Buying Mac OS X "Panther"

That's taking it a bit far.

Where is the limit? Who defines the limit? You?
Do you think the same if YOUR car gets stolen? The thief certainly says: "Who cares about all the red tape..."

Who cares about all the red tape as long is it's cheap and it works!

Anyone who buys those disks and they cannot boot to them, install the OS if it does manage to boot, or have major problems with the OS because it doesn't contain the correct drivers for their Mac would care quite a bit.

You could say the same thing on the flip side though, to both responses. Some of us don't have the $2K or even $129 for the latest thing just because it's the latest thing. It's all dust in the wind anyway. $2000 today is $200 tomorrow in the computer world (yes, even Macs). You might say, "well what about the developers?" Well they get paid pretty well I'd say. Just like musicians and politicians. I can appreciate what they do, but I'm not going to pay that kind of money for something that could be made cheaper.

I hope your account is very anonymous! Admitting to steal Apple software on their own homepage is ...

Nobody said anything about stealing any software. I bought it from an online source for their price and as far as I know, it's legit. As a consumer, I can only go by what I'm told. Maybe in your mind it's stealing, but we all have our own definitions.

If the seller is doing anything illegal, Apple's attorneys would be in action in a minute. If you can find a product that you want at a good price, then by all means go for it! If the product works for you, then great. If it doesn't, then it's between you and the seller. Before making the purchase, inquire whether or not the seller will issue the buyer a refund if the product doesn't work on your computer. If there's any risk involved in making a purchase, inform yourself about that risk, then it's up to you to decide if you're willing to assume that risk or not. It's all really quite simple!
Re: Using a software disk on more than one computer when the software company stipulates that the disk is to be used on only one computer, well, I'd say
most folks do that. In fact, it would be absurd not to. After all, it's your hard earned money.

Here here! There go half of my votes for today...

What do you and Murphy not understand about theft!

If the seller is doing anything illegal, Apple's attorneys would be in action in a minute.

Since they are legitimate Apple disks, it's not illegal. However, if they were an authorized Apple reseller, Apple would stop them from selling these disks in a minute. Where OWC and other sites get all of these genuine Apple machine specific disks from in the first place is another question.

If you can find a product that you want at a good price, then by all means go for it!

Of course. That counts for any product. That's part of how capitalism works.

If the product works for you, then great. If it doesn't, then it's between you and the seller. Before making the purchase, inquire whether or not the seller will issue the buyer a refund if the product doesn't work on your computer. If there's any risk involved in making a purchase, inform yourself about that risk, then it's up to you to decide if you're willing to assume that risk or not. It's all really quite simple!

Completely agree. If you're willing to take the risk buying a non retail disk, even though they advertise it as one, then that's your problem if it doesn't work.

Using a software disk on more than one computer when the software company stipulates that the disk is to be used on only one computer, well, I'd say most folks do that. In fact, it would be absurd not to.

And here's where I, and any HONEST person disagrees. The software agreement stipulates that the item is for use on one, and one computer only. Being able to install it on more than one machine doesn't make it right. Why do you think Microsoft added an activation scheme to Windows XP, and Adobe to Photoshop? Theft! Is this really so hard for you to understand? Your kind of thinking is the type that will eventually push Apple to do the same.

After all, it's your hard earned money.

So what? Everyone's money is hard earned. So does that mean that once I fill up the tank on my car at any gas station, that I should never have to pay to fill it up there again? After all, I already paid for it once. Gee, what a rip off to have to pay again!

When you write your first commercial software product and find out that only one in twenty people actually pay for it, then let me know how fair you think it is to install software on as many machines as you want.

I saw this and just had to rebutt.

"And here's where I, and any HONEST person disagrees. The software agreement stipulates that the item is for use on one, and one computer only. Being able to install it on more than one machine doesn't make it right."

Obviously these disks haven't been installed on the machine they were designed for or we wouldn't be able to install them. The fact that Apple attempts to make hardware-specific OS installs (which, by the way, aren't specific apparently) is pretty rediculous. It's almost as if they are doing everything BUT what Micro$oft has done.

What should we pay then? It seems like in your world, nothing depreciates over time. Why on Earth would I pay $129 for an old OS? So should I drop $129 on Mac OS 9 then too? Maybe $1999 for my B&W PowerMac here in 2005?

"So what? Everyone's money is hard earned."

Have you learned anything about life at all? Honestly, do you really think that EVERYBODY on this green Earth works hard for their money? Jobs don't pay like they should in society (ie roofer vs desk job or doctor vs stockbroker).

