Here is the exact wording: " If the motherboard is upgraded or replaced for reasons other than a defect, then a new computer has been created and the license of new operating system software is required.."
So unless a defect is the reason you had to replace your motherboard you are required to get a new Windows OEM and that is straight from the MS horse's mouth. Deal with it.
And?
That is what Joe_the_dragon stated in response to your other post.
The sad, strange and weird situation as it exists, is that some geeky and technical people believe that Apple's strategy must change, and if Apple doesn't want to change it, that they must be forced to change it. The way they think it ought to be changed is for Apple to completely alter their strategy to copy Microsoft. This is the only true and correct model, as far as they are concerned. This is wrong on many levels, but it seems to be what many techno-geeks believe.
It would be nice for system builders to have OSX as an option for the OS though. I think that's where most people are saying they should copy MS.
Heck, even being able to install osx onto a pc laptop would be appealing to a lot of people. Does osx always require an expensive, cool looking laptop to run properly?
It would be nice for system builders to have OSX as an option for the OS though. I think that's where most people are saying they should copy MS.
Heck, even being able to install osx onto a pc laptop would be appealing to a lot of people. Does osx always require an expensive, cool looking laptop to run properly?
Were you trying to prove my point? If so, I believe you've done a splendid job of it. You are casually tossing off as "nice" (read: non-trivial) what in fact would be a complete change to Apple's entire approach to the computer market. The "lot of people" this would appeal to are geeks, which I am sorry to report, are not Apple's target market. If you don't like it, then you are free to buy something else.
The third paragraph of my post above answers your question, so I don't see any use in repetition.
Does osx always require an expensive, cool looking laptop to run properly?
It does because Apple chooses it to be so. We don't have to like it but we do have to accept it. I don't like that Ruth's Chris Steakhouse is all Ã* la carte so I have to buy a side that feeds four people when I go there by myself*, but that is how they do business.
Were you trying to prove my point? If so, I believe you've done a splendid job of it. You are casually tossing off as "nice" (read: non-trivial) what in fact would be a complete change to Apple's entire approach to the computer market. The "lot of people" this would appeal to are geeks, which I am sorry to report, are not Apple's target market. If you don't like it, then you are free to buy something else.
The third paragraph of my post above answers your question, so I don't see any use in repetition.
Hey, I said it would be nice, not realistic. Calm down.
You said its a sad, strange and weird situation that some geeks want Apple to copy Microsoft. As a system builder, I was merely pointing out why they would want this. They are used to pretty much having only one option when it comes to what operating system to use while building a system. I know for a fact, in my many years of building my desktops, I would definitely have given osx a try if it were available like Windows.
I don't agree with the fact that they must change, I simply said it would be nice to have osx as an option, but then again, it would be nice if cars flew and I could move things with my mind. Apple appealing to geeks is a fantasy I suppose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
It does because Apple chooses it to be so. We don't have to like it but we do have to accept it. I don't like that Ruth's Chris Steakhouse is all Ã* la carte so I have to buy a side that feeds four people when I go there by myself*, but that is how they do business.
lol very good analogy. I feel the same way about Chinese food
Big corporations should not be allowed to dictate what we can do once we make a purchase.
I'm sure all the Apple fanboys here would be cool if Sony made you agree to a "license" that said if you purchase a DVD movie made by Sony Pictures Entertainment, then you have to play it only on a Sony DVD player. Same argument goes with music.
I've used Apple computers since the Apple IIGS and they've always been overpriced on the hardware side.
When you purchase a PS3/WII/XBOX game do you expect it to play in anything put the official system it was designed for? When you purchase Mac software or upgrade the OS do you do so with the expectations that you could just stick it in any 'ole slot that you could find and use it? It's not like Apple tricked you into buying "overpriced" hardware. If you don't like it then perhaps try Linux?
Hey, I said it would be nice, not realistic. Calm down.
You said its a sad, strange and weird situation that some geeks want Apple to copy Microsoft. As a system builder, I was merely pointing out why they would want this. They are used to pretty much having only one option when it comes to what operating system to use while building a system. I know for a fact, in my many years of building my desktops, I would definitely have given osx a try if it were available like Windows.
