dekator said:
HAHA!! That is funny! I love your sarcasm. (Unless, you are being serious. In that case: relax.)
-Chuck
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple vs. Mac OS X Hackers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HAHA!! That is funny! I love your sarcasm. (Unless, you are being serious. In that case: relax.)
-Chuck
if somebody were shrinkwrapping a patched version of tiger or sharing a DVD image then that would be one thing, but sending the forums a DMCA notice is a stupid attack on hobbyists. most of the hobbyists doing this would probably be up to buying an unlocked version of tiger, but if apple insults them with DMCA BS the more likely it is that apple will fall into a piracy battle it CAN'T win. the poem is cute, though.
Choppaface said:
There were links at osx86 that were doing just that.Bittorrents of the DVD image..
lwood said:You obviously underestimate the ferocity of Apple's legal team, sir.
Yes, I have read about the apple legal team. I know that if apple went after individual users or sites they can stop that instance of it, but as a whole they will be as successfull as the RIAA in stopping music piracy. Microsoft has been trying to stop people from using pirated Windows for years, they have so far been unsuccessful.
The poem indicates a light hearted approach towards the hackers, but DMCA notice sounds quite harsh. Sometimes, if you fail to legally assert your rights about some trivial stuff, you may find that you have lost those rights when the real nasty problems arise. I wonder if this is their reasoning behind the DMCA notice. Kind of like "Aspirin" losing its trademark rights in the US and Xerox forcing people to use the term "photocopy" to make sure they don't face the same fate later...
Peace said:
alright, but all that really does is push the bittorrent links to other places. the only honest solution to this problem is still for Apple to figure out how to utilize this market... legal action against hobbyists just makes a bigger mess. if Apple can't serve the hobbyists, then the hobbyists will eventually yeild enough freely available tools for somebody to put a shrinkwrapped product on the black market, and then it's a lot bigger then sending websites DMCA notices.
I would certainly pay full retail for a copy of Tiger that runs on my PC, even if it required some patching for my specific hardware. I think it apple rebranded OSX for x86, removed the protection, and simply stated they don't offer any support that would be enough. They left it to the community to make dashboard widgets, why not for hardware support?
wait what? if i buy Tiger i can't try and install it on my PC? next thing they'll do is say that because I buy a cd I can't use it in the car and at home
bigjohn said:
That is utterly rediculous..
Tiger is designed to be installed on an Apple computer.Apple even states that in the system requirements.
woolfgang said:
Which software ? are you refering to 10.4.3 1111a?..That software was under NDA and was only to be used on the DTK..You could not buy it without buying the DTK.
!0.4.4 for Intel only came with the iMac..Don't think you can buy the DVD seperatly.
Apple seem to be generally quite soft when it comes to protecting their software. I will admit that on occassion I have downloaded an unofficial trial version of iLife to assess it before buying it. It is my loyalty to Apple that then makes me fork out the GBP 50 to get it.
I haven't done that since we finally got an Apple reseller locally.
What this leads to is the fact that Apple can be slack on their protection of non-OS applications because the OS has a limited and loyal user base. If the OS gets hacked and put on PCs regularly then the ball game changes. So Apple will pursue this with their full force and if they fail we will all suffer.
I haven't done that since we finally got an Apple reseller locally.
What this leads to is the fact that Apple can be slack on their protection of non-OS applications because the OS has a limited and loyal user base. If the OS gets hacked and put on PCs regularly then the ball game changes. So Apple will pursue this with their full force and if they fail we will all suffer.
A little bit hypocritical
While I realise that Apple have to protect their technology, Steve Jobs' anti-hacking comments lately have been a bit hypocritical. Here is a more appropriate poem:
"Your karma check for today: There once was a user that whined/the phone companies robbed him blind/he'd do better to phreak/with a 2600Hz beep/so a blue box was designed./Please don't steal phone calls!/Really, that's way uncool."
While I realise that Apple have to protect their technology, Steve Jobs' anti-hacking comments lately have been a bit hypocritical. Here is a more appropriate poem:
"Your karma check for today: There once was a user that whined/the phone companies robbed him blind/he'd do better to phreak/with a 2600Hz beep/so a blue box was designed./Please don't steal phone calls!/Really, that's way uncool."
http://http://www.win2osx.net/frontrow/
It appears that the other "well known" osx86 hacking site has also been served with "legal action", but has chosen to amend their user policy instead of shut down their forums. Now posting links to hacked apple code is forbidden but discussion of such material is allowed.
It appears that the other "well known" osx86 hacking site has also been served with "legal action", but has chosen to amend their user policy instead of shut down their forums. Now posting links to hacked apple code is forbidden but discussion of such material is allowed.
I'm liking the poem. It was very unexpected, unlike the DMCA violation notice, which almost everyone knew would be coming sooner or later.
