Cheap Mac clone draws angry response
Summary: Florida-based Psystar, the company advertising a Mac-compatible system, has attracted criticism from the hackers who created the underlying software.
Aside from the legal ramifications of selling "white-box" systems running Apple's Mac OS X, questions have arisen over the exact nature of Psystar, the firm advertising the systems; and even whether it exists.
As of Thursday afternoon, Psystar appears to be a small operation that has only recently established a Web presence, and which is struggling to cope with the sudden interest aroused by its Mac clone. The product's name has changed over the past week, from Open Mac to Open Computer. Moreover, the company's postal address has changed several times over the past week.
In various published reports, Psystar has explained this is due to a genuine change of address followed by one or several typographical errors on the Web site's "contact" page.
Psystar's e-commerce site has suffered outages, and while it is currently functioning, users have noticed some anomalies--at one point, for instance, the site required users to submit a credit-card number, but then would accept only PayPal payments.
Psystar released a statement Thursday claiming that it was dropped by its merchant gateway, Powerpay, due to the sudden demand for its Open Computer. Psystar is now using Paypal to process payments until it can find a high-volume replacement.
Update: Tom Krazit from News.com reported: "Louisa Deluca, vice president of loss prevention for Powerpay, said on Thursday that her company dropped Psystar because it violated the terms of its agreement with Powerpay. She declined to cite specific violations, but said "there are plenty of reasons why we shut the account off. We did not know that's what he was selling, we learned that yesterday.""
The Open Computer's basic model, at $399, is advertised as featuring a 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo CPU, 2GB of DDR 2 memory, a 250GB hard disk drive, multi-format DVD writer and integrated graphics. Buying a copy of Leopard adds $155 to the price. This compares to $599 for the Mac Mini, Apple's lowest-cost model, which features less powerful hardware.
Apple allowed a handful of companies to manufacture Mac clones in the mid-1990s, but Steve Jobs put an end to the practice when he resumed his chief executive duties in 1997. Psystar claims to be mainly a regional IT support company, which has focused on VoIP integration for "several years" and which added the Open Computer to its offerings last month.
The company's principal, as confirmed by state records, is Rudy Pedraza, whom records show as having been involved in a series of businesses over the years, including a lift company and an IT support firm called Floridatek.
As yet, no users appear to have reported receiving an Open Computer. The first shipments are due to begin in seven to 10 days, Psystar representatives have said, according to reports.
OSx86 anger
If the Open Computer does in fact exist, Apple might not be too happy about it--but neither will the hackers who have developed the "OSx86" software Psystar claims to use. Thus far, Apple has made no concerted effort to stamp out the OSx86 project, which consists of various patches allowing Mac OS X to run on commodity hardware, no doubt in part because it has been used only on a small scale and is relatively difficult to implement.
Psystar is proposing, however, to use OSx86-developed tools as the basis for its systems. On its Web site, the firm specifically mentions PC EFI V8, an emulator for the Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) that lies between OSX and the Intel firmware.
Netkas, the programmer who led the PC EFI effort, retorted angrily to Psystar on his blog. "This is a violation of my authorship rights on PC EFI V8," he wrote. The patch's license forbids any "redistribution... for direct or indirect commercial purposes", Netkas wrote.
Following complaints from OSx86 hackers, Psystar added a statement to its website crediting Netkas for the PC EFI software. "To the open-source community: thank you," the statement said.
The installation of OSX on a non-Apple computer is expressly forbidden by Apple's end-user licensing agreement (EULA). Nevertheless, some lawyers have said Apple will have a hard time stopping firms such as Psystar from breaking the agreement, because of the relative weakness of breach-of-contract disputes.
Apple was contacted for comment but did not respond in time for this article.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
More cheap excuses for questionable changes
The new excuse about why they are now using PayPal (a system known for being scammer friendly) is totally laughable. Does anybody believe that a credit card processing company will drop a client because of "high volume purchases"?? Yeah right!!!
I bet that in a few days the payment option will change from PayPal to Western Union (the biggest scam helper int he world). Then after a month, the company will disapear and people will start complaining about not getting the goods they pre-payed for.
The signs are there and they are HUGE. Anybody dumb enough to fall for this obvious scam deserves to be scammed.
If this were a scam
That said, I wouldn't want to be ANYBODY'S first customer, unless I had an established relationship with that person or company.
