Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Point blank the moral of the story is this.

Hmm...charging $30 for a compilation of Windows drivers, most of which were written by HW vendors.
Sounds to me like apple is starting a "charge for drivers trend"

They truly are THINKING DIFFRENT.

Enough said.

Now bow down to apple and cry in the future when they start charging you 1.99
for turning on the computer, opening any app 20cents. $2.99 for opening safari and .30 cents per page load.
iKinkos


And even then some of you idiots will still bow down to apple and find excuses to justify the prices.
"well thats common business practice kinkos been doing for years i dont see why apple is under fire for doing it" lol
 
Hmm...charging $30 for a compilation of Windows drivers, most of which were written by HW vendors.

Don't forget the non-destructive HFS+ repartitioning tool, and who knows what else they'll throw in the package.

It would be $15 cheaper than iPartition and definitely works.

B
 
Point blank the moral of the story is this.

Hmm...charging $30 for a compilation of Windows drivers, most of which were written by HW vendors.
Sounds to me like apple is starting a "charge for drivers trend"

They truly are THINKING DIFFRENT.

Enough said.

Are you a software engineer? Inside knowledge of Apple or HW?
Yeah, didn't think so. 'Nuff said.
 
If BootCamp allowed the use of a BT keyboard then I'd buy it. But it doesn't. So bleh.

Thats not BootCamp stopping you from using your BlueTooth keyboard....once the Windows OS has booted, BootCamp is done and out of the picture. Windows support for BlueTooth keyboards is your issue.

I don't really like this whole thing that Apple's doing...

Apple giveth (draft-N, BootCamp), and then Apple taketh away ($1.99 charge, $30 charge).

Its a legal issue, not a greed issue.

Will you be able to use Vista with Boot Camp?

Does Vista support EFI?

No wonder Apple is posting 1 billion profit in a quarter.
Sad part is, people will still buy this boot camp program.
I don't think it will be compatible with VISTA.

Next Mac World conference should be just a Question and Answer session with Steve Jobs, asking him about these money making stunts and all the hardware problems Macs have.

Bye findpankaj :apple:
 
Point blank the moral of the story is this.

Hmm...charging $30 for a compilation of Windows drivers, most of which were written by HW vendors.
Sounds to me like apple is starting a "charge for drivers trend"

They truly are THINKING DIFFRENT.

Really? Most of us think they're doing pretty much any other business is doing.

Of course, most of us get out of the house every now and then...

Enough said.

Yeah, guess so.

Jeezus, when are you guys gonna grow up....
 
And what is that, Linux?

In my case, yes.

Congrats, go find an open source version of bootcamp and use that, or program it yourself. Or perhaps you were implying that you pirated OSX?

No, I have not pirated OS X.

Wrong. Dead wrong. Software dev cost money.

By your definition, EVERYTHING costs money. Want to have some friends over for a party? Pay them, I mean, they are spending their time at your place, and time is money. Oh, I'm jut spending my valuable time typing this reply, better hand me some cash ASAP.

Time is money, work is money, and any of those software developers could be making *more* money if they sold their work instead of handing it out for free.

That kind of thinking is the root cause why our society is so screwed up these days. What happened to doing things because you get enjoyment out of it, instead of doing something for earning a buck or two? Like it or not, there is more to life than money. A lot more. And like it or not, there are lots of people doign things for free. And they get their rewards for their work, they just might not get any money from it. KHTML-developers? No, they didn't get any money when Apple and Nokia chose their code for the basis of their browser. So what did they get? They get patches and improvements that made their software even better. They got that great feeling when they realized that there will be millions upon millions of people using their software.

However that is the beauty of open source software, it is often times developed by many different software engineers, over a long period of time.

And many times it's not.

The cost to the individual may not be that great, and the volunteer effort is much appreciated. But the net value is still the same.

What cost? If some developer uses his free time developing some free app, what does it cost him? Electricity? Well, is there a difference between spending that electricity for coding, as opposed to reading macrumors.com? Or playing Gears of War on Xbox360?

And news flash, Safari is free!!

