Since Leopard (10.5) will be Unprotected and Free...

[TCD]

Well Folks,

I have also been waiting for the Leopard upgrade release to purchase a new MBP. However, now that Steve wants to eliminate all copy protection, I assume that Leopard will also be free and unprotected... Right?

I mean, what is the difference between an operating system and music?
They both are content and provide usefulness to a hardware device.

And, why should bad old Apple continue to protect it's OS or, for that matter it's BIOS or hardware and be bad people and make a profit with it? After all, once it's made; they don't do much thereafter, do they?

Do I sound like a programmer who's a little tired of all of the hypocrite's wanting to unprotect what they want or use to make money? Of course then they turn around and are very high and mighty about why their products or services are different and should be protected.

Well, actually, part of my frustration right now is, had I wanted a WinTel laptop, I could have bought one in the last for months and gotten a free VISTA upgrade.

Tom

PS Yes this is my first post here although I've been lurking for sometime, however, this is not a PC/Mac flame! I'm just frustrated by Apple and some of Steve's policies...

TCD

 

[jsw]

Your post makes no sense. Jobs never said music should be free, just not bundled with DRM. No Mac OS has ever had DRM as part of it. Are you arguing that all software should be free?

 

[Sesshi]

Yeah. Why should it be free? The EULA restricting it to Apple hardware only does more directly equate to the DRM debate. But free? No.

 

[suneohair]

Yeah.... this doesnt make any sense. As jsw said no Mac OS has ever been protected. If you are saying let it be supported on Windows computers. How about no. Apple should not and will not take the time to write drivers for a bunch of hardware. Their system works just fine. If you want to install get a hacked version that will run on AMD or Intel chips.

There is no hypocrisy here at all. Mac OS has no DRM. Music does, music should be unprotected since it makes no difference whether or not DRM is in the music. People who want to steal will steal and those that buy, buy. Simple as that.

Free Vista, big whoop. Look at the levels of Vista. Home basic, home premium blah blah blah. One version of Mac OS. One price and cheaper. Features aren't stripped. You don't even get a full install. You get an upgrade, and apparently you can't just provide the previous XP key you have to fully install XP to install Vista. On the Dells at least

 

[Sesshi]

Apple should not and will not take the time to write drivers for a bunch of hardware.

Apple don't write the drivers.

There is no hypocrisy here at all.

There's plenty. And not just from Apple.

Free Vista, big whoop. Look at the levels of Vista. Home basic, home premium blah blah blah. One version of Mac OS. One price and cheaper. Features aren't stripped.

No, features aren't stripped and nor are there different versions of OS X. The single OS just hasn't got the features to begin with. Look at Front Row vs Media Center capabilities for a very good example. It makes for a much simpler choice for those who don't know what they want, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better.

 

[Sayer]

Apple don't write the drivers.

Actually, Apple does write a lot of drivers for their vendors, because the Vendors don't want to waste the resources, but Apple needs hardware support.

Look at Front Row vs Media Center capabilities for a very good example. It makes for a much simpler choice for those who don't know what they want, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better.

Okay so what is the difference? Front Row is drop-dead simple and Media Center Edition is hopelessly complex? Why do I need a separate OS for a "Media Center" anyway? The tv will do as much as a Media Center PC for less money (and space).

And I can use a real computer to get content from a variety of sources and watch it on a widescreen HD TV. I don't need to turn my TV into a computer, I want my computer to send to my TV the content I would watch on a TV anyway. The only missing component is a PVR/DVR. Of course if I can just buy an episode of a TV show and get more usage rights than a DVR recording (place-shifting, no commercials) I will gladly just buy some episodes of TV.

Heck, even with Apple/iTunes DRM shackles I have better access to content than old-school cable/DVR/DVDs.

