They are going to be sued into poverty for using the trademark "Mac" in their product, without authorization. Also, re-selling Leopard is against Apple's rules too, unless you are an authorized re-seller. (And no, I'm not talking about selling your copy on eBay, I'm talking about doing it as a business.)

No matter what they think of the EULA, these two items alone will pretty much seal their fate.

It's not about anti-trust laws, it's about a legal license to distribute OSX. Which currently is NOT given to ANYONE! It's Apple's product so Apple has the legal rights to do as it pleases with it. What a bunch of IDIOT MORONS!!

$400 for an ugly but functioning mac mini clone, not the greatest deal on earth

...so when comparing apples to apples ran me up over $800 or 2x the supposed 'list' price & $1500+ for a quad... Admittedly it would be nice to have a lower priced fuller featured box available however the industrial design of Apple hardware is to my knowledge unequalled & should also be worth something...

ps2 emulators NO it's not about emulators Peter. Emulating gameconsole software on PC's is exactly the same and is practiced for years now. Connectix's won in court over a PS2 emulator for the Mac and Sony had to buy the company to stop them. The ULA is not the the law, it only represents the companies' vision on the law. Apple has the right to protect its intellectual property and license it as they see fit. There is no emulation when it comes to loading a licensed copy of OSX period!

The EFI emulator and some additional drivers just make it compatible with osX and this is most certainly not illegal. Selling it preinstalled with osX (and a backup disk) is something different, the courts will have to decide on this.

The decision is for Apple to make as it belongs to Apple. This isn't emulation, this is Apple's property that needs to be licensed to be distributed period!

Mac is also copyrighted by Apple. There's another issue that will have them shutdown very soon BEFORE THEY SHIP ANYTHING.

This will get laughed out of court even more heartily than Bill O'Lielly's attempt to sue Al Franken.

I pity the bozo lawyer they find to take this case on. Hope they don't pay him in OpenMacs.

How about "Imagine, if the record industry and followed EMI ad dropped DRM, so said unDRMed music that you purchase in iTunes store will work on non Apple hardware" Oh, well, thats greedy record executives for you.

Or, how about "Imagine if Apple licensed Fairplay for free to any and all hardware and software developers so that music bought on iTunes could be played with non apple hardware or software". Oh well, that's greedy Apple for you.

A reminder on Steve Jobs thoughts on DRM in case you forgot: http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/

Bear in mind DRM is only as restrictive as the amount of software that runs it. There's DRM on DVDs, but there's a lot of software and hardware that can play DVDs (not counting those running DeCSS). Yet Apple has specifically decided to keep FairPlay close to the vest so they can make sure they keep their customers locked into their products.

But I'm sure you'll blame Apple's restrictions on the RIAA and not Apple.

laws, it's about a legal license to distribute OSX. Which currently is NOT given to ANYONE! It's Apple's product so Apple has the legal rights to do as it pleases with it. What a bunch of IDIOT MORONS!!

Yeah. But all they have to do to get around that is not sell it with OS X. Just sell the computer as mac compatible. Then watch as Apple tries to update Leopard to make it incompatible, and Psystar bypassing it again...

Mac is also copyrighted by Apple. There's another issue that will have them shutdown very soon BEFORE THEY SHIP ANYTHING.

No, it won't force a shutdown, they, at worst, would have to change their name. You can't force a shutdown of a company for misusing a trademark. Maybe they'd need to pay a fine. But it would take a while for all that to surf through the courts.

Oh, and I would think that "Mac" would be trademarked, not copyrighted.

went to the web site. I just see them calling it Open Computer, not OpenMac. Not sure if they changed the name or it was misreported, but there goes the trademark suits!

They changed the name, I checked google cache yesterday when the site was down.

Apple is screwed on this one, the only option I see for them is to buy the company or to continue legal actions until the company is broke or to hire a bomber.

Apple wont be able to stop the selling of the computers as long as the computers do not come with OS X. If they sell the computers as OS X compatible only there is nothing Apple can do. The people who would be breaking the EULA will be the buyers who then install OS X on them.

It would be in Apples best interest to sell them a copy of OS X that is allowed to be run on those machines to get some money out of it. Otherwise people who buy those computers will prob just download OS X anyways and Apple gets nothing.