Last time I checked, it's part of OS X, and OS X is not free.

Apple developers who go to work every day to bring home money for their family end up working on a free product. I'm sure they enjoy the fact that Apple pays their checks from funds from other sources of revenue.

And that means that when some developer writes free software, it also "costs money"? How exactly? Yes, many such developers are paid for their work, but many are not.

This does not negate the fact that a person spends their time creating a work (improved upon a base or not) and compensation is sometimes helpful.

So, "sometimes"? It's not absolutely required anymore? Of course it helps if someone gives money for the software. But that does not mean that it's absolutely required to ask money for the software, just becuase they spent their "valuable time" on it. Hell, I spent about one hour of my "valuable time" playing with my Nintendo Wii, who should I send the bill for my time?

See above.

See what? Some mind-numbing rambling about how "time is money!"?

There are two different paths for software, Open Source or Company product.

Everything Red Hat writes is released as free software. Yet they earn quite a bit of money from software.

Apple can not hand out all software for free.

Where exactly did I say that they should do that? I said that I have no problems with them charging for Boot Camp. I have no problems with them asking money for other pieces of software. What I did was to challenge the mentality that "software-developement costs money, and therefore asking money for software is a requirement!". There is a huge pool of software out there that goes totally against that claimy, and I merely pointed that out. I did NOT say that "I demand that Apple releases all their software for free!"

But if you dislike companies selling products, by all means find an open source solution or make it yourself.

Did you actually read my comment at all? Let me repeat what I said in the VERY FIRST SENTENCE OF MY POST:

Well, I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp.

Is the above comment written in Esperanto or something, or why is it so hard to understand?

Apple is fully justified in charging for it's products, even if it's not what you want.

Like I said: "I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp.". Do I need to repeat it again? "I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp."

To be grateful a product is free is one thing. To whine moan and complain because a product cost money is just beyond me.:(

Once more for the road: "I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp."
 
People get up, get dressed and go to work for 8 hours. Sorry to disappoint you, but their houses don't pay for themselves. They enjoy their work? Good. Doesn't mean they shouldn't get paid for it. It's not all fun either. Debugging is hell.
They are even including it with the next OS release. Could they be any more reasonable. (Or the better question, could you be any more unreasonable?)
EDIT: What? Now you have no problem with them charging for boot camp. Okay, me neither.
 
People get up, get dressed and go to work for 8 hours. Sorry to disappoint you, but their houses don't pay for themselves. They enjoy their work? Good. Doesn't mean they shouldn't get paid for it. It's not all fun either. Debugging is hell.

Like I said, there are plenty of software that are written for the fun of it, and not as a part of a "work". No, I'm not saying that charging money for software is wrong. What I AM saying is that there's lots of software written for other reasons than monetary compensation.`I NEVER said tht "Boo, Apple should release Boot Camp for free!". What I DID say was "Well, you can write software for your own enjoyment, withour requiring others to pay for the software". But maybe that idea is alien to Mac-users, since even the tiniest pieces of software on the Mac seem to have a pricetag attached to them? Is the idea that someone writes software, and simply gives it away so totally alien to you guys? Do you really believe that everything and everyone is about money?

EDIT: What? Now you have no problem with them charging for boot camp. Okay, me neither.

Um, I never had any problems with them charging for it. Doesn't anyone read the comments they are replying to? Is there something wrong with my English or something? What part of "Well, I have no issues with them charging for Boot Camp" is hard to understand?
 
First off, I want to start by apologizing to Evangelion, and misrepresenting his post. A few other members disregard for the way things exist today, and the software engineering field, got me a bit more rattled than I should have been. Evangelism was one of the few to take one of my posts to task, and called one of my statements "absolute crap" which caused me to spin off in not so much a direct response to him, though I definitely worded it that way, but more others on the board. Again, my apologize.

By your definition, EVERYTHING costs money. Want to have some friends over for a party? Pay them, I mean, they are spending their time at your place, and time is money. Oh, I'm jut spending my valuable time typing this reply, better hand me some cash ASAP.

