or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › "Family Pack"... What they haven't told you yet...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Family Pack"... What they haven't told you yet... - Page 2

post #41 of 98
Quote:
Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>
How was that again???

Volvo sells cars that cost $$ make, produce and store. They pay designers, factory workers and shippers. There is property costs, investment in machinery, a whole myriad of things tied up in production.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes, both a software company and a hardware company puts a lot into the production of their products. There is a large investement made by both hardware and software companies.

My point was, if a potential Volvo customer steals a Volvo that they were otherwise going to purchase, Volvo loses twice: They lose the potential sale of a car to 'potential' customer AND they lose the ability to sell the stolen Volvo to any other customer. They lose the potential sale of the car (which helps compensate their investement in the car) and they lose the car itself (capital).

With a software company there is a difference (I'm not saying the difference justifies the action... I'm just saying there is one).

If a customer "copies" a program, the software company only loses the potential sale, because the physical CD is not stolen and CAN be sold to another customer.

SO... with that said, IF you can assure that the company is NOT losing a potential sale, the losses the company has due to piracy is minimized.

This is impossible to do with a physical product.

Read carefully...

A better example of the Volvo/hardware stealing vs. piracy would be that you wouldn't physically steal a volvo, BUT you'd pay some Chinese company to make a Volvo knockOFF. I'm saying that if the people who would normally buy Volvos STILL bought Volvos and only those who would never buy Volvos bought the knockoffs... Volvo would sell just as many cars because those who would buy them despite there being a knockoff is still buying them. Of course, if the knockoffs would have to be of the same exact quality. I guess it could hurt the "status" of driving a Volvo since more people would be driving knockoffs. But I don't think status transmits to software.

Why would somebody buy a knockoff if it was the same quality as the original? Because the knockoffs are illegal AND people have ethics.

Before anybody knee-jerk responds, saying a knockoff WOULD hurt Volvo sales. You have to remember I am putting the constraint that ALL potential Volvo customers CAN NOT and DO NOT purchase the knockoffs.

To clear things up... let's say Volvos aren't exported to Etheopia because not one person in Etheopia can afford it (hypathetical example). So there are no Volvos sold in Etheopia. Now some Chinese company makes a perfect Volvo knockoff, which is illegal, and sales it in Etheopia for 1/2 the price. Would Volvo be losing money? They hadn't ever sold and weren't ever going to sell a car in Etheopia.

Yes, you can get into the details of brand status and the status of Volvo goes down when poorer people are driving them, etc... But I just want to make it clear, my point can only be made when there is NOT a lose of a sale.


Apple's costs are similar, just distributed differently--much higher in intellectual labor costs.

How do figure that just because Volvo makes a car and Apple makes a CD that one is more easily justified in stealing from Apple? BTW Volvo doesn't give a sh*t about the physical material that is the car, except when it is stolen. If Volvo could sell virtual cars I can assure you they would be much happier and more profitable.

[ 08-20-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ][/QB]
post #42 of 98
well,whatever you say.... you are using a product or service with out paying the fee set by the manufacturer/producer/maker to user the product or service, thus it is illegal.

even if you said "I was never going to buy it anyway", then you have no right to have it. it is hard to compare it to anything because piracy is unlike many other forms of stealing.
When you steal bread, it (as said above) makes it so the producer loses a sale and loses the bread.

When you sneak into a movie, the movie theater and the maker of the film lose.

So, stealing is wrong, and there is no way anyone can say : "I was never going to buy it anyway." or "$129 is way way to high"

well, as i said above, if you do not want to pay the fee, you can not use the product or service.
Also, it has been 18 months since apple made you pay for an OS upgrade, so be thankful people! <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
post #43 of 98
[quote]My point was, if a potential Volvo customer steals a Volvo that they were otherwise going to purchase, Volvo loses twice: They lose the potential sale of a car to 'potential' customer AND they lose the ability to sell the stolen Volvo to any other customer.<hr></blockquote>
No you basically don't understand--how can you sell something twice? If someone steals the hypothetical Volvo they lose the ability to sell the car period, whether to a potential or any other customer. You can only sell a this hypothetical commodity once.

If you steal something from Apple they lose the sale. Doesn't matter if its on CD, engraved on the side of an elephant or virtual.
four more beers, four more beers
Reply
four more beers, four more beers
Reply
post #44 of 98
If someone downloads a copy of 10.2 from Hotline instead of buying it, Apple don't lose any money since they never had the money in first place. But ofcourse, they would make more money if everyone bought their copy of 10.2.

