PC maker looks to sell $399 Mac clone
Mon Apr 14, 2008 11:36AM EDT
See Comments (18)
The OpenMac would come in a big, decidedly non-Apple beige box with a 2.2Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, a 250GB hard drive, and (for an extra $155) Mac OS X pre-installed. But the Miami-based company that's hawking the machine had better brace itself for the wrath of Apple's legal department.
But according to Ars Technica, the OpenMac supposedly will run Mac OS X "Leopard" natively, thanks to a series of emulators and drivers that fool Apple’s OS into thinking it's running on Apple hardware.
Indeed, getting Mac OS X to run on various non-Apple gadgets is a favorite pastime of tech hobbyists and hackers. But Psystar’s attempt to sell the OpenMac commercially is sure to draw the attention of Apple legal, especially since (as Ars Technica points out) the Leopard license specifically forbids installing the OS on non-Apple hardware.
Still, the story harkens back to the tale of Power Computing, the company that made Apple-authorized Mac clones back in the '90s. Personally, I thought it was a great idea—why not give us consumers more (and cheaper) choices for buying Mac hardware?
But Steve Jobs clearly isn't a fan of the Mac cloning business; Apple snapped up Power Computing in 1997, after Jobs returned to Cupertino, and that was that.
So, what do you think? Would you be interested in cheaper Mac clones, even if they don't come in sleek aluminum cases?
Related:
Company claims to sell Mac clone for $399 [Ars Technica]
Top 5 Posts
- AT&T sees red over Verizon's "There's a map for that" ads
- AT&T's hissy fit over Verizon's "There's a map for that" ads continues
- T-Mobile mops up after another embarrassing outage
- The Motorola Droid or the iPhone: Which one's right for you?
- Verizon cries foul over Sprint's "most dependable network" ads
More About Desktops
Comments on PC maker looks to sell $399 Mac clone
Post a Comment
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
-
7 Posted by agrampa2 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 2:47PM EDT Report Abuse
Aaahhh....(sigh).....windows....Abort, Retry, Fail.
-
8 Posted by jrcjer on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:42PM EDT Report Abuse
there's a very specific reason that apple bans clones--if macosx was sold for any computer in the market (or even a select group of clones), most of the mac users (excluding the truly mac faithful) would cheap out and buy the non-apple hardware. osx for apple is nothing like windows for microsoft in that it grosses very little compared to the apple hardware. if apple gave in to cloners, apple as we know it wouldn't be able to survive. LONG LIVE APPLE HARDWARE
-
9 Posted by ryebread45014 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:57PM EDT Report Abuse
Since when did Apple start making computers? I thought they only made iPods.
-
10 Posted by istoops on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:25PM EDT Report Abuse
Good lord. Ben, where have you been the last decade? Apple hasn't sold a beige unit in years. Makes me wonder how much you really know about Apple, and Macs. People have their preference. No big deal. Some like Windows, some Linux, some OS X. Some prefer to just hate one or the other regardless. I've been using and maintaining both Windows and Mac OS's for the last 20 some years. I use both Windows and OS X every day. My own experiences have been that Macs require less overall maintenance, and can stay in service longer. Like it or not, this is because you're buying a complete package designed to perform well together. As for price comparisons, if you actually did spec out an identical PC, say from Dell, for a given Mac unit, you'd find that they are essentially the same price. And with those same dollars, you're getting not only the OS, but also peripheral apps for photos and what-not. If Apple eventually blesses their OS on other hardware, it would open up computing like you wouldn't believe. But, I can't fault them for not doing it yet, as it will cause too many headaches that people will blame on Apple, rather than on the fact that they'd be trying to run the OS on hardware configurations for which it is not yet ready. The lesson was learned well from the clone era, that generic hardware does not produce a good user experience. A good user experience is key to product market performance. People have demonstrated that they're willing to spend a few extra bucks for a quality product. It's nothing more than supply and demand. You can brand it as a racket or monopoly, or whatever, but it's simply business. They have a product, and are allowed to market it however they want. If it were me, I'd stick with the current strategy of supplying quality products that the people who buy enjoy using. Microsoft is starting to realize that their own strategy of trying to be everything to everyone can't be sustained. XP is a pretty good OS, but Vista is still a daily challenge, even after using for it almost a year now. I wouldn't be surprised if you see some changes from them in the next release as well, probably limiting the scope of the OS a little.
