Hackintosher goes titsup It's official: the Florida-based Hackingtosher that Apple's legal team has been hacking at for over a year has finally thrown in the towel. "We respect the robe," Psystar lawyer Eugene Action told Dow Jones Newswires, referring presumably to US District Court Judge William Alsup, who issued a ruling earlier this week that …
Wrong with your first word (N-O-R-M-A-L-L-Y by the way)! OS X has the ability to check your spelling in *every* application, perhaps you'd be better off with it - on a Mac, obviously. "Im" is *actually* written as "I'm", note the apostrophe, "atleast" is actually written as "at least" and it should be "ovbious" that you misspelled "obvious" (see what I did there?). I can guess that you're going to come back with "I was being sarcastic!" or "I was being ironic", you weren't, you just made yourself look more stupid than 'Mectron'. When you've got a spare moment over the next few days, have a look at what **monopoly** means as well, ignorance isn't an excuse. Too easy...
"Apple, the most dangerous monopoly on the planet,"
I have two Macs and even I have to say that has to be the dumbest thing I've ever seen, usenet included. Apple, the tiny competitor of Microsoft is "the most dangerous monopoly on the planet????
What are you drinking? I want a pint. What you are saying is Apple has a monopoly on building Apple computers, next thing you will be telling me Ford has a monopoly on building Ford cars.
And the court did it, so I don't see where it is illegal either.
Nobody is forced to buy Macs, Most people STILL choose to buy PCs and Linux is free. So who is "forced" int buying a Mac? If you want a PC, Dell, HP and Acer are ready when you are. If you think Apple hardware is so cheap, when is the last time you actually opened a Pro series Mac? You think Apple has bad hardware? look in a Mac Pro, then look in a Psystar!
The price of a Mac has dropped 100-150% in the three years since i switched. My Macbook Pro has been going strong almost three years, My Dell went back to Dell SEVEN times before it was exchanged, Sorry I like ball bearing fans and aluminum chassis and frames, keep the plastic fantastic. I fix laptops, tell it to the Marines.
My MBP is three, and I expect to retire it at five, "and sell it to another user" the working life of the average Dell before the PS goes and the sleeve bearing fans start to howl is about 18 months.
Its easy, If you don't like Apple buy something else, lots of choices. Monopoly? Bullshit.
1. Apple is _not_ a monopoly in the computer market (you can't have a monopoly in your own products).
2. How is the shutting down of Psystar illegal when the decision was obtained through a court of law?
3. "Forcing people"? That's the best one yet. No-one _has_ to buy an Apple computer.
The quality/price stuff is personal opinion so I'm not going to counter those.
Im pretty sure any other outcome would have opened door for anyone to violate a EULA on the grounds that they dont agree with it...
Probably for the best to be honest.
If I write some software that I want to limit to a certian type of hardware and put restrictions in place to enforce that, and put it in the licence. Id expect my users to comply with that. Why should it be different for any other company?
Apple *Could* release OSX for generic PC hardware if they wanted to but I suspect that they simply dont want to, for what they charge for the OS.. Im pretty sure the hardware sales are subsidising the OS...
"Apple, the most dangerous monopoly on the planet, illegallyt [sic - Bit upset at this point? Angrily stabbing at the keys?] shutdown a competitor" Erm, they did it by using the law in a court. How did you figure that Psystar were shut down illegally? Are you suggesting corruption on the part of the court? That's a very serious allegation! Hate to point this out to you, but Apple don't have monopoly. <rant>Seriously, high up on my wish list for 2010 is that journo's/bloggers and commentards alike learn what a fucking monopoly is and what anti-trust means. Whilst I'm at it, can we stop with the x-tech killing y-tech stories, it's hackneyed journalism/blogging...</rant>
"FORCING million of peoples to buy extreml low quality, crap Apple hardware at extremly high price." FORCING? REALLY?! Last I went into an Apple store, no-one came up to me to demand or force me in to buying anything! I could have walked over to Currys and bought a Windows based PC had I wanted too. The price bit has been debunked so many times it's untrue. I'm not suggesting that Apple kit is in any way cheap - merely that like for like comparisons are more often than not within £50, and Apple come out cheaper more often than you'd like to think!
"Apple, the most dangerous monopoly on the planet, illegallyt shutdown a competitor. FORCING million of peoples to buy extreml low quality, crap Apple hardware at extremly high price."
