or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Mac clone maker vows to test Apple on OS X licensing terms
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mac clone maker vows to test Apple on OS X licensing terms - Page 5

post #161 of 238
..........
post #162 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifterus View Post

That is such bulls**t. I can't believe people actually believe this nonsense. No, you as a consumer have rights. Get a clue. An EULA has absolutely zero legal authority over you. Only an actual law has authority over you. What if the EULA said:

"By installing this software, you agree never to use it on Tuesday, or on the 17th of March of any given year. You agree never to wear the color orange while you are using it. If you are over 6'4" or weigh over 200 lbs (92 kg) you are prohibited from using this software between the hours of 6:00AM and 12:00AM GMT. Should more than 3 family members come within earshot while you are using this you will be in violation of this agreement. If you are Jewish, Muslim, Mormon, or Hindu, it is also a violation to use this software on Thursdays. Employees of any government agency, GE, Dell, Microsoft, or Jamba Juice are prohibited from using this software. Any violation of these terms requires you to delete all files and destroy all copies of the software, literature, and packaging. Failure to remove any trace whatsoever will cause our private security forces to detain you, torture you, and kill you. This agreement supersedes all laws, local, national and international. Have a nice day."

By your incomprehensible logic, you would be forbidden by the law from "violating" any of these terms. It's so ludicrous I am literally LOL right now.

You're missing what I'm saying. I said that a EULA is a CONTRACT, legal, and recognized by law.

Obviously, nothing in any contract may violate any laws, so your example is absurd.

I didn't say it was against the law to violate it (in a way that is not criminal). But a contract is backed by law. As such, you can be sued in a civil court. If you have been found to have violated the contract, then there are remedies that can be applied against you.

You can read some more of this, it's where I took the criminal statute from.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...1_17_10_5.html
post #163 of 238
..........
post #164 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifterus View Post

That is such bulls**t. I can't believe people actually believe this nonsense. No, you as a consumer have rights. Get a clue. An EULA has absolutely zero legal authority over you. Only an actual law has authority over you. What if the EULA said:

"By installing this software, you agree never to use it on Tuesday, or on the 17th of March of any given year. You agree never to wear the color orange while you are using it. If you are over 6'4" or weigh over 200 lbs (92 kg) you are prohibited from using this software between the hours of 6:00AM and 12:00AM GMT. Should more than 3 family members come within earshot while you are using this you will be in violation of this agreement. If you are Jewish, Muslim, Mormon, or Hindu, it is also a violation to use this software on Thursdays. Employees of any government agency, GE, Dell, Microsoft, or Jamba Juice are prohibited from using this software. Any violation of these terms requires you to delete all files and destroy all copies of the software, literature, and packaging. Failure to remove any trace whatsoever will cause our private security forces to detain you, torture you, and kill you. This agreement supersedes all laws, local, national and international. Have a nice day."

By your incomprehensible logic, you would be forbidden by the law from "violating" any of these terms. It's so ludicrous I am literally LOL right now.

You remind me of those kids on the WoW forums that use the same argument that because you can put anything in a EULA (hint: You can't) that it renders it unenforceable.

This thread reeks of trolling and fingers-in-ears-la-la-la-can't-hear-you.
post #165 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandor View Post

holy crap. are people that stupid??


here you go mdriftmeyer....





The dual quad core 2.8 ghz mac pro with 2 GB ram and a 256 MB video card is $2800
the dual quad core 2.8 ghz dell with 2 GB of ram and a 256 MB video card is $3800


This is brilliant work, well done.

Just one thing however, I am having a lot of trouble finding the included monitor on the Apple store website. Can you point me in the right direction?
post #166 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by murphyweb View Post

This is brilliant work, well done.

Just one thing however, I am having a lot of trouble finding the included monitor on the Apple store website. Can you point me in the right direction?

The display is $200, meaning it's still $800 cheaper. And you really don't need to quote images.
post #167 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by esXXI View Post

The display is $200, meaning it's still $800 cheaper. And you really don't need to quote images.

