Piracy and Mac OS X

[big]

>that is about 3 years of salary for me

as if! I did however buy 2 macs within the last year... and if apple thinks I am not going to put my Bought copy of Jaguar on them both...they are crazy!

I might have paid another $20 for another in home license, but it's just my wife's laptop...she barely uses it (I guess she likes my dual monitors)

hardly justifies 2 copies of jaguar

 

[rice_web]

I just wish society could move closer to a currency-free society...

Ah, communism. 😀

 

[peterjhill]

It would be so simple for Apple to protect their copyrights, that it isn't even funny. Apple has the advantage over Microsoft in that it makes the Hardware as well as the software.

anyone who has run the Apple System Profiler knows that one of the tidbits that it gives you is the System Serial Number. When you install the system, it could have you go to a web page at apple, enter in your license key, the system would send your hardware serial number BUT NOT STORE THE HARDWARE SERIAL! (to solve privacy issues that people will invariably have), hash the two together using a secure algorithm, then either give you a new code to enter, or better yet, just set the final key into the OS. So unless someone has a way to fake the hardware serial number, they could take your software key, and it would be useless to them.

I would not be unhappy if they stored your hardware serial also, that way if you reinstalled your system, they would have an easier time reverifiying your right to install the OS. Otherwise they could have blank boxes under the software license code that you could write in your final install code into.

So, yeah, it would be trivial for apple to do this. Complain if you must how unfair it is, but it would be fully within their right to do so. They are out to make a profit after all.

 

[awrc]

Re: Question of ethics

Originally posted by bbarnhart
Considering home computers only, has anyone ever purchased multiple copies of the same program for two or more computers? (Unless the software physically does not allow this, ie Spectre (old network game))

I think the results will be interesting.

Innumerable Windows licenses for various versions (since the number of computers coming into the house generally exceeds the number leaving over any period of time, with the difference ending up in bits).

Two Eudora licenses, two WinZip licenses, two licenses for a defunct Windows newsreader called Gravity

As for Mac stuff, the only thing on my PowerMac that's also on my wife's PowerBook is the operating system and other stuff that came pre-installed.

 

[Mr. Anderson]

Given what's possible to do these days - the only way to even try to get away with pirating the software would be to take the machines off the net - sort of defeats the purpose of having a computer today though.

So it shouldn't be too hard for them to inforce it to a certain extent. I'll just wait around and see if they do it. I'll still buy my copy - work pays for it anyway, and in reality, 120 isn't all that much.

D

 

[imacguy]

Justification

This is just an attempt by Apple to justify their prices for Jaguar. Based on the comments it sounds like it's working.

I wonder what they will try to come up with for the whole .Mac debacle.

I love apple, but announcing both those items on the same day was D-U-M-B marketing!

 

[Cappy]

I find it amazing how people justify their reasons for pirating software. I don't want to sound hypocritical since there are a few arguments or situations that I would consider ok when legally it would be considered piracy but in all but a few areas there is no justification. The only reason it happens is because it's easy and convenient. If that wasn't the case, there would be alot more cars on the road with tires stolen(or rather not on the road 😉).

I do have to admit that software is just too expensive in general and really has not decreased over the years. I'm not even sure that's going to change unless open source software can make an impact. I would have loved seeing Opendoc make it into an open source scenario. It never had a chance being commercial but open source could have made things *very* interesting.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Back Off, Jack

Originally posted by Pin-Fisher



You sir are truly a moron. .....

I hope you write some software one day and they priate the hell
out of it and the three years of your life you spent developing it
become a total waste...


(BTW Software is both singular and plural in english you pirate
scum)

I'll bet our friend from Venezuela is more fluent in English then you are in Spanish.

To the subject at hand: I run three Macs here. My pragmatic choice is to spend $129 upgrading all three to 10.2, if Apple doesn't prevent my doing so, or zero dollars upgrading none of them, because forking over $390 to upgrade all of them just isn't in the cards. So, which course of action do you think Apple would prefer?

 

[nOrm29]

It was going to come this anyway

While I hate the fact that I would have to buy 7 different copies of OS X (10.2) because of piracy, I could only agree that Apple should do it.

I bought three different copies of OS X, 2 educational, 1 retail. And yes two were for educational machines that I bought.

But I think Apple has a better way of implementing some type of serialization because like someone mention previously, they make the machines and the software!

Maybe Apple will be better for it. Whether people hate the fact that Apple is behaving like MS, well there is only two alternatives, MS (and you guys KNOW you won't want to go that route) and Linux, which there isn't any cool stuff like the kind you get with OS X (iApps, etc.).