I seen to have missed the biggest tech story of 2009 - the one where Kim Jong Il took over from Steve Jobs at Apple!
I was in tears this morning as the Apple employed black-suits dragged me down to their store and FORCED me to buy their wares. Now I have a house full of Macbooks and iMacs and I have no clue how I'll ever pay my credit card bill.
I have rebelled though and am posting this on my PC. They can beat me and FORCE me to buy their stuff but they can never FORCE me to use it.
(I'm actually using my Macbook to stream the cricket while I use my PC to play computer games because my rugby game was called off and I'd rather play computer games than go shopping with the wife)
Welcome to South Florida, boyz'n'grrlz. The further south you go, the worse it gets. Mark 'turn over the page' Foley was born here in Palm Beach County and represented a district from just north of here. Here in Palm Beach County (a.k.a. Corruption County) multiple former county officials are currently guests of the Feds after being caught pulling fast ones. Lots more Broward County officials, including the previous Sheriff, either are or up until recently were, guests at Club Fed. Pretty much the entire Dade County government, especially including Miami city management, were with them. Bermie Madoff lived in Palm Beach. Since ol' Bernie came to light it has been revealed that he was merely the biggest Ponzi operator around, multiple others including one ol' boy who tried to skip town for Morocco in a private jet (no, I'm not making this up, look up Seth Rothsteien in Fort Lauderdale...) having been pulling similar, though smaller, schemes for years. (The ol' boy who tried to skip town in the jet was also the ol' boy who hired the ex-Sherrif once he got out of Federal stir...)
Pikers, they were. Small potatoes.
My only question: who was bankrolling them? My money's on a certain chair-throwing gentleman who really likes his developers.
Despite being a mac user, I actually think this is a shame. Whatever you think of Pystar and their products, this kind of restriction on what people can sell is worrying. Remember, Pystar was selling legit OS X copies, just installed on none macs.
However I never understood why they didn't just sell PCs which were Mac compatible, with all the tools needed to get it running. Then the buyer could pick up their own copy of OS X and install it themselves (it's very straightforward).
Doing things that way would have made it much more difficult for Apple to take them down. They have largely stayed away from the hackintosh community, leaving most of the main websites alone, which is why there is so much info out there. I think that's because it would be a much harder case to make.
That's the whole crux of the case, they *weren't* selling legit copies. For it to be a legit copy, it has to be either sold pre-installed on a Apple manufactured machine *or* as an upgrade to be installed on an Apple manufactured machine. Apple Mac PCs are sold as appliances, in much the same way as XBox, Wii, PlayStation and your washing machine are. Selling "Mac compatible PC's" would have ended with the same result. The judge ruled that commercially enabling a third party to install OS X on a pre-configured machine was as bad - "..."or part thereof that is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure".
El Reg - how about some real investigative journalism and finding out who was bankrolling these guys? Me and thousands of others are really, really curious.
Oh, and I see you missed the bit about what's happened to the Florida court action they started when they started losing in California. What's happened there?
Just a few reminders -
1 - Apple are not a monopoly - there are many competing PC brands and operating systems
2 - Explain how anyone, in the world, ever, has been 'forced' to buy a Mac
3 - Only Apple can make commuters branded as Macs. Only Kellogs can make cereal branded as Special K. This does not make them monopolies.
4 - Going via the courts and following due legal processes to shut down an infringement is not illegal (d'uh)
5 - Just about every PC manufacturer in the world is currently selling Hackintosh-capable devices. They don't advertise this as a feature. Hence no lawsuit from Apple.
6 - Anyone can buy a retail 'upgrade' copy of the Mac OS. What they then do with that disk in the privacy of their own homes - well…
7 - Psystar were selling modified versions of the Mac OS. Coders out there, try this on - someone hacks your app to run on another platform, sells it as such, and doesn't cut you in, or ask permission. Feel OK about that? Inclined to handle support calls from the folks that buy it?
8 - Psystar bought one copy of the OS and cloned it onto their machines. That's piracy
9 - Conspiracy theorists - if a competitor really wanted to establish the viability of selling Mac clones via a shall company, expect them to go about in a less obviously illegal and incompetent way. That's still possible.
