|
|
|
Apple tries to put Mac clone maker out of business citing EULA terms
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 19 July, 2008
Apple is suing Psystar over their Mac clone, saying the terms of the OS X End User License Agreement (EULA) forbid the owner from installing it on anything but Apple hardware. They allege Copyright Infringement by Psystar, as well as Inducement of Copyright Infringement, Breach of Contract, Trademark Infringement, and Trade Dress Infringement. In short they're trying to put Psystar out of ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
doobedoo
Newbie
|
4. August 2008 @ 17:33 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Mez:
Thankx DXR88,
I was pretty sure but I was out of my solid expertise so I wanted wiggle room. I was sure I would be corrected or vindicated by some expert. I didn't want to fall into the same trap doobedoo fell into. If you spout garbage here, someone will put you straight.
I would be running Linux if it wasn't for thousands of dollars invested in software that runs on MS platform. I am a developer and one of the languages I use does not run on Linux. I am convinced I will not upgrade any MS products unless there is a compelling reason to do so. I don't want to give those son of a guns any money. Plus they are now screwing up every thing the make. How can you have a product that ran fine for years then put out trash???? Don't they test??? Why do they completely change interfaces in version 7? I am sure you have only suits (used car salesmen) in management. If you had even one technical manager he/she would have stopped that nonsense. I expect things to screw up in version 1 but not version 7!
UNIX was conceived in an atmosphere where mistakes were not tolerated much. Both Apple and MS 'grew up' with more forgiving users. What is amazing is they (Unix/Linux) have yet to put out garbage.
If Macs could utilize the hardware so well you would see the hardware intensive apps like Oracle run on a Mac.
Trap. What trap. What a load of claptrap.
Thank God develops represent less than a quarter of 1% of all users. I just made that up?aren't statistics and bold statements wonderful.
You're Oracle comment is incorrect. Oracle IS available for Mac OS X and has been available for Mac for some time. I was using X windows on Oracle at Apple in the 90s.
Link: http://www.oracle.com/technology/tech/macos/index.html
My hope for all of you so bent on hatred and animosity towards companies that have proved their business models successful is that some day you will be able to prove your bias in the court of public opinion. Bitching is easy. My opinion is that Macs are just fine; in fact, I think they're just the cat's meow. I have no desire to get involved with the geeksphere of Unix. Command line?truly the domain of programmers and developers?of which I am most definitely not. Glad you're out there, but, you have little impact on my day to day. My point is that there are more people who prefer the easy of Apple to an environment like Linux/Unix. I don't care if you can tweak hardware to omph a few extra cycles out of it. I don't need to design, engineer, build and paint a car in order to drive one. All I have to do is buy the car, put gas in the car and drive the freaking car. There is life outside the car you know.
But please, continue to spend your extra cycles hating Apple, Microsoft and whomever the next flavor of the month is. HATE, HATE, HATE, HATE, HATE. Me uber alles. Anarchy Rules !!! Now where did I put that remote.
Actually, while I don't hate Microsoft, I do feel that their products suck. That's why I use a Mac. But, I think as a company, Microsoft has proven themselves to be a resilient competitor. They've made zillions of dollars and sired thousands of millionaires. But, I guess it's wrong for any company to be successful isn't it. I sure wish the people who bitch so much would vote with their pocketbooks, because, if nobody bought Microsoft Office, Windows or their other products, Microsoft would have a really hard time staying in business. And the same is true for Apple and every other company out there. So vote today people. Of course, if your demographic population is one quarter of one percent...you're not likely to put anyone out of business, except maybe yourself.
"Some poor n00b a couple of months ago, a long time mac owner and user went bought himself an ipod classic.... guess what, to put any legally bought itunes content on it apple required him to pay out for a new pc simply because his 5 or 6 year old mac wasn't up to running leopard (which the classic looks for)"
Anyone that is so STUPID that they can't even read the requirements for a product before they buy it deserves the misery they get. This is not Apple's fault.
