hardware is hardware in function but there are different quality levels. I for one would argue logic boards and older Mac Pros were slow via bus speed to handle the bus of the chips efficiently
mrbit10 3 years ago
mrbit10, the reason Macs run Vista faster than a PC is because Microsoft tested Vista on the Apple platform and had to remove the sticker. From what I hear, they wanted a more stable platform to run it on. And... I'm not joking either. Look it up.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
1. there is no common apple platform. The logic boards differ from each system and so on. I know of the MBP and that Microsoft did certify many apple hardware parts. that does not however say that Microsoft on Apple hardware = faster period. There are too many variables to consider.
mrbit10 3 years ago
But, you're dead on about that EFI Rom for OSx86 project. Psystar stole it. I heard EFI was suing them, too. We both know EFI and Apple are booty buddies.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
EFI -> Extensible Firmware Interface
Nobody owns EFI. EFI is a STANDARD. Nobody can legally stop a standard from being implemented.
Gah, if you're going to lie for an argument, at least make it halfway true.
frak126 3 years ago
mrbit10, that's not true. If OS X ran on every platform, it would still not be able to run all hardware equally well. Do you know how many drivers there are? I am also certified and have written software. I've done it all. Over twenty years. I am telling you that people who owned copies of OS X and non-Apple hardware would be lost without Apple support, and Apple's reputation would suffer due to a less stable operating system. Period.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
I am sorry, you do not quite understand the architecture. The OS controls what it will run not the other way around. The problem is you are projecting Windows flaws on to a relationship that will simply not exist. Solaris is just as stable BSD, Linux, you name it. They all control what drivers will be allowed. Again do not project Windows Faults on the rest of the world. This is not opinion. Nextstep has already been run on non-apple hardware and kicked ass as did solaris.
mrbit10 3 years ago
Also I am not defending Psystar I am defending the idea of OSX on non-apple hardware or a cert program sponsored by apple. The OS must be set free or you will never gain OS market share. Just about everything is software for OS X to beat Windows, you fight fire with fire.
mrbit10 3 years ago
Apple is like Porsche, Ferari, you name it... If Pepsi was putting their juice in Coca-Cola bottles, I'm sure Coke would have a leg to stand on, too. Same goes with Apple. The software is the juice, and Psystar wants to put it in a non-Apple bottle. No way. Doesn't work like that. I wish Apple the best in the suit.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
I am not defending Psystar. It is my understanding that they stole the EFI Rom for OSx86 project anyway. I however do support OS X being set free per conditions of course, say a certification program, what have you.
mrbit10 3 years ago
I'm not getting emotional. I know you would like to see OS X be the primary operating system. Yes, I see what you mean. However, do you think the OS X sales would make up for the loss in hardware sales, and what about covering other drivers and other pieces of hardware? I mean, I've witnessed some serious issues from OS X on a PC that doesn't support its own hardware. Apple would not even be responsible at that point. Do you see what I mean?
blicksflicks 3 years ago
Software sales would make up for any loss 10 fold at a minimum. That is if I even agree that there would be hardware sales loss. I do not. Apple's line up is too unique not like Dell Vs HP boxes. Also Apple hardware sales have gone up since 2005 which happened to be the timeframe that windows could run on Apple. Thus meaning there is a huge % of people that like apple products.
mrbit10 3 years ago
Back to software sales, hell yes they would make it up if there even were anything to make up. But for argument sake yes. As OS X expands so does developer base and apps coming in. This means all revenue from developer, partner and business solutions increase exponentially. That is only part of what expanded OS X would bring.
mrbit10 3 years ago
Well, you might be right. That also would force Apple to make even more outrageously superior hardware with an Apple stamp on it. Hmmm. I wish I could ask Steve Jobs why they do not wish that to happen. Would be interesting to consider. I've ran all platforms over the last two decades, but I ran back to Apple, and I'm glad. I love it. :) Right down to the glowing Apple on the back.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
I do too, I love Apple and want them to kick some major ass. :) Thanks for the great conversation.
mrbit10 3 years ago
Yes, it was a good conversation. I can't lie. Sometimes, my love for Apple since back to 1985 gets in the way of my logical reasoning. :) I owned an Apple LC back in the early 90s, and I have a 1985 Macintosh sitting in the corner here, and I'm typing on a Macbook Pro. I always root for the underdog in any game. :)
blicksflicks 3 years ago
Jobs years back was willing to let clones exist but at a higher price and more conditions. The clones told him to stuff it. But there is a point to where Jobs will consider it obviously it he said it himself way back. I think I state it in one of my Psystar vids where Jobs said that.