10 - For those brave rebels who want to 'beat the system' (coz this is SO much more important than other global injustices and inequities), go ahead and make your own Hackintosh. Just don't expect your friendly banker to back this activity as the basis of a viable business plan.
In conclusion, get a PC, or get a Mac but whichever you choose, get a life and get over this.
Oh for f*ck's sake...
Seriously? After umpteen articles EXPLAINING why what Psystar were doing was wrong, some of you STILL don't understand? How the hell do you even manage to breathe?
Here, let me try and explain. I'll type slowly, so you shouldn't have any trouble keeping up:
1. OS X is ONLY sold as an UPGRADE version. Your OS X License comes with the *computer*. Installing this on non-Apple hardware *violates the terms of the EULA*. Don't like it? Don't buy OS X. (It's just another UNIX clone with a fancy GUI, after all. Given that GNU / Linux is apparently so f*cking awesome and is also a UNIX clone with a bunch of fancy GUIs to choose from, why couldn't Psystar just pre-install that?)
2. Psystar were selling machines which *Apple* would end up providing customer support for. They knew this damned well and this utterly overrides every other criticism: this is stealing, plain and simple.
Apple do not make a profit on OS X sales; applications are essentially seen as "mods" for their hardware, to let it do stuff people want it to do. The software is entirely secondary to the hardware. That's kind of the *point* of Apple gear.
3. Modern software development—thanks to the archaic tools developers still have to use—is insanely complex. The more complexity they have to deal with, the harder it gets, the more expensive it is, and the less stable the results. That's why PCs have a reputation—deserved or otherwise—for being temperamental. That Microsoft's Windows works *at all* is a miracle of engineering.
Apple's approach is to control as much of the platform as possible to reduce the complexities, allow for better integration with the hardware, and a more reliable system.
EVERYONE did it the Apple way in the beginning. In some market sectors, it's still the case: try installing Windows Mobile or Android on a Symbian phone.
Quick, kill it with fire, it's not properly dead yet!! I told you we should have removed the head or destroyed the brain!
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9142494/Contrary_to_report_Psystar_i_not_i_shutting_down_lawyer_says
WHY WON'T IT DIE?
The site's still up 'cause while they were stealing the tech behind the Rebel EFI (still available for $0, oops, out of stock, but a great value for the money) they also stole zombi tech from local Haitian immigrants. Which means that they're about to have _much_ bigger problems than Apple's lawyers.
I wonder how many $15 tee-shirts they have in stock? That's the only other thing available on the site. Hmm. I mean, the only thing available...
...The reports of them shutting up shop have been exaggerated.
It looks like it will be Business as usual for them in the New Year. (well without the "selling OS X" bit that is.)
Reports going around is that they will be "redesigning the site" to remove all mentions of their OSx pre-installing services.
You'll still be able to buy "Hackintoshes" Desktops and Server, from them but without the Mac OS install option... you'll still get the "Rebel EFI" on every box though....
"The price of a Mac has dropped 100-150% in the three years since i switched. "
- O Rly? They're paying you to take them now? Where do I get one?
"My Macbook Pro has been going strong almost three years"
- I should f*****g hope so as well! My Dell is, enjoyable and rapid as they day it was switched on...very and very before any smart arse replies.
Entry level Macbook Pro three years ago, $2800. Entry level Macbook Pro now $1100.
Deal with it, the prices of Macs are declining, and the performance has improved.
Only thing I'd be missing on the new one if I bought it would be the fire wire port I never used. And the newer cheaper Mac spanks my old one, and at less than half the price. What was hard to understand about that?
And if your Dell is still good after three years congrats. I had THREE Dell laptops before my Macbook Pro. The one before last wore out five sets of cooling fans. Seems actual gaming made the gaming laptops run too hot and shut down. You had to overdrive the fan, or no game. Kind of kills the fun at the LAN party, no?. Enjoying your Bangalore India customer support? Or shipping your computer "somewhere" to be repaired? And having it come back in a week or two?
And again, I don't want a plastic computer with a plastic frame and cheap sleeve bearing fans. If that works your wheels, fine. But I repeat, my lappy has an aluminum case, an aluminum frame, and fans that keep taking punishment no matter how hard I pound on it. And I'm not even going to go as far as the Mac OS. Oh hardware alone I'm better off, even if I used it "why?" to run Windows.
