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 95805
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Geez... I give up!
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 15th Feb 2006 09:45 UTC in reply to "Geez... I give up!"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

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:
2005-07-06

"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:
2006-01-09

Thom,

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:
2005-10-12

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