There's not that much ingenuity to it. It's even less ingenious than performing an engine swap from one car to another. I pointed out what Steve jobs would think because if a *lot* of people start doing this kind of thing, then Apple will look for ways to shut them down.
BTW I googled around to see if there are any decent repositories for OSX, and found Darwin Ports. I remember trying it before. It was better than trying to compile everything completely manually, but still wasn't quite perfect, pretty sure it had issues with dependencies a few times etc. I ended up trying out Ubuntu and loving how everything "just worked";)
I am aware of that. There are not drivers for everything though, and even if you use exactly the same components as are in a kosher Mac, I still doubt ol' Steve would be too happy with you. Unless maybe you fit it all in an Apple case, then nobody is really going to be able to tell the difference. The EULA for OSX does talk about "Apple-branded hardware" after all. I suppose if you etched/burned/embossed/whatever on an Apple logo, that might technically make things nice and legal.
I don't see why anyone who is so desperate to use OSX would not just buy a Mac.
In fact, I prefer Ubuntu to OSX. The interface on OSX may be a little more polished (but is way less configurable), but I got fed up of the webserver setup, and the not very graceful X11 support (maybe that's been sorted now), and hoops I was having to jump through to get WINE etc running. It's much better to have a repository manager than dealing with that clusterfuck every time you want to set up a new Mac, or to update your apps.
Heh. I went the other way, had a Pro that I installed Ubuntu on and got fed up with the lack of decent EFI support and a couple of other issues. Now I use a Dell netbook with Ubuntu for basically everything (including work), the MBP only comes out when I need to run a Windows VM.
Or, you could continue using google docs, but just keep offline backups of your files, or email the files to yourself, etc. Don't see what all the fuss is about.. anyone who doesn't keep backups of their important files, will either learn to do so the first time they lose data, or.. they're an idiot and are going to have problems on any system, as you point out.
"Back-up" or "archival" copies are not authorized and are not necessary to protect your software.
Is this not something to do with the fact that you can send scratched disks back and have them send you new disks? I'm sure I've heard of that kind of thing being done before. For cases where I've lost or scratched my legally bought music CDs though, I just download a new one illegally;)
I don't generally condone illegal downloads, but I think they're great (and IMO ethically justified) for that kind of situation. I'd prefer if all companies had a Steam-like system where you could re-acquire any software or music/videos/whatever from them from their website if you already have purchased it in the past. I'd even be prepared to pay a small fee for each additional download. I'd rather pay 50p for immediate downloadage than wait a few weeks for a new plastic disk to be sent to me.
The hammer itself, that is, the physical thing that is a hammer, can neither be patented or copyrighted.
I think if we lived in a world where we had high precision multi-material 3D printers or Star Trek type replicators, we probably would have laws that copy protect physical objects. We have copy protection for information because it is so easy to copy, yet it is acknowledged by us humans to be valuable and most of us recognise that the creator should get first dibs on his idea.
Why should an executable not be eligible for copyright, while a source file or digital image should be copyrightable? And what happens in the case of scripts, where the source file effectively is the same as an "executable", albeit at a higher level of abstraction? There aren't really any real world analogies for that situation. It would be like an edible cookbook that can magically assume the properties of any recipe written inside, and that regenerates each time you take a bite.
I think as well as any savings or efficiency increases, they should also take into account the relative ease with which electronic records can be backed up and restored in case of fire or flooding, etc. At the very least, there should be scans of any paper documents. Full hardcopy backups would take up a lot of space, and they're not very easy to replicate if you do end up losing the originals.
Didn't say it was easy, I just said it was possible. But it is pretty easy to the type of person that cares about that stuff.
Personally I wouldn't care if I were "forced" to do something I already wanted to do, though obviously I understand the benefits of competition. I'm going to keep supporting products that help to weaken Microsoft though. I'd much rather have a google monopoly than a Microsoft one, though obviously any monopoly is bad for consumers, given enough time.
You aren't helping much in that regards if I am missing it. I presume it's something along the lines of "a lot of people are careless idiots who need to be more careful when performing irreversible actions". When I was first introduced to Linux my dad told a story along the lines of his CS lecturers managing to delete the whole of the University's unix system (requiring a few days of reinstallation) by misusing rm, so I've always been careful with it.
Sure there are alternatives available - but buying a product line then cutting support for users using competing OSes is quite "anti-competitive" in my book.
I tend to be wary when deleting stuff. Like when I'm forming a SQL delete statement for example, I will first do a select to double check that what I'm deleting is what I *think* I'm deleting. Likewise I suppose if I were using a complex wildcard expression in bash, I could always check with ls instead of rm, hit up then change rm to ls.
Don't know if I should bite.. but since Apple owns the copyright on OSX (seeing as they created it), that obviously means they can copy it as much as they want.
The only reason that is the case is because iTunes would have soon died out (or at the least become very crippled) with competition from the Amazon MP3 store, and anyone else who dared to introduce a DRM free service.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it could just be a randomly generated joke.
There's not that much ingenuity to it. It's even less ingenious than performing an engine swap from one car to another. I pointed out what Steve jobs would think because if a *lot* of people start doing this kind of thing, then Apple will look for ways to shut them down.
BTW I googled around to see if there are any decent repositories for OSX, and found Darwin Ports. I remember trying it before. It was better than trying to compile everything completely manually, but still wasn't quite perfect, pretty sure it had issues with dependencies a few times etc. I ended up trying out Ubuntu and loving how everything "just worked" ;)
I am aware of that. There are not drivers for everything though, and even if you use exactly the same components as are in a kosher Mac, I still doubt ol' Steve would be too happy with you. Unless maybe you fit it all in an Apple case, then nobody is really going to be able to tell the difference. The EULA for OSX does talk about "Apple-branded hardware" after all. I suppose if you etched/burned/embossed/whatever on an Apple logo, that might technically make things nice and legal.