Please don't buy a Mac, keep buying Dell. Nobody is forcing you. Windows users used to snicker at Mac, now that are scared and lashing out. I wonder why? I was Windows from the beginning till three years ago, I'm done. You like Windows? Enjoy! Just don't be surprised now that we get to laugh as well. I've switched everyone I know, and nobody has gone back. Who needs the hassle?
Sorry Dana W, but his reply is perfectly accurate, you need to get a little better at maths. A 100% reduction in price means, you pay 0 for a product, if something was £1000, and it has a reduction of 100% you pay £0. If that same product was reduced 150%, they will pay you £500 to take the product away from them.
If a product was $2800 and was reduced to $1100 it was reduced in price by approx 60%
EULA's are a joke, I'm trying to get money back from HP for Windows 7 Home Premium OEM and they refuse to honour the EULA, insisting that they can only offer my money back for the hardware.
Even pointing out prior refunds from various companies and themselves leads to a brick wall, taking this to Trading Standards as unfair trading practices and see if it holds up in court.
from Groklaw.com;
'Psystar also can't manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, "or part thereof that is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure"...'
So essentially the ruling states that if Psystar do *anything* to enable someone to pirate OS X (yes, that what it is) they are breaking the law. As you put it, simply selling computers with "the EFI thing pre-installed" would be in breach of that. Also individuals that go on to buy OS X with the express intention of not installing OS X onto Apple hardware are breaching the terms of the EULA and essentially the law. Hackintoshing *isn't* legal!
@those that continue to support Psystar; Microsoft's business model *is not the only way to sell software* nor hardware. It has already been pointed out that Apple's was the way that ALL computers were originally sold. Government instructing private sector business on how their intellectual property is to be sold and distributed is a step in the wrong direction politically for us all. Apple *do not* in any way have a monopoly in desktop or laptop computers, to suggest this is at best naive. I don't buy that *that* many people are *that* naive. Apple were *not* behaving in an anti-competative way. They were protecting what was theirs *the right way*. They took action through the courts, which was a small, but not insignificant risk because they could have lost. They did not leverage their dominant market position in an effective monopoly by coercing or threatening any of it's "business partners" with the removal of the license to sell and distribute their product if said partner distributed *any* competing products. I think we all know who I'm talking about, don't we...
"Also individuals that go on to buy OS X with the express intention of not installing OS X onto Apple hardware are breaching the terms of the EULA and essentially the law. Hackintoshing *isn't* legal!"
Doesn't the EULA specify "Apple labelled computer" ? Apple have made it ambiguous in the past and note as far as I know have not clarified this. They also sell ipods with apple stickers.
Apple could have been more specific, if they so chose.
Interpret this as you will.
@anonymous coward:
"Psystar is not doing anything illegal at that point.
what am i missing ..."
What you're missing is apparently either the ability to read or the ability to comprehend what you've read. The judge's decision is quite simple and clear (and even written in reasonably readable form, compared to many decisions). Groklaw has covered the entire thing.
Of COURSE it's illegal. Would you please stop with the silly arguments that have already been shot down?
A company has the right to offer its products and services on its own terms and if you don't like it you can take your business elsewhere.
Sometimes a company gains control over its market to the point that the free market system simply doesn't work and government regulators have to step it to maintain a healthy competitive business environment.
Apple isn't Microsoft. It simply doesn't have that level of control in any of its markets.
So its neither illegal or unethical for Apple limit their software to their hardware.
Consider: (using a previously stated analogy), if you bought Kellogg’s Corn Flakes but Kellogg’s came along and told you you could only eat them out of a Kellogg’s branded bowl..?
What Apple have done here is effectively exempted their product from a FUNDAMENTAL piece of consumer law which RIGHTLY states that once you've sold a product you can't try to dictate, define or limit what the consumer can do with it.
Were not talking about breaching copyright / patent or other intellectual property issues here, just basic use and the right to bloody well do what you want to with the stuff you buy, (and incidentally the right to re-sell it).
Look at auto-custom outfits like Kernic - what do you think would happen if Ferrari tried to stop Kernic from customising and re-selling their cars? How would you feel if you put a porcher engine into a VW chassis and when you tried to sell the monster Porcher went to court to try and stop you, basically winning the right to say that their engines can ONLY be installed in THEIR cars by THEM..?
