Ah, it's a Cade Metz article

I was wondering why it was such a non-article being pandered as news. I didn't recognise it at first as he didn't try to imply using a Mac was a religion for once.

I know, let's bring down Linux by finding some open source software using unedited boiler plate licenses. Woo!

Dead Vulture because ...

@Webster - Nobody noticed!

Webster reckons iTunes is "somewhat benign".

I never thought I'd see the day. Suck up the Kool-Aid, man!

Safari v Phorm

I have to admit that since Safari3 came along it is now a usable browser. I still only use it for sites that I trust because it does not have the security features of other browsers.

However:

Safari is the only browser easily available to Windows users that does not work with the Phorm scripts.

I wonder how long it will take for the Apple marketing department to start to capilatise on that one?

Re: Install Real Player instead

Real Player is worse than iTunes / Quicktime. Even than WMP, and that's saying something!

Get RealAlternative at least and be rid of all that mal/spy/ad/slow-ware that is RealPlayer, and just gives you the basic codecs to watch Real format videos (if you really must watch them).

There's also a Quicktime Alternative codec package to avoid Apple's front end too.

There are much better media players (free and open source) and you just need the relevant codecs. KMPlayer is one I'm using at the moment which is pretty good (not to be confused with KMPlayer on linux), and works with almost all formats if you have the right codecs.

I got a label on my apple today..

guess where it is stuck now?

Original Software License

Everybody seems to be missing the statement "Use of this software is subject to the original Software License Agreement(s) that accompanied the software being updated,"

As apple are claiming this is an update rather than a new install there must have been some original software (else they are being misleading) this original software must have been a software package containing no files or anything else (afterall there is no signs of this original software existing with any size) and the original license must also have been empty. This empty license applies which means you can do anything you want with it...

lazy lawyers...

Not reading their own EULA before shipping it.

Down with EULAs they are nonsense and should be dumped as they have no legality (as are seeing recently, since you cannot read it before buying the software).

Also Yay for reference to the Chebacca defense!!

Don't worry, Apple aren't legally in the clear either (though IANAL)

Actually, I'm fairly sure Apple can't legally offer Safari for Windows anyway.

Why? Well, it uses WebKit for Windows, which is based on the LGPL-licensed KHTML. Now, the LGPL requires that all libraries that the LGPL-licensed code depends on are also under the LGPL or a compatible license (except ones supplied with the OS or complier). This is to prevent unscrupulous companies circumventing the intention of the LGPL by sticking critical parts of the code in closed source libraries under nasty license terms.

Apple's Windows port of WebKit depends on several closed-source, non-redistributable libraries - specifically, Windows ports of Apple frameworks. Therefore, it violates both the spirit and the letter of the LGPL, they have no legal right to distribute it, and any major contributor to KHTML before the fork could take them to court, force them to cease distribution, and probably make some nice cash on the side.

(Also, Apple's license for these libraries is nasty - as far as I can tell, it forbids anyone who compiles the Windows version of Webkit themselves from redistributing their compiled version, since the libraries are statically linked and the license forbids redistribution in any form.)

Silly

"merely a case of Apple making itself look silly"

As if its products didn't do that already...

Paris, as she represents another sort of silliness.

@ Jared Earle

"I know, let's bring down Linux by finding some open source software using unedited boiler plate licenses"

Most people who write software for Linux actually *do* copy and paste licences without editing. But that's fine, because the two most common software licences used by Linux programmers (the BSD licence and the GPL) are genuine licences. That is to say, they grant permission to do things that the law would ordinarily forbid, as opposed to seeking to deny permission for things that the law would ordinarily allow.

Safari????

Isn't that the web browser for graphic designers who want a "computer" based on looks rather than functionality, no wonder it's a stealth install, who on earth would want something like that festering on their pc?

Great news

"This licence does not allow the Apple software to exist on more then one computer at a time"

So I don't have to install it then?

Mine is the one sans sticker.

@ Will

"My God, I've been using it for 4 months now, getting email and browsing the web, its been far more useable than any other mobile browser I have ever used."

I guess it took you 4 months to download everything, You could have had 3 months free if you'd had 3G :-)

Paris, cause she's not used to hanging around waiting and would def have 3G

@ "Market Share"

"Since any Windows PC with Safari installed will now be, by definition, an Apple-labelled machine, Apple will gain market share like crazy. And you thought this was tupid."

Given how often I see Quicktime installed in the first place, I guess that market share will go up by 3. 3 computers. In total. 2 of which are VMware instances.

you mean there is a browser better.....

than Lynx?

I refuse to believe it!

I bet the gopher client on this "Safari" is rubbish..........

