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.
I didn't know Mac OS X could be installed on more than one computer
- Thread starter Gary King
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Even if you only use one computer at a time, an OS is not like other software. Your computer is useless without that OS (unless you wanna go put Darwin or Linux on it). The OS is an integral part of that machine... particularly with OS X. Your user account can move from machine to machine, but the OS is strictly tied to that one computer. It is very tricky to simply move the OS from one computer to another.
As an anaolgy, it is like the tuner in a TV. The TV doesn't make much sense without it, and you pretty much need a tuner in any TV you want to watch. If you buy two TVs, they don't only charge you for one tuner.
The fact that you choose not to uninstall OS X from one computer and install it on another each time you switch computers means you want to use two copies of OS X.
You could try installing it on an external drive and booting each computer off that drive, but I think it may present you with problems. That again shows that it is tightly tied to a particular computer. If you can live with those problems, then I suppose you might not be stealing the OS. If you want to use two copies of the OS, then you need to buy two copies of the OS.
If enough people steal the OS, then I suppose Apple will go draconian on us and start making us validate licenses. Do you want that?
As an anaolgy, it is like the tuner in a TV. The TV doesn't make much sense without it, and you pretty much need a tuner in any TV you want to watch. If you buy two TVs, they don't only charge you for one tuner.
The fact that you choose not to uninstall OS X from one computer and install it on another each time you switch computers means you want to use two copies of OS X.
You could try installing it on an external drive and booting each computer off that drive, but I think it may present you with problems. That again shows that it is tightly tied to a particular computer. If you can live with those problems, then I suppose you might not be stealing the OS. If you want to use two copies of the OS, then you need to buy two copies of the OS.
If enough people steal the OS, then I suppose Apple will go draconian on us and start making us validate licenses. Do you want that?
Spanky Deluxe said:
The OS is used whenever the machine is on, doing update checks, running maintenance utilities, spotlight indexing... etc. In order for this method to work you would have to power down (sleeping would be questionable since the OS is technically still running) the computer you are not using. You also could not use the other computer if you have a time consuming process running on one of them, i.e. rendering, video work, large file copies... etc.
I don't claim to be a saint when it comes to following EULAs I am just pointing out the fallacy of this argument when applied to the OS.
Edit: Was beaten by Toe...
Actually, come to think of it, your Mac came with a copy of a Mac operating system, and of course you can use that. But if you decide that you prefer to run a different OS (such as a new version of OS X), then your choice is to apply that upgrade, and you are obligated to pay for that benefit.Toe said:
I really wish they'd make it easier for everyone to stay legal by dropping the single-user license and make the license fit everyone by making the family pack standard.
iindigo said:
hold on so i have one computer right now, so i would be paying extra money for the 4 other users that i don't have? and the family will stay the same price.
i don't think so
eva01 said:
By making the family pack standard I also meant reducing its price to the previous single-user's price ($129 USD).
iindigo said:
Proof again that it's good to be specific when wishing.
What I think Apple is reasonable is in the cost of the OS for the five family pack license that I purchased - $199.00.
Compare that to Windows XP Pro for $309 (in seach I just ran) per copy. I couldn't find anything like a family pack or small license set (for enterprise, you can get mult-user licenses, not sure what the minimum is) - so compare the price of Windows XP Pro at $309 for a single and $1545.00 for a five license deal to Apple's $129 and $199, respectively, and I appreciate Apple keeping the software licenses reasonable.
It's hard to interpret Apple as money grubbing on the software in light of that comparison to our friends in Redmond.
Toe said:
Or they might go the other way and actually change their EULA to actually reflect consumer demand. There is plenty of precedence for this. For example, you said:
Toe said:
Well, the 2 big Satellite companies both have boxes that have the tuners in them. You pay a fee per each box, and you used to need 1 box for each TV. But now both of the companies have a box that has 2 tuners, meaning you can control 2 TVs from 1 box. Only 1 fee for 2 TVs. Why - because consumers don't want to pay a fee for each TV.
Another example is MS Office. In the past you only got 1 license when you bought Office. Now you get 3. Again this is because there was enough Civil Disobedience (theft), complaints, and competition (Open Office for one) that offered more reasonable EULA's. If you recall, MS tried to go Draconian and it didn't work. We now have a much more reasonable EULA from them.
While I understand that the OS is different from all other software, I really don't feel that Apple has a good solution for those of us that have spent good money with Apple buying both a desktop and a portable. Personally, I feel that their entry level OS should offer 2 liceneses - one for a desktop and one for a portable. Then if you need more, go for the family pack. Until that happens, I will continue to have to decide wether to be civilly disobedient or order 2 different copies of the same OS.
The OS is such an integral part of the computing experience that I don't see how anyone can justify "bending" the EULA to install it on multiple machines, irregardless of whether or not you are the sole user of said machines.
That being said, I have no problem with having purchased one copy of Adobe CS for both my desktop and laptop, as I will only use one copy at a time. I think that is a bit different than two full-time graphic designers using the same serial number concurrently to get their work done, but that is probably me justifying my decision. Someone told me that Adobe even modified the EULA to allow for a work/home type of dual install, but I don't know if that is really the case. Anyone know?
That being said, I have no problem with having purchased one copy of Adobe CS for both my desktop and laptop, as I will only use one copy at a time. I think that is a bit different than two full-time graphic designers using the same serial number concurrently to get their work done, but that is probably me justifying my decision. Someone told me that Adobe even modified the EULA to allow for a work/home type of dual install, but I don't know if that is really the case. Anyone know?