I don't agree with the fact that they must change, I simply said it would be nice to have osx as an option, but then again, it would be nice if cars flew and I could move things with my mind. Apple appealing to geeks is a fantasy I suppose.
It may not be your view specifically, but as you know, for many the concept of "nice" translates into "must" or at least, "should." I know why some people believe this. I'm only pointing out that it's not in Apple's game plan for some very good reasons.
Or if microsoft said no more windows on mac machines. I could see if apple delivered products that users want, mid range, headless mac, not non mobile low powered crap, i7 machines, non ECG server memory machines. Rubbish.
Go pystar, XEfi, osx86.
Down with apple tv. That's for looked. Not even HD no flash on iPhone xvid movies for free and as a sample developer who sees their material in wares groups, I can say this. Until Apple stops this non high end over priced builds, long live the clone. Some forget when there were clones, late 80s, apple had a larger marketshare. It was intel, that for years, raped the consumer, then AMD forced intel hand. Now apple a the big naughty company that ironically cares more about iPhones then computers.
QFT. A few common sense among the overwhelming boot-licking/brand addicted nonsense.
I don't think we are in total disagreement. I agree Apple is not fighting to insure the EULA cannot be violated under any circumstances. But I do think they are fighting for the validity of the EULA in a broad sense.
A book does come with its copywrite number and terms/conditions of use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
My point is, the EULA is not really the critical issue here. A book doesn't come wrapped in a EULA, but the prohibitions against someone other than the rights holders using it for profit are enforceable just the same.
Even to add to that. These teck geeks completely ignore the fact that Microsoft's business model has proven to be extremely burdensome in a way that Apple has been able to avoid. The fact that Windows has to be made to work on thousands of different configurations of machines was a benefit 15 years ago and is now a liability. At any one time OS X only has to work on about 20 machines that Apple designed.
The fact that Windows does not abandon legacy code sounded like a good idea years ago and is now a weight dragging down the entire OS. Apple has never had a problem with abandoning legacy code.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
The sad, strange and weird situation as it exists, is that some geeky and technical people believe that Apple's strategy must change, and if Apple doesn't want to change it, that they must be forced to change it. The way they think it ought to be changed is for Apple to completely alter their strategy to copy Microsoft. This is the only true and correct model, as far as they are concerned. This is wrong on many levels, but it seems to be what many techno-geeks believe.
The problem is hat most people most often look at this from one perspective. The system builder only sees the fact that they want the freedom to use OS X. Does not really explore the reasons why Apple would not want to follow this path or even what benefit this would be to the consumer.
Actually I think the pieces are falling into place to give someone a good opportunity to come up with a third operating system. Low cost computers and web based software offer a great opportunity for someone who is industrious and times it just right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStink
You said its a sad, strange and weird situation that some geeks want Apple to copy Microsoft. As a system builder, I was merely pointing out why they would want this. They are used to pretty much having only one option when it comes to what operating system to use while building a system.
I don't think we are in total disagreement. I agree Apple is not fighting to insure the EULA cannot be violated under any circumstances. But I do think they are fighting for the validity of the EULA in a broad sense.
Possibly, but what I'm saying is that EULA or no EULA, nobody has the right to profit by the copyrighted or patented works of others without their express permission. The software industry may be peculiar in the sense that they make an effort to spell out use rights in detail on every copy sold, but whether they've done that or not, the basic principles of intellectual property protection don't change.
Quote:
A book does come with its copywrite number and terms/conditions of use.
Some might, but not all. In fact it isn't even necessary for a book to contain an ISBN for it to be covered by copyright. All you really need is the word "copyright" and the name of the work's creator on the work. Sending copies to the Library of Congress and obtaining an ISBN helps prove who was the creator in the event of disputes, but it's not necessary for the owner to enjoy a copyright.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
Very well stated, I completely agree.
Even to add to that. These teck geeks completely ignore the fact that Microsoft's business model has proven to be extremely burdensome in a way that Apple has been able to avoid. The fact that Windows has to be made to work on thousands of different configurations of machines was a benefit 15 years ago and is now a liability. At any one time OS X only has to work on about 20 machines that Apple designed.
