They do tie it to their hardware. You have to modify their base image to remove this :
$ file/System/Library/Extensions/Dont\ Steal\ Mac\ OS\ X.kext/Contents/MacOS/Dont\ Steal\ Mac\ OS\ X /System/Library/Extensions/Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext/Contents/MacOS/Dont Steal Mac OS X: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures /System/Library/Extensions/Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext/Contents/MacOS/Dont Steal Mac OS X (for architecture x86_64): Mach-O 64-bit kext bundle x86_64 /System/Library/Extensions/Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext/Contents/MacOS/Dont Steal Mac OS X (for architecture i386): Mach-O object i386
It's flamebait because tying is not anti-competitive in and of itself, nor should it be illegal. Vertical integration of hardware and software is the big-Iron Unix business model and Apple is simply applying it to consumer computers. Apple is not a software business, it's a hardware business (10% of their revenue is software and that includes all their high-end software packages and OS).
*sigh*, you're talking about the Paralympics. The Special Olympics doesn't have highly trained athletes, only retar... err.. special kids that need an outlet to get some kind of positive feeling about their life. It's very much a kid thing and it's only for that special little guy.
I was waiting for a flight at Dulles International in Virginia just last week and the Boingo hotspot there was free. Google basically paid for wifi for everyone as a "holiday gift" (read, advertising). No strings attached either. Made the 2 hour wait less painful.
Factor in the inital PC cost please. The console is 300$ for 5 years. The PC is initial + upgrades costs. Don't factor in monitors please, you don't for PC, you don't for Consoles (everyone has a TV as much as everyone as a computer monitor).
Who's making fun ? It's pretty much a fact that any normal kid can win the special Olympics (except maybe Cartman) against all the special little children. It might not be a politically correct fact but it is fact nonetheless. I have nothing against reta.. err.. Special kids, but we don't need any more political correctness in today's society.
Maybe it is, but most large shops wouldn't run anything on it besides AD or file and print sharing. WebSphere/Netweaver (SAP) are very big in my shop and none of it runs off of Windows servers. So if you want to keep to small shops, maybe you'll have success, but in big enterprise, big Iron Unix is where it's at.
And the console will last 5 years. For 300$. The PC won't. I've played the game you are playing (gaming PCs and the upgrade loop). It's not worth it in the end. You might think some RAM here + a vid card there doesn't add up. Let me tell you it does. I now have a PS3 and a laptop. My computers spending have gone way down since I stopped the PC gaming thing.
Or they made things like the 3" 1/2 floppy. Compact Discs (in partnership with phillips), DVDs... you know, successful stuff. Sony tries a lot, misses some, wins some. A lot of the stuff they put out is partnerships and they participate in many of the industry standard committees.
Their electronics division is not as bad as people make it out to be. It's certainly not as evil as their media division (Sony Pictures and Sony Music).
The 3 1/2 floppy disagrees with you. Not to mention, like you say, a lot of companies are part of the Blu-ray association and as such, if every maker of Blu-ray devices is part of it, no one charges royalties. Like DVD, Blu-ray is very much design by committee with no one company controlling it. This is the exact opposite of proprietary.
Sony isn't about to let the PS3 go when they're counting on it to push Blu-Ray (their proprietary format)
I don't know how the rest of your post got +5 insightful, but this comment especially should've gotten you a couple of troll mods. Blu-ray is design by committee. It's not Sony's proprietary format even though they started the project to work on it and were most aggressive in pushing it (through the PS3). Sony doesn't own the format and if Sony died tomorrow, you would still have Blu-ray on the market.
So wait, why should Linux sacrifice its ideals so that other OSes take off ? You're not making a very convincing case here. All these other OSes are free to standardise on a driver model if they want. Linux is Linux. It's as much about ideals as it is about building an Operating System.
So you don't agree with the ideals of the Linux developers but you want to push your own unto them ? Take your ego to some other OS where you'll be accepted. Linux is Linux, it's based on the idea of software freedom. If that means that junky USB dongle #2 doesn't work, then so be it. The driver situation is fine on Linux. It has some of the best hardware compatibility out there, supporting older stuff that Windows as long since abandoned and supporting the newer stuff in a very timely manner. The answer is simple and was posted long ago : Hardware manufacturers should just submit their drivers to the Kernel devs for inclusion in the main kernel. How hard or political is that ?
No, this timeframe is very normal. They always have the next iPhone model ready 6 months in advane for a June-July release, so it can go through FCC approval, and they can announce before it does. Same reason the original iPhone was introduced and functionnal late 2006 but only shipped June 2007.
This is just the normal product cycle for the iPhone.
Uhhh... no. According to Wikipedia, Apple won because the court ruled that
Apple won ? According to your own wikipedia article:
Apple lost all claims in the suit except for the ruling that the trash can icon and file folder icons from Hewlett-Packard's NewWave windows application were infringing.