mrbit10 3 years ago
My major fear: Steve Jobs passing away. LOL
blicksflicks 3 years ago
By emotion I do not mean you as in getting emotional. No. I mean when consumers use exclusivity or culture they are non-tangible arguments that are more founded on feeling or by some loyal attachment is what I mean by emotion.
mrbit10 3 years ago
I understand the architecture perfectly well. What I'm saying is rather simple: Real Apple users - Apple's customers - deserve to feel special, because look at all the CRAP the PC world has always put them through? This is OUR TIME! This is OUR HOUR! As for Linux? The own 1% of the server market. It's because no other platform has taste, and it's mainly because of Apple's operating system. When you own an Apple, you are special today. When you own a PC, you're just another bum in the park.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
Well all of this is emotion, I support apple not just for taste but to kick ass. I as a consumer do not need to feel exclusive. I want windows market share to fall and finally get a viable OS out there whether it be OS X linux or Solaris. I fight for Apple to get ahead, not for a "magical ride" of some sort.
mrbit10 3 years ago
It is legal, but just against Apple's EULA, but nobody cares about that stuff anyway.
drumthrasher109 3 years ago
Any manufacturer, artist, creator, whether your Walt Disney, Apple, or Joe Schmoe, has the right to copyrighted what s/he creates. If Apple says: This product is only to be installed on Apple hardware, and you hack it to run on something other than an Apple, it's no different than any other act of piracy, and, trust me, when Apple wants to, the hammer shall fall, and goodbye PissStar. Apple=hardware+software+support. It's all one. Pisstar parasitically profits off someone else's labor.
keytoothed 3 years ago
"You have a right to run Mac Software on any non-Apple computer, but you don't have the right to copy codes that are built into Apple's hardware, so you are stuck," the WOZ.
I find Woz's opinion interesting on this as Psystar from what I hear stole OSX86 EFI ROM, Apple will not pursue legal means at this point but simply write a new ROM making it very difficult for Psystar to hack Snow Leopard IMO.
mrbit10 3 years ago
mrbit10, that's not tr ue. Mac video hardware is plenty. If you want major video hardware, get a Mac Pro tower on the low end. Also, the things that a lot of PC users do not know about Apple video RAM and graphics is that Macs use video ram far better than PCs. So, you don't need as much to get the job done. I play high in games with my 256 megs of video ram. I never have problems, and I'm running on a Macbook Pro 17" with the 8600M and 256 megs of VRAM. Research it. It's all true.
blicksflicks 3 years ago
You make excellent points. I would like to buy an apple, but the affordable ones have weak video hardware and are not upgradeable, thus making it very hard to purchase for me. That is a price argument for me, so I therefor spend 0$ on Apple software/hardware. At least with Psystar I'd be giving Apple $155 for the software. Last time I checked, $155 is better than $0. Wake up Apple.
martinitime1975 3 years ago
Strange my version of Leopard didn't come with a license agreement. Do think that may because I got it for free. If Apple were to release an os that could run on PCs with no problem guess what I would buy it. But they don't so I'll have to take it.
governmentrefunds 3 years ago
yeah
asskick91 3 years ago
Apple "labeled", get it and put an Apple
sticker on it.-all good
vision4wisdom 3 years ago
You REALLY need some new sound equipment. Shot gun mic at least. Hard to hear.
NathanCharrois 3 years ago
Hmm, it would be idealistic if Apple was to license out Mac OS X which would gain a large market share, but given that I've seen a bit of history regarding OS volume licensing, I still feel doubtful that alot of positive things could come out of it. However, I do see if there was a way to eat cake and have. An OEM that manufactures a computer to be able to run Mac OS X must take the approach that Apple does for its hardware, meaning they must tie in their software with the OS.
Coraxuss 3 years ago
well, OS X would not be compromised as it would still control what it would run on just as Solaris or IBM's systems.
mrbit10 3 years ago
Well, that would be a good thing for Mac OS X to remain designed as if was meant to run on Macs, unlike Windows that has to become generic. As far I can see, if clone manufacturers were able to get away with selling computers with the operating system but does a crappy job on their end, I see two possible outcomes. Mac OS X's reputation might get ruined because it won't become reliable as it used to be and people will associate the OS as crap, or...
Coraxuss 3 years ago
Sun's or IBM's system has not had that effect when run on 3rd party x86 platforms though.
mrbit10 3 years ago
this should never happen, OS X is unique and it should & WILL stay on Apple hardware
macnerd93 3 years ago
(cont'd) it might boost Apple's Mac sales because people may actually see the truth as to why Apple keeps Mac OS X tied to their computer hardware and realize it may not be worth trying to install the OS on a non-Apple machine.