That kind of thinking is the root cause why our society is so screwed up these days. What happened to doing things because you get enjoyment out of it, instead of doing something for earning a buck or two? Like it or not, there is more to life than money. A lot more. And like it or not, there are lots of people doign things for free. And they get their rewards for their work, they just might not get any money from it. KHTML-developers? No, they didn't get any money when Apple and Nokia chose their code for the basis of their browser. So what did they get? They get patches and improvements that made their software even better. They got that great feeling when they realized that there will be millions upon millions of people using their software.

You took the idea of Apple making money to a philosophical level. I don't think we really need to debate that here on the forum. If you would like to discuss the morals of money and society with me we can do that in private. Though I dare say we probably agree on the philosophical level.

What cost? If some developer uses his free time developing some free app, what does it cost him? Electricity? Well, is there a difference between spending that electricity for coding, as opposed to reading macrumors.com? Or playing Gears of War on Xbox360?

Yes. Though you did not claim it, others here are claiming that it should be free. Your claim that other software is free only backed up their claim. My reply was in the case of open source vs Apple, and how reality sits at the moment. Apple can not give away software, and to ask them to do so right now is absurd. I'm aware that you did not suggest this.


Last time I checked, it's part of OS X, and OS X is not free.

Can't we use that logic to say that even the icons cost money?
There is a difference there in time and effort.

And that means that when some developer writes free software, it also "costs money"? How exactly? Yes, many such developers are paid for their work, but many are not.

I'm going to hazard a wild uneducated stab in the dark and say more lines of code were compensated for in the world of software than not.

So, "sometimes"? It's not absolutely required anymore? Of course it helps if someone gives money for the software. But that does not mean that it's absolutely required to ask money for the software, just becuase they spent their "valuable time" on it. Hell, I spent about one hour of my "valuable time" playing with my Nintendo Wii, who should I send the bill for my time?

Which is different. The problem is the forum telling Apple and the individual developers at Apple what their time is worth. You wouldn't want a bunch of people telling you what you did for a living wasn't worth compensation. Saying that someone else in the world does your line of work for free in his spare time really doesn't justify not paying you.

I've worked in software engineering, and will have my degree shortly, so the idea hits home a little more for me perhaps. Perhaps, that is, I'm not sure what your line of work is, and perhaps you are a computer scientist as well.

In the end, sadly I would like money because the world more or less requires it to get by. I'd like to get paid to do what I enjoy, and I'm paying for an education that will allow that. While I applaud the open source community, and have worked on a project myself, it irks me a little bit to have people that do not belong to the field, disregard the effort that was put into software like bootcamp as nothing more than child's play. Better yet, as apple stealing someone else's code and charging money for it. I'm aware this is not you, though your comments as seen through my knee jerk reaction appeared to be defending that point. Again, apologizes :( .

Friends?

Like I said, there are plenty of software that are written for the fun of it, and not as a part of a "work". No, I'm not saying that charging money for software is wrong. What I AM saying is that there's lots of software written for other reasons than monetary compensation.`I NEVER said tht "Boo, Apple should release Boot Camp for free!". What I DID say was "Well, you can write software for your own enjoyment, withour requiring others to pay for the software". But maybe that idea is alien to Mac-users, since even the tiniest pieces of software on the Mac seem to have a pricetag attached to them? Is the idea that someone writes software, and simply gives it away so totally alien to you guys? Do you really believe that everything and everyone is about money?

Is there something wrong with my English or something? What part of "Well, I have no issues with them charging for Boot Camp" is hard to understand?

I think the problem is that within the contest of the conversation at hand, it can be easy to miss what you are trying to say.
In this case there is Apple, a for profit organization releasing software that they plan to make money on. And there are those Apple users that think it should be free.

I made the mistake of you claiming that "software can be free, here are examples" as defending the position that Apple should release it for free. Apple is not open source, and so defending the position of open source isn't quite relevant except as a nitpick to posts like mine. Though my posts are often times not entirely relevant either :D
Just pointing out what may be going through other people's heads, or at least mine.