Okay...I have my flame retardant suit on, so, BRING IT ON.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
doobedoo
Newbie
|
5. August 2008 @ 00:09 |
Link to this message
|
One more post and then I'm done.
This has to do with the Oracle comment with regards to Mac hardware performance.
Oracle Database 10g RAC with Mac OS X Server and Xserve RAID delivers superior scalability and price performance.
Rotech Healthcare, Inc., has built its business by acquiring healthcare equipment companies in medically underserviced areas and incorporating them into a larger, more efficient network. As a result, Rotech processes information across varied and complex software, operating systems, and IT environments.
To consolidate its complex, multisite operations, Rotech developed a service-oriented architecture (SOA) to manage its data. The SOA and cluster technology enable Rotech to use service-based software that interoperates over different development technologies. The SOA uses nodes on the company?s IT network to make disparate software available to each employee in every location. Rotech staff in any office can seamlessly access all the information on the company?s internal network.
Using the cluster computing technology, multiple computers, storage devices, and redundant interconnections form what appears to users as a single, highly available system. Rotech IT administrators rely on cluster computing for both load balancing and high availability, spreading functionality across the network and ensuring uptime.
The challenge of an SOA is its reliance on multiple layers of software, servers, and applications to operate as a seamless intuitive interface. Today?s technology offers plenty of options, but finding cost-effective solutions can be time-consuming and full of integration problems. To economically support the critical functions of its SOA, Rotech implemented Mac OS X Server and Xserve running Oracle Database 10g Real Application Clusters (RAC).
Deploying Oracle Database 10g RAC on Mac products reflects Rotech?s movement toward a fully integrated computing grid instead of distinct silos. ?We use multiple locations to process single orders,? explains Albert Prast, Rotech?s CIO and CTO. ?For example, we?ll receive an order in Idaho, the call will be routed to our call center in Kentucky, and by the time the customer hangs up, the order will have been communicated to the customer?s local pharmacy or, if necessary, drop-shipped to the customer?s home back in Idaho ? in less than five hours. We can?t operate each location as an individual entity or we couldn?t provide that level of service.?
?Try and Buy?
Deploying Oracle RAC on Mac OS X Server and storing it on Xserve RAID was unconventional, but configured comparisons indicated it would cost less than half of what running Oracle on Sun Solaris or other solutions would cost. To demonstrate performance, Apple offered Rotech a Try and Buy program, allowing the company to spec out and configure Mac products for Oracle, try them for 90 days, and then decide whether to make the purchase.
?This program alleviated the risk of trying something new,? says Prast. ?For us, it verified Apple?s commitment to customer service ? and we weren?t disappointed. The combination of Apple running Oracle basically creates a database that never breaks.?
Apple configured and deployed both Mac OS X Server and Xserve RAID for Oracle RAC independent of Rotech?s networks. The setup was completely functional before Rotech migrated its data. ?It is the sort of innovative collaboration between Apple and Oracle that makes our cluster technology work. The solution can scale, it supports our SOA, and it just works,? says Prast.
|
|
varnull
Suspended permanently
|
5. August 2008 @ 00:27 |
Link to this message
|
Actually I also lost interest after a couple of sentences... and WTF is with all the double posting.. you don't look big or clever.. in fact you sound like Jenny Craig trying to get me to join weightwatchers..
Their business models really aren't that successful.. that's why they NEED to use the proven anti-competition tactics time and time again. Anybody can turn a huge profit by using lock-in and proprietary hidden secretive code. It's a fact, and their wriggling and litigation proves it..
I'm sorry to say this but.. If you NEED to use an application for development that ONLY runs on an apple or M$ platform then you obviously can't code for shit.. Get out of the hand holding kintergarten of proprietary applications for proprietary platforms and into the real world of raw platform independent coding.. oh sorry.. see earlier point of not being able to code for shit...