The Dell includes RAID that Apple will charge you $800 for.

And I don't really need to do lots of things but I do anyway. I can do what I like, but thanks for the advice.
post #168 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by murphyweb View Post

The Dell includes RAID that Apple will charge you $800 for.

And I don't really need to do lots of things but I do anyway. I can do what I like, but thanks for the advice.

Doesn't it say "Non-RAID configuration"? I've no clue if it has RAID included.

And what's with the attitude? It's forum etiquette to remove images from quotes because it increases load time, bandwidth used and stretches the forums needlessly.

Since when can anyone do what they like on someone else's forum?
post #169 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by esXXI View Post

Doesn't it say "Non-RAID configuration"? I've no clue if it has RAID included.

And what's with the attitude? It's forum etiquette to remove images from quotes because it increases load time, bandwidth used and stretches the forums needlessly.

Since when can anyone do what they like on someone else's forum?

Because unfortunately the part of the post I was commenting on was clearly contained in the images that were posted. So if I had not included the images in the quote I would have been commenting on an empty post, which would have been kind of silly and pointless.

Yes, the dell includes RAID.

The original poster was therefore being a little bit dishonest in his comparison as he failed to mention the monitor that Apple will charge you $600 for and the RAID that Apple will charge you $800 for. A fair comparison should be done on a like for like basis.
post #170 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

The EULA is a recognized contract, recognized by law. It is a statement of copyright, among other matters. It spells out what you may, and may not do to, or with, the product you have licensed. You may not do anything that the company specifies you can not do. You may only do what they allow.

It may be a contract but it is not really enforceable because it is not a signed and legally executed document. Breach of contract is a very minor issue especially when the terms and rights claimed are written as broadly as these EULAs usually are. Yes it is a contract, but a very weak one.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #171 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by murphyweb View Post

Because unfortunately the part of the post I was commenting on was clearly contained in the images that were posted. So if I had not included the images in the quote I would have been commenting on an empty post, which would have been kind of silly and pointless.

Yes, the dell includes RAID.

The original poster was therefore being a little bit dishonest in his comparison as he failed to mention the monitor that Apple will charge you $600 for and the RAID that Apple will charge you $800 for. A fair comparison should be done on a like for like basis.

You can remove the [img] tags and leave them as links, allowing people to click on them if they need to. And you are correct, if one has RAID and the other doesn't they're not configured similar enough.

(Sorry if I was snippy, bad day)
post #172 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by esXXI View Post

You can remove the [img] tags and leave them as links, allowing people to click on them if they need to. And you are correct, if one has RAID and the other doesn't they're not configured similar enough.

(Sorry if I was snippy, bad day)

No worries dude, sorry for being snippy back!
post #173 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by murphyweb View Post

Yes, the dell includes RAID.

The original poster was therefore being a little bit dishonest in his comparison as he failed to mention the monitor that Apple will charge you $600 for and the RAID that Apple will charge you $800 for. A fair comparison should be done on a like for like basis.

Apparently no, it doesn't. It says "Non-RAID configuration, 1 drive total configuration". And it is only a 80 GB drive, compared to a 320 GB drive in the Mac Pro.
post #174 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by durin oakenskin View Post

Apparently no, it doesn't. It says "Non-RAID configuration, 1 drive total configuration". And it is only a 80 GB drive, compared to a 320 GB drive in the Mac Pro.

The drive makes a very small difference in price.

And YES the Dell system does include RAID. The Non-Raid configuration is there because there is only one hard drive configured in the system, If you want to add more drives to the system the RAID controller is already there included in the base price. (A quick look at the system on the Dell website will confirm this).

With the Mac Pro you can also add more drives but in order to have RAID you must pay $800 for the RAID controller.

The only way to do a true comparison must be to perform a like for like comparison otherwise it is useless as a comparison. So i make the Dell $400 cheaper than the mac.

