I always laugh at these kinds of statements.Most people on these forums are wise enought o choose function over style.
A life reduced to function only isn't worth living. It isn't even human.
I always laugh at these kinds of statements.Most people on these forums are wise enought o choose function over style.
A life reduced to function only isn't worth living. It isn't even human.
Last time I checked, microsoft didn't make PC's. And there are many PCs (Dell XPS 1330, 1530 laptops, HP's touch screen PC, many Sony and Toshiba laptops... to name a few) that look and work just as well as the apple ones. The hardware you get from apple is the same as you get elsewhere, the only difference is you get OSX. If OSX is worth it, by all means go buy a mac. I don't think a mediocre, closed at every turn OS is worth the huge markup you pay. But that's me. If you think it is worth it, by all means, go for it.
Oh... and the apple service? If you think going to the genius bar at the mall is great service, by all means keep doing it. Personally, I'll take my PC to a the local repair shop if I need any work where I have a great, personal relationship with the techs (if it's something I can't do on my own). Not only do I then have some say as to what happens to my PC, but I support local business. Win-Win.
Desktop: AMD Athlon64 X2 3600+, Nvidia 8600GT, 3GB RAM, 80GB hd, Windows 7 Beta
Lappy: Sony Vaio FW-140E, Intel P8400 2.26Ghz, 3GB Ram, 250GB HD, Intel x4500MHD, Windows 7 Beta & Kubuntu 8.10 w/ KDE 4.2
http://store.psystar.com/
There you can buy a computer with OS X, Windows, and/or Linux pre-installed with full support from the vendor.
There are companies in various countries that now use OSx86, though, as a result of Apple's OS monopoly not being a legal binding. (Therefore, anybody has the right to install OS X on any computer they wish with no legal repercussions)
I'm all for freedom of choice.
You have absolutely no basis for that statement, you just pulled it out of thin air.
I disagree, the iPod for my old eyes is the easiest of any mp3 player I have ever seen to operate.
That is the sole purpose I bought it, the added bonus that I can so easily sync my contacts on the Leopard side of my iMac is just icing on the cake. I don't listen to music these days, but love well read audio books, which is what lives on most of the 8Gb of storage on my iPod. (None were bought from Apple's store by the way.)
I happily use Arch on my iMac, which was bought for the space advantage in my already crowded office, as I have detailed previously in this thread.
As far as non-Apple machines are concerned, I've been building them since 1995, & hacking Amiga hardware before that; 10 years of the building experience was during existence of my IT technical service business.
I agree that all notebooks & Apple's iMacs are extremely limited as far as upgrading is concerned. A few rare notebooks made by non-Apple manufacturers can have their GPU &/or their CPU's upgraded.
People that buy any brand of notebook or Apple's iMac aren't expecting to be able to upgrade any more than the RAM & possibly the HDD size.
There really exists no argument against Apple regarding upgradability on these products, beyond the slim one that Apple could have joined the list of the producers that build the very rare notebooks (they could have done it with the iMac too) with the inherent ability to upgrade their GPU or CPU.
You are writing as though you are quite a young person.
You should have been taught that such generalisations without backing, are nought but an appeal to the emotions that leave logic behind.
Such statements always fail to win any points, though they are quite often what flame wars exist on, hot air.
Last edited by handy; December 29th, 2008 at 01:42 AM.
Hmm? Where'd you get that from? Apple, to the extent that one can argue they're a monopoly, does not operate in an illegal fashion, nor are they in violation of any laws. They do not engage in anti-competitive behavior, do not use leverage in one arena to shut out others in another one, and so forth and so on.
Installing Mac OS X on anything other than Apple hardware is a violation of the Apple EULA. Period, plain and simple. Now, whether Apple is likely to come after you personally for putting Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware is a separate matter. That being said, if businesses are doing it, then that would become somewhat more problematic. Besides, what business would want to not just risk tort action by Apple, but have no warranty or support for their intended platform (that is, a "Mac")? If I ran a business, I certainly would want support, and that means I would certainly need to make sure everything was on the straight-and-narrow.
Have you ever found something in the second-to-last place you looked?
If it seems like I am ignoring you, perhaps I am.
world:~ mike$ rm -f /earth/united_states/washington/redmond/M$ █
OK, you misunderstood what I said.
It is not of legal binding -> It is not legally enforceable. In some countries, the part that says "OS X may not be installed on any non-apple branded/labeled (it's changed a bit) computers" is not legally enforceable since it, in itself, may be a violation of another law entirely.
If it is being installed not in accordance with the Apple EULA, it's piracy, plain and simple. It doesn't matter what country your in or what their legal structure is like. The EULA is an "AGREEMENT" between Apple and the User...not LAW. However, Apple has the option of pursuing action against those who violate the terms of that EULA, just as Pystar is being hammered by Apple now...In some countries, the part that says "OS X may not be installed on any non-apple branded/labeled (it's changed a bit) computers" is not legally enforceable since it, in itself, may be a violation of another law entirely.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/23/p...re_cnet_inline
http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/16/a...star-examined/
Last edited by tsali; December 29th, 2008 at 01:36 PM.
This account is not active.
Bookmarks