toggle

AAPL Stock: 105.22 ( + 0.39 )

Printed from http://www.macnn.com

Psystar to begin licensing Mac OS X virtualization

updated 03:45 pm EDT, Mon October 5, 2009

Likely to draw fire from Apple

Mac cloner Psystar has announced a new OEM licensing program, designed to spread the company's virtualization software. Subscribers to the program gain access to the company's Darwin Universal Boot Loader (DUBL), which allows users to install Mac OS X on a PC, instead of just an Apple-branded Mac. Users can in fact have up to six operating systems on a computer, but hardware certified by Psystar must at least have Linux, Windows Vista or Windows 7 pre-installed.

The program is likely to attract extra criticism from Apple, which is already involved in multiple lawsuits relating to Leopard and Snow Leopard. At the heart of concerns is Apple's end-user agreement for Mac OS X, which currently forbids people from installing the software on third-party computers. Psystar accuses Apple of abusing copyright, and has been selling PCs with Mac OS X installed for some time.

The first of the legal disputes, involving Leopard, is set to go to trial on January 10th. Psystar has not published details on the timing or costs of the licensing program.




by MacNN Staff

toggle

Comments

  1. zimbardo

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +5

    Why can't they kill it?

    How many ways can one company find to violate Apple's licensing agreement and get away with it? Clearly, Psystar will lose in the long-run, so they must be spending all this money to satisfy some kind of sick sadistic thrill.

    (Which may be why the fine print of the license agreement is so hard for them to read.)

    Comment buried. Show
  1. lamewing

    Joined: Dec 1969

    -11

    Great news...

    Where can I buy a copy. :)

    Seriously. The BS Apple uses to lock folks out of using their OS just because people don't want to buy their hardware is silly - maybe we have hardware that works just fine. My wife bought a Mac Mini last month, but my hand-built PC works flawlessly and I have no desire so give it up and buy a new system.

    This protectionist BS also applies to locking out other mp3 players from using iTunes (directly). Apple gives out the API so that other companies can make software that allows for ease of transfer to non-Apple mp3 players (Sony's Content Transfer is and example. Works perfectly with drag/drop from iTunes). Why not just allow my Sony Walkman to access iTunes directly just like my iPhone and iPod Photo do? This would bring in many more folks to the iTunes environment, especially since the U.S. store sells DRM-free music. They may not sell an iPod (again, not everyone wants or needs a new player), but they sure as h*** will likely sell songs to more people. iTunes becomes a "gateway drug" and there is a better chance that next time they will buy an iPod....

    It is incredible that some folks cannot see beyond the short term...

  1. sodajerk

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +5

    Get Real

    Sounds like someone has a case of the Mondays

  1. lamewing

    Joined: Dec 1969

    -8

    Pardon me?

    What part of my post did not make sense to you? That was not sarcasm or a spur-of-the-moment comment due to today being Monday.

  1. jpellino

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +6

    Wishful thinking...

    Apple is a company that sells integrated solutions - their choice. Apple has no obligation to make their software work on the computer of your choice. They have a rather large body of law supporting that view. If that makes you cross, so be it. Apple has no obligation to supply native support for competing music hardware. It's unfortunate that you find that offensive, but if that status quo is so onerous, then why are iPods continuing to sell like rosary beads on judgement day?

    You, by the way, can put together whatever hackintosh you wish, you don't need Psystar, and you'll likely never hear from Apple about it. As long as you don't resell your creation as a retail product. And as long as you don't stroll into a Genius Bar and ask for support. Which, being a roll-yer-own kind of guy, you won't need to do. You could have Mac OS X running on your perfectly good PC by sundown tomorrow and have no further need to carp.

    I'd bet half my lunch you don't hold a patent or a copyright.

  1. Jonathan-Tanya

    Joined: Dec 1969

    -8

    @jpellino

    copyright is pretty much automatic for anything that you create....your guess is almost certainly wrong, he does hold a copyright (whether he knows it or not).

    But beyond the mere fact that you don't understand the things that you, nevertheless, feel free to pontificate on...

    Nobody was suggesting Apple was 'obligated' or supply native support for other hardware.

    Again, its Psystar providing the support for that, its Apple trying to ban a practice that others have created, for which they provide no support themselves.

    I mean, try again, your whole argument just falls on its face.

  1. lamewing

    Joined: Dec 1969

    -9

    @jpellino

    I have worked for a law firm for 5 years and my brother is a lawyer. I am aware that Apple is not obligated to provide access to their softwares, but that does not change the fact that their protectionist mentality is only cutting off opportunities for sales and new customers

    I know how to install OSX on my PC. I did it as an experiment about 6 months ago. It works, but I have no interest in running an unsupported OS. I would much rather give my hard earned money to Apple for a copy of their OS that I can install legally on my PC. It is not like our family doesn't use Apple products alongside our PCs. Heck, I have been using Apple products since my first Apple IIc back in the mid 80's. I simply cannot fathom why they choose to intentionally limit their own sales. Apple doesn't even need to provide support for OSX on PCs (like Windows has much support for the average user), just allow it to be installed on non-Apple machines.