[ 08-21-2002: Message edited by: Fobie ]</p>
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
post #45 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Fobie:
<strong>If someone downloads a copy of 10.2 from Hotline instead of buying it, Apple don't lose any money since they never had the money in first place. But ofcourse, they would make more money if everyone bought their copy of 10.2.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I suppose the man-hours that went into creating 10.2 Jaguar isn't considered money to you?
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #46 of 98
[quote]I suppose the man-hours that went into creating 10.2 Jaguar isn't considered money to you?<hr></blockquote>

Sure I do, but still, they can't lose money they never had.

And no, I don't think it's OK to download 10.2.

[ 08-21-2002: Message edited by: Fobie ]</p>
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
post #47 of 98
Sorry, I miss-read your post. It's late.

[ 08-21-2002: Message edited by: Son of Pismo ]</p>
14" iBook
700MHz G3
640MB RAM

Kecksy's Korner
Reply
14" iBook
700MHz G3
640MB RAM

Kecksy's Korner
Reply
post #48 of 98
[quote] You make me sick! Downloading pirated software is no different than going into Best Buy and walking out with a Stereo. I wish they would arrest people for this kind of thing. <hr></blockquote>

Please read the post right before yours, I don't think it's OK to download commericial software, my point was just that they can't lose money they never had.

But still, they 'lose' money they could have.
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
post #49 of 98
So....how about that family pack? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Be quiet, Brain, or I'll stab you with a Q-tip
Reply
Be quiet, Brain, or I'll stab you with a Q-tip
Reply
post #50 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Nebagakid:
<strong>well,whatever you say.... you are using a product or service with out paying the fee set by the manufacturer/producer/maker to user the product or service, thus it is illegal.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

No argument. It is illegal. That is fact.

[quote]Originally posted by Nebagakid:
<strong>

even if you said "I was never going to buy it anyway", then you have no right to have it. it is hard to compare it to anything because piracy is unlike many other forms of stealing.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think you are correct. I have no 'right' to have it. And you stated my one and only point. Piracy is unlike many other forms of stealing. That was my point. I wasn't saying that piracy is justified or okay. It is different, and it does have the ability to minimize losses. This does not mean that there still isn't losses, and it certainly does not mean that it is 'right' or 'legal'.


[quote]Originally posted by Nebagakid:
<strong>

When you sneak into a movie, the movie theater and the maker of the film lose.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

This indicates you still don't understand my point. If it was a movie that you would never consider paying for... did the movie theater actually lose? Of course, if you would have paid for the movie but instead you sneak in, the theater loses.

Personally, I *do* think the movie theater loses, so we agree. But I think it is debatable if the theater never had your business to begin with.

[quote]Originally posted by Nebagakid:
<strong>

So, stealing is wrong, and there is no way anyone can say : "I was never going to buy it anyway." or "$129 is way way to high"

well, as i said above, if you do not want to pay the fee, you can not use the product or service.
Also, it has been 18 months since apple made you pay for an OS upgrade, so be thankful people! <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>


Okay, stealing is wrong. Piracy is stealing, therefore piracy is wrong. We agree.

But certainly one can honestly make a statement that they were never going to buy the product.

Likely, 95% of people can honestly make the statement, "I am never go to pay $1200.00 for Mathematica." Wolfram Research (makers of Mathematica) have less than a 5% customer base with their product costing $1200. If one of those people happen to pirate Mathematica... Did Wolfram lose a sale? That is what I'm debating.
post #51 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>
No you basically don't understand--how can you sell something twice? If someone steals the hypothetical Volvo they lose the ability to sell the car period, whether to a potential or any other customer. You can only sell a this hypothetical commodity once.

If you steal something from Apple they lose the sale. Doesn't matter if its on CD, engraved on the side of an elephant or virtual.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Please, if you will not listen to me, listen to Fobie at least. He seems to be the only one who grasps what I am saying.

And get this straight. I have put my order in for the MacOS X Family Pack. I don't care whether or not I can install the single pack on multiple machines, I am still willing to pay the extra $80 to be honest.

You guys think because of what I'm posting, I pirate software. You are wrong.