Choice is good.

Apple's legal rights are not as sweeping as some of you imagine. If I buy a mac with OS X installed, and I later upgrade my machine, even if the upgrade including swapping every bit of hardware so none of the original hardware still exists, that is perfectly fine.

That's why I specifically stated "DRMed". Many Apple products are compatible with the rest of the world, my point is that not all of Apple stuff have to share this habit.

10.5(.2?) might run on it but that's were it'll end. Apple will add stricter hardware checks to the next OS update and that'll be the end of the road for this venture.

Apple can do one of two things: - put better hardware checking into MacOS X - this will just mean you will have to wait longer for updated in order for the hackers to defeat it - charge $500 or more for MacOS X, but offer cheap upgrades for owners of Apple Macs. We all know that Apple uses hardware profits to subsidize MacOS X development. People who hack MacOS X to run on PCs are robbing Apple of that subsidy.

The problem with the former is that it is a cat and mouse game. The problem with the latter is that it implies Apple's approval of running it on non-Apple hardware.

cheap "OS X-compatible" box. You won't get any support from Apple. Period. You better be comfy 'rolling your own'.

I feel like offering OS X was just their way of getting press for a Mac-compatible PC. I guess it worked, we're all talking about it. All they would have to do to make this legal, seems to me, is not offer to sell OS X or install it (waaaaaaay illegal w/o permission from Apple) and quit using the Mac/Apple trademarks.

At that point, you're just selling a PC but one upon which the buyer could install OS X, thereby violating the EULA (which likely would go unprosecuted).

However there's nothing stopping Apple from suing these guys out of existence, wouldn't be the first time lawyers were used to bully someone to achieve a desired result regardless of the legal merits of each side of the argument.

I think it's really important to note yet again that you would get NO support from Apple for this box, so really this is mainly for geeks and not everyday users. Also it's really not that powerful, as noted elsewhere it's the equiv. of a Mac mini, but in a tower. Not exactly impressive.

...all this discussion has gotten me thinking about whether I could build a Mac-compatible tower since I can't afford a Mac Pro right now...

I feel mixed about this situation. While I would love to see a lower priced mid tower from Apple, I doubt I would ever really touch one of these Open Computers. I can only imagine the amount of headaches buyers of this will get with regards to future updates, etc. For the curious hackers and tinkerers, this may be a good option, but the average buyer will not even know about these guys.

That said, what's with the 4th grade level analogies being pushed by this employee? Sounds like a 'did too!' 'did not!' tirade or something. I'm also bothered by the markup comment he made. I hate it when people completely ignore the cost of R&D and special components when arguing that Macs have XX% markup. Yes, they are a little more expensive, but this cheapo box their attempting to sell comes with almost nothing for that $399 price, so what are they talking about? As others have noted, to get a comparable machine, it will cost you quite a bit more than 400 clams. At that point, a cheap clone that borders on illegal may not be so tempting. Just spend a little more and get something you know is compatible and well supported.

It will be interesting to see how Apple handles this. They have one other possible option not mentioned by other posters- Do nothing. Really, what does Apple have to fear? This Open Comp will remain a small product that will barely hurt them. Apple is well established at this point in the public mindshare, so I doubt they will be too concerned. Still, they will likely take some action if only because doing nothing may open too many doors for other clone makers to step in and follow suit. Then they would have trouble.

The reason MAC is successful is because it is an INTEGRATION of hardware and software. They are NOT separate from one another.

Im sure we all know people who have a "modified" PC running OSX. But is that really the machine you want to trust making movies on, doing graphics, or even writing in Word? Of course not, it's a novelty like a dog that can walk on it's hind legs.

Besides - anyone who want a MAC for this price can buy a mini - and actually get a MAC.

Doofuses.

The reason MAC is successful is because it is an INTEGRATION of hardware and software. They are NOT separate from one another.

Im sure we all know people who have a "modified" PC running OSX. But is that really the machine you want to trust making movies on, doing graphics, or even writing in Word? Of course not, it's a novelty like a dog that can walk on it's hind legs.

Why not? Is Apple's OS so unstable and troubled that it would become completely unusable with a piece of non-standard hardware? I thought it was supposed to be superior. Apparently you can't even run Word without having the OS blue-screen on you.