-
11 Posted by nhieb28 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:37PM EDT Report Abuse
@istoops Well put. I agree 100%
-
12 Posted by yadenluigi on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:54PM EDT Report Abuse
Apple is just asoar loser why would any one have to pay a mac (Hardware so crapy i could make a clone my self that would cost lees than $800 dollars
-
13 Posted by beowulf_1976 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:05PM EDT Report Abuse
Apple = overrated status symbol and I for one really don't give a crap.
-
14 Posted by maori_yelir on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:05PM EDT Report Abuse
Also, to back up my assertion I went to the Apple store and designed a laptop that was comparable to the HP I just ordered. I choose the Macbook, not the pro. Right off the bat the Mac loses in display. 15.4 vs. 13 inches is a rather big deal. I ordered an AMD Duo 2.0 GHz, the Apple one had an Intel Core 2 2.1 GHz. Not much of a difference, AMD is easier to overclock but even still Apple wins on that one category. Then comes the RAM. 2 gigs for each however the Apple has 667 Mhz DDR2 vs. 800 Mhz DDR2 that I got for my HP. Both HDDs are 120 GB, same thing.Then I took into account video editing. Windows comes with a video editing program for FREE that is rated equal (or in some cases better) than Apples video editing software. So, I had to add $199 bucks to get the same thing I get for free with Vista. When all is said and done my HP came to $850.00 and I was given a bunch of upgrades (Free upgrade on video card) and freebies (Webcam, Mic, Fingerprint scanner (Never going to use that but cool to say I have), and a custom paint job). Apple gives me nothing and then kicks me in the teeth with a $1,398.00 price tag. Now the HP is arguably better based on the display and a few other things but for the sake of argument I will say they are equal. If you take off the editing software it comes down to $1,199.00 and I don't get a feature I would get for FREE with my PC and it still costs more. Maybe you like the OS enough to warrant that extra $350.00 and I have no problem with that but I do have a problem with you bashing me for my preferences and then trying to tell me that Apple products are CHEAPER. If they were these OpenMacs would not exist.
-
15 Posted by noneone81 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:40PM EDT Report Abuse
i would pay i dont care what it looks like i just want a mac thats i can afford
-
16 Posted by ramborick on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:27PM EDT Report Abuse
I like Apple products, and I would like to see Macs for less. Apple needs to allow people a choice when buying a Apple.
-
17 Posted by amorphic8008 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 2:53PM EDT Report Abuse
#11 istoops: well put. As a front-end web developer I use as many OSes and browsers as I can get my hands on. Ihear the complaints about Apple hardware being more expensive and for the most part I think you get what you pay for. Some people here claim that they can get an HP for less $$ with better specs than a Macbook; I won't argue that. But I will say that of the Windows machines I have owned in the past, I have spent much more time trying to maintain them and eventually tossing them out. I have a barely capable Dell desktop from 2006 that is crying (but runs) with Vista on it and a Dell Inspiron 5150 laptop that can't even run XP/IE6 without crashing every 2 hours. On the Mac side, I still have G3 Tower purchased in 1999, runs 10.3 (Apple is up to 10.5 now), G3 Powerbook, runs 10.3 and works like the day I took it out of the box in 2000; 17" G4 Powerbook purchased in 2003, still works hard everyday, and a G5 Quad that I bought in 2006, runs 10.5 and handles photo and video editing like nothing else I have ever used. The older Macs I have are slower, but no less reliable than when they were new, so say what you will about the price and the 'inferior' hardware, but I will still take a Mac made by APPLE and day, and I'm willing to pay for it.
-
18 Posted by vallet1111 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:31PM EDT Report Abuse
I am soo tired of computer FREAKS getting all ----- ot about Apple products. I get the benefits to Apple--I have been told like 1000 times. FACT is I don't want to spend 4 times the money on Apple. The rest of the world uses IBM based computers--if you Apple people want to be treated a normal people get off you GEEK butts and stop with the Apple crap!
Sponsored Links
My Tech
Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.
Also on Yahoo! Tech
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 Posted by bpollenn on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:12PM EDT Report Abuse
Who cares? Who cares? Anybody who believes in rights, perhaps? Maybe someone who is in favor of competition? Somebody who operates on a limited budget and can't afford to pay MORE simply because it's a Mac? Somebody who looks at their market-share and wonders why such a WONDERFUL choice is such a small portion of the market? Somebody who doesn't believe that "one size fits all"? Maybe even someone who doesn't like their negative marketing campaign ("I'm cool and you're a nerd! Nyaaah nyaaah nyaah!!!")? I think I will get a mac as soon as I manage to get Linux running on my dog... priorities, ya know!