Safari for Windows: Only for 'Apple-labeled' computers?

Last edited by alxz310 on May 28th 2008, 9:20 pm; edited 2 times in total

Apple, it seems, hasn't totally gotten used to making browsers for Windows.

The license agreement for the company's Safari Web browser on Windows includes an interesting restriction: "The software allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time."

Safari for Windows: Only for 'Apple-labeled' computers? Safari10

Safari for Windows: Only for 'Apple-labeled' computers? Safari10

The Register, which was tipped off by legal eagles at the Italian site settleB.IT, calls the terms a "mockery of end user agreements."

Apple last week caught a lot of flak from users and from Mozilla, which makes the rival Firefox browser, for its practice of offering Safari for Windows as part of its auto-update service for iTunes.

Let's see how many millions of Safari for Windows downloads there are before Apple's legal corp tweaks their language to cover exotic things like, you know, Windows PCs.

Update 7:11 AM Pacific: The Apple license has been updated so that Windows PC users can install Safari without fear of violating any licenses. The change occurred overnight Wednesday to Thursday European time.

Veteran Member From : Florida OS : Mac OS X Leopard

wow. all they did was copy and paste it

Lbroskee wrote:: wow. all they did was copy and paste it

from the same agreement thats on safari for mac? xD

Veteran Member From : Florida OS : Mac OS X Leopard

ya i guess so. since i mean it says its for apple labeled comps. i never seen the apple one myself tho. i install updates while i sleep

im pissed. Apple is treating non Mac users like crap! they keep asking me over and over and over if i want to download Safari when i update iTunes, which has been a LOT lately.

Member From : NC, USA OS : OS X Leopard 10.5.4

Yeah, they simply copied the EULA from the Mac version of Safari. I guess it makes sense seeing as how a port of most apps wouldn't really require a changing of the license agreement. You can't really blame Apple for previously locking Safari to the Mac platform. If they didn't port it nobody was...

chris3d wrote:: Yeah, they simply copied the EULA from the Mac version of Safari. I guess it makes sense seeing as how a port of most apps wouldn't really require a changing of the license agreement. You can't really blame Apple for previously locking Safari to the Mac platform. If they didn't port it nobody was...

Well its kind of funny if you look at it. All the ports to windows (iTunes and Safari) run a LOT smoother on Mac OS X then on Windows. iTunes.. i find it to be slow and overall buggy on windows (same as safari), but on a Mac it runs like a dream.. even on old Power Book's which specs are WAY below todays computers

SbuxBlaze wrote:

chris3d wrote:: Yeah, they simply copied the EULA from the Mac version of Safari. I guess it makes sense seeing as how a port of most apps wouldn't really require a changing of the license agreement. You can't really blame Apple for previously locking Safari to the Mac platform. If they didn't port it nobody was...

Well its kind of funny if you look at it. All the ports to windows (iTunes and Safari) run a LOT smoother on Mac OS X then on Windows. iTunes.. i find it to be slow and overall buggy on windows (same as safari), but on a Mac it runs like a dream.. even on old Power Book's which specs are WAY below todays computers

really... but who cares ? who does actually read EULA's ? lol

I'm New From : England OS : Mac OS X Leopard

^ True. But saying apple treats windows users like crap is hypocritical, Microsoft software is usually very expensive for mac and is... well crap tbh, imho Microsoft is crap. Still apple really are stupid for putting that in the licence...

I'm New From : France OS : Mac OS Leopard

Office is better on Mac OS X than on Windows…
The same for Safari happy

I'm New From : Yorkshire OS : Vista Ultimate, Win 7.

I love it when threads turn into apple vs windows.

Anyway, here's my opinion (which is clearly backed up by the EULA mishap).

You can't say Apple is better than Microsoft, because:

- OSX Is a good operating system, but it's only good because Apple spent there resources, time and money into making it a good operating system to work on Macs. It won't work well on PC hardware.

- Compared to Microsoft, whom spend many many hours and millions of dollars making sure they're OS works on any hardware it's introduced to. Aswell as keeping it usable and feature-packed.

- Apple sell they're products because of there design, not performence.