I do disagree with Fobie in that I think Apple CAN lose money to piracy, if they are losing sales due to piracy. But his point is that it is potential sales, not sales. Really, I wish you folks would get a little less emotional about this, and try to understand what we are saying.

And I think both Fobie and I are NOT saying pirating is okay and justified. I have stronger feelings about piracy than most people I believe. I pay for all shareware whether its crippled or not. I pay for EVERY Apple upgrade and will continue to do so. I have spent thousands and thousands of dollars on software that I COULD have gotten illegally, but did not because it would have ripped the companies off if I had.
post #52 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>
No you basically don't understand--how can you sell something twice? If someone steals the hypothetical Volvo they lose the ability to sell the car period, whether to a potential or any other customer. You can only sell a this hypothetical commodity once.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I likely worded it improperly. My fault.

IF the person physically stealing the car would have never bought a Volvo. Volvo did not lose a sale (potential revenue), they lost the physical material (spent capital). They are out the expense of the car (forget insurance).

IF the person physically stealing the car would have been a Volvo customer, but now is not because he now owns a stolen Volvo. Volvo not only lost the sale (potential revenue) but they also lost the material (capital).

----------------------
Losing a sale IS not equal to losing the product.
----------------------

If it was it would be like, every time a person went to a lot to look at a Volvo and then decided not to buy it, they would have to torch the Volvo. That is equivelent to a potential buyer of a VOlvo stealing one instead of buying one.
post #53 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Willoughby:
<strong>So....how about that family pack? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

I ordered mine yesterday!!

I think it is great that Apple is offering the family pack!

I gladly put down my $200.00

...

and I gladly paid my $120 (100?) for OS X.1

and I gladly paid my $100 (120?) for OS X

and I gladly paid my $100 for OS 9.1

and I gladly paid my $100 for OS 9

... you get the point!

(and yes I paid the full price instead of just the upgrade price)
post #54 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by cowerd:
<strong>

If you steal something from Apple they lose the sale. Doesn't matter if its on CD, engraved on the side of an elephant or virtual.</strong><hr></blockquote>

It does not necessarily follow that if you 'pirate' from Apple that they lose the sale.

This is were we disagree.

They will have only lost the sale if the person who got the product was a potential customer.

Go to an extreme. If I made a copy of OSX.2 and mailed it to the middle of an African or SouthAmerican Jungle to a tribe that doesn't even have a money system much less money itself. Did Apple just lose money? I don't think so. Even if these fellows had a G4 left by some research group... IF they would have never EVER bought Final Cut from Apple (they have no means), I just don't see how you can say, right at that point, Apple lost money or even potential money. The potential sale never existed.
post #55 of 98
I am going to get the family pack... but I am wondering if i can get it from macmall (or some other internet based mac reseller...) see I dont want to have to pay taxes on my purchase.... :/

short of going to NH and buying it there... where else can i get the family pack for $200 (not $216)

you know what else is crazy? I hat to pay taxes for my .mac membership <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
125/51041 (top .2449%)-Amie Street - awesome independent DRM-free music
People really have got to stop thinking there is only one operating system, one economic system, one religion, and one...
Reply
125/51041 (top .2449%)-Amie Street - awesome independent DRM-free music
People really have got to stop thinking there is only one operating system, one economic system, one religion, and one...
Reply
post #56 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Paul:
<strong>I am going to get the family pack... but I am wondering if i can get it from macmall (or some other internet based mac reseller...) see I dont want to have to pay taxes on my purchase.... :/

short of going to NH and buying it there... where else can i get the family pack for $200 (not $216)

you know what else is crazy? I hat to pay taxes for my .mac membership <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, I did a quick look before I bought it from the Apple Store. I couldn't find anything, so I went ahead and paid the taxes.

Sorry, if you find it somewhere, please post. Thanks.
post #57 of 98
"I never intended to marry her anyway..."

engpjp
<a href="http://macbloqs.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">MacBloQs</a> - like Apples with Teeth
Reply
<a href="http://macbloqs.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">MacBloQs</a> - like Apples with Teeth
Reply
post #58 of 98
I have already ordered the Fam pack from my local reseller. I have 6 macs and eventually all will run 10.2 when certain apps are re-written.

I also have 4 PC's and have not updated to XP as I refuse to pay full price for 4 XP versions.
I have already converted 2 machines to Suse.

Dobby
post #59 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Fobie:
<strong>

Sure I do, but still, they can't lose money they never had.