Hence Apple lost the look and feel lawsuit, it won the copyright infrigment portions of the suit. Like you quoted, you can't patent or copyright "look and feel", thus Microsoft is free, and has legal precedent to back it up, to copy said look and feel.
Except Apple's look and feel lawsuit against Microsoft has already been thrown out. About 20 years ago. So Microsoft can copy "look and feel" all they want, they have the legal precedents to do so.
Or you know, this guy just let out the big dirty secret and in an attempt to save face, the "Windows team" puts out an official response that claims the contrary even though at this point it's pretty obvious to anyone with 1 functionning eye, trying to kill the first guy's credibility in order to sweep all of this under the rug.
The end the night by sucking their collective thumb and weeping for their mommies to "make it all go away".
See, anyone can say anything about it. The few people who know the actual truth (the first guy and the Windows team) won't ever tell us the real truth.
You're forgetting one thing. The losers are the consumers also. If there is no incentive to innovate, there won't be innovation. And without innovation, you won't have products to clone. Hence why Apple made the move it did in the 90s.
It seems it wasn't as trivial as you tought since their answer to the court was basically "The dog ate our receipts". You could ask the same of SCO and SCO's lawyers as far as sanity goes. Sometimes, all you want to do is stall and delay and drag things for long enough to cause financial burden. Hey, if you're going to die anyway, might as well drag a few people along for the ride.
Go read April's filings. They can't prove shipping the DVDs because they can't prove even buying them. Why do you think they suddenly went for a stall tactic in May with the bankruptcy and now with the Florida lawsuit ? Because when this reaches trial, their failure in April to produce any evidence of having had contact with retail DVDs will hurt them.
No, Apple's lawyer doesn't. First, Psystar failed to produce any receipts for their purchase of OS X licenses back in april when Apple asked for them in discovery. Before they can even argue first sale doctrine, they need to have proof they even purchased the damn things to begin with. Second, arguing first sale doctrine over software is not a given. There is precedents on both sides of the fence, and higher courts are mostly denying claims that software is sold and thus that first sale doctrine even applies to it.
Slashdot Mirror
They do tie it to their hardware. You have to modify their base image to remove this :
$ file /System/Library/Extensions/Dont\ Steal\ Mac\ OS\ X.kext/Contents/MacOS/Dont\ Steal\ Mac\ OS\ X
/System/Library/Extensions/Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext/Contents/MacOS/Dont Steal Mac OS X: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures
/System/Library/Extensions/Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext/Contents/MacOS/Dont Steal Mac OS X (for architecture x86_64): Mach-O 64-bit kext bundle x86_64
/System/Library/Extensions/Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext/Contents/MacOS/Dont Steal Mac OS X (for architecture i386): Mach-O object i386
It's flamebait because tying is not anti-competitive in and of itself, nor should it be illegal. Vertical integration of hardware and software is the big-Iron Unix business model and Apple is simply applying it to consumer computers. Apple is not a software business, it's a hardware business (10% of their revenue is software and that includes all their high-end software packages and OS).
*sigh*, you're talking about the Paralympics. The Special Olympics doesn't have highly trained athletes, only retar... err.. special kids that need an outlet to get some kind of positive feeling about their life. It's very much a kid thing and it's only for that special little guy.
I was waiting for a flight at Dulles International in Virginia just last week and the Boingo hotspot there was free. Google basically paid for wifi for everyone as a "holiday gift" (read, advertising). No strings attached either. Made the 2 hour wait less painful.
Newsflash, MMS is available on AT&T, has been for a few months. That's one less complaint off your list.
Factor in the inital PC cost please. The console is 300$ for 5 years. The PC is initial + upgrades costs. Don't factor in monitors please, you don't for PC, you don't for Consoles (everyone has a TV as much as everyone as a computer monitor).
Who's making fun ? It's pretty much a fact that any normal kid can win the special Olympics (except maybe Cartman) against all the special little children. It might not be a politically correct fact but it is fact nonetheless. I have nothing against reta.. err.. Special kids, but we don't need any more political correctness in today's society.
Maybe it is, but most large shops wouldn't run anything on it besides AD or file and print sharing. WebSphere/Netweaver (SAP) are very big in my shop and none of it runs off of Windows servers. So if you want to keep to small shops, maybe you'll have success, but in big enterprise, big Iron Unix is where it's at.
You need to keep up. QT hasn't been a "GUI library" for a few years now. It does almost everything now.
And the console will last 5 years. For 300$. The PC won't. I've played the game you are playing (gaming PCs and the upgrade loop). It's not worth it in the end. You might think some RAM here + a vid card there doesn't add up. Let me tell you it does. I now have a PS3 and a laptop. My computers spending have gone way down since I stopped the PC gaming thing.
