MacDailyNews Note: Make that over $34 billion, Pete. $10 billion difference still means something outside of Washington D.C.
Burrows continues, “Mac users want the whole enchilada. The world has changed immensely since Power Computing and the other cloners were trying to build their business. Back then, the Mac customer base was mostly companies and technically sophisticated consumers. Now, the company sells millions of Macs a year, to all manner of consumers. When they head out to buy a computer, they’re not defining the Mac as an operating system. The Mac is a stylish machine that runs a well-designed operating system—and a machine that is backed up by support from a company with one of the world’s strongest brands.”
“Psystar’s attorney, Kiwi Camara of Camara & Sibley in Houston, is hopeful the copyright case in California will be reversed on appeal (the partial settlement stipulates that Psystar won’t have to pay those damages until all appeals have been exhausted). And Camara says Apple’s decision to drop a spate of remaining claims against Psystar—on trademark infringement, unfair competition, and others—shows Apple wants to end this saga as well. ‘This [partial settlement] is too good to be true,’ he says. ‘I don’t know why they did it,'” Burrows reports. “A bigger unknown for Psystar, though, is why its founders decided to take on Apple in the first place.”
Read more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “James W.” for the heads up.]
Wow. Mention anything Washington DC and all the progressives think it’s Obama bashing. Pathetic! Throw them ALL out!
If all these comments are representative of Apple users, then I was sadly mistaken in thinking of them as more intelligent and discriminating than the rest of the mindless nosebleed techies
“A bigger unknown for Psystar, though, is why its founders decided to take on Apple in the first place.”
TRY STUPIDITY!!!!
@ Ringgo – It’s pretty much luck of the draw here. Some MDN articles spawn comments or debates which are very insightful (either for or against Apple) and actually relevant to the main article. Others, like this one, devolve into idiotic zealotry and off-topic political rants, often by people who seem to have little interest in Apple.
MDN states that they will delete off-topic comments, but just like Apple’s App Store approval process, they are extremely inconsistent in how they actually enforce those rules.
“A bigger unknown for Psystar, though, is why its founders decided to take on Apple in the first place.”
Apparently, it was part of their business plan. From Groklaw:
[…] that they wanted to get sued, so others would be afraid to do what Psystar was doing until after the trial, and meanwhile the publicity would give Psystar brand recognition and a head start. Indeed the Summary page at the end states it baldly: “Thanks to ongoing litigation and current market conditions Psystar has a unique opportunity.” Unique is too small a word for this, I think. Litigation as business plan. So now we know why it seemed to want to get sued. They thought it was a market opportunity and a way to get VC money.
Also, anyone who takes what Psystar (or their attorney) says at face value is begging to look like a fool – yes, Peter Burrows, I’m looking at you.
Groklaw has another more recent article, which takes a far more skeptical view of Psystar’s latest spin on everything.
I was just pointing out that MDN is the biggest troll on their own site. And you all proved my point.
Kudos to the clever ‘Jake Off’ and 2nd place to TowerTone’s ‘jake-ass.’ lol
@mike: yes, MDN takes a conservatively-biased view of most political topics. Poster “@jake” is absolutely correct.
To the topic of discussion: most of us would be rooting for the small-guy underdogs if they had a legal leg to stand on. However, Psystar doesn’t, and they deserve no quarter for attempting to profit from Apple IP.
You’re all tools. Right wing, left wing… what’s the difference? The only thing these terms represent is which pocket the politicians have their hand in. You’ve all been divided and conquered; arguing about which side is correct or at fault, while they cash in on your stupid human fallacy. So typical…
The comments here are a collective posterchild for why political parties should be outlawed.
Disheartening that the five comments posted after my last comments above, have nothing to do with either the article or the points I raised which are actually relevant to the article.
It does, however, seem to confirm the correlation between strong political affiliations and lack of critical thinking skills. Difficult to perceive the world accurately when you’re deliberately ignoring one side of every debate.
And when did our political parties become more loyal to themselves than to the country they’re supposed to be serving? Are we seeing this shift due to the more selfish post-Boomer generations taking control?