Rachel is just going to KILL me for bringing this subject up again. But this time the stakes are higher. It was reported by CNET and by Appleinsider that a new Apple clone maker QUO is not only offering Mac Clone machines but they are going to offer a store front in LA with customer service. WHAT?!!!!! Apple insider reports:

Quo Computer of Los Angeles plans to open a store on Monday, June 1st that will sell Life Q, Pro Q and Max Q models preinstalled with Mac OS X and which echo Apple’s configurations when possible. They should start at prices less than most of Apple’s systems, beginning roughly below $900.

Besides having a physical space to sample and buy its computers, though, Quo tells CNET that it plans to offer better-than-average hardware. It also wants to offer customer service “up there with Apple’s,” according to the young clone firm’s founder, Rashantha De Silva. In fact, rather than try to differentiate itself from Apple, the California startup is priding itself on how closely it will copy Apple’s practices as a whole — with the exception of allowing more configurations.

“We are trying to mimic things as much as we can,” De Silva says. “I’m hoping that Apple sees the value in what we are doing.”

They also go on to talk about how they are also going to expand thier line with an Apple TV-like set top  box and a version that is like a Mac Mini.

So, is this an extension of the nefarious people behind Psystar (alledged)? Or is this a rouge business trying to gain from the spotlight of the situation?  I welcome your thoughts.  You allready know what mine are.  Now if will excuse me, I have to go dodge the inevitable eye roll of one Miss Rachel. 

Ok, here we go again.  Except this time we have a company that is putting forth a mac clone solution that a consumer can do themselves.  Appleinsider reports:

“Leveraging an internal adapter that lets many generic PCs run Mac OS X, a company called EFi-X USA now plans to offer a solution that potentially allows customers to create their own Mac systems.

Unlike the offerings from besieged clone maker Psystar, the EFi-X USA Millennium 4 will be targeted directly at the performance crowd. It’s expected to boast a Core 2 Quad processor overclocked to at least 3.8GHz, 4GB of memory, a GeForce 8800 GTS video card and a high-speed disk combination that includes a 150GB, 10,000RPM boot drive and a 1TB, 7,200RPM secondary drive that holds the bulk of the computer’s storage. Two DVD rewriters will also be included.

The system will reportedly sell for $1,899 (plus the additional cost of a $199 EFi-X dongle) and deliver “85-90%” of the performance of a top-end Mac Pro for less than half the price, according to a company spokesman. Buyers can also potentially custom-order systems themselves.”

If this is a sign of things to come Apple is going to have a lot on their legal plate.  It also makes me wonder if there are nefarious entities afoot behind this one just as it has been alleged with Psystar.

Catch our latest episode on TPN

Or subscribe to us on iTunes

Get your 30 day free trial of GoToMyPc

Whoa!  Did any of you see this today?  I have to take a breath before I type this.  *sigh*.  Ok i’m ready now.

Apple is expanding the scope of their lawsuit with Mac clone maker, Psystar.  In doing so, they are suspecting that there may be other corporate and/or individuals behind Psystar.

Appleinsider reports:

“Now free of any countersuits, Apple has grown its lawsuit against Mac clone maker Psystar to accuse it of further violations and to claim that others have contributed to its breaking copyright law.

The amended suit, unearthed by Groklaw, primarily expands Apple’s original complaint to assert that Psystar has violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act by engineering its OpenComputer lineup to use Mac OS X despite measures intended to prevent the operating system from running on anything but Apple’s own hardware.

it also charges the Florida-based clone builder with pushing buyers to commit copyright infringement, including violating the DMCA by circumventing Apple’s restrictions in day to day use, and of violating Apple’s trademark on the term SuperDrive used to describe the DVD burners in Macs.

But the most eyebrow-raising element remains the 18th paragraph, which explicitly states that Apple believes ten unknown people or companies — each nicknamed “John Doe” — have contributed on some level to the numerous violations named in the amended suit.

“On information and belief, persons other than Psystar are involved in Psystar’s unlawful and improper activities described in this Amended Complaint,” the new section reads. “The true names or capacities, whether individual, corporate, or otherwise, of these persons are unknown to Apple. Apple will seek leave to amend this complaint to show the unknown John Doe Defendants’ true names and capacities when they are ascertained.”

Wow.  I usually forgo my comments on something like this so I can express them on the podcast.  But my goodness.  If this is true, and if there is discovery that corporate entities are behind the start up Psystar, this has ENORMOUS consequences that will have a rippling effect on the PC/MAC scene.

Stay tuned folks, this is getting interesting.

Cal

I’m going to make this short and sweet then let you read the rest of the article for yourselves.

SUCK IT PSYSTAR!

Appleinsider reports:

“A California judge on Tuesday granted Apple’s motion to dismiss counterclaims on the part of unauthorized Mac clone maker Psystar, who charged the Mac maker with violating antitrust laws through its vigorous attempts to block third parties from selling rival Mac OS X-based computers.”

“Central to Psystar’s complaint was that Apple’s Mac OS X operating system is not reasonably interchangeable with other operating systems such as Microsoft Windows and therefore comprises its own distinct market. The clone maker alleged that Apple has engaged in various forms of anti-competitive conduct in order to “protect its valuable monopoly in the Mac OS market” and that it has also run advertising campaigns to help define the Mac OS as a product separate and distinct from other operating systems.

Apple responded to Psystar’s argument by asserting that the company’s definition of a market comprised of a single brand of a product is neither legally nor factually plausible. Judge Alsup agreed, noting that the definition of an antitrust “relevant market” is typically a factual rather than a legal inquiry, but certain legal principles govern the definition.”

Read the entire article here.

Catch our latest episode on TPN

Or subscribe to us on iTunes

Get your 30 day free trial of GoToMyPc