Apple vs. Mac OS X Hackers

[MeatBiProduct]

microsoft sells two basic versions of windows: those that are upgrades and those that aren't. the upgrade does require a prior installation or at least the install disc of a prior windows version. the non-upgrade version does not.

installing an O/S and UPGRADING an O/S are two seperate things.

To go from windows xp sp1 to windows xp sp2 (just like OSX 10.3 - 10.4) I install a service pack. To go from Windows 98 to windows xp you format and reinstall unless your some total noob who wants a jacked up install.

Saying you HAVE to have an install of windows and use an upgrade disc to get to the latest version of windows is completely stupid. On the other hand, at least I didn't have to buy the O/S 3 times to get to the latest version.

 

[bosrs1]

No idea what that means but I thought I'd laugh anyway. Why can't Apple release some new hardware already and stop us all arguing about semantics and car parts!!

I don't know, but the new MacBook Pro w/ 2.16 is pretty tasty.

 

[jhu]

installing an O/S and UPGRADING an O/S are two seperate things.

To go from windows xp sp1 to windows xp sp2 (just like OSX 10.3 - 10.4) I install a service pack. To go from Windows 98 to windows xp you format and reinstall unless your some total noob who wants a jacked up install.

Saying you HAVE to have an install of windows and use an upgrade disc to get to the latest version of windows is completely stupid. On the other hand, at least I didn't have to buy the O/S 3 times to get to the latest version.

you don't quite understand how windows is installed. if you go to the store and buy the windows upgrade, you must have either windows installed on your computer or have the prior install disc handy. at least that was the way with the windows 98 upgrade. i don't have windows currently, so i wouldn't know what it's like now. for the mac, however, the boxed versions are all full os installs. going from windows xp sp1 to sp2 is not the same as going from osx 10.3 to 10.4.

 

[rjgjonker]

'Stealing'

I really don't understand the anti-hacker attitude here. Hackers brought us computers, they brought us the internet and they brought us open source software. They're cool!

Secondly, I don't get the Apple-apologising and I really don't get the stealing analogy. I currently have a nice desktop G4, which I plan to continue using for quite some time. When it's time for a new computer, I want to build it myself, without any crappy Intel hardware Apple has decided I should use or any of the other inferior components they have a habit of putting into their products. I want to select my own components. Of course I will buy Mac OS X. I will be using it, so why shouldn't I pay for it?

For some odd reason, a lot of people in this forum call that stealing. I would be installing software which I legally bought on a computer made of components that I legally bought. Of course I might be 'breaching' some stupid licence agreement which isn't legally valid anyway (not being signed, waiving European consumer rights, etc.), but that is morally and legally irrelevant. I just don't see the problem in that.

Apple should respect their users and shouldn't interfere with what their customers do with the software they bought. They can't even legally make such conditions in most countries. Nor should they be able to.

 

[bosrs1]

I really don't understand the anti-hacker attitude here. Hackers brought us computers, they brought us the internet and they brought us open source software. They're cool!

Secondly, I don't get the Apple-apologising and I really don't get the stealing analogy. I currently have a nice desktop G4, which I plan to continue using for quite some time. When it's time for a new computer, I want to build it myself, without any crappy Intel hardware Apple has decided I should use or any of the other inferior components they have a habit of putting into their products. I want to select my own components. Of course I will buy Mac OS X. I will be using it, so why shouldn't I pay for it?

For some odd reason, a lot of people in this forum call that stealing. I would be installing software which I legally bought on a computer made of components that I legally bought. Of course I might be 'breaching' some stupid licence agreement which isn't legally valid anyway (not being signed, waiving European consumer rights, etc.), but that is morally and legally irrelevant. I just don't see the problem in that.

Apple should respect their users and shouldn't interfere with what their customers do with the software they bought. They can't even legally make such conditions in most countries. Nor should they be able to.

Luckily people like you are in the minority among mac users. If your attitude were to spread OSX and Apple would become just another crap OS provider like MS.