 

[flyfish29]

Mac OS X is technically "free and unprotected" right now (and always has been) if you chose to install it (illegally!!!) Just like if music was "free and unprotected" you could "install" it or listen to it for free if you decided to do it illegally. However, almost all Mac users choose to pay for the creative and technical work that PEOPLE put into a product (a great product at that!) It is funny, I think that most people when they "steal" software, music, etc. they forget that PEOPLE make a living creating this stuff!

I also have a big problem with TCD's comment "After all, once it's made; they don't do much thereafter, do they?" They not only do quite a bit after, they created the frickin' thing. That is like saying I should have to pay for a new car cause after they deliver it to me they don't really do much afterwards!! Doesn't make ANY SENSE!

And why should Apple make a profit?!?! Because we want great products in the future.

The above posters all make important points to shoot down everything you state in your original post.

That being said, I hope you still decide to join the world of Mac! It is a really great experience.

 

[suneohair]

Apple don't write the drivers.


There's plenty. And not just from Apple.



No, features aren't stripped and nor are there different versions of OS X. The single OS just hasn't got the features to begin with. Look at Front Row vs Media Center capabilities for a very good example. It makes for a much simpler choice for those who don't know what they want, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better.

TV should be a good indication that Apple wants to get into that space.

It depends on your uses. Front Row is fine for me. I am not a big media person anyway and I don't record TV shows so I could care less. So media center being better is moot for me.

And is a strong media center really the only thing you have for features not present? Most people could care less.

 

[SMM]

Well Folks,

I have also been waiting for the Leopard upgrade release to purchase a new MBP. However, now that Steve wants to eliminate all copy protection, I assume that Leopard will also be free and unprotected... Right?

I mean, what is the difference between an operating system and music?
They both are content and provide usefulness to a hardware device.

And, why should bad old Apple continue to protect it's OS or, for that matter it's BIOS or hardware and be bad people and make a profit with it? After all, once it's made; they don't do much thereafter, do they?

Do I sound like a programmer who's a little tired of all of the hypocrite's wanting to unprotect what they want or use to make money? Of course then they turn around and are very high and mighty about why their products or services are different and should be protected.

Well, actually, part of my frustration right now is, had I wanted a WinTel laptop, I could have bought one in the last for months and gotten a free VISTA upgrade.

Tom

PS Yes this is my first post here although I've been lurking for sometime, however, this is not a PC/Mac flame! I'm just frustrated by Apple and some of Steve's policies...

TCD

"Do I sound like a programmer who's a little tired of all of the hypocrite's wanting to unprotect what they want or use to make money?"

No, you sound like a someone who has shown up to post anti-Apple garbage. You have spelled the words correctly, but it is unlikely you will earn much credibility, except among your fellow trollers.

 

[TCD]

Howdy Folks,

Well I'm sorry that I apparently failed to communicate effectively. So I start with the easy challenges and go from there...

As for SIM "No, you sound like a someone who has shown up to post anti-Apple garbage. You have spelled the words correctly, but it is unlikely you will earn much credibility, except among your fellow trollers."

SIM, I have my 1987 Macintosh SE with a HUGE 5 mg external hard-drive lovingly wrapped in the original Apple Blue/Rainbow padded case and the Apple ImageWriter printer in its' own Apple Blue/Rainbox padded case sitting in my garage as I write this. Unfortunately my early Apple II's are long gone. Until quite recently, I fired up the old SE just to play with it... Do you remember VisiCalc or AppleWriter or BLASTER! or Choplifter?

Well anyway, I have a little exposure to Apple products and I am waiting to buy another Apple product, not my first...

Now for:

flyfish29
The above posters all make important points to shoot down everything you state in your original post.

suneohair
Yeah.... this doesnt make any sense.

jsw
Your post makes no sense. Jobs never said music should be free, just not bundled with DRM.

flyfish29
Mac OS X is technically "free and unprotected" right now (and always has been) if you chose to install it (illegally!!!) Just like if music was "free and unprotected" you could "install" it or listen to it for free if you decided to do it illegally.


