UPDATE: Saturday, December 5, 2009: Kughar’s “OSXONAPC.COM” website has changed to present a simple note:
December 5th, 2009 7:30am
It has recently come to our attention that installing the OS X software on anything but a Mac violates Apple’s End User License Agreement. We received an anonymous email informing us of the legality issues which referenced the Psystar case and we definately don’t want to recreate that case. It was never our intention to violate Apple’s EULA in any way. In light of this, we have discontinued this offer.
Please send all correspondence to info@osxonapc.com
MacDailyNews Take: That didn’t take long.
Below is our original article, originally headlined, “Attention Apple legal: Kuhgar tries selling Dell Mini 10v preloaded with Mac OS X Snow Leopard,” as posted on Friday, December 4, 2009 at 7:19pm:
According to some outfit called Kuhgar, based in Hartland, Wisconsin, you can “own the functionality of a Mac at 1/4 the cost!”
It’s surprising that they bother to add the disclaimer, “The statement has not endorsed by Apple or Dell.” It’s wholly unsurprising that it makes no grammatical sense.
Kuhgar’s site states, “The Mini 10v is everything you want in a mobile companion and more. It may be small, but you’ll be surprised by all the fun features packed inside. Exclusively from Kuhgar, buy the Mini 10v preloaded with Mac OS X Snow Leopard! Have all functionality of a Mac at 1/4 of the price! This deal cannot be found anywhere else.”
The site is festooned with Apple trademarks including the Apple logo itself. And you thought the guys behind Psystar were stupid; at least they didn’t try selling unauthorized Mac clones days after a judge slapped a multi-million dollar judgement on an unauthorized Mac cloner.
Kuhgar’s site is here.
MacDailyNews Take: Get ready, Kuhgar, Apple’s likely to go all Psystar on your ass in 10, 9, 8…
MacDailyNews Note: The disclaimer at the very bottom of the site reads, in part, “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone,” which may hint at the possibility that this company is playing PR games and wants to get noticed by offering something that will grab attention, but that they have no intention of actually selling. We’ll follow up on this if and when we find out more information.
Welcome to Kuhgar wildlife natural park, where animals eat each other!
that would be a very cool unit to have.
i have doubts about how well snow leopard would run on an atom processor though.
Kuhgar is a reseller, according to their company website. Is this a Phystar product in a shiny new box?
leave them alone. I think its cool people like this put SL in some laptops. Not everyone wants to pay apple’s prices
@ Jim
You must have forgotten the ILLEGAL part of what they are doing.
@Jim,
that’s not the point. Apple is a hardware company and needs to protect their software as it is a selling point for said hardware. If Apple were to just let people do this kind of thing, there would not be an Apple Computer or further OSX development for much longer.
If you don’t believe me, look up the history of Apple and focus on the clone crisis of the 90’s.
@jim
Where to begin with people like you? Why don’t you just buy a stolen MacBook from the trunk of someone’s car. There is no moral difference, but at least you’ll get a decent laptop with the stolen MacBook.
Kuhgar is run by a bunch of morons.
@Jim – I agree that PEOPLE should be able to put SL on some laptops, if they wish to try it and support themselves.
I do not agree that BUSINESSES (pretend or real) should be pursuing something without Apple’s blessing.
@Jim
Do you deal in “hot” products or act as a “fence”??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fence_(criminal)
If so, please post all your pertinent contact info here for all to see and for anyone else that doesn’t want to pay “apple’s prices.”
They can’t spell ‘separate’. Losers.
Who is behind these attempts to undermine the Mac? Why does one pop up as soon as Psystar looks doomed? Fans of conspiracies might say Microsoft…and is that really so absurd?
After all, there clearly isn’t a profit motive. Psystar didn’t make any money on their so-called “Mac clones.” So why would another loser company suddenly make the same play with a portable model? If it is a play for attention then it reeks of unbearable stupidity because they actually used Apple trademarks. That is illegal even if they don’t intend to sell any units (which would then constitute false advertising).
I just don’t understand the fascination with Mac clones…
I tried to buy one. However it does not accept either VISA or American Express credit card. Asks to use a different card. Apparently it does not accept any credit cards.
Looks like a hoaks
IT IS A HOAX
I think MDN nailed it when they suggested it was a publicity stunt by someone that could use some attention. If they don’t sell any, there’s nothing to sue for.
“I’m sorry, Apple just told us that we can’t include OSX, but could I interest you in a . . . “
Great! kinda like putting a Ferrari engine in a Pinto
Yeah, but hey, it comes PRELOADED with Acrobat Reader 9!!!
YAY WISCONSIN!
Ain’t Wisconsin the land of Cheese?
Yes, well, Apple certainly knows a thing or two about honoring legal rights now then, don’t they!
“OPTI Inc. announced Friday that the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas had found that Apple infringed on patent No. 6,405,291. The extra $2.7 million was added as pre-judgment interest, bringing the total cost to Apple $21.7 million.”
From an Appleinsider article.
Guess it’s do as I say, not as I do.
@ASHOKA8350
“I tried to buy one. However it does not accept either VISA or American Express credit card.”
Sooooo you entered your credit card info and it didn’t work? Mkay. You don’t surf the interwebs much do you?
@Optimus
Apparently you don’t know much about the frivolity of the US District Court in the Eastern District. You might want to read up. Ridiculous patent lawsuits are their bread and butter.
@KingMel
“I just don’t understand the fascination with Mac clones…”
This is just one of those things that Apple let themselves into when they came over to the Intel platform. Hardware and software hacking is a long and honored tradition on the Intel platform. Not condoning it, just acknowledging it’s existence. Even after using Apple products for over 4 years now, I still enjoy building my own. I would love to be able to put OS X on my home brews, but I choose to honor Apples rules. Not everyone does.
In the long run, these activities won’t hurt Apple that much. The legal eagles will see to that. But there will always be a few out there pushing the boundaries. It’s just the nature of the beast.
@What the….
So your position is that ONLY Apple has the right to enforce their patents and all others should just live with it?
As an Apple shareholder myself, I don’t love the idea of illegal clones but I beg to differ that there is no moral difference between buying one and buying a laptop you know is stolen from someone’s trunk. The harm in the former case is distributed between millions of shareholders, it doesn’t even cost a penny to any one individual, while in the latter case you utterly ruin somebody’s day. Also, the average shareholder is much, much wealthier than the average car owner, so declining marginal utility means that a given amount stolen from them would likely hurt them less than the car owner even if one shareholder did bear the entire loss. Then, there is the difference between physical property and IP— while you can argue that both take work to create and that work should be rewarded, the IP case is much more complicated since there is no per se moral standard for just how long a patent monopoly should run— indeed there are very good arguments that patent (and other IP, esp. copyright) protection has been over-extended due to the lobbying of powerful monopolists, and that society would be better off with much shorter-term protections for inventions.
Finally and most obviously, you don’t need to destroy additional property (breaking someone’s trunk) in order to sell a clone.
While I invest in corporations like Apple and enjoy the returns I get—as well as take aesthetic pleasure from Apple products, which equally depends on their tight control of IP—I am still clear-sighted enough to know that corporations are not people, and that “stealing” “IP” from me as a shareholder is quite different from mugging me in person. I’m certainly not arguing that it’s morally “OK” to steal from corporations and everyone should just go right ahead… that would be a separate argument, but there are important differences between stealing (especially IP) from a corporation and stealing from individuals that any competent ethicist would take note of.
Could be a hoax… Know of someone who bought it?