“With unsanctioned clone maker Psystar still pushing its knock-off Macs in the face of ongoing litigation, another company is testing Apple’s legal resolve and treading on its trademarks in the process through sales of a pair of new ‘OpeniMac’ systems,” Slash Lane reports for AppleInsider.
“It’s not immediately clear who’s behind the latest effort spotted by Engadget, but the Argentinean-based dealer has dubbed its systems the ‘OpeniMac’ despite their lack of an all-in-one design. It’s also constructed a snazzy website to promote them,” Lane reports.
Full article here.
OpeniMac’s website can be found here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “MacSmiley” for the heads up.]
MacDailyNews Take: Caveat emptor multiplied by infinity.
Apple needs to stop being evil and allow people to install the software they buy on any computer the want.
Not speaking the language limits the information I can get from the web site (DUH!), but it looks like this is close to the mini-tower configuration some of us have been advocating. Again, a LOT of information not available to mono-linguistic oafs like me. And, there was no mention of how loud it could get in operation.
Apple will tell us if it’s any good. The speed of their response will let us know. If it’s garbage, they will take their time. If it’s an “Apple-like” model … is that the sound of a suit being filed?
I don’t understand why Apple refuses to allow anyone without a Mac to install OSX. All Apple has to do is include a disclaimer in the install process absolving Apple of any responsibility for loss of data, incompatibilities, etc.
While I was typing my multi-line epic, John said: Apple needs to stop being evil and allow people to install the software they buy on any computer the(y) want.
That precise scenario will NOT happen. You put OSX on a $500 PC and you are going to have support problems. One of the reasons Apple does NOT have support problems is because they only support a limited assortment of good-quality equipment. I guess Apple could post a semi-restrictive list of “Mac-quality” parts so that cloners could build XP/Linux systems that could be upgraded to OSX with Apple’s blessing – but not support.
ncvnb –
You don’t understand because you clearly don’t have much experience in business or technology. Apple cannot sell a product and tell people “Hey, you bought it so do whatever floats your boat… oh, and by the way, we’re completely washing our hands of you.” It’s just not possible, especially from a legal standpoint. Not only that, but regardless of whether Apple denies any responsibility it is still their product and their reputation that will be tarnished when all these copies of Mac OS X are floating around blowing up on everyone’s generic unsupported hardware. How do you not see what a mess that would be?
Go buy a pc. it’s not evil to insure your product is quality. And besides… you do realize how expensive that would be don’t you? F@$k the clones… buy a mini if you don’t want to spend, but want an Apple. Don’t want a mini and don’t want a macbook for some “professional” use… be a professional and buy better tools, the pro systems recoup their cost if you actually do any work on them.
You forget all the people just stealing all the work that’s gone into os X. It’s out there… you could always be on of those A$$holes if you want, but you definitely get what you deserve.
Apple has to quikcly build their new Mac lines with PA Semi’s special chips to differenciate Apple’s brend from any PCs.
These so called Mac clones are only there by concurence purposes, tending to prove that Mac are just like PCs but sold “too expensive”.
Apple has to show up with essential and technical singularities with still the hability to run any other OS but with an OS that will no more be instalable on other platforms.
Tony thank you at last someone who gets it. If BMW sold its engines and said that ‘you are free to add them to any cars you like but without any responsibility on our part’ do people really think that when some prat puts one in a SMART car and ends up killing people as it lurches out of control that no one will hold BMW in any way responsible? The irony is that certain powers that be, seem to feel it perfectly acceptable to force Apple into a very similar position. Higher costs, slower development and lower profits- all enforced. Now who would benefit from that scenario I wonder?
“when some prat puts one in a SMART car and ends up killing people as it lurches out of control”
Automakers already sell crate engines. You can buy a BMW engine and do whatever you like with it.
Secondly once any BMW is sold, you can pull the engine out of it and do whatever you like with it and BMW has no legal right to stop you. But they can refuse to honor any kind of warranty.
So I think you’re right. Mac OS X should be more like a car engine. I’m glad you finally get it.
The legal barriers you mention are a fantasy which exists in your mind only.
Equating a car engine to software is like comparing a banana to a Leer jet. I think there is an intelligence barrier in YOUR mind, and it’s not a fantasy.
Some of you are forgetting, or just don’t care, that the majority of Apple’s business is *not* OS X! That said, there is no chance of them spending the resources to make OS X work with generic hardware and why should they? Why reach the “masses” (vocal minority of geeks/penny pinchers, really) by allowing the sale of crappy computers with OS X installed that could very well tarnish the brand image they have painstakingly built! If you can’t afford a mac, or want to custom build one, buy Windows or put linux on it.
Folks –
SMART , like Mini (Cooper) is a BMW brand, if I understand correctly.
Dan LaMee . . . you nailed it. My thoughts exactly.