Or they made things like the 3" 1/2 floppy. Compact Discs (in partnership with phillips), DVDs... you know, successful stuff. Sony tries a lot, misses some, wins some. A lot of the stuff they put out is partnerships and they participate in many of the industry standard committees.
Their electronics division is not as bad as people make it out to be. It's certainly not as evil as their media division (Sony Pictures and Sony Music).
So you're spreading a slang word with a misspelling as a grammatical fact ? At least call them legos and forgo the extra G.
The 3 1/2 floppy disagrees with you. Not to mention, like you say, a lot of companies are part of the Blu-ray association and as such, if every maker of Blu-ray devices is part of it, no one charges royalties. Like DVD, Blu-ray is very much design by committee with no one company controlling it. This is the exact opposite of proprietary.
Sony isn't about to let the PS3 go when they're counting on it to push Blu-Ray (their proprietary format)
I don't know how the rest of your post got +5 insightful, but this comment especially should've gotten you a couple of troll mods. Blu-ray is design by committee. It's not Sony's proprietary format even though they started the project to work on it and were most aggressive in pushing it (through the PS3). Sony doesn't own the format and if Sony died tomorrow, you would still have Blu-ray on the market.
So wait, why should Linux sacrifice its ideals so that other OSes take off ? You're not making a very convincing case here. All these other OSes are free to standardise on a driver model if they want. Linux is Linux. It's as much about ideals as it is about building an Operating System.
So you don't agree with the ideals of the Linux developers but you want to push your own unto them ? Take your ego to some other OS where you'll be accepted. Linux is Linux, it's based on the idea of software freedom. If that means that junky USB dongle #2 doesn't work, then so be it. The driver situation is fine on Linux. It has some of the best hardware compatibility out there, supporting older stuff that Windows as long since abandoned and supporting the newer stuff in a very timely manner. The answer is simple and was posted long ago : Hardware manufacturers should just submit their drivers to the Kernel devs for inclusion in the main kernel. How hard or political is that ?
No, this timeframe is very normal. They always have the next iPhone model ready 6 months in advane for a June-July release, so it can go through FCC approval, and they can announce before it does. Same reason the original iPhone was introduced and functionnal late 2006 but only shipped June 2007.
This is just the normal product cycle for the iPhone.
What is it that Mac OS X does that other OSes don't do exactly ?
Uhhh... no. According to Wikipedia, Apple won because the court ruled that
Apple won ? According to your own wikipedia article :
Apple lost all claims in the suit except for the ruling that the trash can icon and file folder icons from Hewlett-Packard's NewWave windows application were infringing.
Hence Apple lost the look and feel lawsuit, it won the copyright infrigment portions of the suit. Like you quoted, you can't patent or copyright "look and feel", thus Microsoft is free, and has legal precedent to back it up, to copy said look and feel.
Except Apple's look and feel lawsuit against Microsoft has already been thrown out. About 20 years ago. So Microsoft can copy "look and feel" all they want, they have the legal precedents to do so.
Or you know, this guy just let out the big dirty secret and in an attempt to save face, the "Windows team" puts out an official response that claims the contrary even though at this point it's pretty obvious to anyone with 1 functionning eye, trying to kill the first guy's credibility in order to sweep all of this under the rug.
The end the night by sucking their collective thumb and weeping for their mommies to "make it all go away".
See, anyone can say anything about it. The few people who know the actual truth (the first guy and the Windows team) won't ever tell us the real truth.
You're forgetting one thing. The losers are the consumers also. If there is no incentive to innovate, there won't be innovation. And without innovation, you won't have products to clone. Hence why Apple made the move it did in the 90s.
It seems it wasn't as trivial as you tought since their answer to the court was basically "The dog ate our receipts". You could ask the same of SCO and SCO's lawyers as far as sanity goes. Sometimes, all you want to do is stall and delay and drag things for long enough to cause financial burden. Hey, if you're going to die anyway, might as well drag a few people along for the ride.
Go read April's filings. They can't prove shipping the DVDs because they can't prove even buying them. Why do you think they suddenly went for a stall tactic in May with the bankruptcy and now with the Florida lawsuit ? Because when this reaches trial, their failure in April to produce any evidence of having had contact with retail DVDs will hurt them.
No, Apple's lawyer doesn't. First, Psystar failed to produce any receipts for their purchase of OS X licenses back in april when Apple asked for them in discovery. Before they can even argue first sale doctrine, they need to have proof they even purchased the damn things to begin with. Second, arguing first sale doctrine over software is not a given. There is precedents on both sides of the fence, and higher courts are mostly denying claims that software is sold and thus that first sale doctrine even applies to it.