Well here we go again. How many threads do we need about EULA and multiple installs. Again we have the 'thou shall not' and the 'the lord said multiply' brigade, each have their valid points. If Apple wanted to stop multiple installs they would, but they don't so don't sweat it. My money, my Mac, my multiple installs, if thats a problem to anyone then...well...tough.
fyi I don't 'do' warm weather, so I'm grumpier than usual.
fyi I don't 'do' warm weather, so I'm grumpier than usual.
I think Apple knows that people install multiple copies of their OSes on their desktop and laptop, and you know, I don't think they care that much.
If it is being done for commercial purposes or swapped between friends or downloaded from Bittorrent, then that is a different story.
If it is being done for commercial purposes or swapped between friends or downloaded from Bittorrent, then that is a different story.
powermac666 said:
How is that any different from a person who installs a copy of Tiger on his desktop and his portable?
Companies adopt an attitude of zero tolerance for business reasons. Similarly, they privately don't sweat about this sort of thing because doing something to prevent it would be worse for business.
Agathon said:
If you shut down the one you are not using every time you switch to the other computer it is no different. But since you can't quit the OS like you can third party software the OS is still in use when you go to your laptop unless you shutdown your desktop. Your OS is never idle, it is always running in the background monitoring hardware and doing maintenance. Unless you shut down the computer the OS is still in use and it is not legal via the EULA to use the same install disk on another computer.
It would be legal to uninstall it from your desktop and re-install on your laptop so it should be fine if you ensure that the computer you are not using is always shutdown (removing the lengthy install in between computer switching also very much like running one install off of an external drive for multiple computers).
Agathon said:
I never said it was logical, I was just pointing out how it could be legal.
Of course by that logic any time I kick of a long 3D rendering process I should be able to use that software on another machine since I am currently not using it as it works on rendering (note I don't have to be at the computer while it renders). Of course you might say that this is different since the software is working, but the OS is working as well regardless of if you are sitting at the computer or not.
Well... that seems logical, but the license does not allow it. A quick search turned up what appears to be a generic Software Agreement. I think this applies to OS X. Anyway, have a look at section 2 (emphasis added):atszyman said:
Seems pretty clear about the software not existing on more than one computer...
According to the EULA for Adobe Creative Suite:
2.4 Portable or Home. The primary user of the Computer on which the Software is installed may install a second copy of the Software for his or her exclusive use on either a portable Computer or a Computer located at his or her home, provided the Software on the portable or home Computer is not used at the same time as the Software on the primary Computer.
That seems like a fairly progressive and realistic EULA that takes into account the occasional need someone may have to take their work home or on the road without having to dick with uninstalling and reinstalling software. I wish all software was like this, excluding operating systems.
2.4 Portable or Home. The primary user of the Computer on which the Software is installed may install a second copy of the Software for his or her exclusive use on either a portable Computer or a Computer located at his or her home, provided the Software on the portable or home Computer is not used at the same time as the Software on the primary Computer.
That seems like a fairly progressive and realistic EULA that takes into account the occasional need someone may have to take their work home or on the road without having to dick with uninstalling and reinstalling software. I wish all software was like this, excluding operating systems.
Daveway said:I hate people who lie about software EULAs. You don't have to lie about installling on more than one computer, its normal.
I have one copy of Tiger and 3 Macs in my home and guess what, they all have it. I'm not ashamed to say it. I bought it, I will use it as I see fit.
No I don't flash it on torrent sites. I think its perfectly OK to install multiple copies of one title of software within your home. However, I do have a problem with people just letting strangers take it.
Example. MS Office will cost you upwards of $300. Me and a friend both put in for it and pass it around to our close friends.
BTW: Stridey, I'm not accusing you of anything.
I really don't think someone doing something illegal should publish their illegal acts in writing.
If someone wanted to report you to piracy@apple.com, it would be very easy.
Apple said:
Agathon said:
Probably not. Because hey, that means you've bought a desktop and laptop. Who got that money? Apple did. With their margins, that's a lot of money for them right there. In the Windows world, if I buy a dozen PCs, Microsoft doesn't get a penny.
Toe said:
I stand somewhat corrected. So the correct procedure is to shutdown your second machine and then remove the HD. If there is no HD in the computer the OS cannot exist on that computer... of course it's difficult for laptops.
I like loopholes.
Of course it's a moot point for me since I only own one powerbook and my only other Mac is a PPC 601 processor, not capable of OSX.
And how much did that activation scheme have on the piracy of iWork? Cracked and pirated versions are extremely easy to come by all over the internet. As it is for Windows operating systems. There will always be those who will develop a way around the activation system, and make that loophole available to anyone who has a computer.mac-er said:
Say Leopard does have an activation scheme... by the time it is released commercially, cracked versions of it, and instructions on how to crack it will be available to all (I'm assuming it will be available on the net as early as Tiger was). And so this activation scheme will simply bother those who follow the EULA legitimately, and be a minor distraction to anyone who wants to bypass it.
I downloaded Tiger more than a week before it was publically available, just to try it out for fun. Of course I bought myself a copy when it was available (Tiger release parties are half the fun!), and though I have only installed it on one computer (only have one mac), I would have no qualms about installing it on more than one machine. I think piracy and EULA violations are inevitable, and no matter what stance I or everyone on this board takes, it will not change it, stop it, or slow it down in any considerable way. We are reaping the benefits of the technology we've created, and intellectual property theft, in the eyes of the masses, isnt seen as theft at all.