The argument could be that Dell force you to pay for a RAID controller whether you want one or not whereas Apple give you the option and it is a fair argument. But I would imagine that Dell have taken the approach that anyone using systems this powerful and expensive would have something pretty serious running on the hard drives and therefore not using RAID would be a pretty silly thing to be doing. I would probably go along with that viewpoint to be honest.

Hey, don't get me wrong, $400 more for a system like this? I would go for the Mac Pro, It is a nice system and runs OSX. This is not an anti-Apple post, but this is 'be realistic' post, if you truly believe that the Mac is the better deal then great, say so. But be honest about it, by fudging the figures it makes you look like you do not really believe what you are saying and just trying to be the blind Apple fanboy.
post #175 of 238
It is also worth noting that with the Mac Pro your only choice is the 2.8 Quad core. If money was important to your buying decision at least with Dell you have a huge range to choose from.

So with the Dell you could have the same configuration but 2x 2.33 quad core's for $2,428.00. (includes 19" Monitor)

That is opposed to the Mac Pro's 2x 2.8's (plus 20" cinema display and RAID) at $4,199.00


Now this would make anyone think twice I presume? After all it is going to be fairly easy to add a faster processor in 6-months time when the price has dropped if you feel you need one.
post #176 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse View Post

Well one thing they could do is sell a computer capable of running Mac OSX but not install the operating system.. ie, leave it up to users to install operating system. Since they are not selling a Leopard, they cannot violate the EULA. Apple cannot dictate a company cannot make compatible hardware. That would be an interesting test. Would apple then go after individual users for violating the EULA?. What a PR nightmare that would be (similar to the PR nightmare the RIAA have when they sue individuals). It would be expensive too.. they'd have to find out who bought the computer, no easy task especially if PsyStar tells them to go jump of a building when apple request customer info (and i don't think there is any court that would force one company to hand over it's customer info, which is considered competitive information, to another).

By installing the operating system themselves, they are opening themself up to apple legal. Maybe they will argue that they make compatible mac hardware (which is legal) and that they are contracted to install the operating system on the hardware by the user (maybe shift the responsibility to the customer) but then refuse to provide customer information. Hmm.. not a lawyer but i wonder how exactly they will defeat Apple in court.

I think the smart thing to do is make the mac compatible hardware and let the customers violate the EULA.

This is only possible because apple runs on intel of course.. PsyStar could then claim that the machine could be used to install unix, or windows or mac and poor innocent souls, they had no idea the user would violate the EULA of apple. Hey, how can they be at fault if the user does something that stupid??(wink, wink).


I agree. They are lunatics to suggest they will add OS X for the customers. If they just said it's ready to run any OS you wish to install (instructions on a Russian web site) ... they would have got just as much publicity (probably what this is all about) but they are walking off a cliff with this approach I suspect.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #177 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by murphyweb View Post

And YES the Dell system does include RAID. The Non-Raid configuration is there because there is only one hard drive configured in the system, If you want to add more drives to the system the RAID controller is already there included in the base price. (A quick look at the system on the Dell website will confirm this).

Maybe I'm completely wrong, but this page says it supports host based RAID, which is a software RAID, according to the German Wikipedia (the English Wikipedia does not contain the definition of "host based", unfortunately).

As we know, Software RAID is possible with the Mac as well, as is a separate hardware RAID controller for the Dell. The screenshot does not tell if this is the hardware or software option, but I think it's safe to say, it was software. Which brings us back to the point: hardware RAID not included.

I agree with you that fudging the figures does not serve a purpose - I think all sandor wanted to say was: The Mac and the Dell are at least comparable regarding the price.
post #178 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by murphyweb View Post

Because unfortunately the part of the post I was commenting on was clearly contained in the images that were posted. So if I had not included the images in the quote I would have been commenting on an empty post, which would have been kind of silly and pointless.

Yes, the dell includes RAID.

The original poster was therefore being a little bit dishonest in his comparison as he failed to mention the monitor that Apple will charge you $600 for and the RAID that Apple will charge you $800 for. A fair comparison should be done on a like for like basis.

