Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 14th Feb 2006 22:49 UTC, submitted by jayson.knight
Mac OS X 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."
Thread beginning with comment 95798
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Geez... I give up!
by DeadFishMan on Wed 15th Feb 2006 09:02 UTC
Member since:

Raynier and a couple of other posters have been patiently explaining (and even dealing with insults) why it cannot be considered illegal anywhere in the world what Maxxus have done, but there is no way with some Mac users/apologists here. You guys have my deepest admiration and sympathies for trying so hard.

Iīll give my educated opinion about some of the arguments presented by Apple apologists, but I know that Iīll probably waste a few keystrokes. But anyway, there you go:

1) Why do you buy their product if you donīt want to abide by their conditions?

Is not that I donīt want to abide by their conditions. The problem is that theyīre a bit unfair to me. They are selling a goodie that I want to buy, with hard-earned money. They arenīt doing me any favors, you know? If I call them demanding their help to install the damn OS on another PC thatīs not a legit Apple machine, theyīre entirely within their rights to say "Screw you! We donīt have to do that, moron.". And thatīs OK. They really donīt have to.

2) Why buy the damn thing if youīre not planning to install it on a Mac anyway?

Well... Just because I can. Again, I paid them and now the damn thing is mine. To do whatever I want with it. If I want to buy it to use it as a toilet paper, they donīt have a saying about it either. Some of you might say that youīre just licensing their software but that wonīt fly on most countries (Iīm guessing this, since I know firsthand that it wonīt fly here in Brazil). When you buy something here, then the previous owner legally have to transfer ownership to you.

3) But thatīs piracy! You canīt do it.

Hmm... Youīre confusing two different things here. Iīm not reselling, copying, lending or otherwise handing the damn thing over to anybody else. I bought it to use it myself. In other words, Iīm not infringing any copyright laws here.

You might have a point when you say that Iīm not fullfilling one of the conditions of the EULA that says that I have to use it only on a machine supplied by them. But that term, as correctly pointed out by Raynier and several other posters, is based on very shaky grounds. The whole EULA tries to grant too much rights to the vendor that surely wouldnīt work that well on a regular contract. Itīs just too much restrictions on the end-user side when they canīt even be held responsible by damages occured during their product usage.

Some people shouted "Patent law!" earlier... Iīm still trying to figure out what they meant, so I will refrain from answering. :-)

4) But reverse engineering is illegal!

Says who? DMCA?!?! By the way, itīs very sad that such stupidity won its way as a law over there where you guys live. Iīm sure that it will come back to bite you guys in the ass on the future.

Reverse engineering is what allowed Compaq to create IBM PC clones and kickstart the huge industry that we have today. Donīt think even for a second that such stupidity will find its way on other countries (But then, certain commercial agreements that Brazil have with the USA might pave the way for this shit. I sincerely hope that it donīt).

5) OK... Reverse engineering might not be illegal, but there is no retail version of OSX for Mactels. So you cannot legally buy this thing to hack it to run on your crap PC.

Well, again Iīll concede a point here. There is no such a thing... yet. Apple will have to sell this thing soon, and when they do it, they better be prepared for the consequences. :-D

Technically, Maxxus did nothing wrong since neither you or I can tell whether he purchased a Mactel already or not.

6) Youīre overestimating peopleīs capacity of going over all this hassle just to have this shit installed on their crap PCs...

Come on... Now youīre just underestimating them. Look what happened to Microsoft. If there is gonna be someone wanting it that badly, theyīll do whatever it takes to get it installed on those crappy PCs...

7) But youīre ignoring the ethical aspects of all of this.

No, Iīm not. I bought their product. It is mine now. I gave them money for it. I did not prevent them from getting what they deserved for it. Iīm not going to put it on P2P networks nor lend it to a friend. I wonīt even bug them to help me out with this thing. I just donīt think that it is fair to let them tell me what to do with my stuff. And the law supports me on that line of thought (Fortunately).

If there is someone ignoring ethical aspects of this whole thing itīs them, the vendors. They try to grant too much rights to themselves, even if most of those rights step on some basic laws. But since I want to buy whatever they might be selling, Iīm willing to forget it. Just donīt expect any good will from me either.

8) But they deserve their huge profit margins on each unit sold. They invested time, money and effort on R&D to deliver such wonderful products. They raised the quality bar for everybody else. The hardware is top notch. You canīt find it anywhere.

