I think one thing that hasn't really been touched on yet, is the status of the EULA as it stands. Until it's actually enforced in a court of law, to all intents and purposes it's just an "agreement" - nothing else. Apple would have to bring legal action in order to make it stick.
People seem to assume that Apple can automatically enforce their EULA. They can't. In order to really give it teeth, it has to be tested, and that's what a court does. Otherwise I could write an EULA that stated "In order to use this software, you must first have sex with your sister". It would be ludicrous and unenforceable. Now, that's an extreme example to make a point, but concepts such as "you may only install this software on Apple-labeled hardware" hasn't been tested in terms of competition law. That's exactly the case that is currently being decided between Apple and Psystar as I write.