Where are they fighting losing control of their hardware in respect to how you are framing it? Psystar is not a threat to compatibility, who cares if they are compatible, it's a threat to Apple's money making machine, the hardware. And I don't say that in a negative way, of course any company is going to fight for their main turf. But make no mistake, keeping control has nothing to do with keeping quality between their own hardware/software.
My point in another thread I began was taken into regions unknown on purpose to deflect, no one wanted to address the question. There is a big difference between a company being formed and selling hardware with OS X on the machines and a few hackers being able to cram OS X on a netbook for kicks. On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:54 PM, David K Watson <[email protected]>wrote: > > > To tie into another thread, Apple couldn't have done all this > nearly as well if they didn't have complete control over their > hardware, which is probably a major reason that they are > fighting so hard to keep this control. > > Apple is the best example, but not the only one. Linux has > shown dramatic feature improvements, and it is not uncommon > for a release to be faster than its predecessor. > > ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