And no, I don't think it's OK to download 10.2.</strong><hr></blockquote>

They did lose money. You stole something worth a certain amount of money. This money was supposed go towards recouping their initial costs. If the world worked the way you pretend it works, there's be no industry.

You were never going to pay for &lt;insert item&gt; anyway. &lt;insert company&gt; can't lose money it never had!

[ 08-21-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #60 of 98
[quote]If it was it would be like, every time a person went to a lot to look at a Volvo and then decided not to buy it, they would have to torch the Volvo. That is equivelent to a potential buyer of a VOlvo stealing one instead of buying one. <hr></blockquote>

No, it's the equivalent of finding a source of free Volvos. If you could get a Volvo for free, why would you pay for it? Why would I go buy a Volvo instead of getting a free stolen one? Why would Volvo manufacture cars that don't make them any money? <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

They would have never had that money anyway, right? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #61 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

No, it's the equivalent of finding a source of free Volvos. If you could get a Volvo for free, why would you pay for it? Why would I go buy a Volvo instead of getting a free stolen one? Why would Volvo manufacture cars that don't make them any money?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Why would you buy a Volvo instead of getting a free stolen one?

1) Because it is illegal

2) Because Volvo loses a potential sale, which if enough people did the same thing, Volvo would quit making cars, and there would eventually not be any Volvos avaliable to steal OR buy.
post #62 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by IQ78:
<strong>

Why would you buy a Volvo instead of getting a free stolen one?

1) Because it is illegal

2) Because Volvo loses a potential sale, which if enough people did the same thing, Volvo would quit making cars, and there would eventually not be any Volvos avaliable to steal OR buy.</strong><hr></blockquote>

But that doesn't apply to an app like Photoshop for you? Weird. If stealing a Volvo was as easy as stealing Photoshop, I bet you would steal one.
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #63 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

But that doesn't apply to an app like Photoshop for you? Weird. If stealing a Volvo was as easy as stealing Photoshop, I bet you would steal one. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Absolutely not. And I absolutely wouldn't. Adobe is not losing a potential sale. Nor are they losing capital. Adobe only loses money if they lose a potential sale. If people are honest about whether or not they would purchase the product dispite being able to get it free, and purchase it if the answer is YES (or even mabye), then Adobe shouldn't lose any Photoshop sales.

Is it still legal? No.

Is it ethical? Debatable if there truly isn't a victim.

Is it a slippery slope to a very bad practice? Yes.

I would say over 99.999% of my on my computer is spent using legit software. Better than most I'd bet. I use my un-ethical version of photoshop around once every 4-6 months for a few hours.

I have updated OS X both my desktop and laptop using only one legit license. But that has now changed since I happily ordered the Family Pack! What a great thing!

I agree, that if I was a potential Adobe Photoshop customer, they would be losing a potential Photoshop sale. But I'm not, so they aren't.


However,
post #64 of 98
Hey, I say I buy a family pack and we split the costs for 10.2 and we all pay 40 bucks for our licensed OS... would that be legal? I mean, you guys can be my family! My apple family...
If I could put a bug in Steve Jobs' office, I would be able to get some sleep!
Reply
If I could put a bug in Steve Jobs' office, I would be able to get some sleep!
Reply
post #65 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by IQ78:
<strong>
I agree, that if I was a potential Adobe Photoshop customer, they would be losing a potential Photoshop sale. But I'm not, so they aren't.


However,</strong><hr></blockquote>

Why would I be a potential paying Volvo customer if I could steal a Volvo?
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #66 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:


But that doesn't apply to an app like Photoshop for you? Weird. If stealing a Volvo was as easy as stealing Photoshop, I bet you would steal one.
<hr></blockquote>

Personally, I would steal a BMW or a Porsche before a Volvo. Uh... hypothetically speaking, of course.

Taking something that doesn't belong to you is generally stealing, unless you're a government.

Violating the EULA isn't always stealing per se, but it is breaking the agreement, and therefore in some cases, the law.

Breaking the law is breaking the law, whether anyone sees you or not. You can't pick and choose which laws you like or don't like. If you don't like a law, buy a congressman/local official to change it like everybody else does.

Now, has anyone noticed this family licensing outside of North America?
Die Grüne Hölle - Gute Fahrt
Reply
Die Grüne Hölle - Gute Fahrt
Reply
post #67 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

They did lose money. You stole something worth a certain amount of money. This money was supposed go towards recouping their initial costs. If the world worked the way you pretend it works, there's be no industry.