I believe that there is only one reason why DRM is used on iTunes. DRM is there because the music owners want it there. And, it is slowing down Steve's ability to sell both music and video content significantly.

If anyone looks at the success of the open source development process as typified by GNU to understand that there is nothing about Apple's software or hardware that is open.

And flyfish29 I also have a big problem with TCD's comment "After all, once it's made; they don't do much thereafter, do they?" They not only do quite a bit after, they created the frickin' thing. That is like saying I should have to pay for a new car cause after they deliver it to me they don't really do much afterwards!! Doesn't make ANY SENSE!

You missed my point in that I was trying to say that it takes a long time to recover in the basic development cost let alone the overhead required to make any product a success (including music). So, I was trying to be a little cynical by suggesting that once a OS is released, there's not much done thereafter. And we all know, that maintaining an OS takes a Hell of a lot of work after the fact...

My core original point remains unchallenged:

If Steve thinks DRM is bad or unnecessary, why doesn't he apply that to Apple's products also?

Thanks for all of the comments posted. If nothing else, they made me reminisce a little for the very fun last thirty years in computing!

Cheers,
Tom
----------
Remember, I said that I disagreed with you, Not that you are wrong... Unknown

PS Remember folks, you don't want to become a NIMBY (an acronym of Not In My Back Yard) when listening to ideas that may challenge you... tcd

 

[lancestraz]

My core original point remains unchallenged:

If Steve thinks DRM is bad or unnecessary, why doesn't he apply that to Apple's products also?

Do you mean you think Apple should let non-Apple brand computers run Mac OS X and other Mac apps?
Or something else...

 

[pseudobrit]

If Steve thinks DRM is bad or unnecessary, why doesn't he apply that to Apple's products also?

What? Jobs' essay was specifically about downloadable music and how it's still treated as second class and undermined by the record companies, not operating systems and computers.

Apple is an hardware company. They need an OS that sets them apart from the other manufacturers in order to compete. This is their business model.

What is your point?

 

[suneohair]

Ok. So we go from 10.5 to music...

Music has always been open before the internet. CDs were not protected (at least widely or effectively).

Mac OS has always been closed to PCs. They are not managing anything, you just arent allowed to install never have and never will.

DRM is to prevent the sharing of files. music, movies whatever. It is there so you can give to 1000 people. OS X is not DRMed in that sense. You simply can't put it on a PC, legally. Doesn't mean you can't copy all the files and give them to a PC person (it is illegal, but that is copyright).

You are trying to make a connection that doesn't exist. They are completely different.

There is nothing to be applied here.

 

[breakfastcrew]

if you open os 10 to every single ****** piece of hardware out there it will instantly turn into a pile of crap like windows.

 

[dukebound85]

if you open os 10 to every single ****** piece of hardware out there it will instantly turn into a pile of crap like windows.

i would not jump so quick to that conclusion. i mean os x is based off unix which by its very nature is more secure than windows

 

[0007776]

i would not jump so quick to that conclusion. i mean os x is based off unix which by its very nature is more secure than windows

It may be better, but you would still start to have some people getting drivers for their hardware that didn't work.

 

[dukebound85]

It may be better, but you would still start to have some people getting drivers for their hardware that didn't work.

true but i still dont think it would be as bad as windows. just a thought. then again, i would like to build my own computer and put os x on it so yea may be a bit biased lol

 

[The Stig]

Like most of other people. I don't think your post made much sense. Maybe when you start posting more in forums you'll get the hang of it.

