Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Chuckit · Sep 3, 2006, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by kick52

they got something for free, which cost apple money to make, and they shouldnt have it anyway.

So, nobody was harmed, but you're just annoyed by the idea of good things happening to people?

Again, it's not like Apple is losing any money on the deal. The developer preview of Leopard is not something anybody is going to use as a primary OS, so it's not going to cut into sales.

TETENAL · Sep 3, 2006, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Again, it's not like Apple is losing any money on the deal.

Apple is selling access to prerelease builds to developers, so of course they are losing money when it is pirated.

Chuckit · Sep 3, 2006, 11:52 AM

Last I checked, Apple is not selling access to this prerelease build.

TETENAL · Sep 3, 2006, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Last I checked, Apple is not selling access to this prerelease build.

http://developer.apple.com/membership/

ADC Select and Premier members receive pre-release versions of Mac OS X and Mac OS X Server […]

Whether the subscribers to the developer programs got exactly this build or only WWDC attendees got it (which costs good money as well) doesn't matter much. If prerelease builds are readily available to anyone that decreases the value of the developer programs. So yes, piracy does Apple cost money. You will not succeed in justifying it.

Chuckit · Sep 3, 2006, 12:41 PM

You took what I said and turned it into a bizarre absolute.

OreoCookie · Sep 3, 2006, 01:47 PM

People, please don't turn this into something personal. This thread is about Leopard on PowerPC Macs and if you can't stay on topic, I'll close it.

24klogos · Sep 3, 2006, 06:08 PM

Apple can claim they will support their machines for a while, though what really makes your "large invesment in G5 computers " sing is software, and third party cats have to pay rent too, and they will drop PPC before their original claims. some before than others, but you can expect a pro-appz starvation pediod in abou 3 years, it just costs too much to develop universal binaries for a group that will sooner or later have to get an Intel machine.

The machines will still be great for tons of things, but software, or the lack of it will be the key. I mean it was meant to happen, it will just happen a lot sooner than what any company can claim.

OreoCookie · Sep 3, 2006, 06:40 PM

I don't think it costs too much, because right now, most of Apple's code is platform-independent. If Apple is smart, it'll stay that way, too. So there is little extra cost associated to that.

But I think the people using pro apps have a need to upgrade more than the average user does. Moore's law still holds, so the cpu power doubles every 18 months. So after four years, you can have machines that are four times faster -- an advantage real pros need.

Chuckit · Sep 3, 2006, 07:31 PM

Originally Posted by 24klogos

it just costs too much to develop universal binaries

How so?

kick52 · Sep 5, 2006, 03:01 AM

it wont be hard to make apples software into UB because if they make it in xcode, they only have to check a box to make it into ppc software and for most apps it shouldnt take more than that.

TETENAL · Sep 5, 2006, 08:27 AM

For non-trivial applications it takes more than checking a box. All of Apple's current software is Universal Binary already, so I don't understand why you are using the future tense, kick52.

jasong · Sep 5, 2006, 08:38 AM

Tetenal, while it may be more than simply checking a box to get most apps to be a UB to start with, is it more than that to keep them that way? For example, say when Missing Sync 6 is being developed, since Missing Sync 5 is already a UB, does any additional work need to be done at that point to keep it universal, or would it be easier/cheaper to let it go Intel only? If no real additional work is required at that point, then I would imagine software will be in UB format for at least as long as the PPC Macs are supported or viable for the given software (meaning Photoshop will likely drop PPC before BBEdit.)

TETENAL · Sep 5, 2006, 08:54 AM

Once an app is Universal Binary the effort to keep it that way is rather low, that's what I'd guess too. The only issue I see is that you need a PowerPC machine to test on and some smaller developers might not have access to them some time in the future. I'm not concerned about commercial software.

mpancha · Sep 5, 2006, 10:34 PM

Originally Posted by kick52

they got something for free, which cost apple money to make, and they shouldnt have it anyway.

End of the day, Apple is a hardware company, not software. You can only use their OS on an Apple product. They charge between $99-139(ish) for their software, which is chump change. Their hardware goes for minimum $599 (USD).

The software pirating doesn't hurt Apple. It only boost their sales of hardware, which is their bread and butter.

romeosc · Sep 8, 2006, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by mpancha

End of the day, Apple is a hardware company, not software. You can only use their OS on an Apple product. They charge between $99-139(ish) for their software, which is chump change. Their hardware goes for minimum $599 (USD).

The software pirating doesn't hurt Apple. It only boost their sales of hardware, which is their bread and butter.

I would love to see you try to defend that statement in court!

Don Pickett · Sep 8, 2006, 12:31 AM

Originally Posted by mpancha

End of the day, Apple is a hardware company, not software. You can only use their OS on an Apple product. They charge between $99-139(ish) for their software, which is chump change. Their hardware goes for minimum $599 (USD).

The software pirating doesn't hurt Apple. It only boost their sales of hardware, which is their bread and butter.

No, Apple is a vertically integrated company which offers a complete hardware/software solution. OS X is actually the key to Apple's resurgence in the years since JObs came back: it replaced an antiquated, legacy OS, interested people who would never have considered a Mac and continues to provide the platform from which Apple will expand into the future. Software is as important to Apple as is hardware.

edit: I've been using Macs since the original 128k came out in 1984. But if you took OS X out of the equation and I had the choice between OS 9.2.x, Windows and Linux, I would run Linux. OS 9 just doesn't hack it anymore.

alphasubzero949 · Sep 9, 2006, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by mpancha

End of the day, Apple is a hardware company, not software. You can only use their OS on an Apple product. (snip) ...which is their bread and butter.

And look how far Steve got in the NeXT days with that business model.