You were never going to pay for &lt;insert item&gt; anyway. &lt;insert company&gt; can't lose money it never had!

[ 08-21-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

When did I steal something? I never said I pirated 10.2 and thought it was OK.

I know what you mean, but I think its wrong to say that Apple looses money when people pirate their software since they never had the money in first place.

I just thought that 'lose' was the wrong word to use, I would call it a 'non existent' loss.

I can't figure out the correct english word, but I hope you understand what I mean.
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
post #68 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Fobie:
<strong>

When did I steal something? I never said I pirated 10.2 and thought it was OK.

I know what you mean, but I think its wrong to say that Apple looses money when people pirate their software since they never had the money in first place.

I just thought that 'lose' was the wrong word to use, I would call it a 'non existent' loss.

I can't figure out the correct english word, but I hope you understand what I mean.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm using the past tense in a general sense, not damning you specifically.

Besides, when you say "since they never had the money in first place," do you ever stop to think how ridiculous that statement is? When you take something without paying, of course the company never had that money in the first place!

When I steal (take without paying for) (break a contractual agreement that requires me to pay for) anything from any company, that company doesn't get my money! If I can steal &lt;whatever&gt;, that company that offers &lt;whatever&gt; would have never gotten my money anyway! Somebody call Spielberg so they can make a movie out of this paradox!



Use your head.
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #69 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by GardenOfEarthlyDelights:
<strong>Now, has anyone noticed this family licensing outside of North America?</strong><hr></blockquote>

here in switzerland, no.
post #70 of 98
This is all about ideology.

How economic systems work in practice:

Capitialism with pro-competition regulations - whoever can produce the most conveniently avaiable and priced good gets the sale. Anyone can start up a business. There is no such thing as piracy, as PIRACY IS IN NO F***ING WAY STEALING! "Piracy" is starting up a more effecient service than mega-corperations. Some might argue that in this system nothing is developed as there is no incentive to spend R&D dollars.

Capitalism with Intellectual Property - They are ants Michael, THEY ARE ANTS! (BillG on Family Guy). Corperations charge trillions a year in a patent and copyright merry-go-round. This results in a preservation of the establishment. Piracy can land you in jail, because after the Cold War people just feel so f***ing strongly that their ideology has to be preserved, that politicians are bribed and the billionaires of the world are power hungry (arn't we all?).

Pure Socialism doesn't work. Well, it's supposed to work buy having the government controlling all, with people doing their job. This may result in equity, but the loss in effeciency (as seen in Russia in the 1980s) is far to great to sustain a modern economy.

And then there is Isaac Asimov proposing an end to the Cold War by having humanity controlled by 4 omnipresent machines.

Barto
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
post #71 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

Why would I be a potential paying Volvo customer if I could steal a Volvo?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, many people are... Just look at all the Volvos sold. Many people, including myself, purchase software even though we could get it for free via pirating. It sounds as if you also might be a customer that pays for their software even if you have the technical means of getting it free. Why do you do this? Because it is the right thing to do, most likely.

Do you not comprehend what I'm saying? Imagine a world where it is impossible to pirate software. There would still be some people that WOULD purchase and use photoshop, and there are those that would not purchase and use photoshop. Let's say that percentage is 5.000%.

Now imagine that pirating is introduced into this world. However, those in the 5.000% still all purchase photoshop. Only those in the 95.000% group pirate it. Photoshop did not lose any sales. Adobe makes as much money as they did before. Clearly, if some of the 95.000% change their mind and would purchase it IF they couldn't copy it.... they would need to purchase it to prevent Adobe from losing money.

The fact that you find it hard to believe that somebody would pay for software that they could get for free (illegally), confuses me. It seems that you would be one of these persons, yet you ask, "Why would I be a potential paying Volvo customer if I could steal a Volvo?" Isn't the answer obvious? Because it is the right thing to do.