 

[big]

>IJ Reilly

see, I think you got it right...If I can spend the money to upgrade my machines here at the house then its worthwhile...

and If I can not, I surely will not upgrade at all, and certainly will not buy 3 licenses.

I'd be happy to spend another $20 on each extra machine, but that's it!

now for an office, corporate, school I can justify having to buy licenses for each machine.

 

[Rocketman]

Re: Question of ethics

Originally posted by bbarnhart
Considering home computers only, has anyone ever purchased multiple copies of the same program for two or more computers? (Unless the software physically does not allow this, ie Spectre (old network game))

I think the results will be interesting.

I have, out of a sense of fairness. On OS'es I have a different attitude, right or wrong (probably wrong). It's a mac computer. I bought it with a Mac OS paying a substantial premium over a peecee. And this explains alot of the Mac owner issues frankly. I will be buying OSX for a brand new G4 DDR tower about 10 minutes after they are announced. Hopefully it is bundled with it but if not then I will pay the small postege fee for the upgrade as soon as it is available.

I will then try to install the 10.2 disc on my TiG4 that "barely" didn't even come with OSX, by a couple of months. Early adopter there too, it increases system life to be an early adopter. Try it sometime.

I hope it will let me install it and will let me run software update.

Technically I will have two lisences, the one that came with the CPU and one for Jaguar.

Apple, let me get away with it please. I keep buying macs and getting others to do the same. I am your target customer.

Rocketman

 

[buffsldr]

Originally posted by Pin-Fisher



You sir are truly a moron. .....

I hope you write some software one day and they priate the hell
out of it and the three years of your life you spent developing it
become a total waste...


(BTW Software is both singular and plural in english you pirate
scum)

Pin-Fisher, Macrumors would be better off without posts like this. You don't know mymemory, you don't know what his environment is like. Mymemory is a stud for learning computers and technology in an evironment that is so difficult.

 

[peterjhill]

Re: Back Off, Jack

Originally posted by IJ Reilly

To the subject at hand: I run three Macs here. My pragmatic choice is to spend $129 upgrading all three to 10.2, if Apple doesn't prevent my doing so, or zero dollars upgrading none of them, because forking over $390 to upgrade all of them just isn't in the cards.

Question: Do you really need to run 10.2 on all the machines? If you do, then I can't see a good justification for paying for all three. If you don't then buy it for one machine, and install it on your primary machine.

I work at a university, we pay a ton for software licensing fees.

 

[bousozoku]

Re: Free Jaguar?

Originally posted by meddle
Seems like spy mac might be making this one up also. I'm going to buy 10.2 but have been tring to find it online. Granted I haven't looked very hard but the only release I can find is a bad. A broken .dmg. As a developer I would love to install this and play around with it before it comes out. Just don't want to $700 for a month of use. $120 well that's ok. Sort of.

For $500 a year, you can purchase a Apple Developer Connection Select membership which gives you monthly updates on CD-ROM, including the Jaguar developer previews.

 

[Choppaface]

hmmm 3 macs and one of me. even if I put 10.2 on all three, there's no way I can do the work of two, so why do I need to pay for 3 copies? I'll probably only put it on my G4 though...

question for the stern software devs: if somebody has a few different computers and they use them either exclusively or another person uses them exclusively for some amount of time, why does the owner of the multiple boxes have to buy multiple copies of your software? they're not going to get more out of it than one person can at a time, and it improves their relationship with your software if they don't have to uninstall it from one box when they want to use it on another.

as to mymemory and people in his sort of situation, it would be convenient if the idealogy of the software license worked everwhere, but some places don't have governments strong enough to promote it. before one attacks the disadvantaged user, one must consider those that are responsible for the conditions that led him to make that decision. if mymemory lived in the US and had the same job here as he does there, he would probably have the potential to pay for the software he uses. where he is now, he most likely does not, unless he were to commit more crimes in order obtain the money needed to pay. these observations boil down to the case of the lesser evil: not getting paid for software that one would not get paid for anyways, or getting paid with dirty money. I do not mean to defend piracy, I mean to question the amount of censure towards pirates. clearly there must be a difference from pirate to pirate; treating all pirates equally overlooks these important differences..

 

[sicle]

Software rant

"There's no such thing as a free lunch." "Pirate scum!" "Low life like you are denying programmers a living." "Apple needs the money." "blah, blah, blah."

After paying for yet another key for Quicktime pro (wasn't too mad about this it was because of licensing) Getting charged for iTools (I'll probably pay for the first year) and then the upgrade price for Jaguar (I'll probably end up paying), I'm in no mood for posts like these.

I have Office 2001, I've no intention of upgrading to Office X. I have a very old copy of Photoshop, but I'm using the Gimp. Is it better? no way, but it's free and I can no longer afford Photoshop. Are Apple within their rights in preventing me from copying Jaguar on to two machines? Sure.

