"Family Pack"... What they haven't told you yet...
If you have bought or eventually buy only the "standard" $129 version of OS 10.2, you will only be able to install it on only one machine... [within your network].
I'm not sure what this means to everyone [personally], but I would expect that it will surprise a few.
I'm not sure what this means to everyone [personally], but I would expect that it will surprise a few.
Comments
<strong>If you have bought or eventually buy only the "standard" $129 version of OS 10.2, you will only be able to install it on only one machine... [within your network].
I'm not sure what this means to everyone [personally], but I would expect that it will surprise a few.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes I heard the User License dictates that OSX be installed onto 1 computer per copy. But are you saying that extra steps have been taken to prevent multiple installations?
I have "reasons" to believe thst "extra" steps have been taken by Apple to insure that this will be inforced with the retail [$129 CD's] of 10.2.
Consider MS... what have they done recently to "protect" their license "agreement"?
Apple has offered the "family package".. rather [ackwardly], as a "last chance concesssion" to the enivitable.
Just like Office X (block port 222).
[ 08-20-2002: Message edited by: Fobie ]</p>
Apple is trying to squeeze extra $$ from Windows-thinking people that think they need a new license for each computer (which you do actually... but who does??)
<strong>Consider MS... what have they done recently to "protect" their license "agreement"?
Apple has offered the "family package".. rather [ackwardly], as a "last chance concesssion" to the enivitable.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So your "reasons" are that Microsoft does it and Apple is selling a multi-license version, correct? We're wanting to know if you have more information than that.
<strong>This is nonsense. 10.2 will not probe the network for other copies. This would require a registration code first of all. Bereskin himself said Apple was not using any "draconian" anti-piracy measures.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, Apple has never done this and I don't see them starting now. The family pack is just for honest people.
Wake up folks, this is not the Apple we have known and loved. This is the new Apple, which does not want to live off the table scraps of M$. This Apple is squarely aimed at making money (eg .mac, 10.2 cost).
Apple has every reason to do this. First of all, they will make more money. Secondly, and most importantly, it has become an acceptable practice in the minds of the masses. They really have nothing to loose.
We should all be looking at Apple differently now days. The times of blind faith are over. Apple needs to be held responsible for the tactics it uses and the quality (or lack there of) of its products.
Despite the 'company line,' 10.2 is not worth $130 to me. I would be willing to pay something (say $80), but many of the 'features' are useless to me. And, after using it, I realized that I had set my expectations too high in regards to performance. So, Apple will get less than $80 from me.
Apple is growing and I think that is great. After being an embattled Mac user for years, I would love to see my platform gain ground in the world. But, I will not let them do it at my expense. This is a time of change, and we need to be more critical than ever so that the 'essence' of the Mac does not get lost.
If Apple doesn't limit the number of installs now, they will soon. All they need to do is put a serial number in the X installation and have it check for duplicate copies on boot. Very easy to do...even for Apple.
<strong>
Wake up folks, this is not the Apple we have known and loved. This is the new Apple, which does not want to live off the table scraps of M$. This Apple is squarely aimed at making money (eg .mac, 10.2 cost).
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Obviously this isn't happening with 10.2 since so many people have installed the same 115 build on multiple machines. There isn't going to be any surprise since 115 is bit for bit the same code as GM.
Could it happen with 10.3? Possibly, but I don't think so. But who cares, all you pirates will figure out a way around it anyway.
<strong>This Apple is squarely aimed at making money (eg .mac, 10.2 cost).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple is a for-profit corporation. They have always been about making money. The question is whether that is all they are about, or whether they are actually trying to deliver decent products and make money.
[quote]<strong>We should all be looking at Apple differently now days. The times of blind faith are over. Apple needs to be held responsible for the tactics it uses and the quality (or lack there of) of its products.</strong><hr></blockquote>
We should always have been doing this!
[quote]<strong>Despite the 'company line,' 10.2 is not worth $130 to me. I would be willing to pay something (say $80), but many of the 'features' are useless to me. And, after using it, I realized that I had set my expectations too high in regards to performance. So, Apple will get less than $80 from me.</strong><hr></blockquote>
GREAT! You've cast your economic vote. If enough people do the same as you, perhaps Apple will adjust its pricing strategy. But let's be clear about all of this. Apple is a profit-making business (well most of the time ;-)). They are not a charity. Just because they are trying to find new and different ways (Jaguar, .mac, etc.) to make money doesn't automatically make them evil. Are the tactics illegal? Unfair (by what definition)? Coercive? Unethical?
[quote]<strong>This is a time of change, and we need to be more critical than ever so that the 'essence' of the Mac does not get lost.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What the heck does that mean?
[quote]<strong>
If Apple doesn't limit the number of installs now, they will soon. All they need to do is put a serial number in the X installation and have it check for duplicate copies on boot. Very easy to do...even for Apple.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But isn't this their option as a vendor? You are not compelled to buy it. But as far as I know, most software has typically had some kind of restriction (whether enforced or not) limiting the number of users or machines. Now your getting mad because might actually enforce it. This is like being mad because the police officer actually enforced the speeding law on the highway.
[ 08-20-2002: Message edited by: Chris Cuilla ]
[ 08-20-2002: Message edited by: Chris Cuilla ]</p>
1. "draconian" anti-piracy measures will always ineveitably be broken. Why bother with the effort?
2. some "honest" people will but the family pack, but they probably don't reasonably expect everyone to be honest like this. It's only another $70 for four more licenses. I don't think they're betting much on its success or failure.
Nice contradiction... "I wan't Apple to do better!" ~ "but not at my expence"
With that mentality the exact opposite will happen. "I want this plant to grow but I won't give it water..."
Not gonna happen, if Apple is to grow every one of us needs to support them as do new users and converts...
however, i have heard a lot that leads me to believe that it will be the same.
the family pack is for honest people. yes, they do exist. people will buy stuff because it's the right thing to do. is that really that tough to believe?