There's a lot of deflection going on here saying Apple don't stop people from making hackintoshes, they only go after re-sellers, and also a lot of (justified) criticism of Psystar as a company but the fact is that Apples EULA ABSOLUTELY prohibits ANYONDE from installing OSX on alternate hardware and while Apple might only bother to go after re-sellers in court, this legal action has (quite disgracefully) validated their EULA and enshrined this unique dictatorial right in law. THIS has given Apple a monopoly; it has allowed them to reach out beyond the sales counter into consumer's homes and peoples businesses with unprecedented and indefensible power to control what we do with the stuff they sell.
Personally I think the 'conspiracy theories' may just have merit here as this case was SO badly fought and defended by Psystar; either they were / are complete fucking idiots, or they never really wanted to win in the first place because this case has MASSIVELY secured Apples position by plugging what they undoubtedly saw as a potential hull breach in their business model; their potentially illegal and unconstitutional EULA...
I personally don't think we've heard the last of this, while Psystar may be on their last dying breath I strongly suspect that if someone follows the money trail they'll find that the American legal system has been well and truly played by Apple, and I personally don't want a world where creeps like Jobs can basically make the law up as they go along to suite their own exclusive interests and fuck everybody else and their basic rights.
If you search for previous Psystar related articles you will see that this point has been discussed to the nth degree. At no point have Psystar gone to court about the EULA. The legality or otherwise of the EULA has not been established, and the degree to which it is legal varies greatly depending on the country you make your purchase in.
If you're going to wade in with an 'Apple are the bad guys' post then at least research the prior discussions and add something new...
If you don't like the EULA, don't bloody buy the product. Seems simple.
Oh, you want the product, but don't like the restrictions? Cool. Change the law.
Oh, that's not gonna happen? Sucks to be you...
I haven't purchased a Sony product for _years_ (and that includes music or movies from Sony-owned sources) because I don't like certain aspects of Sony's behaviour. If enough people did that, perhaps Sony would change its ways. I'm not holding my breath waiting.
Your problem is that you don't like some things that Apple does... but just as Sony doesn't care about my opinion, Apple doesn't care about yours. And you simply can't get enough other people to care enough about your opinion to make Apple care. In this particular case, Apple is completely in the right according to the law, and has enough (more than enough) support from the public (expressed in cash flowing their way) that they simply don't give a damn about your opinion. If you want things to change you have to:
1 change the law
2 cut off the money supply
or 3 both
As things stand you're not going to be able to do any of that. Sucks to be you.
"Consider: (using a previously stated analogy), if you bought Kellogg’s Corn Flakes but Kellogg’s came along and told you you could only eat them out of a Kellogg’s branded bowl..?
What Apple have done here is effectively exempted their product from a FUNDAMENTAL piece of consumer law which RIGHTLY states that once you've sold a product you can't try to dictate, define or limit what the consumer can do with it."
Incorrect, and therefore invalidating your Kellog's analogy. OS X is not sold as a separate product. It is an integral part of an Apple Mac computer. You're not allowed to install OS X on a non-Apple computer, in the same way that you're not allowed to run the PS3 OS on non-Sony consoles, or the same way that you're not allowed to run Tom Tom GPS software on non-Tom Tom hardware (except where they've specifically allowed it, eg mobile phones). Try installing Android on a WinMo phone, or Symbian on an Android phone...and selling it.
"How would you feel if you put a porcher engine into a VW chassis and when you tried to sell the monster Porcher went to court to try and stop you, basically winning the right to say that their engines can ONLY be installed in THEIR cars by THEM..?"
It's Porsche, not Porcher. If Porsche didn't want you to do that, they wouldn't sell you any engines, and you'd have to buy complete new Porsches to get your engines, which wouldn't make much economic sense. Companies that do that sort of thing generally get the blessing of the other car companies involved before going ahead. In the same way that Porsche engines are not sold to 3rd parties, Apple doesn't sell OS X to 3rd parties. It only provides upgrades to existing Mac owners. OS X is no more a separate product that can be used elsewhere than the case of an iMac is a separate product that can be used elsewhere.
I can't beileve the sheer volume of flawed arguments and unmitigated bollocks being posted in this thead by all you Apple fanbois.
