sjpetry said:An unprecedented 5 consecutive posts.
I count six.
As for me, my father and I will be splitting the $199 cost of the family pack between 3 computers. My G4 iMac, his G3 iMac G4 Powermac.
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.
Will Tiger require activation
- Thread starter Amaj10
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I count six.
As for me, my father and I will be splitting the $199 cost of the family pack between 3 computers. My G4 iMac, his G3 iMac G4 Powermac.
I take it that's sarcasm then?mcadam said:
I think you are partially right there. I'm not the most moral being of all - perhaps it sums is up when I say i'm buying a license for 2 computers, but I find more and more I am buying sofware (recently Salling Clicker, Office, VersionTracker pro and a bunch of others). I don't quite know why this is, but i'm begining to think it's because I want to stay up-to date, and generally updates and updates for cracks are some time apart. I got office cos i needed all the updates and plug-ins for excel and the like.mcadam said:
I do think it's wierd I buy more and more. Anyone else finding this?
In the UK, there is an Educational Family Pack, and it is cheaper than 2 copies of the Single Educational copy, got a Educational Family Pack on order for two computerseva01 said:or instead of buying a family pack for 2 computers, if you can get two copies of education Tiger, would be just a bit more expensive than buying one single copy
because i don't believe there is a education family pack
sjpetry said:An unprecedented 5 consecutive posts.
Sorry to offend, but some of us do believe in posting to separate thoughts. Far easier to respond. Also with what some may think are popular threads is is easier on viewers. Sorry if you were offended...
If there is a hard rule on this, please point me to it...
mcadam said:
I actually have heard otherwise intelligent people give this reason with a straight face.
It just goes to show you how true things like the old research on social conformity are...pirating software is a sort of groupthink problem.
I give Microsoft credit for giving three serial numbers with Office. That is a reasonable idea.
Many homes no longer just have 1 computer. I myself have three. Am I going to purchase multiple copies of the same O/S or software? No.
If your a business, that is different as you are using the product to make money. Although, a photographer I used to work for never purchased multiple licenses of Photoshop to use on his 9 or10 workstations. However, he paid the upgrade fee everytime a new version of Photoshop was released (except CS).
Is a EULA an actual binding legal agreement? Who knows, I know of no case where it stood up in court.
Many homes no longer just have 1 computer. I myself have three. Am I going to purchase multiple copies of the same O/S or software? No.
If your a business, that is different as you are using the product to make money. Although, a photographer I used to work for never purchased multiple licenses of Photoshop to use on his 9 or10 workstations. However, he paid the upgrade fee everytime a new version of Photoshop was released (except CS).
Is a EULA an actual binding legal agreement? Who knows, I know of no case where it stood up in court.
As a business, this is a bad thing to do.joshuawaire said:
Since all it takes is an angry employee, customer, or spouse to blow the whistle and get the owner in trouble with the Business Software Alliance.
Of course it could be fun to see the look on the guys face when the BSA along with federal marshalls or local law enforcement show up at his door for an "audit"
Speaking of the BSA, they busted one of Arkansas' local police stations about three years ago because they were using multiple copies of Windows 98 on their machines. I thought it was kinda ironic and funny. Microsoft ended up giving them licenses for all of their machines, in exchange for a written agreement stating from then on they would purchase legit copies for every workstation.
link92 said:In the UK, there is an Educational Family Pack, and it is cheaper than 2 copies of the Single Educational copy, got a Educational Family Pack on order for two computers
I wish we had that here in the USA. It would make sense for my family, with 5 studens in school.
The other reason, I think, that Apple does not require activation or a serial number is the plain fact that you have to have an Apple computer to put the software [OS X 10.4 Tiger] onto.
Apple makes out big when users want Tiger on a G3 and realize they need something more up to date. Apple is a hardware company; yes, they make excellent software but they've got more figured out than we know.
There is a sort of monopoly in that you have to have Apple's hardware to enjoy the benefits of (most) of Apple's beautiful, easy-to-use software. iTunes, Quicktime, and the very few things available for x86 are meant as candy to lure people into the Apple world.
It worked with iPods.
Apple makes out big when users want Tiger on a G3 and realize they need something more up to date. Apple is a hardware company; yes, they make excellent software but they've got more figured out than we know.
There is a sort of monopoly in that you have to have Apple's hardware to enjoy the benefits of (most) of Apple's beautiful, easy-to-use software. iTunes, Quicktime, and the very few things available for x86 are meant as candy to lure people into the Apple world.
It worked with iPods.
It's a minor rip-off that you need to buy more than one licence to legally install an OS on more than one of your own computers. In most languages you care to use: 1 user means 1 person. In Apple speak, 1 user means 1 computer. I am one user but have three macs, all of which are used just by me - 1 user. However, to do it all properly, I've still got to buy a 'family pack'.
The reason I say 'minor rip-off' is beacuse in the big scheme of things, £150 isn't really all that much to stay on top of things. Better that than pay the same price for a single licence of the latest MicroTosh garbage.
The reason I say 'minor rip-off' is beacuse in the big scheme of things, £150 isn't really all that much to stay on top of things. Better that than pay the same price for a single licence of the latest MicroTosh garbage.
