Stephen Withers
Wednesday, 21 May 2008 11:29
Opinion and Analysis
Page 2 of 3
Even if the company is simply loading a disk image onto each computer it sells and therefore is not in breach of the licence terms as it doesn't actually run Mac OS X on a non-Apple computer, it's hard to argue that the disk image could have been built without flouting the licence.
The apparent absence of legal action has led some to speculate that Psystar is an Apple front, but that seems a long shot to me.
In related news, Psystar has announced the selection of a new case for the Open. The company describes it as having "a familiar and stylish mesh front", though you'd never mistake it for a Mac Pro.
Although the Open starts at $US400, having Leopard preinstalled adds another $US155 to the price. Even then, the specification still does not include items that are standard on Macintoshes such as a wireless LAN card (add $US99) or Bluetooth (add $45 for an external dongle), bringing the total to $US699.
That doesn't sound so cheap anymore, and puts the Open squarely between Apple's two configurations of the Mac mini which sell for $US599 and $799.
On the other hand, the Open still has a faster processor, more RAM and a more capacious hard drive. And it's more expandable. Just about anything's more expandable than a Mac mini, but how much expandability do you need?
Looking at the history of the Windows PCs I've owned, my current system has benefited from a new and larger hard drive, but that was a replacement rather than an upgrade. I've also fitted a TV tuner card, but the software isn't a patch EyeTV on the Mac, and my iMac's screen is far better than the PC's.
Making any other changes will now mean replacing the motherboard, CPU, RAM and graphics card. I'd also be inclined to switch to SATA drives, so there's little reason not to replace the unit entirely. I suppose I could keep the case, but it's hardly a work of art.
So, am I anti-upgrade? Please continue to page 3.
