“a genuine Apple product warranty and what is regarded as the best support in the PC industry.”

Wha. . . ? The AppleCare *warranty* has pretty good terms, but I hear stories from a LOT of frustrated users about support implementation. This has been a problem at Apple for years. . .

As for PowerComputing hurting Apple? Well, I recall buying a PowerBase tower for a mere $1800(?), by far the cheapest price for a MacOS machine on the market. I would not have been able to afford an Apple machine and likely would have been forced to go without or buy a PC eventually. It worked well, ending its life with something like a 350MHz G4.

The clones did get Apple to start lowering prices and that helped in the long run. There is no denying that.

I think the lowered prices had more to do with Steve Jobs wanting to make the company more efficient. Fewer models, fewer product lines, more use of industry-standard components. That adds up to reduced manufacturing costs, which means cheaper prices for all.

As to the AppleCare warranty, tell us about the horror stories. Apple routinely gets the best support ratings in the industry.

Peace,
Gene

“a genuine Apple product warranty and what is regarded as the best support in the PC industry.”

Wha. . . ? The AppleCare *warranty* has pretty good terms, but I hear stories from a LOT of frustrated users about support implementation. This has been a problem at Apple for years. . .

As for PowerComputing hurting Apple? Well, I recall buying a PowerBase tower for a mere $1800(?), by far the cheapest price for a MacOS machine on the market. I would not have been able to afford an Apple machine and likely would have been forced to go without or buy a PC eventually. It worked well, ending its life with something like a 350MHz G4.

The clones did get Apple to start lowering prices and that helped in the long run. There is no denying that.

Oh yeah, taking those PowerTowers apart and adding anything was a pain. I scraped many a knuckle installing RAM, a Zip Drive, Hard Drives and a processor upgrade – brutal.

I always heard a lot of negative things about PowerComputing but mine still runs well, with a 350MHz G3 processor upgrade OS 9 flies on it. I just don’t use OS 9 any more.

I had a PowerTower Pro, the top-of-the-line model. My remembrance is a little painful, because I bruised my fingers occasionally upgrading RAM and adding hard drives. It was hostile inside, and that was typical of the PC boxes on with Power’s products were based.

I soon returned to a pure Apple Mac, and sold the PowerTower Pro to a local graphic artist. Last I heard, his youngest child was still using it — and not opening the case of course.

Peace,
Gene

Apple was getting beat up by the clone manufactures that’s for sure. But in the end Apple learned something from it – How to build cheaper boxes and how to set up a profitable internet store by poaching ideas/management from PowerComputing. I am hoping that they can do the same here and realize how to be profitable in the cheaper/upgradable headless Mac.

*Disclaimer… In ‘97 I purchased a PowerCenter Tower because it was faster and less expensive than the Apple branded Mac. Long live the clones!!!!!!

To put the Mac clone idea in perspective, it’s important to remember why Steve Jobs ended the Mac clone experiment years ago. Originally Apple thought allowing clones would be a good way to get Windows users and new computer buyers to try out the Apple OS of the day.

What happened instead was that the clone makers found it easier to market their machines to current Mac users, so that’s what they did. When Steve came back it was apparent that the clones were taking away hardware sales from Apple instead of expanding the Mac OS into new territory. That’s why Steve killed the clones; Apple was losing money on it.

I imagine Apple (and Steve in particular) has not forgotten that lesson.

Exactly. The clone makers nearly killed Apple, and Steve did what was necessary. I think anyone who thinks he’d allow it in his lifetime — or at least during his stewardship over Apple — is smoking something unsavory.

Peace,
Gene

To put the Mac clone idea in perspective, it’s important to remember why Steve Jobs ended the Mac clone experiment years ago. Originally Apple thought allowing clones would be a good way to get Windows users and new computer buyers to try out the Apple OS of the day.

What happened instead was that the clone makers found it easier to market their machines to current Mac users, so that’s what they did. When Steve came back it was apparent that the clones were taking away hardware sales from Apple instead of expanding the Mac OS into new territory. That’s why Steve killed the clones; Apple was losing money on it.

I imagine Apple (and Steve in particular) has not forgotten that lesson.

To me the legality of this isn’t the issue. I figure Apple will be able to stop production with little effort.

The issue is, is a market for such a computer finally tempting enough for Apple to dive in? Is there enough demand for Apple to take notice and finally make an expandable computer at a lesser cost to the consumer?

Can Apple even do that and keep the profit margins where they like’em? Would it help expand Apple’s market share?

I can see the arguments for both sides on why Apple doesn’t sell such a computer. But will the buzz around this change their tune?

I wish I knew.

Here’s a link to an interesting Wired article that appraises the legalities of the situation: http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2008/04/apple_psystar

What might be more a more serious challenge to Apple would be a software emulator that would allow OSX to run on at least some qualified PCs. Apple might be able to sue or otherwise hassle individual Leopard purchasers for violation of the EULA, but I don’t see how they could sue the developer of the emulator any more than Microsoft could sue the developers of Parallels and VMware Fusion.