Psystar Open Computer unboxing and hands-on
Update: We've done some preliminary testing and benchmarks, check 'em out.
Update: We've done some preliminary testing and benchmarks, check 'em out.
Relevant Posts
- New MacBook / MacBook Pro unboxing and first impressions (52 days ago - 225 Comments)
- DS Lite 'New Super Mario Bros.' bundle unboxing and hands-on (9 days ago - 25 Comments)
- PSP-3000 unboxing and hands-on (46 days ago - 43 Comments)
- Apple In-Ear Headphones hands-on, ears-on, and impressions (Yesterday - 176 Comments)
- Nokia N97 video hands-on! (3 days ago - 161 Comments)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
GreezyG @ Apr 30th 2008 12:26PM
Pimp! I may actually order one of these now.. Thanks for taking the risk Engadget!
Moburkhardt @ Apr 30th 2008 12:51PM
what do you mean taking the risk, they got this for free I am sure
mex @ Apr 30th 2008 1:14PM
wow, really, until PC or MAC hardware revolutionize the tower case or bring a whole new design to the motherboard or something... nothing special here, just a faster rectangular block with all the usual suspects in it - i really don't need to see an unboxing of a stupid tower case, no offense, but nothing cool here, just because its a new apple computer you have to show the unboxing...? do that to every PC that comes out why don't you, o wait its a Mac.. oooooooo.....even alienware towers look better, but still.... boring!
Zoroaster @ Apr 30th 2008 1:29PM
Mex you clearly have no idea what's going on here.
V1k1ng1337 @ Apr 30th 2008 1:40PM
mex, go to the corner. Pay attention before posting drivel.
Nick Catalano @ Apr 30th 2008 2:02PM
@Moburkhardt
Most review sites get their stuff free of charge but ship it back right after they are done testing it. They don't get to 'keep' anything.
In fact, it is policy at many review sites that everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, has to go back... otherwise it would look like manuf are bribing review sites.
Of course, some times the sites will get the stuff donated so they can give it to users in 'give aways', but they are almost NEVER given to employees or used as test benches for future reviews unless they are purchased from the company outright
rv @ Apr 30th 2008 2:34PM
BUT Does it play time machine?
zephead @ Apr 30th 2008 3:07PM
I really hope you guys took the plastic off the front. It annoys the hell out of me when people leave those ugly plastic sheets on.
Brendan Sheehan @ Apr 30th 2008 3:53PM
Apple aren't stopping these guys, for all we know Apple "is" these guys. If you get me.
Hung @ Apr 30th 2008 4:33PM
@ Raptor007
If Apple licensed companies like Dell and Asus to sell Macs, then consumers wouldn't have to deal with activation. It'd be the same as buying a PC that already had Windows preinstalled from any distributor.
Apple isn't monopolizing the Mac market in order to "ensure quality," they're doing it to make their lives easier. Writing drivers and dealing with compatibility are simple when a company only releases four or five products a year.
Apple is actively trying to stay out of the mass-dictribution market because of the baggage that comes along with it. They make enough money and don't feel like they need more. That's why Apple Fanboys need to support the OSX86 project. It does nothing but help them. In the end, Mac loyalists will get a better spec'd machine for a lower price, while still being able to run their favorite OS. Mac will have to lower prices/open their policies in order to keep up with the OSX86ers.
Hung @ Apr 30th 2008 4:37PM
Dagnabit. Wrong reply button.
zpjet @ May 1st 2008 2:03AM
I'm so getting one for my Final Cut Studio set up. Anybody knows how to hook up a P2 camera to that printer port?
Juaquin @ Apr 30th 2008 12:27PM
Cool, but about the only perk you get over building it yourself is them hacking OSX into it for you (and an hour of building). Still, not a bad price all things considered.
Nabil @ Apr 30th 2008 12:56PM
true....
However, good things will come out of this...
We need to keep pushing Apple towards an open model, and the only way they will budge is when they take a hit in the pocket.
frauhottelmann @ Apr 30th 2008 1:16PM
Getting Leopard on a normal x86 PC isn't that hard...I have it running...
Raptor007 @ Apr 30th 2008 1:41PM
@Nabil
Do you really want OS X to cost $300 and be full of online activation DRM? Microsoft has to do it because they don't make their money selling the hardware to run Windows.
Kamokazi @ Apr 30th 2008 2:40PM
@Raptor
Hung @ Apr 30th 2008 4:37PM
@ Raptor007
If Apple licensed companies like Dell and Asus to sell Macs, then consumers wouldn't have to deal with activation. It'd be the same as buying a PC that already had Windows preinstalled from any distributor.
Apple isn't monopolizing the Mac market in order to "ensure quality," they're doing it to make their lives easier. Writing drivers and dealing with compatibility are simple when a company only releases four or five products a year.
Apple is actively trying to stay out of the mass-dictribution market because of the baggage that comes along with it. They make enough money and don't feel like they need more. That's why Apple Fanboys need to support the OSX86 project. It does nothing but help them. In the end, Mac loyalists will get a better spec'd machine for a lower price, while still being able to run their favorite OS. Mac will have to lower prices/open their policies in order to keep up with the OSX86ers.
