Apple OS X on a regular PC...?

[Nothinman]

As opposed to, say, Microsoft, who require activation and then re-activation if you upgrade too many components. On a Mac, you can add hard drives, swap video cards, etc, and the Mothership doesn't care. There's no COA tied to your install. Pretty Draconian, I admit.

With MS you can buy a copy of Windows that can be installed on any machine you want as long as it's the only copy. You can replace any of your hardware with anything off the shelf with the possibility that you'll have to reactivate to prove that it's the only copy in use.

With Apple you can buy a copy of OS X that can be installed on any machine that's approved by Apple as long as it's the only copy. You can replace any of your hardware with anything that's approved by Apple and things will just chug along happily.

The only difference I see is activation vs being forced to use Apple approved hardware so they still end up about equal.

 

[umrigar]

You don't have to use Apple approved hard drives or RAM or DVD burners, as long as they meet spec.

On older machines, you need to use a compatible processor upgrade, as they are proprietary.
On newer machines like Minis, you can swap Intel Core 2 Duo processors and it will hum along with nary a driver update needed, nor activation or BIOS/EFI adjustment.

If you have a guilty conscience, you can buy an OS X "family pack" and install on up to 5 machines. Costs about the same as XP Pro or Vista Premium.

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
I agree, it's a pain in the ass calling tech support only to have to read off 30 numbers.

Yes, that is a pain in the ass, if you ask me.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

It's a non-issue on both platforms, but it's worse on OSX than on Linux.

Now that's a funny statement, an issue that doesn't exist and yet affects two platforms in different ways.

Ok, let me rephrase that.
The issue is not serious on either platform, but OSX applications have shown themselves to be more vunerable and less quickly patched than major Linux programs.

I felt the same way when I installed openSuse/Ubuntu on my system a while ago.

Fair enough, but I doubt you'd considered hacked OSX running on a white box PC even as good as your experience with OpenSuse/Ubuntu. Especially with any hardware that wasn't extremely similar to what Apple uses for its own boxes.

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

I have installed OS X on a beige box and I'd enjoy it more than a Linux setup. The only issue I have is updating (gotta wait til a solution is made) and I can't mute my volume via control (I have to do it via physically turning down the volume). I'd rather put up with this than use Ubuntu or openSuse.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

As opposed to, say, Microsoft, who require activation and then re-activation if you upgrade too many components. On a Mac, you can add hard drives, swap video cards, etc, and the Mothership doesn't care. There's no COA tied to your install. Pretty Draconian, I admit.

With MS you can buy a copy of Windows that can be installed on any machine you want as long as it's the only copy. You can replace any of your hardware with anything off the shelf with the possibility that you'll have to reactivate to prove that it's the only copy in use.

With Apple you can buy a copy of OS X that can be installed on any machine that's approved by Apple as long as it's the only copy. You can replace any of your hardware with anything that's approved by Apple and things will just chug along happily.

The only difference I see is activation vs being forced to use Apple approved hardware so they still end up about equal.

well the advantage of mac is they offer reasonably priced family pack o/s. around $200 for 5 macs
best Microsoft offers is 3 installs for 500-600 dollars depending on what versions of the vista you want.

 

[Nothinman]

You don't have to use Apple approved hard drives or RAM or DVD burners, as long as they meet spec.

True, but everything else requires a real driver so essentially has to be Apple approved.

On older machines, you need to use a compatible processor upgrade, as they are proprietary.
On newer machines like Minis, you can swap Intel Core 2 Duo processors and it will hum along with nary a driver update needed, nor activation or BIOS/EFI adjustment.

To be pedantic Intel processors are proprietary too.

well the advantage of mac is they offer reasonably priced family pack o/s. around $200 for 5 macs
best Microsoft offers is 3 installs for 500-600 dollars depending on what versions of the vista you want.

Do they offer them for upgrades as well? Because since you always get OS X with an Apple machine most people probably won't be looking at full versions since they almost always have a qualifying product from which to upgrade.

 

[TheStu]

Do you mean the Family Pack? If so, then the family pack is the upgrade, and the standalone version. There are basically 2 kinds of OS X install disks (from my observations)

Recovery disks that come with machines, they are the full OS, plus all the apps that came on your system, including iLife.
Store bought disks that have just the OS, but can be used for clean install, or Archive and Install (keeps your settings but puts all the old files out of the way) I think there is a third option, but can't remember what it is right now.

So yes, they offer teh family pack for upgrades. OS choice is simpler on Apple. We don't have 4 (i have heard people say 6, but I can only think of 4) versions of the OS, and then Retail, Upgrade, and OEM to contend with. We buy Leopard, we install Leopard, and everybody has the same OS, with the same features.

 

[Nothinman]

Well technically there's one other SKU because of OS X server. =)

But there's upgrade versions with discounted licenses?

 

[TheStu]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Well technically there's one other SKU because of OS X server. =)

But there's upgrade versions with discounted licenses?

No, to the best of my knowledge, there are no Upgrade specific SKUs. And yes, I did forget about the Server.

 

[erikistired]

Originally posted by: indigo196

Originally posted by: pastorjay

Originally posted by: indigo196
If Apple would just make their products not as expensive as they are I would probably be happy with them....

One of the great myths of the world

Why do you call that a myth; I can get much more for my dollar by building my own PC than buying a Mac.

you can't get os x.

 

[Nothinman]

No, to the best of my knowledge, there are no Upgrade specific SKUs.

Odd since every other software company out there does that.