Up until apple Unix was not so much an operating system as a set of agreed standards.. Anybody could build for it without needing anything specific from sco or berkley other than the standards books that they openly published which had details of certain differences in implementation of system calls and the like..
Even Sun went open source a couple of years ago, realising that the future is in allowing everybody to see how it works, and how to make better things for it. That doesn't mean people will not buy their OS.. it just means that they have to keep it up to scratch if they want to have a viable product in the marketplace.
I know more than a few sys-admins who were very glad to be at long last able to download open solaris and see why certain things were a pain for them, and make little changes to suit their business.. It isn't an impediment to sun, in fact it's the opposite as it makes their OS more attractive to those with specific needs.
As for the clone makers.. I had an IBM 8088 pc way back.. it was 5 times the price of a "clone" and performed no better.. If it had been left to IBM we wouldn't be here now on the internet.. we would probably still be at the 286 stage. Remember the Compaq deskpro386? The first time the cloners took the lead. I had one of those as well. It cost less than my IBM true blue 8088.
So what you are saying is "apple have the right by a restrictive EULA to stifle competition and progress".. great.. die along with your dinosaur business model and all those who subscribe to it... Obviously you don't remember the days when M$ were giving their OS away on magazines.. 3.1 it was called, and designed to run on the new Compaq deskpro386... didn't hear IBM making much fuss. End result.. IBM gave up in the desktop and home computing market and went back to business mainframes and large number crunchers.. and they are enshrined in the C language.. if you know any.. the "H" instruction stands for /? the parent company of modern computing and grandfather of IBM....
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 5. August 2008 @ 00:38
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. August 2008 @ 08:23 |
Link to this message
|
Doobedoo, I think I commend your persistance. You are no wimp but you do not know when to quit.
There is a huge difference between being able to run and app and running it for a serious purpose. I have Oracle on my computer. I am not proud! My computer is a PII dog! I do have fair memory and disk space.
Do you work for Rotech or is this the 'poster girl' for the Macs, proving Macs are the 'little engine that could'?
The Rotech app sounds like a serious app. Forgive me if I am not impressed. I have worked in the DC area for many years. Many of the databases I am familiar with have billions of records. I have yet to see one large database run on a Mac platform. There are few non government databases that can compare with big government. Those companies are well known companies that store massive amounts of data. Many of those database are also maintained in the DC area because it is easy to recruit the staff needed to build and maintain the beasts. I work with someone who was the chief DBA for the Marriot reservations database. He was hired to make the move off the mainframe. They didn?t use Macs when he was there.
If the Mac platform was bionic, they would all be using Mac platforms or do you think they are all idiots?
Quote:
Anyone that is so STUPID that they can't even read the requirements for a product before they buy it deserves the misery they get. This is not Apple's fault.
Well I hope they learned their lesson and got rid of their Mac and got a real computer.
Quote:
My point is that there are more people who prefer the easy of Apple to an environment like Linux/Unix.
I think I already stated Apple is for those that easy is the main priority. There is nothing wrong with that. They could care less if Apple costs more, is not very scalable and that the company has hidden agendas ect. My brother is smart and very successful. He doesn't like computers so he got a Mac. He would never think of upgrading hardware. He would just buy a new one. He has more money than expertise. That is fine but many of us have more expertise than money. Macs are not popular in that group.
|
|
doobedoo
Newbie
|
5. August 2008 @ 17:23 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by varnull:
Actually I also lost interest after a couple of sentences... and WTF is with all the double posting.. you don't look big or clever.. in fact you sound like Jenny Craig trying to get me to join weightwatchers..
Their business models really aren't that successful.. that's why they NEED to use the proven anti-competition tactics time and time again. Anybody can turn a huge profit by using lock-in and proprietary hidden secretive code. It's a fact, and their wriggling and litigation proves it..
I'm sorry to say this but.. If you NEED to use an application for development that ONLY runs on an apple or M$ platform then you obviously can't code for shit.. Get out of the hand holding kintergarten of proprietary applications for proprietary platforms and into the real world of raw platform independent coding.. oh sorry.. see earlier point of not being able to code for shit...
