Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 27th Aug 2009 19:39 UTC
Earlier today we reported that while Apple doesn't encourage it, the Snow Leopard upgrade disk can be used to upgrade machines that have Mac OS 10.4 Tiger installed as well. However, this is actually forbidden by the accompanying EULA, which raises an interesting question: do you have any moral problems ignoring said EULA? And on a more general note, do you actually care about any EULA at all?
Thread beginning with comment 381091
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
I've always been of the opinion that once I've bought software what I choose to do with it is my own business. If I decide to run it through a chipper shredder because I think it sucks, well that's my business.
I just ordered myself a copy of snow leopard that is going to be installed on my Intel Atom powered Hackintosh PC (unless I am unable to get it to run which is a possibility). I'm not a pirate, I firmly believe that if you use software you should be the owner of said software, but as far as following a eula that tells me what I can and can not install the software I bought on. I'm sorry but I don't agree with this. I don't agree with Windows Product Activation either so it isn't that I'm biased against Apple on this issue.
I just ordered myself a copy of snow leopard that is going to be installed on my Intel Atom powered Hackintosh PC (unless I am unable to get it to run which is a possibility). I'm not a pirate, I firmly believe that if you use software you should be the owner of said software, but as far as following a eula that tells me what I can and can not install the software I bought on. I'm sorry but I don't agree with this. I don't agree with Windows Product Activation either so it isn't that I'm biased against Apple on this issue.
I second that; I'm against Pystar because they're selling a modified version of Mac OS X preloaded onto the machine but at the same time if you as an individual do it yourself in the privacy of your own home. The software you purchase and how you use it int he privacy of your own home is none of the software vendors business - as long as you don't resell it with modifications, copy it or share it with people outside your home (the code itself) I don't believe the software company should have any say. Hence to pull it back to what I said about Pystar; if they were selling machines with an EFI firmware and sold a boxed unmodified copy of Mac OS X - then Apple would have no leg to stand on.
Its like 'per seat licences' - never agreed with them; sure, enforce them in terms of technical support - "we only support one installation" but why on earth a family should have to shell out upwards of NZ$600 for Windows 7 family pack is beyond me. Imagine telling Joe and Jane Doe who collectively earn NZ$500 per week that they should shell out close to two weeks pay for a family pack of Windows 7.
Member since:
2008-04-18
I've always been of the opinion that once I've bought software what I choose to do with it is my own business. If I decide to run it through a chipper shredder because I think it sucks, well that's my business.
I just ordered myself a copy of snow leopard that is going to be installed on my Intel Atom powered Hackintosh PC (unless I am unable to get it to run which is a possibility). I'm not a pirate, I firmly believe that if you use software you should be the owner of said software, but as far as following a eula that tells me what I can and can not install the software I bought on. I'm sorry but I don't agree with this. I don't agree with Windows Product Activation either so it isn't that I'm biased against Apple on this issue.
Edited 2009-08-27 21:57 UTC