Chris @ Apr 30th 2008 12:29PM
Weak...this guy is profiting from all the hard work the OSx86 people have done, and risking the whole community on top of it.
GreezyG @ Apr 30th 2008 12:34PM
Welcome to America! He found a niche and is exploiting it. He will get shut down by Apple eventually though.
Flashpoint @ Apr 30th 2008 12:45PM
Leopard is just a cosmetic improvement over Tiger. The same can be said about Leopard Server over Tiger Server.
I learned Mac Servers inside and out. While they may be easier to use than Windows Server, the newest Leopard Server is ridiculously confusing compared to Tiger.
Leopard OS uses more memory and higher CPU speed than Tiger - it totally lags up our G5 overwatch computer. In order to make the best use of it, you gotta get the new Intel processors.
Zak @ Apr 30th 2008 1:01PM
Leopard Server is only confusing if you have a limited capacity to learn, or if you're a little weak-minded to begin with. It's really not that difficult (by which I mean it's not difficult at all).
And of course the fact that you think Leopard is simply a cosmetic improvement over Tiger is laughable. I mean you're either just spectacularly stupid, or you're really ignorant. Objective-C runtime including garbage collection, XCode 3, Core Animation, DTrace and Instruments, scripting bridge, Ruby on Rails, LLVM in OpenGL, ZFS implementation, new UDF drivers, latent semantic mapping, kernel level RBAC, Leopard is fully UNIX compliant, library randomization...
These are only some of the improvements in Leopard and obviously this list doesn't include the mind-bogglingly obvious additions like Time Machine, Boot Camp, Spaces, Quick Look, and all the improvements made to the rest of the applications.
Only cosmetic improvements... heh. That would be funny if it weren't so pathetically wrong.
Fernando @ Apr 30th 2008 1:20PM
Zak to Flashpoint! Flashpoint are you stil there? Hello? Hello? (hears echoes and crickets in the background)
atrain @ Apr 30th 2008 1:51PM
@Zak:
"ZFS implementation": Hardly. Read only. Not too useful. And HFS+ sucks.
"XCode 3, scripting bridge"... Yay! APIs! Expected stuff! Every OS has APIs and dev tools. No big surprise. Microsoft also has stuff like this you know.
"Core Animation, LLVM in OpenGL" -> Whats this gotta do with servers? Yay, My server has pretty graphics.
"DTrace and Instruments, Ruby on Rails" -> Existing software for similar platforms that was easily ported over. Wow, what an accomplishment!
"Leopard is fully UNIX compliant" Surprising that it took 5 revisions of a UNIX BASED OS to be UNIX COMPLIANT.
In fact, it looks like you probably just copied this list off apples site.
jacob @ Apr 30th 2008 2:05PM
@atrain
your opinion about leopard desktop/server doesn't matter. the point is leopard is vast improvement over tiger, especially for intel based macs. Zac's post established that, we don't care what you think. drop some facts or move on. .... HFS+ sucks ... thats funny.
Raptor007 @ Apr 30th 2008 2:18PM
@atrain
HFS+ sucks? Care to give any reasons? Oh, I guess you wouldn't, because there aren't any. I'll take an alias over a symlink or shortcut any day.
I will say I'm not a huge fan of the move to garbage collection, but maybe that's just because Java's implementation did not impress me.
Jason @ Apr 30th 2008 2:48PM
I don't see why this is 'profiting off the work of OSx'. Technically OSx and the Mac hardware are two separate entities and products. You can buy OSx separately. They are paying Apple for each copy of OSx, which seems fine to me. Apple uses off the shelf parts just like everyone else, even if they do get special consideration on some of them like boosted CPU versions.
The two issues here are that:
1. Apple has a boutique product that works well because they put effort into it to try and make it worth that. Psystar's computers may end up unstable and have problems with updates if they can't put the constant effort into the software end.
2. Apple would have a problem if Psystar copied other things like their Bios or tried to push off modified versions of OSx as their own. If they keep it clear that they are applying patches to the OS, that seems like it would be hard to argue against.
Kizorblade @ Apr 30th 2008 2:59PM
Actually Jason the reason for why it will hurt Apple is because OS X and the Apple hardware is more one entity like than two entities.
Apple makes the hardware and software, it doesn't however profit off the software. It uses OS X as a marketing tool and subsidies it to sell more Macs, which is where it makes it's money.
A good example of this would be that while Apple has 6-7% market share, they are making half of what Microsoft makes.
caleb @ Apr 30th 2008 3:39PM
"'Leopard is fully UNIX compliant' Surprising that it took 5 revisions of a UNIX BASED OS to be UNIX COMPLIANT."
BSD is no more "UNIX based" than Tiger is. How many revisions of Linux did it take before it gained UNIX compliance?
As of now there are only 8 hardware/software combinations that meet the UNIX 03 standard, and of those only 3 Operating Systems are represented.
http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
Some how I don't think compliance is as simple as you imply.