Up until apple Unix was not so much an operating system as a set of agreed standards.. Anybody could build for it without needing anything specific from sco or berkley other than the standards books that they openly published which had details of certain differences in implementation of system calls and the like..
Even Sun went open source a couple of years ago, realising that the future is in allowing everybody to see how it works, and how to make better things for it. That doesn't mean people will not buy their OS.. it just means that they have to keep it up to scratch if they want to have a viable product in the marketplace.
I know more than a few sys-admins who were very glad to be at long last able to download open solaris and see why certain things were a pain for them, and make little changes to suit their business.. It isn't an impediment to sun, in fact it's the opposite as it makes their OS more attractive to those with specific needs.
As for the clone makers.. I had an IBM 8088 pc way back.. it was 5 times the price of a "clone" and performed no better.. If it had been left to IBM we wouldn't be here now on the internet.. we would probably still be at the 286 stage. Remember the Compaq deskpro386? The first time the cloners took the lead. I had one of those as well. It cost less than my IBM true blue 8088.
So what you are saying is "apple have the right by a restrictive EULA to stifle competition and progress".. great.. die along with your dinosaur business model and all those who subscribe to it... Obviously you don't remember the days when M$ were giving their OS away on magazines.. 3.1 it was called, and designed to run on the new Compaq deskpro386... didn't hear IBM making much fuss. End result.. IBM gave up in the desktop and home computing market and went back to business mainframes and large number crunchers.. and they are enshrined in the C language.. if you know any.. the "H" instruction stands for /? the parent company of modern computing and grandfather of IBM....
"Actually I also lost interest after a couple of sentences... and WTF is with all the double posting.. you don't look big or clever.. in fact you sound like Jenny Craig trying to get me to join weightwatchers.."
Actually, unlike most of the postings I've read on this blog, I was merely proving that Oracle is available for the Mac using data, not conjecture or snide remarks. I posted twice to prove my point. Otherwise the illiterati on this blog would be able to make blanket statements without supporting their position at all. I, at least, have data to prove mine. You wear your arrogance like a cheap leisure suit; it stinks of moth balls. Jenny Craig, oh brother.
"Their business models really aren't that successful.. that's why they NEED to use the proven anti-competition tactics time and time again. Anybody can turn a huge profit by using lock-in and proprietary hidden secretive code. It's a fact, and their wriggling and litigation proves it.."
This is pure smack. Got any data to substantiate your point? All companies as big as Apple, Microsoft and IBM have to protect themselves because there are always people and companies standing ready to take advantage of them any time they are able. And you're actually saying that Apple and Microsoft do not have proven, successful business models. Man ... I would sure be interested in hearing what you think a successful business model looks like. By the way, the entire business community disagrees with you. Billions in the bank. Doing business in 70 or more countries. In business for more than 30 years. ABILITY TO CHANGE WITH THE TIMES AND TRENDS. I'm sorry, but, in my mind these are real indicators of a successful business model.
The paradigm shift represented by open sourced tools such as Linux is great. I know a number of IT pros that hated NT for many logical reasons and changed their servers to Linux as they were able to do so. Great, I'm all for it. Do you really think this will have any impact on Apple's market. Nope. Two completely different markets. I hope Linux puts Microsoft out of business, but, I don't see that happening and they will not put Apple out of business either. Therefore, yes, I support the EULA. If Apple was my company and I spent my money building the company, hiring the talent, developing the products, copyrights, patents, legal fees and spending more money on all things required by businesses, I would certainly feel entitled to protect the intellectual property which I produced. Hey, do you develop for free? Maybe you should try that for a while. See how well free pays the bills.
"I'm sorry to say this but.. If you NEED to use an application for development that ONLY runs on an apple or M$ platform then you obviously can't code for shit.. Get out of the hand holding kintergarten of proprietary applications for proprietary platforms and into the real world of raw platform independent coding.. oh sorry.. see earlier point of not being able to code for shit..."