Unless Steve has a change of heart, it’s unlikely he’ll allow Apple to license out its OS ever again. From his perspective it goes against the company’s entire design philosophy — Apple are in control of the whole widget, the whole experience. Afterall, one of MS’s greatest failings is that Windows constantly breaks on mismatched hardware and the like.
Plus, remember, licensing can be very dangerous if there’s any fallout between the two parties involved as you’re giving a potential competitor your ‘Coke formula’. Now can you remotely imagine Steve accepting that?
And, so far Steve’s strategy has not let them down, considering Apple is now in better health than any of its competitors.
Either buy a Mac and enjoy the experience or pick up a Linux distro for your PCs, in the end.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
@Over Done
It’s spelled Learjet, not Leer jet. I think there is an intelligence barrier in YOUR mind, and it’s not a fantasy.
Or maybe you were speaking of the super-speedy voyeur?
If you were writing about the high-velocity Peeping Tom, I apologise.
@john
You need to stop being evil and allow people to profit from YOUR labour, designs, production, and marketing of high-quality products, with no recompense to you.
If you already do this, then I apologise for assuming otherwise.
Spelling mistake on their ‘condiciones generales’ page. They really put a lot of thought into that:
2nd paragraph, penultimate sentence: “un Compurtador Apple”
nice . . . .
@qka
“SMART , like Mini (Cooper) is a BMW brand, if I understand correctl”
WRONG!
the Smart car is Mercedes Benz
I should know, I own one.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
There’s a sucker born every minute.
Apple makes their profit from hardware sales. Allowing bottom-feeder PC assemblers to sell OS X machines would be suicide for Apple’s business model, not to mention creating support nightmares.
Do we expect Sony to support their Playstation OS on non-Sony hardware?
Do we expect RIM to support their Blackberry OS on non-RIM smartphones?
Why, then, do idiots continue to expect Apple to support Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware?
Why are people complaining Apple doesn’t license OS X? Fact is you *can* install OS X on a non-Apple PC, just takes a little digging and Apple doesn’t really care if individuals do it (MacWorld recently published an article on building one, FrankenMac I think they called it).
Apple makes money selling computers, and OS X is a big selling point. They’re doing well with that strategy, sales up 30% a year, why would they hurt themselves by helping other PC companies sell computers?
Let’s face it: the mac’s hardware is way overpriced. Component for component, what is the diffrerence between a mac and a dell, apart from the sad attempt at differencing: the aluminium (note the correct SI spelling of aluminium- not aluminum) case? Really, one could buy a pc with exactly the same specs as a mac, for a significant saving. For me, the only big plus of a mac is OSX. It’s a big plus, but paying a $500 – $1000 premium on hardware to run osx is a bit rich. While OSX costs $120, its the hardware price premium that make it not unlike microsh*t’s pricing of windows, just in a more subtle form. Actually, it’s probably more for OSX than windows. Well a new macbook certainly costs waaaaaaay more than a comparable PC with windows.
Recently the organization I work for was evaluating the purchase of about 400 notebooks. It came down to white macbooks and a PC from HP. Needless to say, the mac didn’t win: apple jacked up the price of the white mac by 25% (currency exchange issues, still it’s very rich pricing for an obsolete computer) so what was a fairly poor comparison to begin with became a really, really poor comparison to finish with.
Apple is becoming greedy and arrogant again. The very things that almost killed it first time around (requiring microsh*t to bail it out so it could point to a viable competitor to avoid anti-trust case)
I’m tired of car analogies. Instead, I recommend anyone who thinks Apple needs to “stop being evil” and let people install and sell OS X on whatever they want should go to the grocery store, fill up a cart, and pay the clerk whatever the shopper thinks the groceries are worth.
> Apple needs to stop being evil and allow people to install the software they buy on any computer the want.
Nope, you are wrong. Apple sells and prices Mac OS X in-a-box as an upgrade for existing Macs. All supported Macs came with Mac OS X already. Therefore, there is no stand-alone Mac OS X product.
If Apple ever does sell Mac OS X in-a-box as a stand-alone product, a fair price for it would be $300-400.
@john,
Your grasp of the English language is pathetic and leaves much to be desired.
“Evil”?
You’re a churlish little brat who’s throwing a temper tantrum simply because someone isn’t doing what you want them to do.
Let’s take a look at the word “evil”, for a moment, in order to illustrate my point.
“Evil”, John, would be the murder of 6 million Jews.
“Evil”, John would be the 10 million Russians slaughtered by Stalin.
To be “evil”, John, means to be profoundly malevolent and/or harmful.
“Evil”, you ignorant whiner, does not mean “teh aPpLZors won’t sell meh teh warez to run on my lame ass cheap box, so please, for the love of Pete, get a life and go troll somewhere else.
You are an embarrassment.
@PT
The extra cost comes from quality build, materials, design and style. To those who appreciate it, has value and it’s worth paying extra for. Apple doesn’t make bargains. Face reality, and move on. They seem to be doing quite well following their product designers and not listening to complaining consumers.