More to the point, the Microsoft model is not subject to duplication. Microsoft has tried with very limited success themselves, and in reality, they stumbled into it completely by accident. It has never been clear to me why so many people believe that Apple can (must!) attempt to copy Microsoft's approach to the market, when Microsoft's business was created by possibly the oddest series of events in the history of industry.
Big corporations should not be allowed to dictate what we can do once we make a purchase.
I'm sure all the Apple fanboys here would be cool if Sony made you agree to a "license" that said if you purchase a DVD movie made by Sony Pictures Entertainment, then you have to play it only on a Sony DVD player. Same argument goes with music.
I've used Apple computers since the Apple IIGS and they've always been overpriced on the hardware side.
That's how IP works, but you have to own the technology. You unwittingly made an excellent point here regarding Blu-ray players. You're buying a player made by Sony or one made by someone who paid Sony to license the tech. Blu-ray players are also overpriced, by the way.
QFT. A few common sense among the overwhelming boot-licking/brand addicted nonsense.
the thing is, I pay 25-35% off from apple friends. This is a fair price. Apple is not worth the extra 25% especially mao that most mac specialist don't k ow whY fab is, most one t one traniners only know iLife, no pro apps, and most geniuses, can't troubleshoot, they insert a CD, run it and if it says it's broke, they send it out. Apple gives the illusion that they should require more due to service when in fact, their service is limited at best with most consumers knowing more than the trained reta folk. Then of course, there is no reason that the pro should be built with server parts other than to demand a higher premium, all work stations should be i7 machines, no ecc memeory and sell for $1400 but then their iMac is over priced so they can't.
Not sure were most are from but these days the pro and iMac are more expensive than past prices with pro care and one to one more limited, and under trained then ever before.
That is what Joe_the_dragon stated in response to your other post.
Deal with it...
BZZZ WRONG. ALL Joe_the_dragon said was "not if your are replacing a dead / not working one." He did not say state due to defect.
There are other things that can cause a motherboard to go dead or stop working: normal electronic component failure (rare these days but it still happens), user error ("I thought the computer was frozen so I rebooted." "In the middle of a Firmware update???"), poor care (put the computer where it doesn't have proper airflow or cleaning out the dust bunnies that some PCs tend to get on their CPU due to the fans), and doing something dumb.
None of these cause fall under defect (unless you consider the user being defective ;-))and since Joe_the_dragon did NOT specify the cause I was right to call him out on it. Deal with it.
I suspect one poster's assumption may be correct, in that they are making themselves look like idiots to take the entire fall and get the case thrown out of court.
I mean, no one running even the most fly by night business, would have the gall to go into court and state they have no record of their financials.
No attorney would advise or let their client say such a thing.
Unless it's to accomplish a specific goal and delaying only makes sense if there is someone else involved. The judge will eventually state Psystar must produce said requested documents or be held in contempt or obstruction.
Again this does NOT make sense because to put it bluntly this is not how court cases work. A case gets "thrown out" when the plaintiff has no case and plaintiff in this case is Apple. All Psystar could hope for by looking like idiots would be a summary judgment and that would basically give Apple everything it wants.
Looking around regarding the DMCA (Apple filed a claim against Psystar on this December 4, 2008) I found this little gem under Title 17 § 1203. Civil remedies of copyright law: "at any time while an action is pending, may order the impounding, on such terms as it deems reasonable, of any device or product that is in the custody or control of the alleged violator and that the court has reasonable cause to believe was involved in a violation"
That's how IP works, but you have to own the technology. You unwittingly made an excellent point here regarding Blu-ray players. You're buying a player made by Sony or one made by someone who paid Sony to license the tech. Blu-ray players are also overpriced, by the way.
No he didn't, you would pay the BDA to licence Blu-Ray, not Sony
A more apt analogy would be that someone thinks they have the right to do some minor editing on the movie then turn around and sell copies of it on eBay as their movie.
This is a bad anaology because Psystar doesn't claim Mac OS as their property.
