Apple Offers "Family License" for Jaguar
DietFluffy writes "According to this article, Apple Computer
will offer a $199 5-user family license for Jaguar (Mac OS X 10.2). The article
notes that the family license program depends on an honor system because unlike
Microsoft, Apple 'does not put technical
barriers in place to prevent people from installing software on more than one
machine.'" It's likely that most families would buy only one license anyway, so Apple stands to lose little. Sounds like a smart move to me. (For those keeping score on today's game, that makes it Apple 2, Microsoft 0.)
Putting the whining and moaning about the cost of upgrading to 10.2, it is nice that Apple is providing such a package. At $199, the cost of each upgrade for five machines (be it an iBook, an older iMac, a new iMac, etc.) comes down to around $40 a pop. It is much cheaper than the cost of five upgrades to Windows XP Home Edition, as those go for $99 for the first one and $89 for each additiona license (more info can be found here); add $100 for each license/copy for Windows XP Professional.
Lambast Apple all you want for the price of 10.2, but remember you won't suddenly find that your iMac stopped working because somebody thinks you've stolen the license.
I really want to see how many people will avail themselves of this option. Perhaps the MPAA and RIAA will sit up and notice if people demonstrate that they're willing to pay for reasonable licenses.
It's a nice thing to do, but only something that Apple can really afford to pull of (what with the honor system and all). The five machines that Jaguar will be installed on under this license have allready brought money to Apple. I'm sure that they don't like people to pirate their OS, but they surely aren't going to lose sleep if somebody does it. They are, after all, a hardware company. They can "risk" to play nice and improve their image. After all people are going to be buying Apples again in the future - especially if they feel like the company treats them with respect.
Hank! White!
From the article:
Given the fact that Apple likes to put loyal customers into corners focusing on scoring more money on the OS sounds like something they'd do.
Guess again.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
This is a plan that Microsoft can rip off with impunity.
There are two ways to deal with people who are loose with their software licenses.
1. Clamp down hard to make sure they can only install the software once on a single piece of hardware. Systematically piss off your entire user base.
2. Pragmatically realize that users are going to install their software on every machine in their house. Therefore, change your licensing to make such a practice legal. Charge a reasonable amount to do this.
Note: Item 1 will only work if you are willing to illegally abuse your monopoly.
Cheers to Apple. $199 for 5 home licenses is great because the majority of Mac users I know have two or three Macs in their house and this allows them to "get legal" without breaking the bank.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
God, I hope not.
Haven't you ever thought about the irony of Microsoft's market position? They're the #1 operating system in the world, in number of units, but their software is almost universally terrible. In what kind of world does that make sense?
Then I came up with my own hypothesis: popular software tends to suck. Think about it. The most popular software products in the world-- like, say, Windows-- are always awful pieces of work. There's clearly a connection here. I haven't identified the exact mechanism yet; maybe it has something to do with the products growing too fast or something. But the connection is undeniable!
If Mac OS X ever grows beyond a few million users, it'll start to suck. Keep the user base small! Keep Macs expensive! Keep out the riff-raff!
(HHOS)
Why is installing software on more than one computers a bad thing?
Two reasons: principle, and economics.
On the one hand, Apple asks you to buy one copy of the software per computer (except in the case of this 5-pack, of course). If you're not willing to comply with that request, then you should not use the software at all. Using it on two computers without paying for two copies is like taking two newspapers from the machine after putting in only one quarter: it's stealing.
On the other hand, Apple spends a fortune developing this software, but sells it at a much lower price because they're expecting to sell a certain number of copies. That number is based on how many Macs are out there now, and what fraction of the owners will want to use the new software. See, they're counting Macs, not people or families or little groups of warezing teens. If they sell too few copies of OS X 10.2, they won't make their money back, and there won't be a Mac OS X 10.3. So using two copies when you only pay for one indirectly deprives you of future products that you'd like to have.
And, of course, there's the best reason of all: because your momma told you so, idiot.