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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Comments
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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)
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.