    The only reason iPods are selling like hotcakes is because of a marketing error that Sony made when the digital music scene was first coming online. Sony chose to act like a proverbial dinosaur and not adapt quickly enough to the changing market. Don't forget the Walkman name brand was the leader for over 20+ years. Hubris cost Sony its #1 spot in the hearts and minds of their customers. The same thing could easily happen to Apple.

    The second reason the iPods are selling so well is because Apple finally realized that if they wanted to make the iPod a ubiquitous product, they had to support the Windows market. I had the original 5GB iPod back when there was no Windows support. We PC users had to rely on third party (free and purchased) software to load music on our iPods.

    The same thing could happen with Apple if they allowed the installation of OSX on PCs and allowed non-Apple DAP/PMPs to sync with iTunes. MORE people would understand the ease of use of OSX and that would allow OSX to spread to consumers who otherwise would not give their money to Apple. Many would not buy Apple hardware when they needed to upgrade, but the market is huge and if Apple could tap just a small percentage of users who need new systems, they could increase their marketshare significantly...just as many folks chose to buy iPods after iTunes was release to the PC world.

    All you need to do is give people a taste of what it is like....versus silly switcher (and the humorous PC/Mac) commercials. It is hard for people to switch when the price to even consider switching is, at a minimum, several hundred dollars more than a comparable PC. Tell folks that OSX is better and that they are idiots for not using it just makes Apple customers seem like elitists (whether it is true or not).

  1. Mr. Strat

    Joined: Dec 1969

    +1

    Please, Steve, put these asswipes away

    What is with these Psystar jag-offs? I wish the Apple legal machine would put them away once and for all.

    And to those of you pissing and moaning about lack of non-iPod/iPhone support with iTunes. Go s**** yourselves. Apple developed iTunes for their products. If you don't like it, go buy a crappy Zune or Sansa.

  1. lamewing

    Joined: Dec 1969

    -6

    @jpellino

    errr...

    It makes them seem like elitists (whether it is true or not). I find the juxtaposition of OSX and the iPod to very interesting. The iPod has the market (especially in the West) for DAP/PMPs but hold a tiny portion of the market in regards to computer systems. I guess that Apple simply doesn't want to gain market share that badly and is instead happy to coast along on the coattails of the iPod. I don't know how much longer this can last as the iPod's most recent iteration was rather anemic. We are to the point where iPods are running out of "revolutionary" upgrades and instead are relying on "evolutionary" ones....ie. memory upgrades and gimmicky cameras. Let us hope that Apple can keep the products fresh since they have no serious interest in gaining a sizable share of the PC market.

  1. testudo

    Joined: Dec 1969

    -5

    Re: @jpellino

    We are to the point where iPods are running out of "revolutionary" upgrades and instead are relying on "evolutionary" ones....ie. memory upgrades and gimmicky cameras. Let us hope that Apple can keep the products fresh since they have no serious interest in gaining a sizable share of the PC market.

    That's why Apple's going to completely transform the tablet market with their new Apple tablet and get out of the mp3 player market altogether!


    The iPod has the market (especially in the West) for DAP/PMPs but hold a tiny portion of the market in regards to computer systems. I guess that Apple simply doesn't want to gain market share that badly and is instead happy to coast along on the coattails of the iPod.

    Apple doesn't care about computers anymore. They're moving away from them (and if history is any indication, they'll just stop making macs and basically tell you need to start using their iTablet to do all your work - computers are so last century!).

    But keep in mind one thing. Where is Apple pushing their resources? iPods and iPhones. What do these products give Apple that Macs don't? Control, plain and simple. Where Apple lets you place other music and some video on your iPods, they really want you to buy everything from them. And, now with the AppStore, you literally HAVE to buy everything from them. They're working on a completely vertical market where they can suck people in and keep them there (thus why you they still have DRM on their videos, that's where the real money is nowadays, and they don't want you finding any other device that might have better playback).

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

Sound Blaster Roar Bluetooth speaker

There could very well be a new king of the hill for Bluetooth speakers, with Sound Blaster's recent entry into the marketplace. Bring ...

Kenu Airframe Plus

Simple, stylish and effective, the Kenu Airframe + portable car mount is the latest addition to Kenu's lineup. Released earlier this ...

Plantronics Rig Surround 7.1 headset

Trying to capture the true soundscape of video games can be a daunting task. Looking to surround-sound home theater options, users hav ...

toggle

Most Commented