- A PC the same Spec as a Mac would be cheaper to buy, and perform just as good with OSX, but wait? OHSHI They can't run it, it's a PC.

- Upgrading a Mac, hardware wise, is very limited, you only have a limited selection of Ram, Hard drives and....that's it I think, to choose from.

- With a PC, You can upgrade to anything, whether it's a new motherboard, heat sink, processor, memory, case, etc.

Must I continue? No I doubt it.

So, to conclude my points, Apple is a lazy company, who force users into limitations at a higher price than a PC equivilent. They don't spend as much time and money as Microsoft making sure there software works on a huge array of computers, instead they spend all there money on glossy paint for the Mac's.

Slightly off-topic, and slightly bias I know, but I felt I had to post this, as Apple just copy and pasting the EULA is the most perfect example of their lazyness.

I'm New From : England OS : Mac OS X Leopard

huh not much to argue against there... I wouln't call apple lazy I'd call then laid back if they were lazy then there wouldn't be macs.

Regular Visitor

Rob wrote:: I love it when threads turn into apple vs windows.

Anyway, here's my opinion (which is clearly backed up by the EULA mishap).

You can't say Apple is better than Microsoft, because:

- OSX Is a good operating system, but it's only good because Apple spent there resources, time and money into making it a good operating system to work on Macs. It won't work well on PC hardware.

- Compared to Microsoft, whom spend many many hours and millions of dollars making sure they're OS works on any hardware it's introduced to. Aswell as keeping it usable and feature-packed.

- Apple sell they're products because of there design, not performence.

- A PC the same Spec as a Mac would be cheaper to buy, and perform just as good with OSX, but wait? OHSHI They can't run it, it's a PC.

- Upgrading a Mac, hardware wise, is very limited, you only have a limited selection of Ram, Hard drives and....that's it I think, to choose from.

- With a PC, You can upgrade to anything, whether it's a new motherboard, heat sink, processor, memory, case, etc.

Must I continue? No I doubt it.

So, to conclude my points, Apple is a lazy company, who force users into limitations at a higher price than a PC equivilent. They don't spend as much time and money as Microsoft making sure there software works on a huge array of computers, instead they spend all there money on glossy paint for the Mac's.

Slightly off-topic, and slightly bias I know, but I felt I had to post this, as Apple just copy and pasting the EULA is the most perfect example of their lazyness.

#

Interesting, we all know both companies have different work ethics... This just seems like a sloppy job Apple have done with the EULA I think, but simple, it was fixed, no biggie.

I totally agree with SbuxBlaze. Running Itunes on windows is absolutely terrible. Safari sucks on it as well. But on my Mackintosh it's heaven sent. love

Edit: Haha nice one Apple. Also i give a huge thumbs down to the braniacs who made it so you can't resize windows on all four sides. Another genius move apple.

If OS X Leopard was released for every platform, not just Macs... you'd see it outself windows easily. But, apple likes to keep things very "secure" so this is definitely not happening any time soon

I'm New From : France OS : Mac OS Leopard

They can't do that, simply because if OS X would be made available for every brand of computers they will sell less Apple hardware (maybe the half or more !). If you can have Mac OS X running smooth on a 500$ machine, why would you pay the double or triple ?
The design and quality are important too, but Mac OS X is the important key for Apple Inc. !

I'm New From : Yorkshire OS : Vista Ultimate, Win 7.

^ Define Apple Hardware.

The CPU, Ram, Graphics, etc. All that stuff is made by other companies.

I'm New From : France OS : Mac OS Leopard

Like the case with Psystar.

who the f*ck reads EULA's ? mostly are only written to U.S.A. so, NO FEAR tongue

we all should be able to buy a copy of leopard and install it without hacks.. for instance.

PS : cookie.. the "Apple" hardware is not that GOOD... i can build a 700€ computer that kicks ass to every single config that Apple has to offer to normal users (MAC PRO is another story, it uses FB-Dimm Ram sticks so that increases the price like hell.) what really turn people into Macs is their design and Operative system... i wouldn't care much about the design... if i only could experience MACOS X in my custom built pc.

PS : noticed that i'm the gravedigger here.... sigh ._____________.