Psystar wants a summary judgment because if they go to trial and Apple wins, Apple could be awarded some pretty hefty damages, in the millions. If a judge decides it, there won't likely be any huge monetary damages.
Apple wants a summary judgement because they have the law behind them. The system is pretty much set up to protect people who own the rights to something.
If Psystar were to win, that would mean any operating system, including those inside of consoles like the Xbox or Wii or Playstation or even an OS inside a freaking camera, would be available for anyone to install on a competing product. No judge is going to let such insanity happen.
No company who bother to develop anything if they were forced to hand it over to a competitor.
Even if a judge ruled in favor of Psystar, it would likely get reversed on appeal.
@clak: "If Psystar were to win, that would mean any operating system, including those inside of consoles like the Xbox or Wii or Playstation or even an OS inside a freaking camera, would be available for anyone to install on a competing product."
Only if the company sells the OS as a separate product. Which neither MS, Nintendo, Sony, or any camera manufacturer does.
@HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H.:
There is no indication in the court documents I've seen that there be a stipulation that the OS be sold separately. So no, if Psystar were to win, that would be exactly what would happen.
@HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H.: Apple doesn't actually sell their operating system separately. What they DO do is sell UPGRADE licenses. They DON'T sell full licenses.
@JMS3072: Somebody should tell Apple that. There's no stipulation in their license agreement that says you must own a previous version of Mac OS to buy any particular version of OSX.
I'm not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, I know that Apple is a closed system and that they market themselves as a hardware company making most their profit on the hardware, not the OS and that a competitor running their OS might steal market share from them. On the other hand, there are many people who want a Mac, who can't afford to buy one, and who don't have the know how to make a hackintosh.
... come on, it's not THAT complicated to hackintosh these days! there was a time when obscure hardware combinations were a crapshoot, but there's literally lists of setups one can buy that are pretty straightforward in hackintoshing.
personally, i dont find the Mac OS as appealing as it once was compared to Windows. it used to be cut and dry, windows was a pain and mac seemed to work without any fuss. that's no longer true. and i dont think i'll ever get over the single button mouse. too many years of working on windows machines has atrophied the mac skills i grew up with. i can no longer fix a mac when something is misconfigured. they've changed so much and well, i go on, so i'll leave it at that.
In every city I go to, Sprint beats out AT&T hands down. In Austin, where I live, I have dropped 1 call in 2 months with my Palm Pre. With my iPhone, I literally dropped about 1/2 my calls. HALF. AT&T is the worst carrier I've been with by far, and I've been with them all.
No, my "coverage" sucks, therefore the VZW network isn't "reliable". I get a signal, i'm in a suburb of Nashville, and my reception is spotty at best at home. I can't "rely" on my VZW service to make an emergency call, or even check my voicemail. Good thing I'm moving soon.
Ok, how about this AT&T:
Verizon (and hell, Sprint too for that matter) is consistently faster everywhere I go. Your 3G coverage is spotty, whereas my Verizon and Sprint phones are always in EV-DO coverage. The closest AT&T 3G area for me is Chattanooga, and the speeds I'm getting there on your network are nearly identical (even worse in some cases) than I get on Sprint or Verizon.
But whatever though. You can keep arguing that you don't suck ass. It's up to you.
In the future there will be no such thing as minutes for cell phones. Every single plan will be unlimited data/minutes/texting/pix/flix whatever, and you'll pay one fee every month. Guarantee it. The natural progression of cell phone technology is going to force this to happen, because in the future there will be no such thing as the RAZR.
@njso18: It's the exact event that all the carriers want to delay for as long as possible. Eventually, the carriers will just be pipes for data--it's already starting with Google Voice being more popular.
Until Verizon (my provider) gets an IPhone/Palm Pre-class device, there claims won't make a lot of difference in the market. People want the coolest stuff, from a human interface standpoint, even if there are holes in the service.
Now, an IPhone running on Verizon's network? That'll rock if/when it happens.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/09/09
Apple wants a summary judgement because they have the law behind them. The system is pretty much set up to protect people who own the rights to something.
If Psystar were to win, that would mean any operating system, including those inside of consoles like the Xbox or Wii or Playstation or even an OS inside a freaking camera, would be available for anyone to install on a competing product. No judge is going to let such insanity happen.
No company who bother to develop anything if they were forced to hand it over to a competitor.
Even if a judge ruled in favor of Psystar, it would likely get reversed on appeal.
10/09/09
Only if the company sells the OS as a separate product. Which neither MS, Nintendo, Sony, or any camera manufacturer does.
10/09/09
There is no indication in the court documents I've seen that there be a stipulation that the OS be sold separately. So no, if Psystar were to win, that would be exactly what would happen.
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/10/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
Can you wear this dress while transcribing?
10/09/09
10/09/09
@Jrsy Devil's Bright Idea®:
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
... come on, it's not THAT complicated to hackintosh these days! there was a time when obscure hardware combinations were a crapshoot, but there's literally lists of setups one can buy that are pretty straightforward in hackintoshing.
personally, i dont find the Mac OS as appealing as it once was compared to Windows. it used to be cut and dry, windows was a pain and mac seemed to work without any fuss. that's no longer true. and i dont think i'll ever get over the single button mouse. too many years of working on windows machines has atrophied the mac skills i grew up with. i can no longer fix a mac when something is misconfigured. they've changed so much and well, i go on, so i'll leave it at that.
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
When you do have a signal... is it reliable? THAT's the question.
I have ATT, and their connection drops from 3G to Edge in my office without even moving about....
07/28/09
No, my "coverage" sucks, therefore the VZW network isn't "reliable". I get a signal, i'm in a suburb of Nashville, and my reception is spotty at best at home. I can't "rely" on my VZW service to make an emergency call, or even check my voicemail. Good thing I'm moving soon.
07/28/09
Verizon (and hell, Sprint too for that matter) is consistently faster everywhere I go. Your 3G coverage is spotty, whereas my Verizon and Sprint phones are always in EV-DO coverage. The closest AT&T 3G area for me is Chattanooga, and the speeds I'm getting there on your network are nearly identical (even worse in some cases) than I get on Sprint or Verizon.
But whatever though. You can keep arguing that you don't suck ass. It's up to you.
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
07/27/09
07/28/09
07/27/09
Now, an IPhone running on Verizon's network? That'll rock if/when it happens.
07/28/09
QFT. All the Time I see Verizon coming out with new ENV's and Chocolates and phones intended for tweens it makes me rage inside. :
07/27/09
07/27/09
07/28/09
07/28/09
Welcome to the US Justice System.
07/27/09
See? I can do it too!
07/27/09
AT&T: Nuh uh it isnt, that's preposterous
Verizon: It's not my fault your too quick, if you know what I mean.
AT&T: Screw you Verizon you may be bigger and more reliable, but I get to screw Apple customers every-single-day.
07/27/09
07/28/09