@ Morely Dotes

... wait till June... by the way, how does that LG do with real email and the real internet? Comparing a phone to a pocket computer is absurd.

@ ge

3G? have you looked at a 3G map of the US? no 3G where I live. Having something that doesn't work is not a feature to me. (Don't get me wrong, I will love 3G, 4G, etc. when it is mature and works)

Buy the way, what's the battery life on that 3G phone of yours?

Oh... and how's the WiFi working for you?

@ Chris Matchett

Really? I hadn't heard that.... what are your sources? Please give real life examples, statistics, and empirical data.

(Just trying to help.... you look like a moronic idiot shilling with a hidden agenda, unless you give real data that people can look up for themselves... after all, not everyone believes something, just because it's on the internet!)

Who cares!!

Theres always Firefox!!!! Why bother with just another spin off!!!!

@ Aaron

The Wi-Fi on my N95 is fine, thank you, and the battery life (after the software update, I admit) is more than adequate, 2-3 says between charges, with a 4GB memory card, I have more than enough space for a few albums, picture takem with my, ahem, 5 megapixel camera, maps for my GPS (works like a dream, you should try sometime)...

Don't start a war you can't win, please.

@ Coward

anon of the yellow belly. I installed it and it didn't work with sites that I use, there were adverts all over the screen that adblock on firefox normally hides and the securit settings don't let you have site by site settings.

There's your evidence and meanwhile safari is still shit.

RE: Credibility part 1

"Observation:" - that must be the Apple fanboi translation for "my myopia makes me think this is true"?

"Windows users bash M$ after using M$ products and software." - many M$ users, through ignorance, really don't bash M$ as they don't even realise there are alternatives. As M$ producst usually do what they want, they don't bother to investigate alternatives.

"Windows users then bash Apple, even though they never have owned & used an Apple product." I have used many Apple products in the wrokplace and would seriously object to anyone suggesting I should part with my hard-earned cash for any Apple products when there are better Linux alternatives for free, and often much better Intel/M$ products at a better price.

"Apple users (ALL of whom used to be Windows users or are concurrent Windows users), laud and defend Apple products, while they try to explain to Windows users (who have never used Apple products) facts and reasons why they like the Apple products they own." - Actually, I have personally helped two Apple victims move from Mac to Windows XP, including finding and installing comparable products for the ones all the fanbois told them were "unreplaceable". They did not previously own PCs but stared with Apple after being fed a load of marketting manure about "unparalleled" graphics capability, are happier, and they bash Apple.

"Apple users also bash Apple products (go to the Apple hosted website) but mostly because they've come to expect perfection." - You obviously have very low standards.

"Linux users (all of whom are former M$ users) also bash windows." - I am a Linux and Windows user, and I recognise for some uses Windows is better. Apple fanbois won' EVER admit anything is better than an Apple product for anything.

"Linux user that have not used Apple products also bash Apple products just like it were the second coming of M$." - I have (professionally) helped Apple users switch to Linux workstations. They are happier with their new Linux systems, they have used Apple because (like the M$ users above) they didn't realise there was an alternative. Oh, and they now bash Apple

"Linux users that have used Apple products, use both... they only bash M$." - Really? You can vouch for EVERY Linux+Apple user in the world? OK, I have used all three, and I bash Apple. It is bottom of my list of choices for an OS for the vast majority of tasks. Actually, I can't think of a single Apple product where there is not a free (Linux or BSD) or purchaseable alternative that is usually cheaper and better.

"Liberals buy Apple products to be cool & elite (and to also be productive)." - Again, you can vouch for all Liberals? Then again, I wouldn't call myself a Liberal, so thanks for exempting me from ever having to touch a Mac again.

"Conservatives buy Apple products to be productive (and to also be cool & elite)." - See above. But I do tend more to the Conservative end of the spectrum, and I still wouldn't touch a Mac with a bargepole.

"Liberals buy Apple products because they like Al Gore." - Unfortunately, I'm still waiting for many Liberals to hold their breath indefinately to help ol' Al with his global warming claptrap.

"Conservatives buy Apple products because they like Rush Limbaugh." - No, they buy them because they don't know there are better alternatives.

"Keeping adding to the list!" - I would need a labotomy to be able to add to your list in line with your interesting form of logic.

Pushing Safari is thus "illegal"

EUL"A"s are a notorious way for vendors to write their own law, but in this case, an interesting spin is that what Apple's "software updater" does is actually illegal within their own frame of reference.

It's certainly sucks, within ours. It's bad enough to be forced to swallow updates to limit risks posed by the QuickTime surface, without having these risks increased by foising iTunes and especially Safari, given Apple's track record of exploit opportunities and slow patching.