 

[TheStu]

The closest thing I know of to an Upgrade SKU is the UpToDate program, where if you bought your mac after October 1st, you only pay $10 to get a copy of Leopard shipped to you (ok, you might have to pay shipping, im not positive).

But, there is no other Upgrade only option. And by Upgrade only I assume you mean that you have to have an existing OS on there already, namely OS X, preferably OS X 10.4

 

[Nothinman]

Well you have to own a previous version, for example Windows has other methods for validating whether or not you really qualify like having you put the old version's installation disc in the drive at some point in the installation. But yea, that's the idea.

 

[TheStu]

Yea, they don't have that to the best of my knowledge. Though there is an upgrade option on the disk.

Erase & Install (self explanatory)
Archive & Install: Backs up your old system into a folder called "Previous System", which IIRC lets you then revery back to Tiger should things go south
Upgrade & Install: Installs Leopard on top of Tiger without waiting for an erase to go through.

 

[dclive]

<notext...see next msg>

 

[dclive]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

No, to the best of my knowledge, there are no Upgrade specific SKUs.

Odd since every other software company out there does that.

Doesn't really apply to Macs since by definition every copy you buy retail is an upgrade copy.

 

[Oil]

Here are instructions to install Leopard in 3 steps. I have not yet tried it out.

(Mod, please delete if it is against the rules to post this)

 

[TheStu]

I had heard that this had happened, and that was wicked fast too considering. Wonder how it will it do as compared to Mac OS X(86).4 in terms of stability and whatnot.

 

[Nothinman]

Doesn't really apply to Macs since by definition every copy you buy retail is an upgrade copy.

So Apple also put restrictions on transferring licenses?

 

[dclive]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Doesn't really apply to Macs since by definition every copy you buy retail is an upgrade copy.

So Apple also put restrictions on transferring licenses?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Since every Mac shipped with a copy of MacOS (whether 10 or 9), every MacOS you put on it afterwards is an upgrade.

 

[TheStu]

There are no restrictions on transferring licenses... in fact there are no restriction upon installing the software either (aside from any in th EULA) For example, one does not have to buy the family pack to install OS X on 5 machines. The OS does not have anything in it to call home to say "I have been installed on this computer, eliminate me from the pool of installable OSes". In fact, once I upgrade to Leopard, I can sell my old Tiger restore disks to someone with a Core Duo MacBook and that would be completely legal.

So i am not sure why you would think that Apple would restrict transferring licenses... what gave you that idea?

 

[Nothinman]

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Since every Mac shipped with a copy of MacOS (whether 10 or 9), every MacOS you put on it afterwards is an upgrade.

Unless you gave your license to someone else or kept it for yourself and just sold the machine or were the one who bought the machine without OS X. There are plenty of ways that you could end up with a Mac without an OS X license or vice versa.

So i am not sure why you would think that Apple would restrict transferring licenses... what gave you that idea?

Because he said that every copy is retail copy is essentially an upgrade because you always have a previous version to upgrade from which obviously isn't the case.

 

[dclive]

Who are you talking to? I'm only saying that every MacOS sold at retail is by definition an upgrade. Are you talking to NM?

Why would someone with a CD MacBook want your Tiger CDs? He already has them - they came with his hardware. A better example would be selling (assuming you had the PPC edition) 10.4 to a 10.3 owner - and since every MacOS is an upgrade, you're fully within your rights to do exactly that, as long as you remove 10.4 from your hardware.

Clearly installing 10.5 on every PC in the house without a family pack is piracy, so I think it's a bit silly to discuss that.

 

[dclive]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Since every Mac shipped with a copy of MacOS (whether 10 or 9), every MacOS you put on it afterwards is an upgrade.

Unless you gave your license to someone else or kept it for yourself and just sold the machine or were the one who bought the machine without OS X. There are plenty of ways that you could end up with a Mac without an OS X license or vice versa.

So i am not sure why you would think that Apple would restrict transferring licenses... what gave you that idea?

Because he said that every copy is retail copy is essentially an upgrade because you always have a previous version to upgrade from which obviously isn't the case.

P1: Sure, it's possible, I suppose.

P2: It's the norm, I think it's fair to say. You'd have to give away the copy that came with your Mac, which is tailored (IIRC - at least in recent memory) to _only_ install on that type of Mac, so if you did sell it, it would be to a really, really limited audience, and it would be illegal / shady in the first place, so it's pretty unlikely.

 

[TheStu]

Originally posted by: dclive
Who are you talking to? I'm only saying that every MacOS sold at retail is by definition an upgrade. Are you talking to NM?

Yes, i was talking to NM, who are you talking to? I would assume me, just as you could have assumed him.

And I think a better way to phrase it (since you are critiquing my examples) would be to say "Every retail copy of MacOS can be used as an upgrade."

Why would someone with a CD MacBook want your Tiger CDs? He already has them - they came with his hardware. A better example would be selling (assuming you had the PPC edition) 10.4 to a 10.3 owner - and since every MacOS is an upgrade, you're fully within your rights to do exactly that, as long as you remove 10.4 from your hardware

Perhaps they lost their discs, or they are damaged. I don't know why they would, people buy things. I don't care if it is a poor example, it is the one that I have.

Clearly installing 10.5 on every PC in the house without a family pack is piracy, so I think it's a bit silly to discuss that.

I wasn't opening it to discussion, but merely pointing it out. Just as stealing a car is illegal, my pointing out to someone, "hey, that car door is open, and the engine is running" is not illegal, it is making conversation about something.