The hardware inside an Apple computer is hardly vastly better than on some self-built game rigs that Iīve seen. And you can build it much better than what they offer for less money. You can buy good/stylized cases for PCs , too. Why should I settle for less?

9) What about iLife? You canīt tell me that you paying less until you sum up the amount of money required to purchase PC equivalents of this suite...

Well... Putting it mildly, I couldnīt care less for iLife. And I consider myself a creative user, doing all sorts of multimedia editing including sound, vectorial drawing and even 3D.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Geez... I give up!
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 15th Feb 2006 09:45 in reply to "Geez... I give up!"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:

Raynier and a couple of other posters have been patiently explaining (and even dealing with insults) why it cannot be considered illegal anywhere in the world what Maxxus have done, but there is no way with some Mac users/apologists here. You guys have my deepest admiration and sympathies for trying so hard.

You are not getting it. I *understand* all this might be allowed by law. But, as I already said, I don't care. Do you do everything just because the law allows you to?

When I'm throwing a party, I might come to an agreement with my neighbour that my friends are allowed to park their cars on his driveway. Now, I'd be pretty pissed off if in the middle of the party he starts kicking all the cars off of his driveway-- even though he is legally perfectly allowed to do so. Apparantlly, people like yourself would not be pissed off at all- you neighbour has done nothing illegal, so why care?

When I use an Apple, Microsoft, or any other product which comes with a contract, then I have an agreement with that company. And as such, I will try my best to adhere to that agreement, whether the law forces me to or not. It's not because I like those companies; it's because I have an agreement. Just like I had with my neighbour.

And I'd be pretty pissed off if everyone were to just break agreements because they are not legally binding. What a world we'd live in.

Edited 2006-02-15 09:46

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Geez... I give up!
by Chreo on Wed 15th Feb 2006 11:36 in reply to "RE: Geez... I give up!"
Chreo Member since:

"When I use an Apple, Microsoft, or any other product which comes with a contract, then I have an agreement with that company."

That is because you view that as an agreement between the two of you. I view that as a "forced to accept agreement" of use and that is NOT what I agreed to when I purchased the product.

That you view the "thank you for buying our product, now here's how WE allow YOU to use it" after purchase as valid is your issue but I see it as very unethical behavior and as I have the right NOT to adhere to that here in europe then I see that as VERY ethical and a moral obligation to oppose this the right way, by using their product the way I see fit and stick it to "the man". Not buying and whining is valid too but does NOTHING to further the rights of those that for various reasons adhere to the so called "agreement".

Now if I had to agree to the contract BEFORE I purchased the product THEN we're talking different matters. However, some things are not legally enforcable even if you agree before purchase (the "right to your firstborn if you agree" type)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Geez... I give up!
by DeadFishMan on Wed 15th Feb 2006 12:04 in reply to "RE: Geez... I give up!"
DeadFishMan Member since:


I understand your point. Really. I know that you can't stand the idea of going against the terms of the agreement that you signed and I fully support that as I also do my best to fullfill all of my commitments.

But I think that I speak on behalf of many here when I say that, when we say that there's nothing wrong in this particular case, it is because nobody's gonna be prejudiced. You, as a consumer, is using the product the way that best fit your needs (or desires). The vendor gets his money, no complaints and possibly a happy customer that could come back later to purchase the real thing.

We don't see it as something ethically wrong. At least, not to the same degree that some people have implied on this thread comparing the enthusiasts willing to pull it to thieves, pirates, rapers and God-knows-what-else.

Nobody is doing this because the law ensures that he or she can do it, but if that's what it takes to uphold our rights, then we'll most likely pursue that route.

However, it doesn't really matter that much to me as I don't even own any Apple product and don't intend to do it on the foreseeable future unless they change their prices[1] to something more realistic outside the USA boundaries, even if I love their OS. I said what I said because that's is what I believe is right.

[1] I could buy a reasonable powerful x86 gaming rig with the amount of money that they charge for an iPod Nano here. Please don't get me started on the PowerMacs prices...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Geez... I give up!
by alcibiades on Wed 15th Feb 2006 15:26 in reply to "RE: Geez... I give up!"
alcibiades Member since:

Thom, you're missing it, still. The point is not like your neighbour at all. The point is, that the restrictions which you think you have signed up to are actually unlawful in the EC. It really is contrary to consumer protection and competition law to attempt to impose these conditions on buyers.

This is why it is quite wrong to consider yourself bound. It is condoning unlawful behaviour on the part of your supplier.

Reply Parent Score: 1