It seems like flee-in-Apple's-fur, cracker 'Maxxuss', has succeeded in cracking Mac OS 10.4.4 for Intel. "We were just about to hunker down and wait through the cold winter and a wet spring until we saw some results on the OS X 10.4.4 for Intel hacking efforts, but it looks like we're getting a little Valentines present from 'Maxxuss' who has already broken through Apple's heightened security that is present in their shipping version of the OS. It's just a preliminary release, not all hardware is supported and it requires a bit of futzing around to get it to work, but seeing as we weren't expecting this kind of breakthrough this early, we really can't complain."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
he EULA is valid because the vendor says, pay me money, and promise not to use my product like this, and I'll let you use it.
And you agree.
What the hell kind of legal argument is that? What's the legal definition of "promise". What law gives the vendor the power to demand promises from the buyer?
Edited 2006-02-15 04:09
Member since:2006-01-28
Member since:2006-01-02
Member since:2005-07-06
Windows XP's EULA is particularly entertaining. You don't agree to it until you get to the installer, but it says if you don't agree to it you should return the media and ask for a refund. Of course, nobody accepts returns on opened media. So basically, the consumer has no option --- if he doesn't agree to the EULA (which isn't printed on the outside of the box, of course!), he's forced to keep the software anyway. Of course, if anybody ever brought it to court, they would win, but software vendors don't care because nobody will spend thousands to recoupe a few hundred for a piece of software.
I understand that there is a need to protect software from pirates. However, if it cannot be done without infringing on the rights of the people, well, that's just too bad. Society has no obligation to protect your business model. If your business model is based on coercion that is legally unenforceable, its time to find another business model.
Member since:
2006-01-28
The EULA is valid because the vendor says, pay me money, and promise not to use my product like this, and I'll let you use it.
And you agree.
Now, if you don't like what that vendor is saying, don't use the product.
Return it.
No one does this, because they want to have what they want, their way.
You cant.
If more people disagreed, then the EULAs would become more fair.