Apple Shuts Down Mac OS X Download Listing, Moving to App Store

[Tonepoet]

Wait, what? The downloads page is going away? After all this time? It's been around since before OSX! This makes me sad, lonely and . It's sorta iconic as it was meant to be something to exhibit what the mac was truly capable of and bring the community together. Seeing it go away is kinda heartbreaking, like losing the the Happy Mac or the Technicolor Apple, except even worse since it actually has a practical day to day purpose other than sentimental familiarity. Dare I say it's almost as if we're losing Mactracker or even worse, the Macrumors website itself? 's really sellin' out. I mean, they don't even want to play with us at Macworld anymore. I can understand if Steve can't make it in poor health, busy with disney/pixar or whatever but they have more than one employee, don't they?

But yeah, getting back on track here I used to find all sorts of neat stuff on the downloads page, especially games since they're so scant and few between. I mean, just The Battle for Wesnoth alone is a game I played for years...

Who actually pays for shareware? Once in a blue moon someone "claims" they do. Maybe 1 time did I find a piece of shareware that I really felt like I should send the developer a "donation." If you make shareware, you'd probably make more money using the app store and selling for a buck or 2 than you do now.

I'm just about ready to swear off of downloadable content altogether myself with all this overbearing DRM nonsense but back in the day I thought shareware was a fabulous idea. Try something out, pass it along to friends, get exposure and then have everybody pay a one time fee to unlock its full potential using a personal key that served as a PoP and could be used at any time.

I'd have bought quite a few things if I actually had my own payment method back in the day but as things are I only ever really bought one piece of shareware, (not counting the Humble Indy Bundles): Escape Velocity Nova. I had to work out a deal with a friend to buy it on his credit card and in his name since he wasn't sure if he could put it in mine but I did it quite gladly. I actually bought it because I liked the original Escape Velocity but never had the chance to pay for it back in the day and I abused the heck out of the fact that the only thing that was locked out of the demo were plugins. It's probably for the best that things worked out the way they did though since Classic was on its way out. Albeit at the same time, I wish I could've given my dollars a voice: Maybe today's market would be somewhat different if more people did.

Finally if I'm following this topic right, it sounds like the Mac OS X software option goes away, to redirect us to the App Store, where there's no free stuff? Does this mean we'll have to pay for bugfixes, security patches and new iTunes versions? Totally bogus if so man. I mean, the first two are largely screwups on their part for stuff we already bought and the third makes them its own money via sales comissions... I seriously hope Apple has the good sense to make an exception for themselves at the very least.

 

[BaldiMac]

Finally if I'm following this topic right, it sounds like the Mac OS X software option goes away, to redirect us to the App Store, where there's no free stuff? Does this mean we'll have to pay for bugfixes, security patches and new iTunes versions? Totally bogus if so man. I mean, the first two are largely screwups on their part for stuff we already bought and the third makes them its own money via sales comissions... I seriously hope Apple has the good sense to make an exception for themselves at the very least.

There will be free software on the Mac App Store. And updates like you described will also continue to be free.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

This is an online forum. No one knows you or what you really mean. It helps to be clear.

No, only YOU seem to have that problem. I don't see anyone else claiming my posts are obtuse but you. But as always, you decide that YOUR point-of-view (or total lack thereof) is the view that EVERYONE ELSE also shares. After all, you have to be right and therefore everyone naturally agrees with you. The problem is your perception and reality are diametrically opposed to one another.

Or do a clean install of the software of your choice. What's your point?

And how do you do that on an iOS device that is designed to thwart just that? The fact that Apple has no taken anonymous individuals to court does not mean they are for hacking. The fact that Apple hasn't sued small potatoes does not mean they encourage hacking. One only has to look at Apple modifying iOS to break the hacks over the past few years to see that they are NOT for them in any way, shape or form. One only has to look at the way they repeatedly changed iTunes to prevent Palm from syncing their device to it to see that they will use their software to prevent competition from selling more hardware. When Microsoft does things like that, they end up in court. When Apple does it (despite passing Microsoft earlier this year), it's OK.

You claimed that Apple tells you what software you can run on your hardware. They do not. They only determine what software their software will run.

The fact you even think there is a difference tells me you are just dancing around the issue. Apple regularly leverages one market to prop up and/or impede competition in another market. The fact that the Clayton Anti-Trust laws forbids this means NOTHING to you or to others that think those laws were just "suggestions" and that large corporations can do anything they like unless it involves another large corporation. No one else matters.

Nope, just really trying to looking past the personal comments and the various ways you try and call me a fanboy.

You're right. You're not a fanboy. You just happen to defend everything Apple does 100% of the time. It's purely a coincidence.

I am aware of such laws, as you well know. I am also aware that none of them apply to the topic we are discussing.

The only thing I'm aware of is that you apparently cannot read plain English seeing that those laws are not in lawyer-speak and are not thousands of pages long and ANYONE can read them for themselves to see that the things I've said about them are 100% true. Apple breaks the tying clause of Clayton with OSX in their contract law. The first line of Sherman and the tying clause of Clayton make that perfectly clear to anyone that can read. But some try to twist laws for their own benefit and many rule on laws in favor of their own interests rather than what is written and that is where corruption and greedy self interests comes into the picture. You either cannot see that or simply refuse to admit it.