As for Apple users being foreign to open source and free software, I think those flaming Apple for charging money shows that it is not foreign in the least bit! Though perhaps a little bit unrealistic in context of who the developers are.
 
What a bunch of cheap a$$ whiners!

Now bow down to apple and cry in the future when they start charging you 1.99
for turning on the computer, opening any app 20cents. $2.99 for opening safari and .30 cents per page load.

Thank you, Nostradamus, I'll write that down and make sure to give you credit when that happens. Oh, wait, I'm almost out of toilet paper. Sorry.

I personally don't give a flip about Boot Camp. I personally find it an inconvenient way to run Windows (having to reboot to get back and forth from OS X). Having to use Windows for anything is already an inconvenience.

People were badmouthing Apple from the start with the Intel machines because they were assuming that Apple wouldn't even let you boot Windows on the machine. People were begging for Windows boot capability from the start. So, Apple creates a hook in the OS that lets you boot from another partition on your hard drive, and bundles tested hardware drivers and a repartitioning utility. So Apple wants to charge $30 for the non-beta version.

If you installed BETA software, which states up front that it's an expiring Beta license, with the final version to be a part of Leopard, and now you're acting surprised that you have to upgrade to Leopard to get it? But, Apple's willing to realease a stand alone version and you're whining that it's $30 bucks???

Go home and sob in your pillow, people...

Or better yet, just take all the energy wasted in whining and earn more than enough money to pay for the software you're using.
 
Boot Camp really consists of two components: The partitioning and installation helper tool on the one hand and the drivers for Windows on the other hand. Charging for drivers is very uncommon in the Windows world because most hardware is designed to be used with Windows in the first place. This is also the case for most components in todays Macs and probably most of the drivers included in Boot Camp were written by the suppliers of the corresponding devices. I don't know this, but I guess they can also be downloaded for free directly from the companies making these drivers. The partitioning and installation helper tool, however, is a different story. It has been written by Apple and is not a driver. So charging for the whole package is not unreasonable especially if they fully support it (which the MR article didn't really say anything about).

Another question: Did Apple ever mention that people could install windows on Macs as well as OSX after they released the boot camp beta in their advertisements?
 
I think the problem is that within the contest of the conversation at hand, it can be easy to miss what you are trying to say.
In this case there is Apple, a for profit organization releasing software that they plan to make money on. And there are those Apple users that think it should be free.

I believe that it's the developers right to determine whether to ask for money for the software or not. Apple is no different. My original comment was directed against the idea that there are basically two choices: Pay for software, or pirate software. And it was directed against the idea that "Writing software costs money, so we should pay for it". Neither claim is necessarily true.

If time is money, and we should therefore pay for the privilige of taking advantage of someone's invested time every time, there wouldn't be sites like wikipedia. Nor would there be places like forums.macrumors.com, since we have people spending their time writing messages to this forum. We have people sharing ideas and advice, yet we do not pay them one dime, even though they spend their time doing it. And they do it because they want to do it. There really is no difference when it comes to software. Yes, some people write software for profit. And some people write text for profit (books). And still, we have tons of people who write software for other motives than pure profit. And we have tons of people who write text for other purposes than pure profit (like me, when I type this message. I'm not expecting to receive any money for my invested time. My motives are elsewhere).

So, to recap: it's up to the individual developer to determine whether to ask for money or not, and Apple is no different. I personally have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp. But that said, charging money for software is not a requirement. And if you think that it always costs money to develop software, then you might as well think that laying on the grass and looking at the clouds also costs money. I think that things of pure enjoyment are priceless. If you enjoy doing something, thinking that "I just spent two hours doing this thing. That's 60 bucks down the drain" is simply... wrong. Or very least, it's not a key to happy life.

No, that does not mean that if you enjoy coding, you should go work for Apple (or Microsoft, or Oracle, or IBM) for free, since you would be enjoying your work. I'm talking about free time here. It's difficult to put my thoughts to words, but I hope that I'm conveying at least part of them to you guys.
 
i am not saying if Apple is right or wrong to charge for boot camp, i just want to know if apple is charging to recover the development costs, because its their intellectual property?, or just because they can ...?