However, Apple still make their money mainly from hardware. I'm willing, for now, to pay a premium on the hardware because I like Apple's products so much and because of all the cool freebies that come with a Mac and because they don't treat their customers in the same way as Microsoft does. However, I am rapidly approaching my limits. Becoming familiar with Unix I'm a lot less intimidated by Linux than I once was. If Apple go down this road I won't be spending any money on Apple hardware or software.

And to all the software developers that post defending the astronomical prices of their employers products. I don't care how much work has gone into the product if it doesn't provide me with value for money I won't buy. The bubble is over for everyone, so don't think you can pass your problems onto the consumer.😡

 

[zed]

I think in some instance, such as graphics programs, piracy can actually help the software company. I mean who wants to pay all the money to see if they can figure out how to work a particular program. If they pirate it and learn how to use it then they may be more likely to purchase after they find that they can make money off of it. or... I think this applies to college students at least (for a student even the educational prices are unthinkable)

Of course, if you are using the pirated programs and making money from them then you are just plain stealing.

I think Maya has the right idea with the Personal Learning Edition. This gives people like me the opportunity to learn the program without forking over the money.... now if I just had my broadband connection back.... I could download it and take advantage of my opportunity 😀

 

[zed]

Re: Question of ethics

Originally posted by bbarnhart
Considering home computers only, has anyone ever purchased multiple copies of the same program for two or more computers? (Unless the software physically does not allow this, ie Spectre (old network game))

I think the results will be interesting.

The only software that I have purchased 2 copies of for 2 machines is Diablo II, gotta have those access keys to play on battle.net..... and if you arent gonna play on bnet then why play at all??

then again, ive only had 2 macs for a few months now.....

 

[3777]

PLEASE

I can't believe the crap i'm reading. If I buy software, and then I make copies and give it to a bunch of people, yes that is wrong. But to hear all of these people whine about how I should "buy one OS or program for each computer" PLEASE, if I spend $140 dollars on XP Pro or OSX, I should be able to install it on any damn computer I own. And if there is something in the law that says that is wrong..... then there is something very wrong with the law. And all the Apple and Microsoft employees who disagree with me can go to #ell!!!

 

[peterjhill]

Re: Software rant

Originally posted by sicle

After paying for yet another key for Quicktime pro

Last year I bought a new QT key for my windows box at work. I had one before on a mac, but had lost it. Then I got a Ti800, found out that the key did not work, it was windows only, so i bought a new Mac key. In May. Now I need to buy a new Mac key. I will though, because I like to download trailers and watch them at full size. Also making AAC's will be nice.

However, Apple still make their money mainly from hardware. I'm willing, for now, to pay a premium on the hardware because I like Apple's products so much

Compare a dell laptop to a similarly configured Ti800, the prices are very close.

 

[peterjhill]

Re: PLEASE

Originally posted by 3777
I can't believe the crap i'm reading. If I buy software, and then I make copies and give it to a bunch of people, yes that is wrong. But to hear all of these people whine about how I should "buy one OS or program for each computer" PLEASE, if I spend $140 dollars on XP Pro or OSX, I should be able to install it on any damn computer I own. And if there is something in the law that says that is wrong..... then there is something very wrong with the law. And all the Apple and Microsoft employees who disagree with me can go to #ell!!!

You are wrong. Sorry. There is nothing wrong with the law. Most games will let you install it on multiple computers, as long as you only play it on one at a time. Diablo for instance.

When it comes to an OS, even if you are only using it on one computer at a time, you are reaping the benefits of it on multiple machines. It is because of people with this attitude that I hope Apple puts a install code tied to the hardware serial number into the OS. That way, they will sell more copies of the software and recoup more of the cost of developing the software.

As mentioned before, if Bill Gates goes to comp usa and buys one copy of OSX retail, and installs it on all the Macs that they have (yes they have macs, what do you think they develop Office X on, virtual mac for pc?), yes he "owns" all those computers as the majority shareholder, but, umm, it would be totally illegal.

If it weren't for all the software pirates, maybe games wouldn't cost $65 a pop.

 

[menoinjun]

I don't completely agree. If software was cheaper, I would have no problem buying multiple copies of it. If warcraft III cost only $30, I'd buy one for every computer I own so that I could network it. Not at $60 though.

So not only does piracy drive costs up, but costs drive piracy.

-Pete

 

[elgruga]

Pirates...

Pirates are important to remind us that most 'ordinary' people are little fascists waiting for a chance to get the neighbours kids arrested for just being there.