Comments
BZZZ WRONG. Changing the motherboard for ANY reason invalidates the Windows OEM
Here is the exact wording: " If the motherboard is upgraded or replaced for reasons other than a defect, then a new computer has been created and the license of new operating system software is required.."
So unless a defect is the reason you had to replace your motherboard you are required to get a new Windows OEM and that is straight from the MS horse's mouth. Deal with it.
And?
That is what Joe_the_dragon stated in response to your other post.
Deal with it...
The sad, strange and weird situation as it exists, is that some geeky and technical people believe that Apple's strategy must change, and if Apple doesn't want to change it, that they must be forced to change it. The way they think it ought to be changed is for Apple to completely alter their strategy to copy Microsoft. This is the only true and correct model, as far as they are concerned. This is wrong on many levels, but it seems to be what many techno-geeks believe.
It would be nice for system builders to have OSX as an option for the OS though. I think that's where most people are saying they should copy MS.
Heck, even being able to install osx onto a pc laptop would be appealing to a lot of people. Does osx always require an expensive, cool looking laptop to run properly?
It would be nice for system builders to have OSX as an option for the OS though. I think that's where most people are saying they should copy MS.
Heck, even being able to install osx onto a pc laptop would be appealing to a lot of people. Does osx always require an expensive, cool looking laptop to run properly?
Were you trying to prove my point? If so, I believe you've done a splendid job of it. You are casually tossing off as "nice" (read: non-trivial) what in fact would be a complete change to Apple's entire approach to the computer market. The "lot of people" this would appeal to are geeks, which I am sorry to report, are not Apple's target market. If you don't like it, then you are free to buy something else.
The third paragraph of my post above answers your question, so I don't see any use in repetition.
Does osx always require an expensive, cool looking laptop to run properly?
It does because Apple chooses it to be so. We don't have to like it but we do have to accept it. I don't like that Ruth's Chris Steakhouse is all Ã* la carte so I have to buy a side that feeds four people when I go there by myself*, but that is how they do business.
* I'm not antisocial, I just travel constantly.
Were you trying to prove my point? If so, I believe you've done a splendid job of it. You are casually tossing off as "nice" (read: non-trivial) what in fact would be a complete change to Apple's entire approach to the computer market. The "lot of people" this would appeal to are geeks, which I am sorry to report, are not Apple's target market. If you don't like it, then you are free to buy something else.
The third paragraph of my post above answers your question, so I don't see any use in repetition.
Hey, I said it would be nice, not realistic. Calm down.
You said its a sad, strange and weird situation that some geeks want Apple to copy Microsoft. As a system builder, I was merely pointing out why they would want this. They are used to pretty much having only one option when it comes to what operating system to use while building a system. I know for a fact, in my many years of building my desktops, I would definitely have given osx a try if it were available like Windows.
I don't agree with the fact that they must change, I simply said it would be nice to have osx as an option, but then again, it would be nice if cars flew and I could move things with my mind. Apple appealing to geeks is a fantasy I suppose.
It does because Apple chooses it to be so. We don't have to like it but we do have to accept it. I don't like that Ruth's Chris Steakhouse is all Ã* la carte so I have to buy a side that feeds four people when I go there by myself*, but that is how they do business.
lol very good analogy. I feel the same way about Chinese food
Big corporations should not be allowed to dictate what we can do once we make a purchase.
I'm sure all the Apple fanboys here would be cool if Sony made you agree to a "license" that said if you purchase a DVD movie made by Sony Pictures Entertainment, then you have to play it only on a Sony DVD player. Same argument goes with music.
I've used Apple computers since the Apple IIGS and they've always been overpriced on the hardware side.
When you purchase a PS3/WII/XBOX game do you expect it to play in anything put the official system it was designed for? When you purchase Mac software or upgrade the OS do you do so with the expectations that you could just stick it in any 'ole slot that you could find and use it? It's not like Apple tricked you into buying "overpriced" hardware. If you don't like it then perhaps try Linux?
Hey, I said it would be nice, not realistic. Calm down.