I'm sure you have a point, but absent references to anything specific, who knows what you are talking about. The point that I made was that Oracle is available for the Mac and is used in real world appplications, such as the example above, because someone posted a comment that Oracle was not available on the Mac because Oracle is such a hardware intensive environment and would not run on a Mac. Obviously none of you have a clue about X Serve technology, otherwise you would never make such a statement. The second largest credit card processing center in the world is run on a massive X Serve cluster. What do you mean "need to use an application for development that ONLY runs on an Apple and Microsoft" More smack. Proprietary tools are a competitive edge, not a sign of weakness or dependence. And there are one hell of a lot of developers that agree. Have you ever actually even investigated any of the tools available for a Mac. Or are you content with what you know and what you learned a decade or more ago. My earlier post about the DEVCON this year with the largest turnout ever is a good trend indicator. I think you are in the minority on this issue.
"As for the clone makers.. I had an IBM 8088 pc way back.. it was 5 times the price of a "clone" and performed no better.. If it had been left to IBM we wouldn't be here now on the internet.. we would probably still be at the 286 stage. Remember the Compaq deskpro386? The first time the cloners took the lead. I had one of those as well. It cost less than my IBM true blue 8088.
So what you are saying is "apple have the right by a restrictive EULA to stifle competition and progress".. great.. die along with your dinosaur business model and all those who subscribe to it... Obviously you don't remember the days when M$ were giving their OS away on magazines.. 3.1 it was called, and designed to run on the new Compaq deskpro386... didn't hear IBM making much fuss. End result.. IBM gave up in the desktop and home computing market and went back to business mainframes and large number crunchers.. and they are enshrined in the C language.. if you know any.. the "H" instruction stands for /? the parent company of modern computing and grandfather of IBM..."
Okay, I will make one more attempt to address this issue. During Apple's darkest days, they made a very bad decision to license the operating system to clone manufacturers. This decision almost put Apple out of business. The culture of Apple is NOT the same as Microsoft or IBM. They have always done well ONLY when they were in complete control of everything. You may not like it, agree with it, but that's the truth. When Steve came back to Apple, he did three things that essentially saved the company. 1. He ended the clone program. 2. He fired the entire Board of Directors and hired industry giants to take their places and unlike most executives who sign on with a golden parachute which basically means they can't get hurt whether they produce or not, Steve only gave them stock options. This was his way of saying: Fix the company and make it work or you won't get anything. 3. He fired the Newton team, got rid of the Performas and refocused the company on what it does best, which is making great products that Apple can personally guarantee will work as advertised. And yes, this is based on close control of everything. It works. You don't have to like or agree with it and you can certainly choose how you want your computing world to be. But making comparisons to companies that were designed from day one with a dependency on Microsoft's operating system to Apple is at best erroneous.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
doobedoo
Newbie
|
5. August 2008 @ 18:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Mez:
Doobedoo, I think I commend your persistance. You are no wimp but you do not know when to quit.
There is a huge difference between being able to run and app and running it for a serious purpose. I have Oracle on my computer. I am not proud! My computer is a PII dog! I do have fair memory and disk space.
Do you work for Rotech or is this the 'poster girl' for the Macs, proving Macs are the 'little engine that could'?
The Rotech app sounds like a serious app. Forgive me if I am not impressed. I have worked in the DC area for many years. Many of the databases I am familiar with have billions of records. I have yet to see one large database run on a Mac platform. There are few non government databases that can compare with big government. Those companies are well known companies that store massive amounts of data. Many of those database are also maintained in the DC area because it is easy to recruit the staff needed to build and maintain the beasts. I work with someone who was the chief DBA for the Marriot reservations database. He was hired to make the move off the mainframe. They didn?t use Macs when he was there.
If the Mac platform was bionic, they would all be using Mac platforms or do you think they are all idiots?