The original poster was assuming the readers here have a sense of humor I think. The price difference kind of took the p**s out of the 'free monitor' from Dell. Then you for some reason picked up on Apple's lack of a free monitor
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #179 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_M View Post

I've just been on the Psystar site and that $400 doesn't even include OS X.
That will cost you an extra $155!
Even Firewire will cost you another $50

This brings it into Mini Mac territory and I know which one I would rather buy.

I think that Psystar have missed the point, even if they were'nt about to get annihilated by Jobs' lawyers, these machines just aren't cool!! :-)

The company accuses Apple of price gouging, maybe in the same way they would accuse Mercedes of price gouging. Basically this shows why there is so much cheap sh*t on the market that feels thrown together and while cheap does not show any care or sense of quality. They simply don't get it.

The cost of good design and R&D are non-negligible, and should not be ignored it the total cost of things. Also, in business you sell at a price that your market is willing to support and the fact that people are buying Macs at the prices as currently defined, show their is no need to lower the prices.

As to the price of memory and upgrading video cards, well anyone who has been using a Mac for a while knows you don't buy these things from Apple.
post #180 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I agree. They are lunatics to suggest they will add OS X for the customers. If they just said it's ready to run any OS you wish to install (instructions on a Russian web site) ... they would have got just as much publicity (probably what this is all about) but they are walking off a cliff with this approach I suspect.

If Apple has stated that the MacOS X is only meant to run on Apple branded computers, then what I see happening:
- Apple refusing support, per the contract
- Apple refusing support, because the OS has been modified in a non-sanctioned way
- PsyStar tells you that your hardware issues are OS related, so see Apple

You pay cheap, but I can see no easier way to get screwed if something goes wrong.
post #181 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

It may be a contract but it is not really enforceable because it is not a signed and legally executed document. Breach of contract is a very minor issue especially when the terms and rights claimed are written as broadly as these EULAs usually are. Yes it is a contract, but a very weak one.

Tell that to the folks that Blizzard sued for breach of contract (EULA). Then there is ProCD v Zeidenberg. Apple certainly can compell them not to install Leopard via an injunction.
post #182 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

It may be a contract but it is not really enforceable because it is not a signed and legally executed document. Breach of contract is a very minor issue especially when the terms and rights claimed are written as broadly as these EULAs usually are. Yes it is a contract, but a very weak one.

Not entirely true. Most courts have held that simply opening the sealed package that has clearly defined the consequences of such action is binding. Afterall, even a handshake is binding.

Yes it is a contract. And yes can be perceived as a weak one. But only if you have the resources to fight it in court.

Perhaps you should ask your company whether they regard EULAs as binding, and what would happen to you if you defied the EULA on one of their machines.
post #183 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by canucklehead View Post

When you buy a copy of software (or music or movies), you DO NOT own it. You've purchased a license to use it and that license comes with terms of usage.

There are way too many people who do not understand the concept of copyright or intellectual property and I think that is where the problem lies. You can try to challenge the laws (as this company is trying to do with their Open Computers) but until the laws change (and they are not likely going to be), you need to understand how these laws work.

Again, you are buying the right to use ... you do not buy ownership of the product.

I understand the intricacies of copyrights and the right to use concept, I just thought it was too dull to talk about here

My point was that if they sell the items in the proper order (Machine, then software, then installation) that any violation of user agreements has passed to the consumer and the Apple would probably not go after the consumers directly. But like someone else mentioned, if they pre-install OSX then it seems like they have crossed the line.
post #184 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by murphyweb View Post

Yes, the dell includes RAID.

Nope. Host based (software) RAID:

Integrated LSI 1068e SAS/SATA 3.0Gb/s controller supports host based RAID 0, 1

Quote:
The original poster was therefore being a little bit dishonest in his comparison as he failed to mention the monitor that Apple will charge you $600 for and the RAID that Apple will charge you $800 for. A fair comparison should be done on a like for like basis.

The T7400 is $4277 with the 320GB and 20" WS UltraSharp.
The Mac Pro is $3398 with the 20" ACD.

Both with software RAID.