You said its a sad, strange and weird situation that some geeks want Apple to copy Microsoft. As a system builder, I was merely pointing out why they would want this. They are used to pretty much having only one option when it comes to what operating system to use while building a system. I know for a fact, in my many years of building my desktops, I would definitely have given osx a try if it were available like Windows.
I don't agree with the fact that they must change, I simply said it would be nice to have osx as an option, but then again, it would be nice if cars flew and I could move things with my mind. Apple appealing to geeks is a fantasy I suppose.
It may not be your view specifically, but as you know, for many the concept of "nice" translates into "must" or at least, "should." I know why some people believe this. I'm only pointing out that it's not in Apple's game plan for some very good reasons.
Is that calm enough for you?
Looks like someone from the Osama, sorry Obama team is here.
It seems that a retarded and brainwashed bigot try to communicate from its cave. Pathetic.
Or if microsoft said no more windows on mac machines. I could see if apple delivered products that users want, mid range, headless mac, not non mobile low powered crap, i7 machines, non ECG server memory machines. Rubbish.
Go pystar, XEfi, osx86.
Down with apple tv. That's for looked. Not even HD no flash on iPhone xvid movies for free and as a sample developer who sees their material in wares groups, I can say this. Until Apple stops this non high end over priced builds, long live the clone. Some forget when there were clones, late 80s, apple had a larger marketshare. It was intel, that for years, raped the consumer, then AMD forced intel hand. Now apple a the big naughty company that ironically cares more about iPhones then computers.
QFT. A few common sense among the overwhelming boot-licking/brand addicted nonsense.
A book does come with its copywrite number and terms/conditions of use.
My point is, the EULA is not really the critical issue here. A book doesn't come wrapped in a EULA, but the prohibitions against someone other than the rights holders using it for profit are enforceable just the same.
Even to add to that. These teck geeks completely ignore the fact that Microsoft's business model has proven to be extremely burdensome in a way that Apple has been able to avoid. The fact that Windows has to be made to work on thousands of different configurations of machines was a benefit 15 years ago and is now a liability. At any one time OS X only has to work on about 20 machines that Apple designed.
The fact that Windows does not abandon legacy code sounded like a good idea years ago and is now a weight dragging down the entire OS. Apple has never had a problem with abandoning legacy code.
The sad, strange and weird situation as it exists, is that some geeky and technical people believe that Apple's strategy must change, and if Apple doesn't want to change it, that they must be forced to change it. The way they think it ought to be changed is for Apple to completely alter their strategy to copy Microsoft. This is the only true and correct model, as far as they are concerned. This is wrong on many levels, but it seems to be what many techno-geeks believe.
Actually I think the pieces are falling into place to give someone a good opportunity to come up with a third operating system. Low cost computers and web based software offer a great opportunity for someone who is industrious and times it just right.
You said its a sad, strange and weird situation that some geeks want Apple to copy Microsoft. As a system builder, I was merely pointing out why they would want this. They are used to pretty much having only one option when it comes to what operating system to use while building a system.
I don't think we are in total disagreement. I agree Apple is not fighting to insure the EULA cannot be violated under any circumstances. But I do think they are fighting for the validity of the EULA in a broad sense.
Possibly, but what I'm saying is that EULA or no EULA, nobody has the right to profit by the copyrighted or patented works of others without their express permission. The software industry may be peculiar in the sense that they make an effort to spell out use rights in detail on every copy sold, but whether they've done that or not, the basic principles of intellectual property protection don't change.
A book does come with its copywrite number and terms/conditions of use.
Some might, but not all. In fact it isn't even necessary for a book to contain an ISBN for it to be covered by copyright. All you really need is the word "copyright" and the name of the work's creator on the work. Sending copies to the Library of Congress and obtaining an ISBN helps prove who was the creator in the event of disputes, but it's not necessary for the owner to enjoy a copyright.
Very well stated, I completely agree.
Even to add to that. These teck geeks completely ignore the fact that Microsoft's business model has proven to be extremely burdensome in a way that Apple has been able to avoid. The fact that Windows has to be made to work on thousands of different configurations of machines was a benefit 15 years ago and is now a liability. At any one time OS X only has to work on about 20 machines that Apple designed.