Again, if penny-less, homeless bums were to pirate Adobe Photoshop, would Adobe see their sales drop? Answer: No. Pennyless bums are not potential adobe customers. NOT because they can pirate it, but because they are unwilling to spend their beer money on Photoshop. If they happen to acquire a copy of photoshop, Adobe wouldn't have lost a dime.
post #72 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by IQ78:
<strong>

Again, if penny-less, homeless bums were to pirate Adobe Photoshop, would Adobe see their sales drop? Answer: No. Pennyless bums are not potential adobe customers. NOT because they can pirate it, but because they are unwilling to spend their beer money on Photoshop. If they happen to acquire a copy of photoshop, Adobe wouldn't have lost a dime.</strong><hr></blockquote>

To counter-example:

Now a graphic artist is another story. Likely a graphic artist would be will to pay the $900 for photoshop *IF* they had no way of getting it cheaper. In other words, though they would not like the idea, they would actually purchase it, if they had no other means of getting it. Therefore they are a potential Adobe customer. If THEY were to copy photoshop, Adobe WOULD be losing $900, because they would be losing a potential sale.

Now why would the graphic artist pay for Photoshop even if they could get it for free? Why is the graphic artist a STILL a potential customer even though they could pirate PHotoshop. Answer: Because it is the right thing to do. They (like myself) know that they rely on the development of the product for their needs (whether they be entertainment or business).

Believe me... I hated the idea of paying Microsoft $260.00 x 2 = $520.00 to upgrade two machines to Office v.X. At the time that I ordered both copies, I had 2 working pirated versions running on my two macs with two illegal serial numbers. Both pirated copies run fine, and now I have two unopened Office v.X boxes sitting on my shelf. Truth be told, one of the boxes is opened (I was curious of the contents).

Some people call me a chump for giving microsoft my money win I could have used the pirated copies for free. However, I honestly asked myself if I would fork over the $520.00 IF I didn't have access to the pirated copies. The answer was, "yes"... So, I ordered both copies. It was difficult to do, and that is why I call my methods a dangerous slippery slope.

However, I have no difficulty giving Apple my money... Microsoft was harder to swallow, but I knew I had to do it, because it was the right thing to do.

I haven't paid for photoshop, because the answer is without a doubt, "NO" I wouldn't pay $900 for Photoshop... Heck, when I reformatt it is months and months before I even bother installing it... and even then I don't use it much at all. However, I have purchased GraphicConverter for two machines and even sent them some extra money (which I often do when buying cheap shareware).

Not to sound too uppidy, but I feel like I have pretty good software ethics... especially when compared to the majority of other people.
post #73 of 98
Back on the discussion of Apple v MS licensing....

Apple is primarily a hardware company. True, they spend a lot of money on software development (more than $129/install of Mac OS X actually), but that expense is focused on _selling_hardware_.

The entire XServe + Family Pack line of thinking is to twist a knife in a spot MS can't defend. MS is a software company. No software company (even with $40B in the bank) can give away their core assets for very long.

I think Apple is better served by keeping the price of Mac OS X down, and letting the comparisons do the talking. Yes, the software division might be able to make more profit by raising the price. I'm not sure that would lead to a net profit _for_Apple_. It might decrease the number of switchers - some of whom are switching BECAUSE they love MS soooo much. It also causes a wider spread across OS versions. Why is it again that MS is trying to force people off of Doz98... 4 YEARS after introduction? Less spread = less overhead for the customer service folk -&gt; lower TCO.
post #74 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

I'm using the past tense in a general sense, not damning you specifically.

Besides, when you say "since they never had the money in first place," do you ever stop to think how ridiculous that statement is? When you take something without paying, of course the company never had that money in the first place!

When I steal (take without paying for) (break a contractual agreement that requires me to pay for) anything from any company, that company doesn't get my money! If I can steal &lt;whatever&gt;, that company that offers &lt;whatever&gt; would have never gotten my money anyway! Somebody call Spielberg so they can make a movie out of this paradox!



Use your head.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You don't seem to get my point, so I give up, you win.

Anyway, downloading pirated software is bad, Apple is worth the money since OSX is a great OS. And if too many people start to download Apple's commerical software they will be forced to implent some annoying CD-key authorization to OSX.
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
post #75 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by IQ78:
<strong>

Again, if penny-less, homeless bums were to pirate Adobe Photoshop, would Adobe see their sales drop? Answer: No. Pennyless bums are not potential adobe customers. NOT because they can pirate it, but because they are unwilling to spend their beer money on Photoshop. If they happen to acquire a copy of photoshop, Adobe wouldn't have lost a dime. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Then a penniless bum wouldn't steal it in the first place. But people who do steal it do use it. And if you use it, you are a potential customer and you should pay for it. Why should I pay $600 while you or somebody else downloads it for free? It doesn't matter how much he uses it. That's not how the contract works. If he uses it only for the features replicable in Graphic Converter or Photoshop Elements, why shouldn't that person just buy that instead? Why should I be paying extra for somebody else to use Photoshop 7.0 for free? This is basically what I'm doing, right? I feel like a victim in this supposedly victimless crime scenario.

[ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #76 of 98
I'd like Apple to simplify licensing.

The ONLY upgrades are those for ppl who buy a new computer or OS after the next version has been announced. The upgrade is sent to you when it is ready.

$100 buys you an "individual" license to install on all personal computers which you own.

$150 buys you a "Mac OS X with .Mac" license, valid until 3 months after the release of the next Mac OS X version

$80 buys you a single computer license for com/edu customers

$300 buys you a 5 computer com/edu license

$800 buys you a 20 computer com/edu license

$2000 buys you a 100 computer com/edu license

Obviously these figures are just examples, I just wish they would simplify everything like above.

Barto
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
Self Indulgent Experiments keep me occupied.

rotate zmze pe vizspygmsr minus four
Reply
post #77 of 98
Barto: Apple would have to implent a CD-key authorization for that to 'work'. I don't know, but how many people would be honest and buy a 100-computers license for $2000 when they can buy a 1-computer licence for $100 (and it works as good as the 100-computers licence).

Sure some big companies would, but still..

And do we want to mess with CD-keys?

[ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: Fobie ]</p>
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
iBook 800 with 10.2.6 - Various PC's with OpenBSD 3.3
Reply
post #78 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

Then a penniless bum wouldn't steal it in the first place. But people who do steal it do use it. And if you use it, you are a potential customer and you should pay for it. Why should I pay $600 while you or somebody else downloads it for free? It doesn't matter how much he uses it. That's not how the contract works. If he uses it only for the features replicable in Graphic Converter or Photoshop Elements, why shouldn't that person just buy that instead? Why should I be paying extra for somebody else to use Photoshop 7.0 for free? This is basically what I'm doing, right? I feel like a victim in this supposedly victimless crime scenario.

[ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, let's just say that the pennyless bum wanted to make a "Will Work for Food" poster. But that's it. Use it only once.

And you still don't get the financial angle. You aren't paying extra. If Adobe isn't losing any sales due to piracy you would not be paying extra. IF Adobe is losing sales due to piracy then there are lots of victims. You are a victim and Adobe is a victim, and believe it or not the person pirating ends up suffering as well.

The fact is Adobe does lose sales due to piracy and so you are a victim.

There is no doubt that your stance is valid. My original point has always been that if a person uses ethics, one can still pirate and minimize the negative effects of doing so (almost to the point of there not being a victim). I'm not claiming that this is good. I'm just stating that piracy is very different than stealing a volvo.

Your point about buying other software, such as GraphicConverter and PHotoElements is a very good point. And to tell you the truth, I really should buy PhotoElements now that mention it. Because the likely victims of Piracy isn't the company or product that gets pirated, but competing products that are cheaper and offer a little less feature that people would buy IF they didn't pirate the professional version.

Graphic Converter suffers from Photoshop piracy probably as much as Adobe does. I think it is very very wrong for someone to pirate a product they would normally buy.
post #79 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

And if you use it, you are a potential customer and you should pay for it.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Not true. I can use photoshop and still not be a potential customer. And the reason I'm not a potential customer is NOT becuase I can pirate it, it is because it is not even close to being worth $600 to me. Yes, the product is worth $600 to many people, but not me. Just as much as someone could drive a rollsroyce and not be a potential RR customer.
post #80 of 98
[quote]Originally posted by IQ78:
<strong>

Not true. I can use photoshop and still not be a potential customer. And the reason I'm not a potential customer is NOT becuase I can pirate it, it is because it is not even close to being worth $600 to me. Yes, the product is worth $600 to many people, but not me. Just as much as someone could drive a rollsroyce and not be a potential RR customer.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Pirated use of Photoshop by people who think like you drives up the price. There is no question about it. You're not paying for your piece of the pie and I have to pay extra. Of course I don't understand the your financial rationale. Your the one getting the free ride and I'm the one getting gypped!



[ 08-23-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › "Family Pack"... What they haven't told you yet...