Apple had recently filed suit against clone-maker, Psystar, that was packaging OS X with their computers for being in violation of the OS X EULA, which restricts OS X to Apple hardware. How did Psystar respond? In the only reasonable way possible, they filed a countersuit saying that Apple is engaging in anti-competitive behaviors by tying their operating system to their own hardware. I’ve been waiting for this day as that is my number one complaint about Apple. I like their products, but I wish they were a bit more open (you can arguably say that they are more “closed” than Microsoft, though fanboys will say that Apple is a hardware company while Microsoft is a software company). No matter how you spin it, Apple is both a hardware and a software company since they do make both.
I like OS X. Heck, I’ll go as far as saying I love it (though it crashed on me this afternoon when I was shutting it down, as it does every few weeks… which is more often than Windows crashes on me, including Vista). I just hate that you have to buy overpriced hardware to use it. The hardware in Macs is no different than the hardware in a decent business class PC, which can be had for a lower price if you know where to look.
I hope Psystar can make some headway with this countersuit. It’s everything the tech world needs right now. Apple’s lock-ins (the iTunes/iPod lock-in, which is partially gone with their DRM-free music, even though they charge more for it, and the OS X/Mac lock-in) have lasted too long. Everyone loves to bash Microsoft about their anti-competitive behaviors, and I’m not saying they don’t deserve some of the bashing, but Apple has been ignored for too long. Having a smaller marketshare should not exclude you from scrutiny.