Let's say I spend 1000 working hours on building a popsicle stick out of the finest wood. What are you going to pay for it? And why should I charge the public $100 for it when it cost me maybe 2 cents to mass produce? What justifies the cost exactly? The time invested? Here's a tip about the consumer world: It doesn't matter how long it took or how many people, as long as IT WORKS. Bottom line.

And so these disks work for some of us at a much cheaper cost. We still paid like you did, but it was almost 2 years later. We didn't need the latest thing or else we would have shelled out the $129 for Tiger. And as far as the programmers and Apple getting what they deserve for this great OS, we can only speculate that the disks were obtained in a manner in which credit and money was given where due. But for users like us, down the line a few links on the chain, it was just a great deal and it worked.

Obviously these disks haven't been installed on the machine they were designed for or we wouldn't be able to install them.

I never said they were impossible to install. Reread my post here. I specifically stated in the next post you are rebutting it was illegal to install the software from the same disk on more than one machine.

It seems like in your world, nothing depreciates over time.

And in what world did you get that ridiculous notion? Nothing I said mentioned anything about any item never losing value. Putting words in my mouth to validate your self serving arguments are ludicrous.

Have you learned anything about life at all?

More than you, apparently. Like the difference between right and wrong. Try it sometime.

Jobs don't pay like they should in society

No kidding. Just look at every insanely overpaid professional athlete. You took my response to its extreme literal translation. Of course not everyone works hard for vast sums of money, but Murphy's comment makes it sound like he's in a select minority. The vast majority of people work hard to make just a decent living. Many can't even achieve that.

Why on Earth would I pay $129 for an old OS? So should I drop $129 on Mac OS 9 then too?

Completely worthless comment. Any software older than the latest version can be found at a discount.

If you're going to argue a point, at least use logic.

"More than you, apparently. Like the difference between right and wrong. Try it sometime."

So where is the line then? Isn't your entire argument here about how it's so BAD to buy second-hand, machine-specific disks and use them on a machine they weren't intended for? What exactly is so bad about buying and installing an old OS for a good price? I think maybe you're one of those big spenders on new technology who's upset because you always pay full price. You justify it by being self-righteous and saying that you want to be sure everything is legal and everybody is getting their share. Really though you just don't like it when another user gets the same thing at a better price down the road. My condolences go out to you for over-paying for everything. I'll see you in 5 years when your G5 is equivalent to my G3.

Oh wait, no I won't. Because by then you'll already have shelled out top dollar for the latest thing. That's ok. I'll happily take your G5.

A new Apple computer can only be sold through an authorized Apple reseller. And an authorized reseller is, I understand, prohibited by Apple from selling their computers at less than Apple's established retail price ( why are new computers sold at virtually the same price at all resellers?). Fine. Other big corporations do the same. But that's monopoly capitalism, not free market capitalism. And it used to be called "price fixing" and was illegal at one time, wasn't it?
Multi multi million dollar corporations are extremely greedy. They will "stick it" to us as much as they can, in any way that they can, and they do. It's them against us, and us against them. If consumers can find a way to get some recompense, wonderful!
The analogy of buying gas for one's car doesn't cut it. Once I use up the gas that I purchased, it's gone. But when I install, or use, information from a disk, every byte of information on that disk still remains. And if I utilize the disk over and over, the information on that disk still remains totally intact.
If Apple decides to employ activation methodology on their software, so be it. There are software programs being developed, some of it to be offered for free, that will allow one to defeat that feature.

"Just like musicians and politicians. I can appreciate what they do, but I'm not going to pay that kind of money for something that could be made cheaper."

SO IGNORANT. Do you even KNOW anything about the music industry?????? Do you understand the cash flow and how hard it is to make even NEARLY enough money to support yourself off music full time?

Do you realize that just because a band has two records and a major label contract that they can still be making peanuts?? What about the people who the band hired to make a record and you steal it because "They have enough money already"... whether they make $40k or $500k a year, they put their time and efforts into what they do and because of people like YOU they lose jobs because people can't afford to make records since someone decides to get it "cheaply".

Your arguement doesn't work. Go crawl back under your rock.

About this (not sure how to properly quote)

Re: Using a software disk on more than one computer when the software company stipulates that the disk is to be used on only one computer, well, I'd say
most folks do that. In fact, it would be absurd not to. After all, it's your hard earned money.

-----

I agree... I think software companies put that line in often times so that if they feel they want to persue someone who's used one disk on (arbitrary) 200 computers, they can say "well, we put that thing on there. you're not supposed to do that. you're being fined" or something.

I think it's absurd how this post is going. Didn't anyone think that maybe, just maybe, Apple had companies stop selling panther with "new" older computers just because tiger came out. Then Apple sold these discs at a buyout rate. Therefore, it wouldn't be illegal like some think, but just a way for Apple to make money on a "discontinued" product.