 

[MeatBiProduct]

you don't quite understand how windows is installed. if you go to the store and buy the windows upgrade, you must have either windows installed on your computer or have the prior install disc handy. at least that was the way with the windows 98 upgrade. i don't have windows currently, so i wouldn't know what it's like now. for the mac, however, the boxed versions are all full os installs. going from windows xp sp1 to sp2 is not the same as going from osx 10.3 to 10.4.

you also forgot to mention, that only complete tools purchase an O/S upgrade - the logic here, is that if you were to ever loose the O/S, you would need to reinstall and old version of windows and reupgrade. perhaps if you were helping these tools install their O/S you might encounter an upgrade disk - I haven't since around 1998, 8 years ago - I have a list of other crazy crap that went on with all machines that same year if you want to read them.

these same people could have also spent $20 more and purchased the full O/S. Things you forgot to mention - which btw I loathe windows as much as the next person, only because I'm always made to clean up other peoples mess's.

- Windows XP doesn't require a prior O/S unless you purchased an upgrade disc, which you shouldn't.
- Windows 98 hasn't been supported since 2003 and hasn't been in print since 2001. Arguments about this O/S should also include the availble options from Apple since that was the basis, that windows requires a prior install to install the latest version.
- Windows xp hasn't required any additonal purchases to upgrade the O/S itself from the initial 2600 build to the latest version availble right now.
- To install windows freshly all you need is a windows xp disc.
- To upgrade a prior release of windows OTHER than windows xp TO windows XP; which shouldn't be done on any serious computer, it does require the purchase of an upgrade CD.

The difference is the original poster stated, to get from 1 version of OS X to another you could easily do it with a disc that has the latest full version of OS X on it. This is the same O/S from the exact same code tree - this is not moving from a prior O/S to a tottally new O/S. In comparison, Windows XP does NOT require ANY additional disc or purchases in order to upgrade from the very first initial release to the latest release - it only takes a SP disc or a download - FREELY - from the windows update center or various other venues that offer the SP in its entirety.

So please tell me, how do I get from the original release of OS X to the latest available with just my original install disc without any purchase. If anything is f'd up, thats f'd up. Buying the exact same thing multiple times.

Also before some mac cult members jump my bones, I own a iMac, a G4, an ipod, and use a duel G5 workstation and multiple multi-processor clustered X-Serves at work, all running powerpc chips. I'm not a windows supporter, I'm not a mac supporter, I use the right tool for the right job always. No O/S or single computer can fulfill every need. If you can't agree to that you're a complete idiot and shouldn't even reply to this post.

 

[mdavey]

Luckily people like you are in the minority among mac users. If your attitude were to spread OSX and Apple would become just another crap OS provider like MS.

Or perhaps it would encourage Apple to innovate technology more and focus on differentiating the quality of their hardware from those dull little boxes (rather than just the innovative design).

 

[tasslehawf]

I actually can not figure out why apple even bothered with this. A new site will pop up. People want osx on generic machines, some people find wrong in this, but that does not take away the demand.

People want it and don't want to pay for it. It can not be stopped. This is simalar to the RIAA and there beef with file sharing, they can never stop it.

I would gladly pay for it in a heartbeat if Apple made a version that would install on generic pc's.

 

[griz]

Why is it stealing?

If I buy a copy of OSX Tiger, hack it and install it on a dell, how is this stealing? I paid for the OS. Just because Apple wants me to buy their hardware, too damn bad. Personally, I like their hardware, but I am a big supporter of freedom to choose. If someone wants to pay for OS X, they should be able to do whatever they want with it.

 

[snowmen]

Apple does not sell OSX by itself; they sell upgrades to OSX. They are still well within their rights and they are not Tying in any manner from what I have seen them sell in the market. I think you just to BELIEVE that they are Tying to justify your desire to steal from them.

It is Apple's choice of business models, not their customers. If you want free software, go get Linux.

No.
1. Apple DO sell full instal OS X.

2. They are not Tying and still well within their rights BEFORE entering into Intel.
But Now, if you want to get OS X, you HAVE to get a Mac. BUT, the Mac's spec is same as other PC manufactures'. That is where the tying comes from. It's unfair for other manufactures because they cannot be competitive with Apple's Hardware. That Breaks the Anti-Trust Law. If Apple's Hardware is THAT GOOD as you guys said, their sale will not go down that much at all. BUT you guys start worring for your Apple. Why? Afraid of competition?