Quote:
Anyone that is so STUPID that they can't even read the requirements for a product before they buy it deserves the misery they get. This is not Apple's fault.
Well I hope they learned their lesson and got rid of their Mac and got a real computer.
Quote:
My point is that there are more people who prefer the easy of Apple to an environment like Linux/Unix.
I think I already stated Apple is for those that easy is the main priority. There is nothing wrong with that. They could care less if Apple costs more, is not very scalable and that the company has hidden agendas ect. My brother is smart and very successful. He doesn't like computers so he got a Mac. He would never think of upgrading hardware. He would just buy a new one. He has more money than expertise. That is fine but many of us have more expertise than money. Macs are not popular in that group.
"Do you work for Rotech or is this the 'poster girl' for the Macs, proving Macs are the 'little engine that could'?
The Rotech app sounds like a serious app. Forgive me if I am not impressed. I have worked in the DC area for many years. Many of the databases I am familiar with have billions of records. I have yet to see one large database run on a Mac platform. There are few non government databases that can compare with big government. Those companies are well known companies that store massive amounts of data. Many of those database are also maintained in the DC area because it is easy to recruit the staff needed to build and maintain the beasts. I work with someone who was the chief DBA for the Marriot reservations database. He was hired to make the move off the mainframe. They didn?t use Macs when he was there.."
Ahhhh....a federal GSA contractor. My favorite flavor. I worked in the GSA market both in the U.S. and Europe. I think things are a wee bit more complicated than what you are saying. Getting listed on the GSA is everything, otherwise you don't stand a prayer. In the government, it's not bias, it's contracts. None of this has anything to do with Apple not having the technology to stand up against the competition.
I actually spent two years getting Apple listed on a GSA in Europe and sold $millions.
Poster Girl for Mac. I am still chuckling. Great line. Apple's weakest markets are large business and government. So, you win this argument. However, it should also be stated that Apple does little more than give a passing glance to large business and government. This is due to scar tissue they incurred during the late 80s and 90s when they did try to actively pursue these markets. And, it should be emphatically reinforced that this has absolutely nothing to do with Apple's technology abilities, rather the overwhelming issues of selling into large business and government accounts. I've done both.
Interestingly enough, in spite of not really trying to pursue fortune or federal accounts, they are brought in on a regular basis by technologists who understand the power of things like X Serve, and, employees that refuse to accept another Dell. The desktop is always controlled by IT. And IT doesn't want insanely great, they just want something a little newer, updated, maybe a little faster?anything that doesn't pose a dramatic change in the way they do business. That's called job security. Nothing wrong with that, I suppose, and with Microsoft holding dominant market share in the enterprise, it is very difficult for competing technologies to approach accounts in this market. The rule of dominant market share is that once established, most companies will continue to buy what they have because it's what they know and it is easier than having to think about anything new. Apple doesn't have the armies of Corporate or Federal account reps that companies like Microsoft and Sun have. I worked in the enterprise for more years than I care to remember. And it was always one step forward, ten steps back. I would show up for my monthly account call, moi, all alone, to see the Microsoft account team on their weekly visit to the same account. Team, you know A and B sales rep, two engineers and maybe even a product manager to boot. I was a damn good sales rep, but SHIT. Can't fight Tiger Tanks with a B B gun.
But this has nothing to do with Apple's technology. X Serve is a proven solution for any size application you wish to throw at it. The second largest credit card processing center in the world is run on a massive X serve cluster. The U.S. Navy nuclear submarine fleet uses X serves. Don't believe me, please check it out.
Rotech is one of a few substantial installations that Apple has done. Billions of records? Phhht. That's the norm for enterprise class systems. I'm not impressed either.
You know what...here's how you can get in good with your Federal buddies. Get them to switch to X Serve. Apple will help and X serve is completely scalable and has the ability to work with just about anything. Certainly Oracle and certainly anything UNIX. And it will come in at half the price. That'll make you a hero.
|
|