The Stig

 

[mattibek]

Why so angry take a Mac-pill

Apple is making a tidy profit with or without DRM. Without it Apple might see a drop in sales as its itunes sales could now be traded between friends. So it's not greed that has spurred Jobs letter. There is no music on itunes that could not be found and stolen instead, yet people are still buying the DRM protected music...more and more. The hypocracy is that I can buy a CD that is 1) unprotected, 2) a hard copy 3) often comes with songs and extras not available on itunes. Removing the DRM won't increase illegal piracy and DRM doesn't decrease it. But DRM does upset alot of people who have paid legally for the same music but have less privilleges than if they had bought the CD. As for the OS that is currently unprotected and available on most torrent sites (a beta version of leopard as well if you can't stand the wait) well you should just admit that was a bad example and be done with it. Business needs to make profit, there is nothing greedy or evil about that. I'm sure you don't work for free. It is a far better product and if you don't like that stick to PC and Vista, I've seen Vista at work and it doesn't even rate compared to Panther. Why are Mac people always so happy and carefree and PC people always so angry and don't believe that a computer company wants to make things better for it's user's? Oh I guess that Q. answers itself...

 

[dejo]

My core original point remains unchallenged:

If Steve thinks DRM is bad or unnecessary, why doesn't he apply that to Apple's products also?

No, it has been challenged. And I'll repeat: Mac OS X is already without DRM.

 

[wazgilbert]

Ok. So we go from 10.5 to music...

Music has always been open before the internet. CDs were not protected (at least widely or effectively).

Mac OS has always been closed to PCs. They are not managing anything, you just arent allowed to install never have and never will.

DRM is to prevent the sharing of files. music, movies whatever. It is there so you can give to 1000 people. OS X is not DRMed in that sense. You simply can't put it on a PC, legally. Doesn't mean you can't copy all the files and give them to a PC person (it is illegal, but that is copyright).

You are trying to make a connection that doesn't exist. They are completely different.

There is nothing to be applied here.

For the amusement of everyone following this, a theoretical timeline proposed by The Register in April '06.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/05/apple_windows_timeline/


Imagine that if you will....

not forgetting that slightly before that time, Darwin was being touted by apple as their enormous contribution to Open Source....

Then after cherry-picking the open-source developers' work, closed the OS to the outside world, spiked all OSX86 avenues with the EFI and ran-off with the money.

I think TCD is right, but for the wrong, or unexplained reasons..

 

[AppleMatt]

Does he not mean the protection features put in place that prevent you installing Mac OS X (Intel) on non-Apple hardware, but that people have been circumventing for the past god knows how long.

?

AppleMatt

 

[Eraserhead]

There's plenty. And not just from Apple.

I agree, people always act hypocritically sometimes.

No, features aren't stripped and nor are there different versions of OS X. The single OS just hasn't got the features to begin with. Look at Front Row vs Media Center capabilities for a very good example. It makes for a much simpler choice for those who don't know what they want, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better.

This is one of the few areas where I hear MS is ahead, but what else can use do with Windows media center that you can't with Frontrow? EyeTV has front row integration, so you can watch TV with it. The only other problem is that Frontrow is a bit slow but I haven't used media center...

 

[chaosbunny]

No, features aren't stripped and nor are there different versions of OS X. The single OS just hasn't got the features to begin with. Look at Front Row vs Media Center capabilities for a very good example. It makes for a much simpler choice for those who don't know what they want, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better.

So you believe Windows (Vista) has more/better features than OS X? Look at Exposé vs that Aero effect for a very good example. The first is a really useful feature where the second is just resource hungry eye candy with almost no actual use.

I understand your "mission" to defend windows and pcs in every single post on this board, I just think you must be a little bored.

 

[John Jacob]

My two cents... There is no DRM in Mac OS X, and there is nothing that is comparable or analogous to it. There is something comparable to DRM in Windows, it is called product activation.

Complaining that Mac OS X does not run on other PCs... bad analogy. That is like complaining that your X-Box games don't run on your PS3.

There is no way Apple would want to support PCs. They would not want to write the drivers (and yes, Apple DO write drivers for their own hardware) and they would not want to allow third parties to write those drivers because then the quality of the user experience would be limited by the stability of the drivers - a badly written driver could crash the whole system (as happens in Windows today). The fact that Mac OS X is based on the Unix architecture has nothing to do with it - drivers that directly access the hardware run at the maximum privilege level and so a bad driver could crash the system in any OS.