Besides - anyone who want a MAC for this price can buy a mini - and actually get a MAC.

Yeah, but with an Open Computer, you might actually get a computer you can modify with additional capabilities. Oh, and you still have to buy a keyboard and mouse for that mini.

Doofuses.

Rob, one thing you should learn before calling other Doofuses. It's Mac, not MAC. Mac users hate it when you PC-lovers call it MAC.

I can vividly remember the Mac Clones of the past. Power Computing and Daystar. They sucked horribly. There were so many "mother board" issues that we gave up after the 4th computer they swapped us to try to get one that would work for longer than a couple of days. And THAT was with Apple Approved Designs. I just can't imagine these things being any kind of reliable.

If you think these clones are a good idea, Welcome to the world of Windows®.

that is exactly why (among other reasons) it would be idiotic to license OS X for non-Apple computers, despite the hooting and hollering some ignorant folks make about how Jobs should do just that.

No matter how many disclaimers you put on it, people are going to have issues running OS X on a non-Apple box. They will complain, complain, complain, completely disregarding the disclaimers.

People will hear these complaints and, without knowing whether the source(s) of these complaints were trying to run OS X on an Apple-approved box or one that didn't have a chance in h*** of running it successfully, repeat and amplify these complaints about OS X, which would tarnish Apple's reputation.

PC fanboys and columnists with axes to grind would use these instances of OS X not working well on non-Apple boxes to spread disinformation about Apple in order to further their pro-Win agenda.

Here's a useful comparison/metaphor: someone with sufficient mechanical knowledge and a machine shop could probably assemble their own car for far less than it would take Toyota to build a roughly similar one. That doesn't mean it's a wise idea to do so; a car is worth more than the sum of the mechanical parts it took to put them together.

I would like some of those/you cheap b******* out there who think a computer is only worth the sum of its component costs, to try going to your auto mechanic with the parts needed to fix your car and ask him to put them in for free. Or, go to McDonald's with some meat, lettuce, cheese and a bun and ask them to make you a Quarter-Pounder for free. I mean, you bought all the parts/ingredients already, right? And only idiots pay more than the cost of what it takes to make the final product, right?

If Apple can run Windows on a Mac, then for "fair" competition I see no reason why Mac Os X should not be licensed and able to run on non-Mac hardware.

Just imagine ... if they actually won. (Nearly impossible) but what if?

That would have the potential to change the industry right now.

"I see no reason why Mac Os X should not be licensed and able to run on non-Mac hardware."

Um, because it's not designed to.

You can run OS X on non-Mac hardware all you want, just like you can put kerosene in your car's gas tank.

However, you can't go running to Apple for support if you do so, just like running your car on kerosene will immediately void your warranty. You are demanding that Apple re-engineer OS X so that its 'car' will run on 'kerosene'. That's a silly argument.

Oh please, everyone's talking about how Apple won't support you. How many OS users actually get support from Apple to begin with. If you're lucky, you might live close to an apple store. But most people just deal with their problems, they don't go crying to Apple (they just figure they, the user, must be doing something wrong).

PC fanboys and columnists with axes to grind would use these instances of OS X not working well on non-Apple boxes to spread disinformation about Apple in order to further their pro-Win agenda.

I guess these people are completely different from the Mac fanboys and columnists with axes to grind against MS, and use every instance of bad MS press against them?

I can vividly remember the Mac Clones of the past. Power Computing and Daystar. They sucked horribly. There were so many "mother board" issues that we gave up after the 4th computer they swapped us to try to get one that would work for longer than a couple of days. And THAT was with Apple Approved Designs. I just can't imagine these things being any kind of reliable.

Well, those weren't just apple approved designs. IIRC, they had to use Apple motherboards to start with.

And a lot of people swore by PowerComputing and the other cloners (motorola was another). Just because you had a bad experience, doesn't mean they were overall bad. h***, if that was the case, we'd be talking about Apple's crappy computers, what with my bad experiences with my iBook, let alone my G5.

I guess these people are completely different from the Mac fanboys and columnists with axes to grind against MS, and use every instance of bad MS press against them?

silly testudo. There is an enormous difference between using FACTS to support your argument, and twisting facts into distortions and lies to support your argument.

