Snow Leopard: In EULA we trust

As far as I'm concerned I bought the disc and put it on a NON Apple computer due to economics. After all I don't have money falling out of my asshole and cannot afford the cost of a Mac. Hell I can't even afford a new windoze OS. This Hackintosh gives me insight into whether or not to save up and make the purchase of a Mac. What I've seen thus far I will get one BUT it will be a while before that happens. People that criticize others for going against the EULA of major corporations should sit back and do a bit of thinking whether or not there are reasons why someone may "bend the rules" in the first place. One thing that is bothering me with this discussion on the morality of a Hackintosh or installing SL on a Mac that doesn't meet the criteria is if mac didn't want this to be done then why is it so damn easy to do?

@78

and I cant stand people who are self righteous....EULAs are not legally binding, you need a lawyer to properly interpret them, are often easily modified to say something else, and are too long for most people to bother reading. I never read them and I feel finnnnee. I pay for it I can do whatever the hell I want with it including installing it as many times as I feel like it without being a "thief" as you say(though if one really liked the software it would be good to support it). You are out, self righteous joe six pack *closes door in face*

Are you legally obligated to read EULAs? I suspect that you aren't as that wouldn't really make sense considering that all that the company is interested in is that you agree to be bound by the terms of the agreement, and that is not contingent upon whether or not you actually read the agreement is it?

Family pack for me, then. I have a really nagging conscience.

What I found interesting is that with the Upgrade at least they provide you with two Apple Logo stickers. This defeats the purpose of using the "brand" Condition, because I can just stick that on my beige box (actually, it's greyish) and have an Apple branded computer. I have to admit I haven't read through all the comments, I couldn't be arsed. I just get sick of ppl going on about intellectual property and "the right thing". Business and morals do not mix. Apple has no right whatsoever to expect that its users will do the right thing and not use an upgrade copy for what it was not designed for. I have no moral objections to actually using that disc and installing SL on the PC. If I cared, but I don't. Oh and someone said, something about buying a box with the cd and owning it. They are right. We are the customers and we are the reason Apple still exists. They are at our bidding, not the other way around.

So what if you didn't want the iLife and iWork software in the first place? Why should Tiger users be screwed over? They should have just marketed Snow Leopard as the four versions, with or without, and single or family.

Be glad Apple is not like Windows and you only have three chances in which to install the OS. I bought a legitimate version of Vista, and am extremely pissed that the serial number no longer works. I refuse to call their damn tech support from now on in the event I have to reinstall Windows. I for one actually like using my computer and will try something new.

BTW, I never bothered with upgrading any other Microsoft apps when I bought Snow Leopard.

This article wrongly equates the Box Set with section A (Single Use License) of the EULA and the $29 retail box with section C (Upgrade) of the EULA. Nowhere in the EULA or on Apple's site does it say that the $29 retail box does not contain a Single Use License or that the $169 box set is the only way to purchase a Single Use License.

It just so happens that if you get the Box Set then you also get the i-apps, which many Tiger users may find useful. Note that it may also be appealing to Leopard users who upgraded from Tiger and are still using older versions of iLife/iWork.

Apple has used some creative marketing language to steer Tiger users toward buying the $169 "upgrade" (note use of the word upgrade in the description of the $169 SL Box Set). All versions of SL have been marketed as an "upgrade", and if you interpret the marketing language on Apple's site with the same legal framework within which you interpret the EULA then 10.5 Leopard users are the only ones who can legally "upgrade" to Snow Leopard and there is no way to legally "upgrade" from Tiger to Snow Leopard.

See this thread on the Apple support forums, especially the posts by R C-R, for more details: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2142736&start=30&tstart=0

Walt Mossberg is a shit bag for advocating people to purchase the upgrade even though they're not eligible for it.

I give Apple respect for not forcing bullshit draconian copy protection (ironic aint it?) on SL discs.

I suspect it's for the following reason: Apply makes the bulk of their money selling hardware. If I'm correct, it explains they're desire to shut down pystar, while giving a fuck less if you have tiger or leopard. Regardless, of which you have, you still bought a mac.

"The rest of the quote doesn't matter"

That's exactly the point I'm making. Apple makes it crystal clear that the $29 deal is for upgrading from Leopard. Everywhere that they list the price, they list it as being for upgrades to Leopard.

Whether YOU think the rest doesn't matter isn't relevant. Nor is it an EULA issue. It is a matter of what Apple, as the seller, expects, and whether the buyer is making a fair, honest deal or is simply a crook trying to rip off Apple.

Apple is clear that $29 is for Leopard users. $169 is the price to upgrade from Tiger (including extra apps). There is absolutely no ambiguity about that at all in ANY of Apple's public information.

So are you an honest person making a fair trade ($29 for a Leopard upgrade only) or are you just being a whining, self-justifying crook?

Choose one.

Let's include the REST of the quote:

"Mac OS X version 10.6 Snow Leopard will be available as an upgrade to Mac OS X version 10.5 Leopard in September 2009 through the Apple Store® (www.apple.com), Apple’s retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers. The Snow Leopard single user license will be available for a suggested retail price of $29 (US) "

Read the first sentence. It clearly does NOT apply to Tiger.