# I can't wait for Microsoft to go bankrupt! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 20, 2013, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816 "2013-01-20T17:37:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![jz78817](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jz78817/32/1028_2.png) [@jz78817](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jz78817)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/41 "2013-01-21T13:52:29Z")
> [@amanset](#): > > I’m not aware of a limit on the number of installs you can do with Apps downloaded from the Mac App Store. > > [http://www.apple.com/osx/apps/app-store.html](http://www.apple.com/osx/apps/app-store.html) App Store, uh, apps are DRMed by tying them to your Apple ID. an Office install isn’t. Not sure what point you were trying to make. ---
**Author:** ![amanset](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@amanset](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amanset)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/42 "2013-01-21T14:21:10Z")
> [@jz78817](#): > > App Store, uh, apps are DRMed by tying them to your Apple ID. an Office install isn’t. Not sure what point you were trying to make. That App Store apps, within the scope of your account, have an unlimited amount of installs. Gary Kumquat was expressing surprise that someone would find it annoying that their apps have a limit, as in he thought it was the default. Which has bog all to do with DRM. ---
**Author:** ![beowulff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beowulff/32/542_2.png) [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/43 "2013-01-21T16:16:53Z")
> [@Gary\_Kumquat](#): > > You’re pitting a software company for having a limit on the number of times a program can be installed? Did IQ’s suddenly drop when I was away? No, I’m _not_ pitting them for having a limit - I’m pitting them for not having a reasonable scheme for determining if a user is within that limit. I’m loath to bring up Apple, since this isn’t about them, but frankly, they do it right. I’m allowed 5 computers that are authorized to play Itunes music with DRM. If I exceed that number, I can de-authorize one or more, and authorize another one. I can even de-authorize ALL computers associated with my account, and those machines don’t need to even be working at the time! As far as Microsoft goes, their scheme is just poorly designed - there is (as far as I can determine), NO WAY to de-authorize a machine. Which seems pretty stupid, coming from a company who is supposed to produce such great software. ---
**Author:** ![jz78817](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jz78817/32/1028_2.png) [@jz78817](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jz78817)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/44 "2013-01-21T16:52:19Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > Did IQ’s suddenly drop when I was away? > > No, I’m _not_ pitting them for having a limit - I’m pitting them for not having a reasonable scheme for determining if a user is within that limit. > > I’m loath to bring up Apple, since this isn’t about them, but frankly, they do it right. I’m allowed 5 computers that are authorized to play Itunes music with DRM. If I exceed that number, I can de-authorize one or more, and authorize another one. I can even de-authorize ALL computers associated with my account, and those machines don’t need to even be working at the time! when it comes to mandatory DRM, I dislike things like FairPlay which tie purchases to _devices._ I grudgingly accept DRM as done by, say, Steam which ties purchases to _me._ I can install games I buy on as many computers as I feel like, but I can only play them on one at a time. > [@](#): > > As far as Microsoft goes, their scheme is just poorly designed - there is (as far as I can determine), NO WAY to de-authorize a machine. they don’t have to, really. In theory, you’ll have to call the automated phone number (as you did) and reactivate it. I’ve reactivated the same Windows 7 key multiple times when I’ve upgraded hardware on my desktop with no issues other than the time sink. In effect, re-activating _is_ deauthorizing the previous state. I think you were just running into a glitch with their automated system; it should have worked. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/45 "2013-01-21T17:01:11Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > This is such a profoundly incorrect statement that I feel compelled to correct it. List every manufacturer of platforms that MacOS/OSX software will run on. List every avenue of software development for MacOS/OSX that does not have a required Apple component. Compare with the fact that under Windows, the ONLY required component is a licensed copy of the OS itself. We aren’t even bound to Intel processors or the MS APIs. Then explain again how I am “profoundly incorrect.” Or don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/46 "2013-01-21T17:09:10Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > I recently had to rebuild one of my machines, after an SSD failed. After doing so, I find that I can’t launch Office 2011, because I’ve “Exceeded the maximum number of computers.” Which is bullshit. I’ve just upgraded hardware a number of times, and now I’ve tripped some type of alarm in Microsoft HQ. I’m no fan of Microsoft—I’m a Mac guy myself—but this sounds like Theseus’s paradox to me. At what point is your rebuilt computer no longer the same computer? I can’t really say that this is some egregiously evil act on Microsoft’s part. ---
**Author:** ![deltasigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e5b9ba/32.png) [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/47 "2013-01-21T17:53:12Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > I’m no fan of Microsoft—I’m a Mac guy myself—but this sounds like Theseus’s paradox to me. At what point is your rebuilt computer no longer the same computer? I can’t really say that this is some egregiously evil act on Microsoft’s part. I’ve found that the easiest solution is to get a standard technet subscription. It costs $150/year to renew and I think you can find coupons at places like retailmenot to get the first year for that price or close to it. Technically it’s only supposed to be for developers, system builders and the like, but I’m none of the above, although I do run about 6-8 rigs at any given time for distributed computing projects. And for your buck and a half each year, you get activation codes for almost all of MS’s software except for some enterprise and devel software like say visual studio (although visual basic studio is free btw). That includes every operating system, MS office (but not Access - at least not at the ‘standard’ level), and almost anything else you can think of such as Visio and some other high value pkgs IIRC. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/48 "2013-01-21T18:19:55Z")
> [@Critical1](#): > > see this right here makes me suspicious as fuck, I mean who the hell owns a mac and has the skills to do things like turn screws and shit? everyone who owns a mac “knows” you have to get a new one when the old one breaks. I assume you are being facetious, but the reason I used a Mac is specifically because I can run bare metal Unix-type scripts and applications natively (e.g. without an emulation environment). I’ve modified a number of Macs for specific purposes and in general (excepting designs like the MacBook Air) find them to be easier to work on than most PCs. It is true that the number of third party and aftermarket peripherals and components is much smaller than PCs, but Macs also tend to be more stable and interworkable with the approved peripherals specifically for that reason. > [@NitroPress](#): > > List every manufacturer of platforms that MacOS/OSX software will run on. > List every avenue of software development for MacOS/OSX that does not have a required Apple component. > > Compare with the fact that under Windows, the ONLY required component is a licensed copy of the OS itself. We aren’t even bound to Intel processors or the MS APIs. > > Then explain again how I am “profoundly incorrect.” Or don’t. Yes, you are profoundly incorrect, for reasons already mentioned. And you are now shifting the goal posts of your argument from “a closed architecture completely owned by the most paranoid development team on earth” to a discussion upon the platforms which it is design to function on and the APIs required to develop applications. As previously mentioned, Apple makes the entire Development ToolKit freely available to developers, which is necessary if you want to build components which interface natively with the Cocoa architecture. However, it is also a POSIX-compliant operating system, meaning that you can (at least in theory) easily port software written with for POSIX APIs from one platform to another. (The reality is somewhat different, but that is just as true for Windows as it is OSX.) I’ve have also been able to compile and run source code for every \*nix application I’ve ever tried on OSX, generally with minor tweaking to replace references to deprecated libraries, and most Linux binaries will run natively on OSX with near native performance. Apple, of course, provides support for Java VM and other virtualization environments/languages, like Ruby and Python, allowing cross-platform development. There are plenty of reasons to criticize Apple’s practices and cooperation with the BSD and GNU communities, but claiming that OSX is “closed” and “paranoid” are not among them, especially in comparison to Microsoft. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/49 "2013-01-21T18:41:48Z")
Does OSX run on any but an authorized Apple platform? Can you develop a full-fledged OSX app without Apple’s APIs? I’ll concede that “closed architecture” may be technically incorrect, but when it comes to MacOS/OSX/iOS apps, you do it Apple’s way, with Apple’s proprietary product line, or you don’t do it at all. That’s pretty closed compared to nearly every other platform out there, including MS/Windows. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/50 "2013-01-21T18:47:57Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > I’ve tried 3 times today. > I’ve gotten disconnected all three times, after tediously keying in my 30-digit code on the phone, while the annoyingly chipper robot tells me to enter the next group of digits. > > Maybe it’s some Hindu holiday today. Jolly Vindaloo Day! ---
**Author:** ![Simple\_Linctus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Simple\_Linctus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simple_Linctus)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/51 "2013-01-21T19:15:19Z")
> [@NitroPress](#): > > Does OSX run on any but an authorized Apple platform? [certainly](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSx86) 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bookkeeper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bookkeeper/32/281_2.png) [@Bookkeeper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bookkeeper)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/52 "2013-01-21T19:19:53Z")
Note as well that Apple is primarily a hardware company and therefore has a different view of software licensing than Microsoft. ---
**Author:** ![spinky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@spinky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spinky)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/53 "2013-01-21T21:54:05Z")
My understanding is that if you have activation troubles due to old inactive copies of the software, you can generally call up Microsoft and explain the situation and they simply reset the registration count for your product key with no further questions asked. I’ve done this twice and what I thought was going to be a never-ending hassle ended up being easy as pie. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816/54 "2013-01-21T23:48:28Z")
> [@NitroPress](#): > > Does OSX run on any but an authorized Apple platform? > > Can you develop a full-fledged OSX app without Apple’s APIs? I really am lost on the point you are trying to make here. No, Apple is not in the business of developing and selling an operating system that can be loaded onto any architecture. Neither, for that matter, is Microsoft. Both are offering a commodity OS intended primarily for desktop and lightweight server applications. The difference between them is that Microsoft views itself as primarily a software company, and doesn’t get involved in the hardware side of the business (as far as desktop and laptop machines are involved anyway), whereas Apple has been a premier hardware provider from their first day of operation and provides a hardware integrated operating system to support their hardware. This is no different from any number of other companies, including IBM (in their pre-PC mainframe days), SGI (with their Unix workstations running Irix, a proprietary version of System V Unix on MIPS hardware), or any number of other hardware vendors. The difference, of course, is that since the inception of OS X, Apple has made the core of their operating system openly available, and since it was largely based upon FreeBSD 4.x and the OpenStep protocol, this was planned from the beginning. As for “develop[ing] a full-fledged OSX app without Apple’s APIs,” if the question is in regard to applications that function with the Cocoa framework, the answer is, of course, no. In other news, you can’t speak French without using a francophone vocabulary. This hardly makes the operating system “closed” by any definition of the term, or the developers paranoid, particularly since not only is the API fully documented and openly provided to developers, but in fact Apple offers an entire development environment for free. And if you want to develop applications that are not natively Objective-C (the preferred language for OSX and iOS development) then there are bindings for most popular programming languages like Python, Ruby, and Perl. Apple developers have often worked to develop and document these bindings with the express permission and support by Apple, and the operating system ships with versions of Perl, Python, Ruby, and of course Java installed by default. (They are not generally the most current versions or the ones I personally prefer, at least with regard to Python, but that is a stability choice on the part of Apple, and they do not preclude installation of other versions.) > [@NitroPress](#): > > I’ll concede that “closed architecture” may be technically incorrect, but when it comes to MacOS/OSX/iOS apps, you do it Apple’s way, with Apple’s proprietary product line, or you don’t do it at all. That’s pretty closed compared to nearly every other platform out there, including MS/Windows. If you want to release applications via the Apple App store, this is true. They have standards for documentation and testing that they impose fairly rigorously in order to ensure that the applications are reasonably stable, reliable, and interoperable with the current and projected supported range of hardware and operating systems. However, as an independent developer you are free to develop applications any way you like or port applications from Linux, Java, Python, et cetera. Of course, if you don’t adhere to the Cocoa or Mach APIs your application may not be stable or functional. POSIX.1-2008 is intended to assure that applications can be system independent, but if you use particular features that are particular to any given operating system that are not POSIX conformant, you can expect to have to clean up and potentially rewrite any code when going from one architecture to another. This isn’t particular to OSX; the same is true for Microsoft Windows (even the POSIX compliant versions), and the various BSDs and Linuxes as well, and certainly true for non-POSIX proprietary \*nixes like Solaris and IRIX. Stranger [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-wait-for-microsoft-to-go-bankrupt/647816.md?page=2)