Even if you deduct the 20" Ultrasharp the Dell is still $3,928.
post #185 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifterus View Post

I'm glad you now seem to understand somewhat, but not completely. You can be sued for any reason, by anyone. The EULA does not give someone special permission to sue you. It simply shows that the software maker expected you to read it and is operating under the assumption that you agreed to it. That's all. It has no legal authority over someone who buys a copy of the software, and like you said you are not breaking any laws by violating any restrictions that are not laws. And breaking that assumed contract (again, nobody can prove you read it and actually agreed to it, which is why EULAs are joke compared to real contracts) in a manner which does not violate any laws does not give anyone legal precedent to claim damages they otherwise couldn't claim with or without an EULA.

EULAs are mostly just "you can't sue me if we deny you warranty or tech support for doing xxx" and "if you sue us we can use this to say we warned you." It's about denying liability. It has absolutely zero legal authority over you. If they want to sue you for non-illegal violations, it doesn't help them at all, nor do they require it just to file a lawsuit.

I NOW seem to understand? That's actually funny! I haven't changed what I said, only explained it more completely to you, so that now YOU seem to understand somewhat. But, not entirely.

The EULA does give the holder the right to sue you. The EULA is a binding document, as are all contracts. Or don't you believe in contract law?

Most states even have the "shrink-wrap" contract law, in which you agree to the EULA (contract) as soon as you open the wrapper, without even having seen it, much less read it!

It's not that you are breaking the law, in the way you seem to think some of us are saying, but that the law does back the legality of contracts. Otherwise, there would be no civil couart system in place where it could be inforced. It would simply be a provate agreement, with no penalties possible.

You can go to trial, where a real judge, and a real jury decides whether the contract was violated. And, as the case, the EULA is recognized as a valid contract. If it weren't recognized by law, that wouldn't be the case.

As you are so set against this, why don't you provide some legitimate links proving your point, as you seem to be avoiding reading the information provided by mine, which contain the actual laws in question?
post #186 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

This won't be such a big problem if Psystar installs Tiger instead of Leopard on their systems.

There most likely won't be any more updates to Tiger, so they can be sure that there won't be any iPhone-style bricking, and Leopard hasn't added very much functionality anyways (other than boot camp, biweekly fixes and lots of crashing...)

I'm still getting Security Updates from Apple for Tiger.
post #187 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

It may be a contract but it is not really enforceable because it is not a signed and legally executed document. Breach of contract is a very minor issue especially when the terms and rights claimed are written as broadly as these EULAs usually are. Yes it is a contract, but a very weak one.

It isn't a "weak" contract. If it can be proven to have been violated then it can be taken to court. It's then up to the jury to decide, as it is with everything, unless both sides agree to have a judge decide instead.

This is one reason why the RIAA, ill advised as it may be, can do what it's doing. Sometimes it wins, and sometimes it loses, you're right as it's a matter of proof. But, if the proof is there, they will win.

Same here.

There is an old saying:
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse".

It actually holds up in court.
post #188 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by murphyweb View Post

The drive makes a very small difference in price.

And YES the Dell system does include RAID. The Non-Raid configuration is there because there is only one hard drive configured in the system, If you want to add more drives to the system the RAID controller is already there included in the base price. (A quick look at the system on the Dell website will confirm this).

With the Mac Pro you can also add more drives but in order to have RAID you must pay $800 for the RAID controller.

The only way to do a true comparison must be to perform a like for like comparison otherwise it is useless as a comparison. So i make the Dell $400 cheaper than the mac.

The argument could be that Dell force you to pay for a RAID controller whether you want one or not whereas Apple give you the option and it is a fair argument. But I would imagine that Dell have taken the approach that anyone using systems this powerful and expensive would have something pretty serious running on the hard drives and therefore not using RAID would be a pretty silly thing to be doing. I would probably go along with that viewpoint to be honest.