The guy who called the Venezuela Pirate scum is a jerk of the first order.

Apple make computers, You buy one , you get the software with it.
All of a sudden people are buying Apple software who dont have an Apple? NO.
So a few people (mostly poor people) pirate a lousy disk. They still have to run it on an old Apple machine. Which they paid for at some point.
All the new Apples have the new software. No pirating there, right?
Oh I forgot, I bought my Tibook 667 in early July - no 10.2 for me.
My f***ing OS only lasted 2 weeks. (true)

Old machines running pirate software? Apple should be glad that people are interested enough in their OS to pirate it.
Its a sure sign of success.

As for Application piracy, well, lets face it, $700 for Photoshop is insane.
$150 - maybe.

Look at M$ Office - Bill gates has 400 billion bucks, but he needs more and somehow this is a good thing?

Its time to wake up guys. The world is now dominated by rich and selfish oafs, like gates and Jobs and Martha Stewart etc.
They arent nice people - they are *******s.

Steal their damn stuff if you can - they will Never pay you enough per hour to buy it.

Photoshop = 140 hours of labor at minimum wage - thats 3 and a half weeks - whoops! no rent or food in Photoshop month!
OS 10.2 = 24 hours of labor - no shoes for the kids this week.
Office X = 60 hours of labor (10 days) - Bill needs his cash.

You want to work for almost 4 weeks to get a copy of Photoshop?

Tell me that it isnt ALL overpriced.

Unwilling owner of about $20,000 bucks worth of legal software that just aint worth the price I paid.

 

[elgruga]

Re: Re: PLEASE

Originally posted by peterjhill




If it weren't for all the software pirates, maybe games wouldn't cost $65 a pop.

WRONG.
If it wasnt for software costing an arm and a leg, there would be no need to pirate.

Apple make money on the software when they sell a machine for 25% more than everybody else.

Thats why its more expensive, because you get a Mac not a crappy Dell, and you get OS 10.
Thats the profit. Now they want more profit? Try asking Steve to take a cut in salary instead.

Sell his bloody private jet that I paid for.

 

[G4scott]

Ok. Software Piracy hasn't been too big of a problem as far as I have seen it, but the way that some of you are talking is starting to scare me.

Everybody at one point in their lives has pirated software, and that's understandable. I'm not going to buy 4 copies of Jaguar for all of my computers, I'm going to buy one. I may sound like a hypocrite by saying this, but Apple does need to make some money. They put 9 million dollars into R&D for OS X, and they want something out of it. Apple is a business, not a charity foundation, and besides, $129 isn't too bad after you see what Jaguar will do to your Mac (and for those of you who say that OS X should've been as fast as Jaguar from version 10.0, piss off a$$holes, and go make your own OS...)

There is a lot of uncertainty in the software business, almost like there is in the music industry. Software isn't a physical thing (If CD's were so expensive to manufacture, then I wouldn't have tons of AOL discs laying around my house). It's a series of 1's and 0's that perform certain functions. True, not everybody has the money to buy photoshop. I do like their LE edition, though, because it's free and comes bundled with things like scanners, etc. (It'll be the day they have a LE version for OS X, though...) Unfortunately, not every software company can do this. Software is programmed by people, who have to live too. How would you like it if you made shoes, and people just came by and started taking them without paying you. You'd be pissed off.

It's the greedy money hogs that piss me off. $400 for office, and you can only run it on one computer at a time on a network? I don't have $1600 to blow on a word processor. I'm going to use AppleWorks that came with my computer for free! Software piracy does have the same affect as shoplifting, though. It drives up the prices, not only for security, but to turn a profit for the few copies that they sell. You shouldn't have to buy a car, and then pay for extra people to ride in it, but you should still have to pay for the car...

Part of my biggest complaint about software companies is how much money the executives make... Look at worldcom and enron... The execs had enough money after the companies died to still make a living, while the employees, the ones who run the company, got the royal shaft... This ties in with software giants, like microsoft... bill gates has billions of dollars, enough to give everyone at microsoft a raise of a couple thousand dollars... These executives don't need to be sitting on a pile of cash their whole lifetime... You can't use that money in heaven (or hell). They should give the workers more and the executives less (lets hear it for communism!) They don't need to charge $400 for office to turn a profit. They just need to cut down on how much they give their executives. As long as the company can make money, they've got it made...

Granted some software isn't worth the price you'd pay, if nobody actually bought software, there wouldn't be any software out there, because nobody would want to make it. As for those of you who haven't bought software in 10 years, you are complete morons, and have no right to complain about software prices and anti-pirating practices. It's because of you that the people who actually pay something for software to use on their computers are being hurt...

Now, of course, shareware and freeware is always nice... 😎