Do you ever tire of getting things wrong?

wow, when I wrote, "do you ever tire of getting things wrong," I had not yet read the above comment regarding Apple's support.

I should have phrased it like this: "do you ever tire of talking out your a**? doesn't that give you hemorrhoids or something?"

Apple support is world-class, including AppleCare and the Apple Store. I've twice DROPPED my iBook while it was under AppleCare warranty and they fixed it, no questions asked. I am far from the only person to have that experience. AppleCare is simply amazing.

" Just because you had a bad experience, doesn't mean they were overall bad."

and then testudo goes on to bash Apple's support.

this company will lose in court but probably gain tons of exposure in the process. Methinks there is an ulterior motive at work here.

There is no motive here. It's really simple. An OS should be licensed to run on any system. Now, I love Apple, and have always had a respect for them, but all of this bashing of Microsoft for being a monopoly is unsolicited. The fact of the matter is that Apple needs to license their OS to run on other systems, and they need to support other hardware much like Microsoft does. That is the only "fair" alternative if we're going to discuss monopolies.

Maybe if Apple gets their asses handed to them in this we can finaly rely on OTHER companies to provide computers that are actually upgradeable video card wise, and not have to rely on a whole new machine revision to be able to use the latest video cards. These cards could be easily made compatible, but are locked out by Apple now. you cant upgrade s*** on a mac accept the ram and hard drives without doing too many tricks to get around apples pompous lock-outs and backwards tricks. If they were as upgradeable as PC's Apple would have an easier time keeping up because people would actually get a better value through upgradability. Why cant I buy a mac with NO video card or hard drive or ram so I can use my own? Why can't I choose from the many video cards available from vendors? Because Apple wouldnt get their ridiculous markup, THATS WHY. They inflate their products prices becuase they are the best,and they know it. But this "millions of configurations" c*** is useless if those configurations dont give you REAL choices and value. Choose from our 2 video cards and ridiculously sized 250gb and up hard drives! we know you probably only need an 80 gb drive but EVERYONE needs a quarter terabyte these days right?of course?! And dont worry about the fact that we can make all of ati's/nvidias cards work in any G5 or intel mac, but we dont so you are forced to get the latest machine to use it even though the hardware is EXACTLY compatible. F***** idiots

What's up with climacs? Is that normal behaviour? The reponses to testudo seem a bit uncallled for.

Had a thought: Apple didn't do anything to stop hackintosh community from having their fun. Intel's trusted module can't be used as an effective copy protection measure, so the real challenges were kexts for incompatible hardware.

Now when Psystar turned hackintosh into a business model things may change. Apple might introduce protection mechanism into Mac OS X, that of course could be hacked, but hacking effort would have to increase in many times. This may spell the end of hackintosh community golden days.

Connectix had a PS2 emulator they sold? sounds great... anyone have a link to that completely fictitious piece of software that has been referenced several times?

@miniryu who said:

"If one happens to be in the market for a cheap Apple computer (I'm thinking low income families), now would be the time to grab the clone before it gets pulled from the market. Because it will get pulled."

Then why be so retarded if you are looking for a "cheap" computer buy a PC from Dell, at a retail, etc...

Why buy from a company that won't exist in 5 days, won't ship any units and won't give any warranty support?

If you need a cheap 'computer', go buy a freaking PC. Apple, like BMW's (in contrast to a Toyota Corolla) are the 'premium' of the computer world.

Some people never learn...

>>If you need a cheap 'computer', go buy a freaking PC. Apple, like BMW's (in contrast to a Toyota Corolla) are the 'premium' of the computer world. >>

Or pick up one from eBay. Significant savings are to be had by purchasing a Mac thats a year or two old.

I haven't been able to find a use-by-date on any of the Macs I've bought from eBay. This leads me to believe they'll last for several more years ; )

1. "Windows" hardware belonged to IBM. IBM released that for development so anyone could sell it.

2.Apple products are rightly sold at a higher premium and are usable for far long with software than PCs. Well worth the price in my opinion. The only ones who don't think so are PC trolls.

3. There was a fantastic Mac clone maker. Apple bought them out upon Steve Jobs coming back as CEO. Apple can just buy these guys out.

this company is a hoax.

srsly. get a clue. it's Go-L all over again.