Jailbreaking lets you run non-Apple approved software on Apple hardware.
Psystar was running Apple OS software on its own hardware.
I can think of lots of reasons for Apple to take a hard line on this:
Apple wants to control the quality of both hardware and software to protect its image. That image is in contrast to Windows which has a reputation for being a buggy virus magnet, and bloated in memory use. Having non-Apple software crash on Apple hardware looks bad but having OS X crash looks even worse. Having OS X run FASTER on cheaper non-Apple hardware also makes Apple look bad. They don’t want to be relegated to software only like Microsoft and susceptible to the vagaries of hardware makers.
“Jailbreaking lets you run non-Apple approved software on Apple hardware.
Psystar was running Apple OS software on its own hardware.”
Exactly and this is why I’m confused. Isn’t it the same basic concept? A non Apple product is still being used on an Apple product either way. I totally get why Apple is suing, I am just brainlocked how one way is considered ‘legal’ and what appears to be the same basic concept, IP wise, the other way isn’t. Then again my argument supposes hardware to be IP as well.
Not being argumentative, just wholly confused. Then again it’s 3:45 am here ;)