It really must be true that your brains just aren't connected up like the 'normal' brains of most 'ordinary' folks for you all to be able to spout such utter arse gravy and believe it so thoroughly.
"What Apple have done here is effectively exempted their product from a FUNDAMENTAL piece of consumer law which RIGHTLY states that once you've sold a product you can't try to dictate, define or limit what the consumer can do with it."
Not really. Software is covered by both copyright law and the license (EULA) in which you can write pretty much anything you like. It is not a simple 'product'.
thing is you don't own the software you rent the software. I remember having the same argument against the software providers for our back office system, and all the systems we have used in the last 20 years, the agreement is ALWAYS you are paying for a software licence NOT the software. so in the last 3 systems they provide the hardware and the software together.
I don't like it but thats the way it is, if you don't agree don't sign up.
1) your analogy is flawed as both of those are seperate retail items. A correct analogy is that Microsoft does not allow the reinstall of their OEM licences on new hardware, and then apply the retail Win7 Ultimate upgrade to it, without paying full price for heir OS. Microsoft, being a near monopoly, and subject to numerous cases of governmnet control, is doing the EXACT SAME THING you say Apple is doing ilelgally. Your bought the hardware, but only LICENSE the OS that came with it. Apple is simply saying you can not install an upgrade of their OS on non-apple hardware as the OEM license that came with the Mac is non-transferable. Since they CHOOSE not to sell the full license seperately, which is their legally protected choice and to which anticompetitive regulation does not apply, what Psystar did was in full violation of Apple's EULA and license terms, and doing so as a commercial entity for profit is blantantly against numerous federal stauates that have now been upheld, clearly indicating which side the law is on.
Apple is NOT telling you what you can and can't use the MACHINE for, they're telling you the OS is non-transferable. That's all. They have every legal right to protect that, and Psystar, by distributing their systems with "upgrade" copies of OS X is in full violation of copywrite by assisting a purchaser with overriding the EULA and providing tools or instructions that permit installing an upgrade ontop of a non-licensed machine laching a pre-existing EOM license.
Engines and components are not licensed, and are subject to first sale doctrine. The only conditions Porche can put on preventing the sale are simply to void the waranty on the machine. However, the opposite, taking a Honda, putting a remanufactured Porche Moter in it, decaling it up, and selling it AS a Porche, and telling buyters it's supported at least in some level by Porche, you bet your ass Porche would have the dealer in court. MANY shops have been accused, tried, and shut down for selling cars that "look like" others, being sold as counterfeit. That is what Psystar did.
Apple does not have the power to contro what you di with stuff they sell, only with what the DO NOT SELL, namely, the OEM license. This has been FULLY supproted by the courts numerous times in numerous businesses. There is "License" and "purchase", and both have been defended successfully at the supreme court level. You can in fact resel a "liceense" if it was a RETAIL license (recent ruling against AutoDesk for example) however, in that case they tried to prevent the resale when the license only indicated internally (and not on packaging) that is was non-transferable. Apple is clear in their OEM language, and in the outer packing for retail upgrades to that OEM license, that apple branded Mac computer is required.
I can't deny your claim that the folks at Psystar, and their previous legal defense, are complete fucking morons, but please don't lead folks to believe apple may have been behind that... That's just insane.
You're also right, we have not heard the end of this. the judge specifically indicated Rebel EFI should not be distributed, though he did not explicity order the destruction of that product. He gave Apple the easy ability to simply request that be reintroducted if abused, and requires no retrial for additional sanctions or orders in this case to be released. Apple simply need complain and provide evidence Psystar has marketed ANY technology, software, or even simple instructions that lead someone to bypass Apple's fully vetted and approved license terms, or to inatll any unlicenced or unapproved apple software on non-apple hardware. This is not over, but I think some folks from Psystar abe about to see a very quick contempt of court ruling, have Rebel EFI taken and destroyed, and likely will see additional SEVERE penaties (outlined in the ruling already as a warning), and will also likely see not only jail time, but finally will see their investors revealed, rebuked, and possibly themselves improsoned if they had anything to do with bypassing the judges orders.
If I ever get to write a EULA, I'm going to add some really amusing stuff in there. So many think that they create new laws, at least from the comments here, that I can get them to hand over 10% of their salary for the rest of their life (I'm not THAT greedy) if they install my software.
Who reads the EULA anyway?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
