Psystar Back in the Fight Against Apple

[Guest]

The real issue here is Apple makes money on the hardware, not the operating system. Microsoft makes money on the operating system, not the hardware. Forcing people to use only your hardware seems like a monopoly to me. The only reason people do not go after Apple, is they only account for a small portion of the computer industry. Plus they were used for mostly graphics, video, music editing. So technically they had only a few purposes. Now that people are trying to push them to be more main stream, you have to allow them to be open to other machines. It does not work both ways. People go on about how the hardware is so great, its not different than a pc people. Last I checked if I so desired I could go buy and intel processor. I can also buy a Foxconnn Mobo. And gee look at that I can go buy the same brand of ram that mac's use. And I think if I look closely enough I can buy the same hard drive too. Wow and I can buy a case of my choice, and all for less than a mac.
But yes all the companies out there make crap products, because they are not branded with the apple logo. So all you mac lovers out there, there is nothing special about the hardware. Yes if you do graphics, music, video editing, a mac beats a pc hands down. But for everyday computer stuff pc beats mac hands down. When a mac can do as much as a pc, be used on any hardware you choose, and when they have as many programs as pc does, than MAC can be compared to pc.
But mac will never do that, if they were that open they would put themselves out of business. They would have a lot more problems than windows.

 

[Guest]

Houndsteeth: Claiming that Mac is superior from a developers standpoint is laughable at best. 99% of all cross-platform applications for Windows and OSX all have various bugs and far worse performance(typically half as fast) on OSX. That's why you don't see anybody benchmarking the same application cross-platform, Apple wouldn't have it. There is no API superiority without any real-world application performance to back it up. Tom's should roundup a huge(re: not cherrypicking) selection of cross-platform apps, and then benchmark them on identical Mac and PC hardware, it would be a blood-bath...

 

[gpj]

[citation][nom]jw_37[/nom]Hey hypocrites, remember when MS was sued because they strong armed PC manufacturers like Dell, HP, etc to sell only Windows?[/citation]

There is a big difference between manipulating the market and telling people what they can do with software they legally bought. It's like MS selling you Office and saying you can't share any of the documents you create with friends unless they are using Office as well. How would you like that?

 

[belardo]

[citation][nom]r0x0r[/nom]I find it odd how people say Macs have better hardware than PC's when it's the same hardware as PC's... but by definition Mac's ARE PC's...I need an aspirin (I assume better hardware means better case, seeing as the silicon inside is the same).[/citation]

Not so. Yes they both have Intel Core2 CPUs, GeForce cards, memory, etc whatever. But the components for the motherboard, how the case is constructed, the quality of the keyboard, all play a part on how much the computer cost to make and the value for its price.

Hence a Core2 Motherboard can cost as little as $40 and as high as 300 (used to be $400+ but i7 replaced the top end)

Compare a $400 Compaq to a $1000 Thinkpad, there is a difference in quality, performance and longevity.

 

[compulsionnra]

Good for them. Stand up to apple and their crap. Imagine the outcry is MS said you couldn't install windows 7 on non HP, dell, etc... computers. This is the same thing. If someone wants to make a hack-in-tosh whether it be a company or one person it is their right. While I don't really like OS X myself, I think the following is fair. If a user really wants OS X because it's supposed to be quick, and they are smart enough to build a hack-in-tosh to avoid Apple's terrible rip-off prices... more power to them.