Hey, don't get me wrong, $400 more for a system like this? I would go for the Mac Pro, It is a nice system and runs OSX. This is not an anti-Apple post, but this is 'be realistic' post, if you truly believe that the Mac is the better deal then great, say so. But be honest about it, by fudging the figures it makes you look like you do not really believe what you are saying and just trying to be the blind Apple fanboy.

You don't need to have a controller to have RAID on a Mac, any Mac, even the Mini.
post #189 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richardlol View Post

I understand the intricacies of copyrights and the right to use concept, I just thought it was too dull to talk about here

My point was that if they sell the items in the proper order (Machine, then software, then installation) that any violation of user agreements has passed to the consumer and the Apple would probably not go after the consumers directly. But like someone else mentioned, if they pre-install OSX then it seems like they have crossed the line.

The interesting thing here is that they can sell the machine, but must be a licensed dealer to sell Apple products as new.

If Apple were to give them an agreement to be a licensed dealer of the OS, then they could sell that as well, otherwise no.

But, under no circumstances could they install the software themselves.

Even if the are allowed, bt Apple, to sell the software, they can't say that the customer should buy their machine for the express purpose of doing so, as that would lead them to be the cause of their customers violating the software license, and as they were profiting from those sales, they could be held to a higher standard of copyright violation, that MAY be elevated to the criminal level. That's difficult to say, but, at least, they could be sued out of business.
post #190 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmas View Post

As to the price of memory and upgrading video cards, well anyone who has been using a Mac for a while knows you don't buy these things from Apple.

Not entirely true.

Apple has always been accused of 'over' pricing and often it is an 'over' simplication of the truth.

For example as shown here, most often comparative price shopping has not been accurately tabled. Turns out the Mac is cheaper than a 'comparative' Dell and the Psystar may not represent the true value as declared.

Having bought/procured hundreds of new Macs for myself, my company and my clients, buying them off the shelf fully 'loaded' from Apple can be a lot cheaper and faster than sourcing, purchasing, transporting, installing, testing and guaranteeing options than doing it myself or hiring or outsourcing service personnel.

Upgrading is another matter. Providing of course you know what you are doing. And more often than not, most aren't in the 'capable' category.

And before anybody challenges my opinion, just how many of us buy a 'basic' car and go to Cosco for the tires, or buy a frame house and join Direct Buy (and that is joke) to finish it.

In any event, Apple has made it exceptionally easy to upgrade RAM. Something I wouldn't hesitate to do myself. My wife is another matter.
post #191 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by esXXI View Post

The display is $200, meaning it's still $800 cheaper. And you really don't need to quote images.

An apple display is $200?.. can you please post that link?..
An apple 19 inch widescreen (or close, i'd take 20 inch) is $200?..
Apple has never sold a monitor for $200 in the history of it's existence.
That is blasphemy, you should be ashamed of yourself.. which self respecting mac zealot would buy a monitor that cheap?.

Hope you weren't comparing a used mac monitor with a new monitor dell supplies with it's computers..


We are all waiting for this link to a $200 apple monitor. I have an old monitor i need replacing.. i am waiting with abated breath.
post #192 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

To be even more precise one has to go to Newegg and order 800Mhz ECC Dual Fully Buffered RAM:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820148188
$151.99

That of course makes the price even worse for DELL.


hehe

yeah, we are on the same page here. Apple, with the switch to Intel, has been holding the position as the lowest price Xeon workstations.
post #193 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse View Post

Where is the monitor for the mac?.

go pick up a shiity 19" LCD at Best Buy for $120 - it'll be better than the "free" 19" you get with teh dell. for $1000 more than the apple. with a smaller hard drive. and "worse" ram.
post #194 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It isn't a "weak" contract. If it can be proven to have been violated then it can be taken to court. It's then up to the jury to decide, as it is with everything, unless both sides agree to have a judge decide instead.

This is one reason why the RIAA, ill advised as it may be, can do what it's doing. Sometimes it wins, and sometimes it loses, you're right as it's a matter of proof. But, if the proof is there, they will win.

Same here.

There is an old saying:
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse".

It actually holds up in court.