Coraxuss 3 years ago
yes, but then the mac wouldn't be unique or different. Apple hardware is the best, who'd want it on an UGLY PC, it would never look right
macnerd93 3 years ago
True, and I've yet to see another company that can produce a vertical architecture personal computer like Apple does.
Coraxuss 3 years ago
Mr.bit you make such a valid point because lots of people are loyal to certain products. A company might swear to only use Dell's because thats what they've always used. I, myself, is quite loyal to ATI video cards because I've used them for so long.
You take OSX off a Mac, it's just hardware, it doesn't mean anything, has no purpose. You put an OS on it and suddenly it's useful. What I'm saying here is that an OS or application has a greater purpose than what type of hardware it runs.
blacksteel25 3 years ago
I'm for both OS's for doing well, but more toward having universal applications. I'm sure some Windows users wouldn't mind certain Mac specific applications to work on Windows and vice-versa...
Is what's holding Apple back to release OSX to PC is that they would need to support all the different types of hardware?
blacksteel25 3 years ago
You made a great point when you said People that buy apple hardware will buy it regardless cause that is what they want even if it was on a non apple computer. I think that is very true.
bullboykennels 3 years ago
Totally agree which is rare but I believe that the future is open and the big companies will be left fighting for office space. As soon as you can play games without the need for a certain OS then why would you buy them unless you were a company.
ddrmegamixer 3 years ago
mrbit. you are a devloper who would like to develop for Apple? so, don't you have an ulterior motive for osx to be on as many computers as possible? i am not criticizing you. just clarifying a bit.
wellhowdydeux 3 years ago
i can see how that can be seen and is why i brought it up in my vid, but no that is not my intention although it is an effect. I truly believe that licensing out OSX conditionally of course as that would be the reality would help OS X grow and move faster to getting more market share, more apps and more dependence.
mrbit10 3 years ago
but i don't think Mr. Jobs, and hence, Apple, are strictly concerned with increasing their os marketshare, overnight! having a 10% increase in about 2 years is fairly significant.
wellhowdydeux 3 years ago
sure this is all debate of ideas, in the end I am for Apple doing well and OS X getting more share.
mrbit10 3 years ago
which it certainly will, especially with the help from microsoft! (vista)
wellhowdydeux 3 years ago
Apple development is easy and friendly?? I've never coded for OS X, but is all of the kernel source code availiable for OS X?
sarsrkewl2 3 years ago
opensource[dot]apple[dot]com/darwinsource/
mrbit10 3 years ago
Well thats nice. Its too bad that the next project at work is a windows driver.
sarsrkewl2 3 years ago
Hey dude, i just realized that ur from H-town! Me too! unfortunately i've moved to pittsburgh a year ago. what part u from, i used to live in clear lake.
AymanRSaleh 3 years ago
very close to Katy.
mrbit10 3 years ago
mrbit....
you just pwned me
DeffJux 3 years ago
Mrbit10, on the video you say you are a programmer. What kind of program do you write?
big46uk 3 years ago
all kinds, accounting, banking/finance, medical, work flow and usually very custom programs that fill in the gaps of existing business models.
mrbit10 3 years ago
ah I see so mainly database driven. So do you develop mainly on Mac platform? I guess in the US mac's are much more pervasive compare to the UK. sorry for being nosy.
big46uk 3 years ago
both, MS represents more of my clients, but I try to sway them otherwise.
mrbit10 3 years ago
do you actually succeed in swaying them? Most of them just want the industrial standard and a solution that work 'yesterday' :)
big46uk 3 years ago
no very rarely, in that I very rarely see the opportunity in the client being able to have the switch realistically and thus do not even bother.
mrbit10 3 years ago
switching is just too costly for the co. Not because the machine cost much more, its all the training you need to provide the staff that uses and maintain those machine and also its easier for co to find employee that has MS experience. This is what I think keep the co from bothering to switch. Apple need to release the OSx to the mass before you'll see swaying happening.
big46uk 3 years ago
yes, exactly the logistics is what kills my attempts to find an opportunity.
mrbit10 3 years ago
I agree with your point on allowing OSX on the other hardwares. The only way to compete with software like window is to target the mass market of hardware out there. I mean Apple is just one company how can they compete with several large companies such as Sony, Dell, Hp, etc at producing hardware. I must admit MS marketing is very clever even thu they have a weaker product. If OSx is made for the other hardwares it would be Apple that would dominate the personal computer market.
big46uk