3. NO, you're wrong again. I'm not only a royal customer to Apple (From Motorola to G3 to G4 to G5), but I'm also a shareholder. If customer cannot speak out what they want with Apple, then shareholder at least can. But then of course I cannot change Apple's business model. If Apple decide to run their business model right on the edge of the violation of Anti-Trust Law, then go ahead... Just don't be another Microsoft when US government decide they finish with Microsoft and want to find another target.

AND, as I said, I'll get a MacBook Pro or MacBook or whatever Apple laptop comes with Illuminated keyboard for sure. I might even buy 2 to 3 licenced Leopard or get 2 licenses on the laptop, and I'll play around with OS X86 on my PC to kill time. With that, as I said before, Apple can only question me about violating of EULA, but since it's not easy to enforce because its questionable legality, I won't care any sooner.

 

[sw1tcher]

next thing they'll do is say that because I buy a cd I can't use it in the car and at home

That's probably not too far behind. The RIAA's already saying that ripping CDs to an iPod is not fair use.

I imagine that they'll soon tell us to purchase a CD for each device that it's going to be played on.

 

[nataku]

If I buy a copy of OSX Tiger, hack it and install it on a dell, how is this stealing? I paid for the OS. Just because Apple wants me to buy their hardware, too damn bad. Personally, I like their hardware, but I am a big supporter of freedom to choose. If someone wants to pay for OS X, they should be able to do whatever they want with it.

It is true and correct that you bought it therefore you can use it to how you see fit. However, the freedom that you are saying is not limitless. We still have to adhere to rules. Think of the OS X as a sacred religious book. You can buy any religious book without any restriction (whether you are Chrisitan, Muslim, Buddhist, Jewish etc...) but you can't always use it to how you see fit. You can't (and shouldn't) use it as a paper napkin or scratch paper (or whatever other "debatable" purpose you want) because you have to respect the rules given by their respective religions. You can't desecrate or defile it. Like the software that Apple creates, you have to adhere to their rules.

When you buy something, you get everything that comes with it.

 

[sw1tcher]

As I've said before, read your license agreement that comes with Mac OS. It's not STEALING if you install YOUR copy on a PC, but it is a violation of your license agreement with Apple, both because you have it installed on more than one machine, and because you have installed it on a non-Apple-
labeled computer! If you download a copy of Mac OS from the internet you are stealing regardless of whether it is a hacked copy or not.

Sorry, I mistook your bracket's meaning! But it would still be a violation.

barstard.

Even if it were downloaded from the internet, it's still not stealing because no one's been deprived of it. It's just copyright infringement. In order for something to be stolen, someone must be deprived of it.

 

[windmaomao]

Luckily people like you are in the minority among mac users. If your attitude were to spread OSX and Apple would become just another crap OS provider like MS.

come on, don't talk like that. As I know, most of mac users were rich guys with no time and no interest knowning computers. It's getting not true any more though.

But no offense, that's why I like mac os x.

p.s if not with x11, I won't be able to stick with my powerbook.

 

[nataku]

For some odd reason, a lot of people in this forum call that stealing. I would be installing software which I legally bought on a computer made of components that I legally bought. Of course I might be 'breaching' some stupid licence agreement which isn't legally valid anyway (not being signed, waiving European consumer rights, etc.), but that is morally and legally irrelevant. I just don't see the problem in that.

Apple should respect their users and shouldn't interfere with what their customers do with the software they bought. They can't even legally make such conditions in most countries. Nor should they be able to.

licenSe agreements have a purpose. Therefore, they are not stupid. Maybe when you have an invention that is worth billions, you will know why you should protect your investment.

This is where you have crossed the line to make Freedom as an excuse for Abuse.

 

[windmaomao]

That's probably not too far behind. The RIAA's already saying that ripping CDs to an iPod is not fair use.

I imagine that they'll soon tell us to purchase a CD for each device that it's going to be played on.

