Mta-interface: amavisd-new-2.3.3 (2005-08-22) + Maia Mailguard 1.1.0 at daleenterprise.com
On May 10, 2008, at 15:10 PM, John C. Welch wrote:
On 5/10/08 12:24 PM, "webmaster"
<email@hidden> wrote:
I think that's a pretty bad idea. If the host OS goes down then so
does all the guests. Not to mention the latency requirements of OD
servers. Really you would want your replica on a separate switch or
network.
Oddly, that doesn't seem to be a problem with VMWare in the world.
As well,
there's nothing in the EULA that says "Mac OS X server MUST be the
host OS",
just that you can only run Mac OS X Server on Apple hardware. So an
ESX
setup is possible under the EULA.
Why do people keep quoting an illegal stipulation from the EULA???
You like a handful of others gotta keep throwing out the remark about
the EULA and apple hardware stipulation like your turning on a light
that a reader or the poster may have missed, why bother offering YOUR
opinion on a topic that was never inquired about?
Based on the EULA you cannot netboot or netinstall Mac OS X because
the EULA states you cannot make the OS available over a network or
that you cannot install it on more than one machine so does that mean
all those netbooting or netinstalling are in violation, the EULA
clearly states you can't do these things but of course you are free
to interpret it any way you wish, that is your right.
Based on the EULA you cannot install apple software on non-apple
hardware yet millions of people have installed quicktime, itunes and
safari in windows and those licenses clearly state you can install
only on apple hardware so those million are in violation.
I was referencing a discussion I had with a lawyer regarding the
stipulation, he has posted nothing online about our discussions
however if you have had similar discussions with your legal counsel
I'd be more than happy to examine the links to those discussions,
since you ask me for them one can only assume you have online access
to the counsels documentations on your discussion and this is why you
keep asking me for these.
It seems that every time I try to make mention of a specific company
regarding this matter some moron from this list prevents the post
from propagating to the list.
It appears someone doesn't want me posting specific references to
specific material or specific information, censorship at it's finest.
Like the Peach Executive IV, I know the whole lowdown on it and how
apple screwed four innocent employees and rewarded the thief with a
promotion, all over the release of classified information, like a
good apple employee, I kept my mouth shut to keep my job but I knew
two of the people who got screwed and the retard they promoted, if I
had made any kind of statement or taken any kind of stand I would
have been fired, retirement is much better.
I could care less what you believe is legal or illegal, unless you
are a judge please refrain from cramming your interpretation of the
EULA down anyone's throat, as long as you do then I feel obligated to
offer a different interpretation on the subject.
Show me proof that the stipulation is binding and I'll reconsider my
position on it but as long as I see contradictory clauses from the
DMCA protecting my rights of hardware choice then the stipulation is
bogus.
apple legal, now there's an oxy-moron, I don't take anything they say
as fact, a judge tells me and I would tend to believe him but with
that apple EULA, it would take a whole lot more than apple legal
making a remark or comment about it's legal standing to sway my
interpretation.
I have generic intel hardware from apple that does not bare the apple
label and it runs Mac OS X, the only way for apple to get it back
from me is to pay me every cent they were paid for the product plus
my fees, since they don't wanna pay they wont get it back and that is
how it has been left for more than two years now.
I gave away a lot of information and source code to a guy who gave it
to a company in Canada so they could develop a mac compatible/clone,
did I break any laws, no, I'm not under any NDA and anything I
downloaded from a publicly accessible site owned by apple can be
freely distributed according to the included licenses, pulling it or
changing the terms of the license doesn't affect the stuff already
downloaded.
As far as I know, they have been selling the machines in Canada for
over a year now and apple hasn't sued them cause nothing has made the
news, I guess if they don't do anything publicly then it draws little
attention is the approach they've taken.
Because Dale, we're not lawyers, nor do we allow our egos to
overinflate and
crush our self-awareness of our own non-lawyerhood. I'm not a
lawyer. Nor,
as it turns out am I a judge or jury. Therefore, there are no less
than
three levels of clear problems with me unilaterally deciding the
legality of
a given clause. Unless you can show proof that you are a judge/
lawyer/jury
on a case that specifically pertains to this EULA, then you have no
professional, and even less moral basis to declare the legal status
of this
EULA. In other words, when it comes to legal declarations, you're
talking
out of your hindquarters.
My only opinion comes from reading the EULA, and I FREELY admit the
probability of error is high. However, were I to wish to put a bare-
metal VM
server running Mac OS X Server on Apple hardware into production,
you bet
your ass I'd make sure I had competent legal experts, (read:
Lawyers) look
at the EULA and make sure my interpretation was in fact, in line with
qualified legal interpretation. I have this issue with creating an
opening
for my company to get sued, because even if we win, we'd lose. Ask
a certain
D.C. Dry cleaner about winning a lawsuit.
If you have independently verifiable, (read, not your opinion)
analysis from
actual legal experts, (read: not your opinion, and a lawyer that
specializes
in contract law, has passed the Bar, has a license to practice law
in the
same state the EULA was written for), then by all means, show us
the links.
Other than that, stop with this OMGANYTHINGIWANTISLEGAL schtick of
yours.
It's *exactly* as believable as your (finally admitted) false claim
that you
could perfectly replicate Mac OS X Server with no increase in setup,
maintenance, or installation times from 100% FOSS products, on a Mac.
"OMGANYTHINGIWANTISLEGAL" what the hell are you talking about??? I
think you need to up your medications or something.
It is not a false claim, only how YOU interpret it.
At no time did I say it was feasible from a business point of view
where a paid employee must do the work, at that point it probably
becomes cheaper to buy than to pay for the work to be done.
I scripted the process and overnight it would build all of the
required (missing) pieces, this meant I didn't have to hang around
and watch it build the sources so it didn't take away any free time I
had or consume a lot of my time.
I never charge myself for time, time is what I have plenty of, it
didn't cost me any extra money to perform the task and I didn't have
to pay out any money to achieve it, an employee doing all the work is
uneconomical for the owner but that's a different ball of wax, I was
only talking about doing it without paying the $1k to get it and
there is very little additional setup involved between client and
server, you and a few others turned it into a issue over "time cost
money" so I conceded to end your whining.
Instead of being enthusiastic and inquiring about the process you
amongst others thought it was better to take a different approach and
it was this approach that prevented the masses from being provided
the sources and scripts for free, do I care for their losses, why
would I, I didn't lose any sleep or miss anything, it was you who
messed it up for them.
You wanted proof and a tour of the system was insufficient so you
wanted me to give you the sources and scripts I used, I was more than
willing to comply but due to your approach I decided to do it but
only for a fee and no one including you wanted to pay it so you got
nothing, interpret that any way you want, it makes little difference
to me.
In other words not at all.
Technically, you have good points to make. Legally? Not so much.
--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Macos-x-server mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/macos-x-server/webmaster%
40macftphttp.serverbox.org