Chip NoVaMac said:
This is exactly what I did.. I bought a Second hand G3 that had OSX Jaguar loaded onto it. I got the system, fell in love with OSX, and I bought a new G5 2 weeks ago..
I have also plan on visiting my local Apple store on the 29th to get a copy of Tiger OS.
I am not a "switcher" because I have had Pre OS9 comptuers since ~2000, and had little or no use for XP at home.
AlBDamned said:
That not the just apple speak that is computer speak. 1 licences = 1 computer. It makes sence if you think about it. You do not buy insucercnes for each driver of a car. you buy it for each car. one policy = 1 car but their can be 10 diffence drivers for that car. Some one like you though gets in a little more trouble because you own 3 Macs that requires 3 licences of software to cover all 3 of them.
Also I going to use you as an example here. A lot of people like you who own 3 computers would buy 1 copy of the software and then install it on all 3 computers that is where large part of pirating software comes from is it being over installed on computers, This is where activation cuts massivley into since a majority of those people are not going to have the know how on how to get around it and they would have to buy more copies of the software.
An unprecedented 5 posts on how many posts Chipnovamac made in a row. Including 3 separate corrections to the original count of 5.
Timelessblur said:
It's a reasonable analogy, but what you're saying here relates to '10 different drivers'.
I am one 'driver'. But yeah - if one driver has three cars - they would probably have one insurance policy (effectively the family pack' that is more expensive pro-rata than it would be for just the one car.
My little beef on thesubject, and it is little because I don't feel £150 is too bad to keep my OS bang up to date for a couple of years (online updates are free etc.), comes from having to pay for the 'family pack' to update my (1 user's - not family's) macs. I think really it boils down to more of a wording issue than anything. I think they should call the family pack, the 'multi-system' pack and the 'single user' pack should be called 'single system' pack. That IMO, would be a correct descriptive. In many other markets, you could do them for misleading advertising.
Regardless, my gear will be roaring with legitimate orange and black stripes come April 30th.
Wrong!
As a named driver on a car, you have to pay insurance for each driver on that car. My premium on a car that my parents own is Far higher than the same premium that my parents pay. (Of course i am including 3rd party insurance!)
Bzzzt Wrong!!!Timelessblur said:
As a named driver on a car, you have to pay insurance for each driver on that car. My premium on a car that my parents own is Far higher than the same premium that my parents pay. (Of course i am including 3rd party insurance!)
too late tiger pirates!
too late. tiger is available in pirated form already! check it:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/120183/
joshuawaire said:
too late. tiger is available in pirated form already! check it:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/120183/
James Philp said:
The point is you have one policy (Licence) - but have to pay more for each person (system) you want to add to that policy as a named driver.
As said, it's a reasonable analogy.
If Tiger did require activation and you refused to pay for more than one licence, you could hack it fairly easily, as you can with pretty much any program (through P2P programs etc). IMO though, this doesn't do you any favours in terms of stability and online updates. I think for the time you'd spend circumnavigating the problems, you may as well just buy the extra licences.
I know a guy who loves getting everything for nothing for his box of MicroTosh, but I just couldn't be stuffed with fixing all the minor faults everywhere.
After buying an iMac for my wife (2nd mac in the house) I've been cringing at the thought of a $199 family pack. Recently my company negioated an Apple discount so its only $165 for the family pack. A nice discount.
no it is on the car. They insuarnce is paid based primary driver. Yeah you see the based on the policy but if you also read the fine print if you allow some else to drive the car they will cover the car but anything that happens in a wreck counts agaist you (the owner of the policy) Oh that is at least how mine works. I am insured primaryly on my car. I am allowed to drive my parents car and State farm will cover me. Even when I the amount paid was based on the fact my car was the cheapest car and it had the lowest rate of all of our cars on it (now my car is the 2nd highest of the cars I can be on).James Philp said:
If it was like how you put it friends would not be allowed to drive any of you car so for road trips you take with you friend you have to drive the entire time. Also if you get pulled over by the cops they ask for proof of insurnces and it does not matter if you car has insurnces on it it only matters if that car has it no matter what the names are on the policy
Apology!
Sorry I started this, it is completely off topic, and the rules are probably very different in the US and UK (as they are in most automotive ways - you guys drive on the wrong side etc etc!). Lets get back on target!
I WANNA USER LICENSE (not machine license!)!
Family Pack - 5 USERS
Hmm, just made myself think - that doesn't work! - OS X is a multiple User OS isn't it?! That means I can have 1 computer and 10 people using it fine, but I can't have 1 user aand 3 computers!
I just think this is unfair. It's like saying if i buy a piece of piano music I can only play it on one piano! (hmm, maybe!!)
Timelessblur said:
Sorry I started this, it is completely off topic, and the rules are probably very different in the US and UK (as they are in most automotive ways - you guys drive on the wrong side etc etc!). Lets get back on target!
I WANNA USER LICENSE (not machine license!)!
Family Pack - 5 USERS
Hmm, just made myself think - that doesn't work! - OS X is a multiple User OS isn't it?! That means I can have 1 computer and 10 people using it fine, but I can't have 1 user aand 3 computers!
I just think this is unfair. It's like saying if i buy a piece of piano music I can only play it on one piano! (hmm, maybe!!)