More to the point, the Microsoft model is not subject to duplication. Microsoft has tried with very limited success themselves, and in reality, they stumbled into it completely by accident. It has never been clear to me why so many people believe that Apple can (must!) attempt to copy Microsoft's approach to the market, when Microsoft's business was created by possibly the oddest series of events in the history of industry.
Big corporations should not be allowed to dictate what we can do once we make a purchase.
I'm sure all the Apple fanboys here would be cool if Sony made you agree to a "license" that said if you purchase a DVD movie made by Sony Pictures Entertainment, then you have to play it only on a Sony DVD player. Same argument goes with music.
I've used Apple computers since the Apple IIGS and they've always been overpriced on the hardware side.
That's how IP works, but you have to own the technology. You unwittingly made an excellent point here regarding Blu-ray players. You're buying a player made by Sony or one made by someone who paid Sony to license the tech. Blu-ray players are also overpriced, by the way.
QFT. A few common sense among the overwhelming boot-licking/brand addicted nonsense.
the thing is, I pay 25-35% off from apple friends. This is a fair price. Apple is not worth the extra 25% especially mao that most mac specialist don't k ow whY fab is, most one t one traniners only know iLife, no pro apps, and most geniuses, can't troubleshoot, they insert a CD, run it and if it says it's broke, they send it out. Apple gives the illusion that they should require more due to service when in fact, their service is limited at best with most consumers knowing more than the trained reta folk. Then of course, there is no reason that the pro should be built with server parts other than to demand a higher premium, all work stations should be i7 machines, no ecc memeory and sell for $1400 but then their iMac is over priced so they can't.
Not sure were most are from but these days the pro and iMac are more expensive than past prices with pro care and one to one more limited, and under trained then ever before.
And?
That is what Joe_the_dragon stated in response to your other post.
Deal with it...
BZZZ WRONG. ALL Joe_the_dragon said was "not if your are replacing a dead / not working one." He did not say state due to defect.
There are other things that can cause a motherboard to go dead or stop working: normal electronic component failure (rare these days but it still happens), user error ("I thought the computer was frozen so I rebooted." "In the middle of a Firmware update???"), poor care (put the computer where it doesn't have proper airflow or cleaning out the dust bunnies that some PCs tend to get on their CPU due to the fans), and doing something dumb.
None of these cause fall under defect (unless you consider the user being defective ;-))and since Joe_the_dragon did NOT specify the cause I was right to call him out on it. Deal with it.
I suspect one poster's assumption may be correct, in that they are making themselves look like idiots to take the entire fall and get the case thrown out of court.
I mean, no one running even the most fly by night business, would have the gall to go into court and state they have no record of their financials.
No attorney would advise or let their client say such a thing.
Unless it's to accomplish a specific goal and delaying only makes sense if there is someone else involved. The judge will eventually state Psystar must produce said requested documents or be held in contempt or obstruction.
Again this does NOT make sense because to put it bluntly this is not how court cases work. A case gets "thrown out" when the plaintiff has no case and plaintiff in this case is Apple. All Psystar could hope for by looking like idiots would be a summary judgment and that would basically give Apple everything it wants.
Looking around regarding the DMCA (Apple filed a claim against Psystar on this December 4, 2008) I found this little gem under Title 17 § 1203. Civil remedies of copyright law: "at any time while an action is pending, may order the impounding, on such terms as it deems reasonable, of any device or product that is in the custody or control of the alleged violator and that the court has reasonable cause to believe was involved in a violation"
That's how IP works, but you have to own the technology. You unwittingly made an excellent point here regarding Blu-ray players. You're buying a player made by Sony or one made by someone who paid Sony to license the tech. Blu-ray players are also overpriced, by the way.
No he didn't, you would pay the BDA to licence Blu-Ray, not Sony
A more apt analogy would be that someone thinks they have the right to do some minor editing on the movie then turn around and sell copies of it on eBay as their movie.
This is a bad anaology because Psystar doesn't claim Mac OS as their property.
This is a bad anaology because Psystar doesn't claim Mac OS as their property.
also what Psystar is editing is more like removing a region check / other drm stuff in the movie then editing the movie it self.