I guess eventually everyone will start to use linux like os, 'cause no piracy detectors are installed.

 

[MeatBiProduct]

licenSe agreements have a purpose. Therefore, they are not stupid. Maybe when you have an invention that is worth billions, you will know why you should protect your investment.

This is where you have crossed the line to make Freedom as an excuse for Abuse.

Your right, there isn't anything more important in the one life you have then make money and maintain it. :applaud: Greed = Power = Godliness.

GNU what? Umm the great billion dollar product (OS X) that apple has is freely available - it's called BSD and it's 9/10th's of your OS X installation.

 

[cslewis]

I think this is a very funny and original idea. Instead of a heavy-handed legal warning, why not a sensitive yet cautionary bit of haiku?

 

[spikeovsky]

And it seems the 'net is lacking also in the first kind... Remember Google.cn?

At the risk of being off-topic, I'm going to have to respond to this. The Google.cn thing is a complete non-issue in China. The internet here is already heavily censored, but it has still been a medium through which people can have conversations they wouldn't otherwise be having. Google.com is not blocked, and when Google.cn blocks results, it tells the user that it has done so in accordance with Chinese law -- it's certainly less sneaky about this than some Chinese search engines. If Google were to leave China to the Chinese search engines, I think there would be even less transparency about internet censorship.

Good article here:
http://www.danwei.org/archives/002404.html

...Aaaand to bring it back on topic

Even with Apple's recent successes, they will NEVER move beyond 5% of the market. Unless they adopt a strategy like Dell, which is to go rock bottom and be a loss leader selling product as cheaply as possible. That's the only way to build market share. Will they be satisfied with a small but profitable segment of the market?

I don't think that market share is really the main focus over at Apple. Sure, it would be nice to add a few percentage points to that market share number, but I doubt they plan to dump their R&D spending and join Dell and others in a race to the bottom any time soon. Small and profitable is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[nataku]

Your right, there isn't anything more important in the one life you have then make money and maintain it. :applaud: Greed = Power = Godliness.

GNU what? Umm the great billion dollar product (OS X) that apple has is freely available - it's called BSD and it's 9/10th's of your OS X installation.

What's your point? It clearly shows how much you know in business.

Your right,

you're = you are. your=your

 

[jhu]

licenSe agreements have a purpose. Therefore, they are not stupid. Maybe when you have an invention that is worth billions, you will know why you should protect your investment.

This is where you have crossed the line to make Freedom as an excuse for Abuse.

they're not necessarily stupid, but they're also not entirely enforceable either.

 

[snowmen]

I guess eventually everyone will start to use linux like os, 'cause no piracy detectors are installed.

If you buy some of the CD from Asia, you will get a warning saying: Only Windows PC are able to listen...
Really, Mac and Linux cannot listen to the CD!

 

[jumpinjohn]

Your right, there isn't anything more important in the one life you have then make money and maintain it. :applaud: Greed = Power = Godliness.

Exactly! Everything should be free! That way nobody can make any money. There will be no greed and no power. We will all love each other. The complete reason for human misery is those stinky people that want money and control over their innovations.

See 'ya

 

[Uragon]

This is a point worth making. Part of the reason I love Apple is that none of the software I use requires any sort of copy protection that would take away my control. No dongles, no activation schemes... And because I believe in supporting that model, I pay for the software I use...........

.......Thanks, but no thanks, osx86project. I *like* Apple's current business model, because it protects their consumers from all the copy protection BS that has become so prevalent in the Windows world. You guys are just ruining it for everyone.

I totally agree with you 200%

 

[bearda]

If I buy a copy of OSX Tiger, hack it and install it on a dell, how is this stealing? I paid for the OS. Just because Apple wants me to buy their hardware, too damn bad. Personally, I like their hardware, but I am a big supporter of freedom to choose. If someone wants to pay for OS X, they should be able to do whatever they want with it.

Tell you what, you go and buy a copy of OS X Tiger for Intel and we'll talk about stealing.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

This whole "I'd pay for it if I could, so I'll just steal it now" argument is BS. The vast majority of people installing OS X on their PCs right now have illegally downloaded it, not bought it.

Andrew Beard