* Posts by Pat Dougan

3 posts • joined 7 Apr 2008

Apple ups the ante in Psystar battle

Pat Dougan

@ Ed

Apple offer for sale a software licence to any member of the public that wishes to purchase one. They don't "have" to offer it for sale, but choose to do so.

In the same way (to borrow an anology) I can fit a Mercedes engine to any car I so choose to (with me carrying out the neccecary modifications), I *should* be able to use the software I buy on any device I can homebrew to run it. It's not for Apple corp to decide what I may or may not do, or to suppress other manufacturers.

The flaw in your arguments are thus : Sony Ericsson do not offer for sale their software separate from their hardware. To install the software on another machine you would have to do so with an unlicenced copy you took from another machine meaning two machines = one licence.

SE software runs on custom designed, closed architecture (generally) to "clone" this would be in violation of SE's intelectual property. Apple computers however run on a bog standard, vanilla intel platform - Meaning that their software can run on other hardware. If Psystar can create a hardware platform that runs OSX, why shouldn't they? After all, apple will sell you licence. Psystar can buy the hardware with no (apparent) IP infringement.

TBH, and I say this as a Mac user of long standing, I find Apple's position both disappointing and hypocritical.

Next they'll be closing down iTunes to teach those pesky artists a lesson.

Deutsche Post issues Rudolf Hess stamp

Pat Dougan

@ Andy Livingstone

What do you want from Mr Samond in return?

Remember, philately will get you nowhere!


Mr. and Mrs. Boring sue Google over Street View pics

Pat Dougan

I can't believe...

...so many here think it's unreasonable for the Borings to have some expectation of privacy. Complain about phorm, but when real life (tm) issues occur, how dare we complain!!

Should phorm be an opt out only? DNA entries for all?

These people should have a perfectly reasonable expectation of privacy. Just because Google has decided it wants to photograph the world doesn't mean that it is right. And just because the couples house falls below some of you aesthete's high standards, doesn't make it any more right that Google, or anyone can drive up to their door and invade their privacy.

The Borings didn't cause this. Google did. Google decided to take pictures and splash them across the web for anyone to see. Nice house or horrible house, freedom and privacy shouldn't be an opt in deal. It should be an expectation.

I hope the couple are successful. A take down order will make no difference to the company. A $25000 dollar take down for each infringement might.


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022