Zak @ Apr 30th 2008 3:46PM
atrain: Work harder on keeping your responses within the context of the post that you were responding to. Everything you said is irrelevant because it's your opinion and honestly who cares what you think? The reason I wrote my post is in direct response to Flashpoint's ill-conceived usage of the words "cosmetic improvement".
Now if you can come up with an argument that actually takes the "cosmetic improvement" statement into account and you can think of a way to defend it, then feel free. Otherwise, why are you even bothering to respond?
Nick M. @ Apr 30th 2008 8:05PM
@ Flashpoint
seriously WTF did anything you say have to relate to Chris' post
"Weak...this guy is profiting from all the hard work the OSx86 people have done, and risking the whole community on top of it."
And why are you talking about Leopard Server? It's not even in the picture for the post. What can i expect from a guy that was looking into using Time Capsule to backup your school's important documents.
Stop trying to impress everyone on the tech blog with constantly posting your credentials and your literary vomit.
I always feel so bad correcting you. Its makes me feel like the a$$hole who yells at a mentally challenged person, but you leave me no choice.
Nick M. @ Apr 30th 2008 8:12PM
@Jason
"I don't see why this is 'profiting off the work of OSx'. Technically OSx and the Mac hardware are two separate entities and products. You can buy OSx separately."
Chris isn't talking about profiting off of OSX operating system, which i guess they are cuz the main reason they are moving units is because they are shipping them with OSX, hes talking about the OSx86 community. It's an open community of people that donate time and funds to research and reports findings as to which Intel based hardware and PC hardware you can use in combination to build yourself a computer that will run OSX. Chris is saying that its pathetic that Psystar is taking free knowledge from a community of people that others have put time and personal funds into and selling that knowledge for personal gains.
http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
coffee @ Apr 30th 2008 12:32PM
wow, styrofoam peanuts. gripping story.
Pochi @ Apr 30th 2008 12:34PM
You're supposed to make a flipbook out of the gallery images.
Bakk @ Apr 30th 2008 12:33PM
Dont support these scammers!! If you want OSx86 do it yourself. Its not like apple updates arent going to break this in a few weeks anyway and require you to learn how to hack osx yourself anyway. Ordering this will only give more money to people too dumb to do something with there life
friendlyner @ Apr 30th 2008 2:13PM
Well, they managed to found a company and get shipments of a new product out the door. What have you done?
And you might want to proofread before you go calling anyone stupid. "do something with there life"... clever.
caleb @ Apr 30th 2008 3:44PM
What's with all of the complaints from the OSx86 crowd? Isn't OSx86 licensed under the GPL?
iPeople @ Apr 30th 2008 4:45PM
How would apple updates go about blocking this? They're using genuine OS X Leopard.
Stevie Jobs @ Apr 30th 2008 12:33PM
So lt me get this straight. It ships with a boxed copy of Leopard but you can not use it to reinstall on the computer they ship should you need to because it's not the hacked version. I thought Paystar said they were going to ship the proper software that would allow you reinstall their version of the OS X if you need to?
So what happens if you need to reinstall? do you ship it back to Psystar?
GreezyG @ Apr 30th 2008 12:35PM
Or you can image your hard drive when you receive it.
bald_gye @ Apr 30th 2008 1:27PM
u send back ur hdd
Boden @ Apr 30th 2008 1:18PM
psystar said specifically that the vanilla kernel would be installable on their open computers.
John @ Apr 30th 2008 12:34PM
Well, it's definitely not packaged as beautifully as the Mac. This should be interesting. I cannot wait to see some test results.
Max Savin @ Apr 30th 2008 12:35PM
I'd get it if it didn't look so bad.Seriously, id rather get a dell and put Leopard on it.
Zak @ Apr 30th 2008 12:36PM
OMG ANOTHER Mac unboxing article, why don't you change your name to MacGadget, blah blah blah, whine whine bitch bitch cry cry... oh wait.
Phoenix @ Apr 30th 2008 12:44PM
IT'S NOT A MAC THOUGH!!!
Zak @ Apr 30th 2008 12:48PM
I KNOW!!1!!1!!!!1one!!twelve
And for whoever low ranked me, read my post again - all of it this time, including the last two words. And consider getting your irony detector fixed, lol.
1.21JiggaWatWat @ Apr 30th 2008 1:11PM
Zak: I think people are low ranking you because, well, your post was stupid.
Who the hell thinks the !!111eleven thing is still funny?
Zak @ Apr 30th 2008 1:18PM
Thanks for the insight Captain Obvious, I never would have been able to figure that out without your help. And people are low ranking my posts because I'm the one posting. It's just reactionary, it's not because of what I'm saying.
And if you think my post was stupid, it's because you haven't seen the hundreds of crybaby whine posts from all the Apple haters every time Engadget has an Apple product unboxing of some kind. It's pathetic to the point of hilarity.
Luigi193 @ Apr 30th 2008 1:37PM
But your post was INCREDIBLY stupid...