I am perfectly clear on what you think should be illegal. My only point is that it is not.

I am perfectly clear that your opinions on Anti-trust law are simply flat out in contradiction with what is written in those laws. The fact that some politicians and courts refuse to act on those laws does not change the content of those laws just as the Supreme Court ruling 5:4 that corporations are legally people and can contribute unlimited money for propaganda under 1st Amendment protection even if it means completely corrupting the Republic as a result and destroying this country from within tells me that 5 of them are absolutely corrupt (good to know in a system that lets them stay on the bench their entire life without any checks after the fact). It doesn't take Einstein to see that a corporation is not a person and that only a politician or judge working for them (because they're getting financial support to do so; in the old days we called these "bribes" and today we call them campaign contributions) would ever vote as such.

And here is where the conspiracy theories come into play. Whenever anyone has shown you court decisions and legal arguments about market
requirements for antitrust claims, you argue corruption, bias, and political influence. Kind of hard to have a rational discussion when you can just dismiss legal precedent with the wave of a tinfoil hat.

Denying the truth does not make the truth a conspiracy theory except in the mind of a fanatic, it seems.

You can keep on replying if you like, but I'm unsubscribing from this thread since apparently you are the only one that has anything left to say and what you say isn't worth reading.

 

[BaldiMac]

No, only YOU seem to have that problem. I don't see anyone else claiming my posts are obtuse but you. But as always, you decide that YOUR point-of-view (or total lack thereof) is the view that EVERYONE ELSE also shares. After all, you have to be right and therefore everyone naturally agrees with you. The problem is your perception and reality are diametrically opposed to one another.

Please stop trying to analyze my personality and making up my POV. I'll handle my side of the argument.

And how do you do that on an iOS device that is designed to thwart just that? The fact that Apple has no taken anonymous individuals to court does not mean they are for hacking. The fact that Apple hasn't sued small potatoes does not mean they encourage hacking. One only has to look at Apple modifying iOS to break the hacks over the past few years to see that they are NOT for them in any way, shape or form. One only has to look at the way they repeatedly changed iTunes to prevent Palm from syncing their device to it to see that they will use their software to prevent competition from selling more hardware. When Microsoft does things like that, they end up in court. When Apple does it (despite passing Microsoft earlier this year), it's OK.

I didn't mention hacking at all. I mentioned a clean install of any software of your choice. You can install Linux. You can install Android. Whatever. Apple doesn't have any say in what software you install on an iPhone, as long as the software doesn't belong to them. They only control the software post-sale, not the hardware.

The fact you even think there is a difference tells me you are just dancing around the issue. Apple regularly leverages one market to prop up and/or impede competition in another market. The fact that the Clayton Anti-Trust laws forbids this means NOTHING to you or to others that think those laws were just "suggestions" and that large corporations can do anything they like unless it involves another large corporation. No one else matters.

There is nothing wrong with leveraging one market to prop up your product in a different market. It happens all the time. It's good business. Burger King uses fries to sell burgers in their combos. It's completely legal unless you have sufficient market power in the market you are leveraging. And even if you do, other factors have to be demonstrated in order for an antitrust claim to go forward.

You're right. You're not a fanboy. You just happen to defend everything Apple does 100% of the time. It's purely a coincidence.

Except when I don't. I also try not to confuse "I wish Apple would do something different" with "I don't agree with what Apple did, so they must be (idiots, greedy, evil, illegal, control freaks, etc.)"

The only thing I'm aware of is that you apparently cannot read plain English seeing that those laws are not in lawyer-speak and are not thousands of pages long and ANYONE can read them for themselves to see that the things I've said about them are 100% true. Apple breaks the tying clause of Clayton with OSX in their contract law. The first line of Sherman and the tying clause of Clayton make that perfectly clear to anyone that can read. But some try to twist laws for their own benefit and many rule on laws in favor of their own interests rather than what is written and that is where corruption and greedy self interests comes into the picture. You either cannot see that or simply refuse to admit it.

I am perfectly clear that your opinions on Anti-trust law are simply flat out in contradiction with what is written in those laws. The fact that some politicians and courts refuse to act on those laws does not change the content of those laws just as the Supreme Court ruling 5:4 that corporations are legally people and can contribute unlimited money for propaganda under 1st Amendment protection even if it means completely corrupting the Republic as a result and destroying this country from within tells me that 5 of them are absolutely corrupt (good to know in a system that lets them stay on the bench their entire life without any checks after the fact). It doesn't take Einstein to see that a corporation is not a person and that only a politician or judge working for them (because they're getting financial support to do so; in the old days we called these "bribes" and today we call them campaign contributions) would ever vote as such.

We have a recent court case, on point to this discussion. The judge in the Psystar case threw out the specific antitrust claims that you are trying to make. Not because of corruption or politics, but because of rational legal arguments based on law and precedent that you can read in his order.

http://groklaw.net/article.php?story=20081118183927679

Denying the truth does not make the truth a conspiracy theory except in the mind of a fanatic, it seems.

When you claim a conspiracy without evidence...

You can keep on replying if you like, but I'm unsubscribing from this thread since apparently you are the only one that has anything left to say and what you say isn't worth reading.

Don't forget your ball.

 

[Maclver]

And the downloads section is still open?