Melgross, you are usually a smart guy but you are wrong in this one aspect.. EULA's are extremely weak. For example, what if the EULA was in English but I only understood Spanish?. Can a court force somone to agree to a contract that they didn't understand?... if that was so, the Pre-nup that Jack Kent Cook signed with his ex-wife would have held up.. i believed she argued something similar (that becuase she did not have a lawyer, she did not understand the contract as it was drawn up). Yes, it's still a contract but it's weak. I suspect companies do not challenge it because all companies have EULA.. why would microsoft for example challenge the EULA of another company when they too have EULA's?. Acually, by PsyStar challenging apple EULA, they are setting themselves up (if the court agree with them) for consumers to ignore their EULA, not something any company would look forward to.

To be honest, I suspect if an individual hired a top lawyer and took a company to court for it's EULA, they would have a very good chance of winning. It depends on whether PsyStar has a very good lawyer.
post #195 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandor View Post

go pick up a shiity 19" LCD at Best Buy for $120 - it'll be better than the "free" 19" you get with teh dell. for $1000 more than the apple. with a smaller hard drive. and "worse" ram.

That's not adequate.. dell is giving you a dell monitor. If i buy an equivalent apple system, i expect then an apple monitor. If you want to take that argument to the extreme.. then i could compare the dell system without any ram and no network card, etc just to get it cheaper than the mac and then buy those from best buy.

We are comparing systems here from the original vendor. Apple Zealots always state that apple monitors are better than any other monitors.. why if i am buying an apple instead of a dell would i want some shiity 19'' LCD from best buy?. I'd want an apple monitor right?. Is it Dell fault their monitors are cheaper than Apple (dell doesn't work in the apple pricing department).

Naw, sorry, you don't get away with comparing a mac with a dell and then say buy some generic monitor. That's not how systems comparison works.
post #196 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse View Post

To be honest, I suspect if an individual hired a top lawyer and took a company to court for it's EULA, they would have a very good chance of winning. It depends on whether PsyStar has a very good lawyer.

Except that folks have done that (well, you'll have to assess whether they had a "top" lawyer or not) and lost. Likely the EFF has at a minimum "decent" laywers (who have defended cases all the way to SCOTUS) and they lost the BNet case based on EULA and DMCA.

If PsyStar had a good lawyer they'd likely have advised them better thus far.
post #197 of 238
updated to add the monitors and equalize the hard drives...





post #198 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse View Post

We are comparing systems here from the original vendor. Apple Zealots always state that apple monitors are better than any other monitors.. why if i am buying an apple instead of a dell would i want some shiity 19'' LCD from best buy?. I'd want an apple monitor right?. Is it Dell fault their monitors are cheaper than Apple (dell doesn't work in the apple pricing department).

Naw, sorry, you don't get away with comparing a mac with a dell and then say buy some generic monitor. That's not how systems comparison works.

Too bad it's still cheaper for the mac:

The T7400 is $3928 with the 320GB and free 19" monitor.
The Mac Pro is $3398 with the 20" ACD.

With the Dell UltraSharp 20"WS it's $4277.

This is from the post several messages back that you convienently ignored.
post #199 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandor View Post

updated to add the monitors and equalize the hard drives...

1GB on the Dell should be 2GB.
post #200 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

It isn't a "weak" contract. If it can be proven to have been violated then it can be taken to court. It's then up to the jury to decide, as it is with everything, unless both sides agree to have a judge decide instead.

Many legally executed binding agreements have language such as the following:

"In the event that any portion of this Agreement is held unenforceable, the unenforceable portion shall be construed in accordance with applicable law as nearly as possible to reflect the original intentions of the parties, and the remainder of the provisions shall remain in full force and effect."

The whole notion that by clicking a button, you are bound to the terms and the stated rights claimed by the EULA is a little shaky. It would be much stronger if you signed it in blue ink and it was witnessed, dated, notarized etc. Of course that would be ridiculous, but it would be stronger. So relatively speaking it is weak.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Mac clone maker vows to test Apple on OS X licensing terms