OS X 10.5 LEOPARD Question.....HELP PLEASE

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Hello all new to the forums and MACs in general. I have a question with leopard coming out this will be the first time upgrading my INTEL MACBOOK and iMACs operating system. I was wondering if I HAVE to buy the family pack as I don't really need the 5 install liscenses that come with it??? Can I just buy the single liscense?? Also I have a another question if I have 2 MACs in my household and my parents have 3 MACs back home in Ohio would we be able chip in and purchase the family pack together, I use 2 liscenses and then would I be able to make a copy of the LEOPARD disc, and what program would I use?? and send them a copy with the remaining 3 liscenses. I mean techincally it is all legal we paid for 5 liscenses and using the 5, and I don't feel as if that is illegal. This is all new to me. With windows you really weren't governed with how many you could install the OS on. Sorry if this is a dumb question, but I would really appriciate any info. Thanks again.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    You can do whatever you want. OSX does not need a serial number to install so you can do what ever you feel is fair to Apple. If you have 2 computers at home you can buy the single liscense and install it on both or buy the family pack. I'm sure if you have bought 5 Macs recently enough that they can run leopard, I dont think apple would have a problem with you stretching your liscense. They make the OS to sell computers, not make a ton of money.
  • Reply 2 of 13
    sequitursequitur Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacSuperiority View Post


    They make the OS to sell computers, not make a ton of money.





    I'm not so sure about that. If that's so, why is Apple so stingy about upgrading computers purchased between the original date Leopard was supposed to be out and October 1?
  • Reply 3 of 13
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,219member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sequitur View Post


    I'm not so sure about that. If that's so, why is Apple so stingy about upgrading computers purchased between the original date Leopard was supposed to be out and October 1?



    You are mistaken about two things:



    1. Leopard was delayed until October, not October 1. October generally means late October. October 26 is the last Tuesday of the month.



    2. There is a huge difference between "not make a ton of money" and "lose a ton of money." Developing commercial software, especially a new OS is an expensive proposition. Look a the price of any version of Vista despite Microsoft's much greater economies of scale. At $129, MacOS X is a steal. The difference in prices between Vista and MacOS X is partially explained by Apple's hardware subsidy. But, Apple is a for-profit corporation and cannot wipe-out its hardware profits to provide you a cheaper OS.
  • Reply 4 of 13
    sequitursequitur Posts: 1,901member
    [QUOTE=Mr. Me;1158670]You are mistaken about two things:



    1. Leopard was delayed until October, not October 1. October generally means late October. October 26 is the last Tuesday of the month. QUOTE]



    I used October 1 because purchasers after that date can get a Leopard upgrade for $10.00
  • Reply 5 of 13
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. Me View Post


    Leopard was delayed until October, not October 1. October generally means late October. October 26 is the last Tuesday of the month.



    Umm, on my calendar October 26th is a Friday, not a Tuesday.
  • Reply 6 of 13
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,219member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by donebylee View Post


    Umm, on my calendar October 26th is a Friday, not a Tuesday.



    My bad. Friday was the day that Apple released the iPhone. Perhaps Friday is the new Tuesday.
  • Reply 7 of 13
    pbpb Posts: 4,233member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. Me View Post


    Perhaps Friday is the new Tuesday.



    Friday evening/Saturday morning was always the Tuesday of major Mac OS X releases, with the exception of 10.1.
  • Reply 8 of 13
    bg_nycbg_nyc Posts: 189member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacSuperiority View Post


    *snip* I dont think apple would have a problem with you stretching your liscense... *snip*



    I think they would... And its probably not a good idea to encourage violation of the EULA on this forum.
  • Reply 9 of 13
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    If you even plan to sell any of your old Macs, you really need to have a legit copy of the OS to go along with each computer you sell. If you hold onto a Mac long enough for the copy of OS X that came with it to be outdated, you'll either have to sell it with only the old OS it originally came with, or with its own individual legit copy of a later version of OS X.



    I just pre-ordered two individual copies of OS X instead of a family pack so when I eventually, almost inevitably sell my current Quad G5 and MacBook Pro on eBay, they'll each have legit copies of Leopard to go with them. I do the same thing with iLife updates too. Beyond that, I've never tried to sell a computer with any other bundled software.
  • Reply 10 of 13
    flounderflounder Posts: 2,674member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bg_nyc View Post


    I think they would... And its probably not a good idea to encourage violation of the EULA on this forum.



    Hmmm, seems doubtful to me. If they did, they would probably have more Draconian measures in place. I'm sure they realize there will be plenty of 2 computer households purchasing only the single computer license.
  • Reply 11 of 13
    kaiwaikaiwai Posts: 246member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bg_nyc View Post


    I think they would... And its probably not a good idea to encourage violation of the EULA on this forum.



    IMHO as long as people realise that it could be illegal its up to the individual; 'encouraging' has nothing to do with it. Its up to the individual and the individuals responsibility if he or she is caught by the relevant authorities.



    With that being said, Apple is more concerned with those whom they can successfully sue than trying to get after every licence violator. Same situation in NZ, you don't see police ramsacking houses because billie downloaded some software off limewire, they'll focus on the big fish - aka those who have cd pressing machines and selling them down at the markets.
  • Reply 12 of 13
    bg_nycbg_nyc Posts: 189member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kaiwai View Post


    IMHO as long as people realise that it could be illegal its up to the individual; 'encouraging' has nothing to do with it. Its up to the individual and the individuals responsibility if he or she is caught by the relevant authorities.



    I think its the same as if you went to a forum where you are taught how to rip DVDs. You always discuss in terms of 'backing up your collection' just to keep the forum clean (even though I'm sure most don't restrict their rips to their own collection). You can say things in forums without outright encouraging violating agreements... just be smarter about it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kaiwai View Post


    With that being said, Apple is more concerned with those whom they can successfully sue than trying to get after every licence violator. Same situation in NZ, you don't see police ramsacking houses because billie downloaded some software off limewire, they'll focus on the big fish - aka those who have cd pressing machines and selling them down at the markets.



    Just because they don't take legal action it does not mean they are OK with it. They definitely have a problem with it, which is why they have restrictions in their EULA.
  • Reply 13 of 13
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aandf1978 View Post


    With windows you really weren't governed with how many you could install the OS on



    Well, I don't know what windows you're using, but Windows XP COMPLEATLY governed the way I installed it. *cough cough PRODUCT ACTIVITION cough cough* Vista is even more restrictive with their lisence agreement (if you buy a new power cable for your computer, you need to pay us $500 more dollars for Vista again)
Sign In or Register to comment.