P.S: some of you guys should come back in 10 years time and read your comments.
 
Last time i checked intel made the motherboard & the processor
last time i checked broadcom or atheros made their wireless cards
last time i checked seagate or toshiba made their hard drives.
Last time i checked matchita or pioneer made their superdrives.
Last time i checked ati or nvidia mde their video cards.

i can continue i mean if you narrow it down-apple keyboard, mouse and isight is whats left behind and they consider themselfs HARDWARE BASED COMPANY?

Have the nerve to charge for ONCE AGAIN 3RD PARTY DRIVERS?


Unless i am missing something with boot camp, the only diffrence is that vista does not support efi other then that is just like any oher intel based windows laptop. Which means a **** load of drivers and hardware are at your fingertips.

You know Earendil for being an excellent english prof.
You certainly do lack intelligence in other subjects.


Have you used bootcamp? I guess not judging by your post. This is more than Apple charging for "3rd party drivers". You are paying for repartitioning software more than anything. If you bought a similar program for windows (partition magic) it would cost you $69.95. iPartition for the mac costs $44.95. In addition to ONLY being able to repartition they give you a simplified install process for all of those 3rd prty drivers (which you or I may not need but a lot of folks do). You get extended functionality in their bootloader and start disk manager etc. It's more than just a collection of drivers.
 
Have you used bootcamp? I guess not judging by your post. This is more than Apple charging for "3rd party drivers". You are paying for repartitioning software more than anything. If you bought a similar program for windows (partition magic) it would cost you $69.95. iPartition for the mac costs $44.95. In addition to ONLY being able to repartition they give you a simplified install process for all of those 3rd prty drivers (which you or I may not need but a lot of folks do). You get extended functionality in their bootloader and start disk manager etc. It's more than just a collection of drivers.

Bootcamp is a graphical front end for diskutil and a boot loader.

Diskutil is built in to the operating system (and free).

All you are really paying for is the yummy graphical front end and ease of use.

You are not gaining any functionality whatsoever from boot camp (other than a driver disk which includes drivers that should logically be provided elsewhere. I am not sure if they are yet) that you cannot get from command line diskutil and the bootloader available from refit.sourceforge.net
 
Bootcamp is a graphical front end for diskutil and a boot loader.

Diskutil is built in to the operating system (and free).

All you are really paying for is the yummy graphical front end and ease of use.

You are not gaining any functionality whatsoever from boot camp (other than a driver disk which includes drivers that should logically be provided elsewhere. I am not sure if they are yet) that you cannot get from command line diskutil and the bootloader available from refit.sourceforge.net

Yes i have used boot camp. As a matter of fact im am running vista on my macbook pro 17". I downloaded alot of the drivers from the corresponding manufacturers to be up to date. I managed to get DRAFT-N and everything else working on my windows install by doing that.

The only thing that does not work is the backlight keyboard. Everything else works and i did not even use the drivers boot camp provides.
 
Does Vista support EFI?

Irrelevant. Windows XP doesn't support EFI either. The work-around is a BIOS-compatibility layer incorporated into EFI. If I recall correctly, early versions of Apple's EFI implementation didn't include that layer, but installation of Boot Camp required the prior installation of an EFI patch which adds the BIOS compatibility layer.
 
What difference does that make?

if they are charging for work that has been put in to develop such prodcut, then i would like to see them justfiy that, cuz even a bunch of am. hackers can do that ... if they are charging just cuz they can, then it says a lot about the character .. doesnt make a whole lot of difference but then atleast the question doesnt stand out form the rest either.

(waiting for the day when someone qoutes my post and goes 'WHY ARE YOU ASKING A QUESTION???!!!!")
 
I think Blizzard should give out WoW:BC for free, since the Beta already was. And most of its framework has already been done in WoW.

And Microsoft should offer Vista for free as well, since the Beta was, too.

Oh, and next time I am gonna test-drive a new car, I will demand to get it for free since trying it out was free, too! :cool:
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.