Will Tiger require activation

[Doctor Q]

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'.

1 Tiger per computer is actually cheaper than 1 Tiger per person if you have one Mac with multiple users. We're lucky nobody charges per user per computer. "Sorry, Junior. You can't use the Mac in the family room anymore because we ran out of user licenses."

I hit the sweet spot. We have 5 Macs running OS X in our household, so I'm not "wasting" any licenses with a family pack. If the dog decides he needs his own Mac, he'll just have to do without Tiger.

 

[James Philp]

1 Tiger per computer is actually cheaper than 1 Tiger per person if you have one Mac with multiple users.

No poo, Dr. Q!
But not cheaper if you are one person (I think most of us are - sorry all the schizophrenic people!), and have multiple computers!
"Tiger per user is actially more expensive than 1 tiger per computer if you have multiple macs with a single user."
See how those words can be interchanged!
I'm glad you're sorted out, trouble is i think there are plenty of people who have a desktop/laptop combination who only need 2 licenses, not 5!

 

[sorryiwasdreami]

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.

But you only need one license to drive many, many different cars.

 

[krappamc]

so what would happen if i install a single user tiger into my 2 macs?
would one not be able to update???
or is it that 2 computers cannot be logged on at same time??
please let me know what would be the disadvantage of installing single user into 2 computers..

 

[James Philp]

But you only need one license to drive many, many different cars.

And you tell us to ride a bike in your sign-off?

 

[mac-er]

so what would happen if i install a single user tiger into my 2 macs?
would one not be able to update???
or is it that 2 computers cannot be logged on at same time??
please let me know what would be the disadvantage of installing single user into 2 computers..

Ummm....it's morally wrong??

Isn't that the biggest disadvantage?

 

[krappamc]

well..
for me being morally wrong.. i just bought a powerbook and G5 about 2 months ago and to be straightforward and honest, i only had about 100 dollars in my bank account.. which i bought the educational tiger for..now i really can't afford it and i think i really paid my due to apple
so to be honest, i really don't feel like i am doing anything wrong... i guess there is problem with my morality + status of my bank acct.. so i guess i will just go ahead and install it on both macs when i get it assuming that it won't have any problem when i have both machine connected to same lan..

sorry for being such an ignorant person... really can't afford $70 extra..

I HOPE IT WORKS!!! (sorry again for not being sure, i only been a mac user for couple months..)

 

[matticus008]

No poo, Dr. Q!
But not cheaper if you are one person (I think most of us are - sorry all the schizophrenic people!), and have multiple computers!
"Tiger per user is actially more expensive than 1 tiger per computer if you have multiple macs with a single user."
See how those words can be interchanged!
I'm glad you're sorted out, trouble is i think there are plenty of people who have a desktop/laptop combination who only need 2 licenses, not 5!

That's true, and for power users like us, it's an inconvenience. But we're a pretty extreme minority. There are three usage patterns for computers: 1)one user, one computer, 2) one computer, multiple users, or 3) multiple computers, one user. The general market assumption is 1 computer per person, or multiple people per computer (work, families, school labs). So the license per machine works out advantageously for the more common 2 of 3 useage schemes. Licensing can't benefit everyone based on just one of the two variables unless software starts being sold based on a hybrid calculation of users/machines, which would be a complicated pricing model.

The other side of the coin is that if we choose to invest in multiple computers, the extra cost for software per machine is something we have to take into account for that investment. There are few people who truly NEED multiple computers and simultaneously CANNOT afford the extra software costs. In fact, I personally can't think of a single reason why someone would absolutely need more than one computer for personal use (i.e. not professional/business related). It's a luxury item that isn't totally paid for at purchase. Like a car needs insurance and gas and maintenance, computers need software, and so must be taken into account for determining affordability.

 

[Doctor Q]

I think there are people who routinely need one desktop Mac and one portable Mac. For example, a moviemaker might need the heavy iron for most editing but need to take the show on the road to visit clients (or potential clients) and be able to do quick edits in the field. Or a traveling salesman might be more efficient on a huge screen when in the office (big spreadsheets) but need something small when hitting the road.

Recognizing that one person might have multiple computers is reasonable, and I applaud software licenses that allow multiple installations for one person. Some licenses (MS Office? -- I forget) even say you can install on two machines primarily used by the same person as long as one is portable.

 

[mduser63]

This thread has kind of changed subject from when it was started, but I still wanted to add my thoughts on activation. While I'm against software piracy, and don't advocate it in any way (including installing a single user copy of Tiger on multiple Macs), I must say, I despise activation schemes even more.

One of the big things that made me completely fed up with Windows was the activation system. I had an expensive Windows PC, which had many problems, both software and hardware. Luckily it had/has a lifetime warranty, so I was able to get it fixed free of charge every time it broke. It should be noted that the copy of Windows being used came with the machine, and was never installed on any other machine. It ended up needing a reinstall of Windows several times (7 or 8, I'd estimate), and after the first 3 times or whatever, the automatic activation system stopped working. Having to talk to someone on the phone in India and explain myself to them every time was rather aggravating, and by the end I basically felt like swearing at them and telling them that the reason for my reinstalling the OS was because they were incapable of making a product that worked right. It's been very refreshing to switch to Mac and not have to worry about reinstalling the OS, but knowing that even if I have to, activation won't be necessary.

My point in all this, is that I will seriously consider moving over to Linux if Apple begins requiring activation for OS X, and will be very unhappy with the change in any case.

 

[Timelessblur]

I would not be surpised in the least to see Apple go to an activation system in the future. Simple because activation has turned out to be the easy way and the most effect way to cut down on piraters of software. It increase the diffuclt of getting around it greatly and it increase of trouble for the user is not really increased that much.

Remeber when CD keys where brand new. I remeber hating them (hell they still bug me) but now they are common place and no one really thinks much of them. The same thing is going to happen with activation, it just going to keep becoming more and more wide spread.

 

[rvmartinez]

The "Family pack" is more of a "Household pack" what you're doing is still illegal if you don't buy two copies. (or the cheaper family pack)

If it is illegal, it should not be. I have 2 macs, iMac and PB 17". I use one at the office and the other at home. I never use them at the same time, except when transferring files from one to the other... why should I have to pay for 2 programs?

 

[iMetalG5]

If it is illegal, it should not be. I have 2 macs, iMac and PB 17". I use one at the office and the other at home. I never use them at the same time, except when transferring files from one to the other... why should I have to pay for 2 programs?

that's what a lot of people i talk to say. i mean no one i know is copying tiger and giving it away or whatever. i just know a few people who live by themselves who happen to own a desktop and laptop mac and use one Tiger DVD for both.

this is just a grey area. i don't know.

A friend of mine just sold his iMac G4 and will be using that loot to purchase the 1.8 revised iMac. his problem now is how does he take Tiger off the G4 and put Panther back on and how does he "prove" this to Apple. I'm like what the!?!?!?!?