Sometimes "grammar Nazis" correct grammar not because they want to criticize you to make you look bad, but because they (we) want to take a small step to help improve the dismal level of literacy we observe in internet forums. Are people too defensive to be able to take constructive criticism and learn when their mistakes are pointed out?
And your post was extremely rude, which the preceding post was not. If you want to argue a point, it might come across better if you demonstrate it in a respectful (and literate) manner.
There is NOTHING rude about having a point view. Patronising People like you are BORING. Hey Wait!, What am I even responding to this for??
IOW, you are incapable of rational discussion (much less proper grammar and spelling). You know more about the law than Judge Alsup. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is stupid.
I hope you enjoy having a miserable life - that's the way you're heading.
Same to you, you horrible person. These boards used to be a good place, not any more. And Im NOT heading anywhere you said. Talking about peoples grammar etc, is just rubbish.
And saying I think anyone "who doesn't agree with me is stupid", and "I know more about the law than Judge's" etc.... oh please don't make me laugh!
you people are not very nice. maybe not stupid, but sure as hell not nice. Thats why Im no a longer going take part in Apple insider discussions anymore, It is just NON constructive, and all I find is some patronising freak like you being a bitch. I just cant stand people like you.
You are obviously trying to rile me... (but wasting your time.)
There's a difference between legally purchased and legally used. Read Judge Alsup's decision. Using Mac OS X DVDs on non-Apple hardware involves both an EULA violation AND a DMCA violation. It's just plain not legal (no matter what the whiners here say). Please read the decision. It specifically says that the EULA is valid. It also specifically says that installing OS X onto generic hardware is a DMCA violation and therefore illegal. It specifically does NOT say that it's only a violation if you sell the computer.
Sorry if my question might look dumb, but i'm not from the US and don't really understand your law as it's very different from german law in this specific case.
Isn't Judge Alsups decision only binding to the way Psystar did the installation on the machines they tried to sell? At least that's the way i understood this decision as he regarded the specific ways Psystar used to install Leopard onto their computers.
Not that this decision is of any importance to me (as i live in germany and we have different laws over here), but i'm just interested in the whole case.
Of course the decision is only specific to Pystar in THIS case. BUT, it may set precedent for other cases using slightly different methods but still are not in accordance with EULA and copyright protections. In those future hypothetical cases this precedent may make summary judgement even faster in Apples favor as many of the issues have already been vetted in the courtroom.
While this case won't be a binding precedent across every US District Court , the rest of the District Judges don't generally like doing every case from scratch, so even non-binding precedent becomes a big deal.
I never said it was "some sort of unmitigated disaster for Apple". I'm sure it sold very well among Apple devotees (note my refusal to use the word fanboy today). But the fact remains that netbooks appeal due to their form factor in addition to their price. That's all- don't be so negative.
I live in San Francisco where Macs are everywhere and there's no shortage of people who wouldn't think twice about dropping $2000 on a laptop. Yet I very rarely see anyone with a Macbook Air.
I doubt Apple will drop it after all they've invested in it and I think they like it for their image. But I don't think they're selling very well.
Comments
In response to the previous post:
Sometimes "grammar Nazis" correct grammar not because they want to criticize you to make you look bad, but because they (we) want to take a small step to help improve the dismal level of literacy we observe in internet forums. Are people too defensive to be able to take constructive criticism and learn when their mistakes are pointed out?
And your post was extremely rude, which the preceding post was not. If you want to argue a point, it might come across better if you demonstrate it in a respectful (and literate) manner.
There is NOTHING rude about having a point view. Patronising People like you are BORING. Hey Wait!, What am I even responding to this for??
IOW, you are incapable of rational discussion (much less proper grammar and spelling). You know more about the law than Judge Alsup. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is stupid.
I hope you enjoy having a miserable life - that's the way you're heading.
Same to you, you horrible person. These boards used to be a good place, not any more. And Im NOT heading anywhere you said. Talking about peoples grammar etc, is just rubbish.
And saying I think anyone "who doesn't agree with me is stupid", and "I know more about the law than Judge's" etc.... oh please don't make me laugh!
you people are not very nice. maybe not stupid, but sure as hell not nice. Thats why Im no a longer going take part in Apple insider discussions anymore, It is just NON constructive, and all I find is some patronising freak like you being a bitch. I just cant stand people like you.
You are obviously trying to rile me... (but wasting your time.)
oh, and you enjoy having a miserable life too!!!
END OF SUBJECT OK??
There's a difference between legally purchased and legally used. Read Judge Alsup's decision. Using Mac OS X DVDs on non-Apple hardware involves both an EULA violation AND a DMCA violation. It's just plain not legal (no matter what the whiners here say). Please read the decision. It specifically says that the EULA is valid. It also specifically says that installing OS X onto generic hardware is a DMCA violation and therefore illegal. It specifically does NOT say that it's only a violation if you sell the computer.
Sorry if my question might look dumb, but i'm not from the US and don't really understand your law as it's very different from german law in this specific case.
Isn't Judge Alsups decision only binding to the way Psystar did the installation on the machines they tried to sell? At least that's the way i understood this decision as he regarded the specific ways Psystar used to install Leopard onto their computers.
Not that this decision is of any importance to me (as i live in germany and we have different laws over here), but i'm just interested in the whole case.
While this case won't be a binding precedent across every US District Court , the rest of the District Judges don't generally like doing every case from scratch, so even non-binding precedent becomes a big deal.
I never said it was "some sort of unmitigated disaster for Apple". I'm sure it sold very well among Apple devotees (note my refusal to use the word fanboy today). But the fact remains that netbooks appeal due to their form factor in addition to their price. That's all- don't be so negative.
I live in San Francisco where Macs are everywhere and there's no shortage of people who wouldn't think twice about dropping $2000 on a laptop. Yet I very rarely see anyone with a Macbook Air.
I doubt Apple will drop it after all they've invested in it and I think they like it for their image. But I don't think they're selling very well.