Should Apple use Copy Protection?

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by exbox, Aug 29, 2002.

?

Should Apple start using Copy Protection?

  1. Yes. Illegal file sharing hurts companies.

    5 vote(s)
    23.8%
  2. No. Copy Protection will limit my freedom.

    13 vote(s)
    61.9%
  3. Undecided

    3 vote(s)
    14.3%
  1. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2002
    Location:
    sneaking up behind you with a knife...
    #1
    Mac OS X is starting to seem like a heavily pirated OS. You can find places to download public release versions and beta versions. I beleive apple should start to take measures against this. Then there is the question, though, how can you stop the illegal share of files without intruding on our rights?
     
  2. arn
    macrumors god

    arn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2001
    #2
    Re: Should Apple use Copy Protection?

    the most direct way would to be send lawyers after the sites that distrubute this stuff.... because copy protection isn't going to stop the distribution.

    arn
     
  3. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Location:
    chicago
    #3
    i think apple is doing the right thing and competitively pricing their products...im a starving college student who is willing to put down $70 for a major upgrade (from what I hear) for os x 10.2 and many people who are serious about their apples will drop the $129. if i ever saw them introduce a $500 office suite then i'd **** a brick but i think that their pricing model is just right to woo over those people interested in gaininig their copy through illegal means...$129 could potentially save them ALOT of money and heartache down the road (minimum $100/hour for a decent lawyer)
     
  4. macrumors 603

    rainman::|:|

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2002
    Location:
    iowa
    #4
    Re: Re: Should Apple use Copy Protection?

    Hear, hear. all copy protection does is make it difficult to upgrade software and reinstall... i detest that huge SN on windows, i always misplace the label and i'm screwed. With shareware, serial numbers make sense, as it stops all but the most determined people... well, before surfer, anyway... but operating systems... bah

    pnw
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    Shrek

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Nashville, Tennessee USA
    #5
    Absolutely. Stealing is immoral and only hurts others. :(
     
  6. Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #6
    It's a lot like shoplifting. Someone pays for the stolen merchandise--the honest consumer.

    I know that Apple have high margins, but not with Mac OS X--yet. They have too many people dedicated to getting it going for it to really be profitable in a big way right now.

    The server software should be tied to a serial number in the machine--just like the big guys have. You have that serial number as long as you keep the machine/O.S. combination current, even through upgrades.

    It's really not a terrible thing to expect. Apple should protect themselves at least, on the server level. If they would go with something on the consumer level, it would have to be very clever and not so intrusive to make things go smoothly.

    I want to be able to afford the software to use my machine, so paying a reasonable price is the only way to keep doing that. Everybody buy Mac OS X. Well, at least, if you have a machine that will run it. If you've got a Wintel machine, buy two copies of Mac OS X. :D
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    Royal Pineapple

    #7
    NO
    i like being able to make copys of my boot cds to take with me, so if i lose it or scratch it, no problemo,


    the server os is pretected, the question is weather this should apply to all of their software.
     
  8. Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #8
    Mac OS X Server is barely protected. You can give the serial number to multiple people...it's not tied to the machine.
     
  9. macrumors 65816

    evildead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Location:
    WestCost, USA
    #9
    no point in doing it

    anything you protect can be broken. I dont want to see what MS is doing with their maditory registration and hard ware licence keys.. that would just be a pain in the ass. I had my hands on a copy of 10.2 a while ago... but I had my order into apple just as long. Im one student that didnt mind spending the $69 for OS 10.2. And I love it.

    -evildead
     
  10. macrumors 601

    cb911

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Location:
    BrisVegas, Australia
    #10
    i voted 'yes' but then i realised that it would make things more difficult for the user. i can't believe that people would do that to OS X, especially 10.2

    but copy protection isn't the solution, anything can be cracked...
     
  11. macrumors 68000

    SilvorX

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    'Toba, Canada
    #11
    no, since apple=NOT MS, one of the main reasons quite a few pc fans switched to macs when xp came out was due to the stupid lame xp activation scheme
    in some ways yes it should be copy protected but when it comes to when your cd is scratched/warn and your best friend wants to burn a copy of the software (if hes a cheap @$$) then it would be a bad idea for copy protection
    if mac os EVER comes to x86, put TONNES of copy protection on the cds (if the ppc version stays)...since the ppc users would be the true mac users, while the x86 mac users would just be wannabes lol
    (i cant really think right now)
     

Share This Page