I don't see why anyone who is so desperate to use OSX would not just buy a Mac.
In fact, I prefer Ubuntu to OSX. The interface on OSX may be a little more polished (but is way less configurable), but I got fed up of the webserver setup, and the not very graceful X11 support (maybe that's been sorted now), and hoops I was having to jump through to get WINE etc running. It's much better to have a repository manager than dealing with that clusterfuck every time you want to set up a new Mac, or to update your apps.
Heh. I went the other way, had a Pro that I installed Ubuntu on and got fed up with the lack of decent EFI support and a couple of other issues. Now I use a Dell netbook with Ubuntu for basically everything (including work), the MBP only comes out when I need to run a Windows VM.
Or, you could continue using google docs, but just keep offline backups of your files, or email the files to yourself, etc. Don't see what all the fuss is about.. anyone who doesn't keep backups of their important files, will either learn to do so the first time they lose data, or.. they're an idiot and are going to have problems on any system, as you point out.
I think hacking together your own "Mac" out of a mac logic board and non-mac hardware still counts as being a "Hackintosh".
"Back-up" or "archival" copies are not authorized and are not necessary to protect your software.
Is this not something to do with the fact that you can send scratched disks back and have them send you new disks? I'm sure I've heard of that kind of thing being done before. For cases where I've lost or scratched my legally bought music CDs though, I just download a new one illegally ;)
I don't generally condone illegal downloads, but I think they're great (and IMO ethically justified) for that kind of situation. I'd prefer if all companies had a Steam-like system where you could re-acquire any software or music/videos/whatever from them from their website if you already have purchased it in the past. I'd even be prepared to pay a small fee for each additional download. I'd rather pay 50p for immediate downloadage than wait a few weeks for a new plastic disk to be sent to me.
The hammer itself, that is, the physical thing that is a hammer, can neither be patented or copyrighted.
I think if we lived in a world where we had high precision multi-material 3D printers or Star Trek type replicators, we probably would have laws that copy protect physical objects. We have copy protection for information because it is so easy to copy, yet it is acknowledged by us humans to be valuable and most of us recognise that the creator should get first dibs on his idea.
Why should an executable not be eligible for copyright, while a source file or digital image should be copyrightable? And what happens in the case of scripts, where the source file effectively is the same as an "executable", albeit at a higher level of abstraction? There aren't really any real world analogies for that situation. It would be like an edible cookbook that can magically assume the properties of any recipe written inside, and that regenerates each time you take a bite.
I think as well as any savings or efficiency increases, they should also take into account the relative ease with which electronic records can be backed up and restored in case of fire or flooding, etc. At the very least, there should be scans of any paper documents. Full hardcopy backups would take up a lot of space, and they're not very easy to replicate if you do end up losing the originals.
The convenient thing about being a pirate, is that you tend not to give a fuck about laws..
If you are using untested drivers on your hardware it might even result in a premature buffer overflow.
Oops, I assumed it was just editing a config file.
Didn't say it was easy, I just said it was possible. But it is pretty easy to the type of person that cares about that stuff.
Personally I wouldn't care if I were "forced" to do something I already wanted to do, though obviously I understand the benefits of competition. I'm going to keep supporting products that help to weaken Microsoft though. I'd much rather have a google monopoly than a Microsoft one, though obviously any monopoly is bad for consumers, given enough time.
Safari isn't a Google product, so it has basically no relevance at all to what he was saying.
Also, you can change the search engine to something else if you really are that committed to using something inferior.
"NASA Campaigns For Safer Lunch Requirements".
No idea what those guys have been eating.
I don't think you can really argue the same of terrorism. Just look at Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Israel..
It's like asking whether nuclear warheads or terrorism is the greater danger to world peace. (I'd answer both.)
I think you mean "neither". They can't both be greater.
And it can logically be argued that if anything nuclear warheads have encouraged world peace.
Mod this "-2 pedantic and offtopic", I just had to point it out.
You aren't helping much in that regards if I am missing it. I presume it's something along the lines of "a lot of people are careless idiots who need to be more careful when performing irreversible actions". When I was first introduced to Linux my dad told a story along the lines of his CS lecturers managing to delete the whole of the University's unix system (requiring a few days of reinstallation) by misusing rm, so I've always been careful with it.
Sure there are alternatives available - but buying a product line then cutting support for users using competing OSes is quite "anti-competitive" in my book.
I tend to be wary when deleting stuff. Like when I'm forming a SQL delete statement for example, I will first do a select to double check that what I'm deleting is what I *think* I'm deleting. Likewise I suppose if I were using a complex wildcard expression in bash, I could always check with ls instead of rm, hit up then change rm to ls.
Don't know if I should bite.. but since Apple owns the copyright on OSX (seeing as they created it), that obviously means they can copy it as much as they want.
It is in fact entirely different.
In the old days, nobody would even think about separating the software and hardware of an Atari, Apple, Amiga or Commodore computer.
Actually, in the "old days" I used to run Shapeshifter (a Mac emulator) on my Amiga.
Where is this anti-competitive behavior?
Pretty sure he was referring to Apple buying "Logic Studio" and then cutting off the Windows line.
The only reason that is the case is because iTunes would have soon died out (or at the least become very crippled) with competition from the Amazon MP3 store, and anyone else who dared to introduce a DRM free service.