Interestingly enough, the RIAA doesn't serve .torrent hosting sites with DMCA or copyright violation notices (MGM v. Grokster doesn't count), and in this I think Apple definately has the upper hand in the attempts to pirate their software. Whereas music is literally everywhere, Apple decides who sells their stuff besides them. Since Apple is obviously very well-read in 'net blogs, etc. which address Apple stuff, unlike the very few people who try to police P2P networks, they'll be far more active with their notices of copyright or DRM violation.
Off-topic question: How has the word "karma" (not "kama") been vulgarized on the 'net?
Interestingly enough, the RIAA doesn't serve .torrent hosting sites with DMCA or copyright violation notices (MGM v. Grokster doesn't count), and in this I think Apple definately has the upper hand in the attempts to pirate their software. Whereas music is literally everywhere, Apple decides who sells their stuff besides them. Since Apple is obviously very well-read in 'net blogs, etc. which address Apple stuff, unlike the very few people who try to police P2P networks, they'll be far more active with their notices of copyright or DRM violation.
Off-topic question: How has the word "karma" (not "kama") been vulgarized on the 'net?
jacobj said:
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.
But open up OS X to run on any old pc, as the osx86project is trying to convince Apple to do, and Apple's business model suddenly changes. All of a sudden they're in the business of selling software, instead of hardware, and that business model needs to be protected in other ways. Sure, the pirates will find ways around whatever copy protection, but those of us who do the right thing end up getting the shaft.
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.
Agreement
What people who think they have a right to do what they want after they have bought software... read your license agreement. You will see that "The software (including Boot Rom code)...are licensed, not sold, to you by Apple Computer, Inc..."
And goes on to say: "This license allows you to install, use and run one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so."
Bolding added by me.
So you see that there is nothing you can say that still doesn't mean you are violating your License Agreement. And if you don't agree with the license you can return it for a refund.
Simple
barstard.
What people who think they have a right to do what they want after they have bought software... read your license agreement. You will see that "The software (including Boot Rom code)...are licensed, not sold, to you by Apple Computer, Inc..."
And goes on to say: "This license allows you to install, use and run one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so."
Bolding added by me.
So you see that there is nothing you can say that still doesn't mean you are violating your License Agreement. And if you don't agree with the license you can return it for a refund.
Simple
barstard.
Peace said:Slick redirect to microsnot
I entered the adress in wrong, and extra "http:" will redirect you to microsoft, I did not know this. You must be quick because the post was up for about 2 seconds before I fixed it.
Use of the word karma
Sorry about that. It's very nice of you to defend other's religious feelings. But indeed as Buddhist I refer Karma just to be the basic principle of cause and effect. In this way the usage of the word by Apple is correct. May be
sombody has noticed Steve Jobs Commencement adress at Stanford University last autumn? If interested please go to
http://itunes.stanford.edu/
and watch Steve (you can download it as video for your iPOD) .
When you are a little familiar with Buddhist philosophy than you find that he is mentioning the very basic a biggest points of Buddhist philosophy there.
1. Steve said: "Connecting the dots" and it was: Cause and effect
2. Steve talked about: "Love" and it referred to Love and the wisdom behind that.
3. Steve said: "In fact, death is the greatest invention of life." - no comment.
Best wishes,
Fernando
dekator said:
Sorry about that. It's very nice of you to defend other's religious feelings. But indeed as Buddhist I refer Karma just to be the basic principle of cause and effect. In this way the usage of the word by Apple is correct. May be
sombody has noticed Steve Jobs Commencement adress at Stanford University last autumn? If interested please go to
http://itunes.stanford.edu/
and watch Steve (you can download it as video for your iPOD
) . When you are a little familiar with Buddhist philosophy than you find that he is mentioning the very basic a biggest points of Buddhist philosophy there.
1. Steve said: "Connecting the dots" and it was: Cause and effect
2. Steve talked about: "Love" and it referred to Love and the wisdom behind that.
3. Steve said: "In fact, death is the greatest invention of life." - no comment.
Best wishes,
Fernando
I used to think that is was a Bad Idea with the direction that Apple appears to be going, I'm still a little unsure. I love Mac OS X and I only want it to get better and better. But at the same time I like the small community. I only know four other people that own a Mac and one of them is my mom. Running Mac OS X on a PC is the best thing that could ever happen to the thing, I bet it makes the parts feel better inside. I own at least a half-a-dozen working Macs and use three of them on a daily basis. Getting Mac OS X to install, even on supported machines has almost always been a big pain for me. Many sleepless nights of failed attempts. I have the older 10.4.3 patched image and if someone happens to let me borrow their PC for a few days, it will go back to them upgraded. And in regard to the "Don't steal Mac OS" in the hidden message, I just don't see how every situation could be considered stealing (in Apple's eyes). If someone was to purchase a brand new iMac for example that has the Intel version of Mac OS X installed, and they build a PC and install OS X (that they bought) on it, surely that can't be stealing?Choppaface said: