I installed an updated version of iTunes on my PC and in the EULA I noticed this:
Que? iTunes isn’t an OS, so it shouldn’t have any effect on the operations of a nuke plant, or anything else mentioned in the EULA. (Interesting to note that space craft aren’t mentioned. So you could use it on the shuttle or the ISS.)
The OS is not the issue but the devices that are used to listen to the music. Just in case you are, or are related to, an H. Simpson.
It’s just boilerplate legalese.
Until you discover the hard way that the scroll wheel on the front also controls the reactor’s control rods…
(Just don’t hit “pause”)
This standard disclaimer has to do with system stability. You obviously can use such things at your desktop, but not on mission critical servers or control systems. Regardless of the stability of the OS, insufficient testing has been performed on such software to be able to guarantee the complete absence of memory leaks or other bugs which may corrupt or otherwise interfere with other system processes.
Incidentally, congratulations on being the only person in the world who reads the EULA.
I would assume it means that they aren’t responsible for what happens if their program fails I.E. if there are audio instructions for a critical piece of equipment. If you us iTunes to listen to them and iTunes goes kaplooie and as a result you mess up the equipment and the plant goes kaplooie you agree that Apple isn’t responsible for the second kaplooie.
Read this part again (emphasis mine):
Actually, I don’t read the whole thing (Why bother since they basically say, “By using this software you agree that we have the right to treat you like the bitch you are and demand that you come back for more.” in all of them?), the giant font they used in that warning just happened to catch my eye, is all.
Right, which is what had me puzzled, since I’ve no idea why anyone would think that streaming internet radio to the core of nuclear reactor would somehow prevent it from melting down.
Since Windows is buggy, just about any program could cause it to crash. They don’t want to be responsible.
What scares me is we’re using Windows to control our nuclear reactors, or any of the systems mentioned in the EULA??? :eek:
Actually, no. It’s come up in other threads that the folks who run nuke plants don’t use Windows since they have to custom write all their software for their systems anyway.
One might envision using iTunes as the repository and playback system for critical warnings or emergency instructions. Well, YOU might not envision it, but a lazy dingbat in charge of managing pre-recorded warnings and instructions might think it’s a dandy idea.
Of course, as mentioned before, it’s likely boilerplate language, which is easy to add and doesn’t require Apple to think up outlandish scenarios like the one above for misuse of their software. Just throw the paragraph in, and the lawyers are happy.
No, you’ve got to be careful. Apple OSes are bad mofos. Remember what that Apple OS did to the alien mother ship in “Independence Day”. Uploaded a virus right up it’s ass! Even the alien OS didn’t stop it!
Yes, but what does this have to do with hats? 
For similar reasons as Apple lists it’s recent iPod as being non-edible. (Though hopefully they’re just being amusing).
If you encounter a EULA longer than 4 paragraphs, the nuclear power plant/air traffic control disclaimer is almost certainly in there, as it has become software-industry standard boilerplate, saying basically that if you use our software for anything important you’re freak’n nuts. It’s in the Microsoft Windows EULA, though for some reason some people ignore it.
Perhaps because M$ has been throwing wads of cash at congresscritters in hopes landing a fat government contract.
Ever since I noticed the exact same boilerplate in Oracle’s license gibberish, I have always wondered what database they use in the forbidden industries.
Surely, all other major league database vendors must have identical CYA wording.
Seems like it would be safer to use some trusted industry-standard DB engine (i.e. if banks trust it, it must be reasonably robust) instead of having to roll your own, but none of the vendors have the cajones to allow this.
Well maybe, but if you wanted to, it might be good to have the vendor do a level of testing beyond that for non life-critical applications. I suspect the language is to protect them if some clown integrates software that is meant to be secure or stable. I assure you, that it costs more to test for a mission critical or worse, life-critical application than for a desktopper. This is one place where the EULA is okay. The part that says that if our software destroys your system and house, we’ll refund you the price of the software - not so much. 