Good Point
That's a good point but they're making money and getting credit cards and billing info like mad right now. With Voip, these guys could be taking calls in Brazil for all we know. It will have a shorter life than many fraudulent on-line stores but it will make them a lot more money, quicker.
get a clue...
CC processors like stagant sales over growth.
For an example, we estimated our monthly cc sales below 100k for the first half of the contract. We did over 300k in less than one month, cc processor shut us down overnight. Failure/stagant sales makes the banks much happier than success/fast growth with sales for whatever your product may be.
Actually...
Paypal isn't all that notorious for scammers, but they ARE notorious for ripping people off, locking up their legitimate accounts and freezing the funds unreasonably.
I have to think that a better way to market this beast would be through retail stores. There would be long lines to buy it, if it is legit.
Is it a scam? Maybe. Or maybe just an attempt to launch something legit when they know they can't afford to outspend MS and Apple's advertising budgets. But I still can't afford to chance it, so I will have to wait til the dust settles.
RE: Cheap Mac clone draws angry response
If it's *not* a scam, good luck to them.
If it is a scam, they need to improve on hiding their trail!
"Mac" is not a company
OMG!!!
Attention: Apple!!
I Would Love One of Those Myself, Schneb
Sue in EU
This would set an international precedent which they could use to either negotiate a deal with Apple or also use for PR and as support for a domestic US case.
Then again, not much is known about Psystar. I wish some of their existing customers would come out and speak about their experiences. Then we would have a more objective basis for commentary.
As it is, most accounts seem to unfairly draw doubts on Psystar. They may be completely legit.
Let's recall history: Steve Jobs did something similar in days gone by, and he ended up using it to get back into the Apple fold. Perhaps Psystar could work a similar deal to work with Apple.
Apple should embrace some cloning as this increases their OS base and revenues from the OS itself. Of course, they will have to lose premium on hardware, but most computer firms now make very little on hardware. The most profit tends to be in software and services.
Netkas is greedy...
Nope, he is just another Stallman-like wacko (n/t)
Does netkas have a case?
As I understand it, the whole idea of open source is to promote technological advancement and mitigate the negative influences of the patent and copyright systems currently in place; as well as break the monopolies held by Big I.T. (M$, Apple, etc). Commercialization, when it spreads beyond a few of the big guys, actually helps in this regard.
you must be stupid
RE: Cheap Mac clone ... and litigation agains product bundling
If Psystar (sp?) can take Apple to court and win on those grounds, it would open a whole new market the way IBM clones opened up the PC market.
So, let's not throw away the baby with the bathwater.
If, instead of Apple, the company name were Microsoft, I know quite a few pundits in the media and the government that would be hell-bent on breaking up such "monopoly".
Why, then, should Apple enjoy such immunity?
The iPhone - ATT product-bundling also comes to mind as another legal war against Apple. It would have the support of a lot of customers burned and salted (or insulted?) by Apple's cattle-prodding sales and marketing practices.
It is time for Apple to be painted as the Evil Empire it has really become, and their fanatically loyal customers as a bunch of clueless suckers, which they really are, and take the legal war back against them, just like with Microsoft.
Just don't look at the media to spear-head it, because of the usual $$$ reasons. It would have to be organized consumers or better-funded corporations. Even a lawyer firm would do.
Simple question... Simpler answer...
Why, then, should Apple enjoy such immunity?[/b]
Many reasons, none the least of which include:
1.) Apple is the underdog. People like underdogs.
2.) Apple has an excellent marketing department that has the ability to make things seem MUCH cooler than they really are.
3.) Apple has a cult following who are willing to throw themselves on hand grenades if Steve Jobs life were in danger.
4.) Microsoft is the "evil" empire. They played for blood to get to where they are now.
5.) On that same note - Microsoft got sued by the feds and various states on the basis of their aforementioned behavior and lost. Apple has yet to be sued for their equally bad behavior.
If you'll recall, a LOT of people were calling for a Microsoft breakup during their trial. The judge decided against going that far (for better, worse or otherwise).
While Apple does enjoy a bit of a monopoly - in so far as the hardware goes that you can run their OS on, it's never been illegal to create an OS that only runs on your own brand of hardware. IBM's done it, DEC's done it, Sun's done it - in fact, pretty much EVERY major computer vendor's done it.
How can they charge for OS-X?
That just can't be, Aple does not sell standalone licenses of OS-X just bundled with ney macs.
Something strange here, just wait and see.
it's not apple's osx...