or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple Mac mini purchase claimed to ship with Snow Leopard disc
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple Mac mini purchase claimed to ship with Snow Leopard disc - Page 3

post #81 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

But what percentage of Macs do they represent? Fairly small, I'd wager.

Yeah, because unlike PC users, Mac users replace their computers every 2-3 years.
Oh wait. Not having to replace a computer every couple years has always been one of the "benefits" of owning a Mac, isn't it?
post #82 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Yeah, because unlike PC users, Mac users replace their computers every 2-3 years.
Oh wait. Not having to replace a computer every couple years has always been one of the "benefits" of owning a Mac, isn't it?

Your comment seems to hinge on the fallacy that if you cant get the next OS update that you must replace your Mac. Macs do tend to last longer than PCs because point updates and point releases tend to speed up operations while there is no registry and other Windows-like mechanisms that keep slowing the machine down over time. PPC users can run Leopard, will get security updates, app updates for years to come. Snow Leopard has very little new look and the new underpinnings arent designed to work for PPC so when it is time to pony up the money for a new Mac those PPC users will benefit from Apple spending more time getting GDC, OpenCL and everything else in Leopard working well.

PS: The last PPC wsa sold from retail 36 months ago yet the announcement of moving to Intel and the first Intel Macs had been going on for some time. Why did these people buy when they knew the Intel versions were coming. Did people actually try to save a buck by buying the old tech in the refurbish section. If so, then I certainly dont feel for you since you are the ones that put yourself in this position.
post #83 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

First, businesses do not normally jump on an update right away anyway. When money is involved, they want to make sure the update is stable. Second, I suspect most big shops start to update their computers every two three years. So, they probably have a mixture of both Power PC and Intel machines.

Yes, they will have a mixture of hardware, but, every machine will be running the same version of the OS to keep them all aligned with each other, and to avoid any possible conflicts and problems of having to support more than one version of OS. So, if a bunch of Macs currently in use are PPC, then all the Macs will most likely be running Leopard, not SL. It's unlikely that companies with a large number of Macs are all running different versions of the OS, that would be a nightmare for IT to support.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Moreover, the speed increase gives serious shops an incentive to upgrade their machines if they have not already. So, Apple may lose some update sales, but it will gain some new Mac sales. Win win anyway you cut it.

Not really. You forget that the people who make the decisions to buy hardware in large companies are bean counters, not the people who have to use the computers. It's all based on economics. A 10% speed gain isn't going to motivate a company to replace half of their hardware at great expense. They'll squeeze every last dollar out of those computers first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

Now consider the potential cost to R&D Snow Leopard for PPC to such a small number of potential buyers, with the actual number of Snow Leopard for G5 Power Mac because people with older systems arent as likely to update their OS and cant even use GCD and OpenCL. Now multiply whatever number get by $29, figure out the net margin, then subtract gross R&D costs for developing for the PPC architecture from 4 years ago. The numbers dont add up from a business standpoint.

As I've already mentioned, I am not saying that Apple should be supporting legacy equipment with Snow Leopard. I'm saying that adoption may be slower than previous versions of the OS due to the legacy hardware issue that now comes into play. Besides, where are you finding all these percentages that you refer to? I'd be curious to see them.
post #84 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celemourn View Post

First of all, Mr. T, that was a phenomenal example of accidental trolling you just pulled. Kudos.

Trolling? Why, because I'm not drooling over the latest blurry photos of fake packaging for Snow Leopard?

If you don't agree with my opinion, then state why. Calling me a troll just makes me stop reading your post right there, because you clearly have nothing worthwhile to contribute when you have to start your post with childish name-calling.
post #85 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

You really think all those design and audio/visual shops using PPC computers will just throw them away to use Snow Leopard because it only costs $29?? LOL!

The only conceivable reason to still run PPC in production wouyld be for something on OS9, and if they havnt noved forward from that point, well, let them rot...evolve or die.
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #86 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

Your comment seems to hinge on the fallacy

No, my comment hinges on exactly what I responded to.
That PPC macs are "fairly small percentage" and that Macs are almost never replaced every two-three years.
Therefore, the majority of PPC owners that puchased new units in the last 1-2 years of PPC sales, would only now be considering a new computer.
Quote:
PS: The last PPC wsa sold from retail 36 months ago yet the announcement of moving to Intel and the first Intel Macs had been going on for some time.

The announcement of going to Intel was made on the same day Apple released the 1st intel (iMac iSight - 10 Jan 2006)
Apple announced and released the PPC iSight iMac only three months before it was discontinued and replaced by the Intel.
post #87 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

The only conceivable reason to still run PPC in production wouyld be for something on OS9, and if they havnt noved forward from that point, well, let them rot...evolve or die.

PPC Macs can run Tiger and Leopard. I doubt most businesses are still using OS9 in a production environment. It's possible a company has a Mac or two still running OS9 for some legacy application, but, by now most of those have been ported to OSX. One company I know still has a bunch of the original iMacs (with CRT screens) in deployment, but they all run Leopard right now. They won't, however, be running Snow Leopard until they decide to replace all remaining PPC Macs with Intel Macs.
post #88 of 141
I'm actually about to retire several PPC Mac's and replace them with new ones that were supposed to ship on the 24th after a three week wait. Mysteriously, my ship date changed yesterday to the 28th and now after close inspection I see a Free Multi User /Site License Version of Leopard (10.5, not Snow Leopard) was added to my order. THe plan had been to integrate the remaining PPC (10.4) Macs with the New ones that were suppose to ship with 10.5 ( and get the free upgrades later) My assumption was that I would have to update the remaining PPC's to 10.5 on my own as our Apple& Software reps told me that I can either mix 10.4 & 10.5 or 10.5 & 10.6 , but not 10.4 and 10.6 .
So, my hopeful guess is that this means my order will actually ship with Snow Leopard ! Wow , some times waiting until you actually Need something pays off and Apple giving away something to business a customer for free, with even being asked at the same time . . . never in nearly 25 years of Mac use would I have thought . . .
post #89 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

The announcement of going to Intel was made on the same day Apple released the 1st intel (iMac iSight - 10 Jan 2006)

No. The "announcement of going Intel" was made on June 6, 2005 at WWDC.
post #90 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrENGLISH View Post

No. The "announcement of going Intel" was made on June 6, 2005 at WWDC.

Okay.
There was no mention of exactly when ("by the end of 2007" ) and which models at what time would be transitioned.
post #91 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jensonb View Post

I have, and it doesn't change my mind. It would be amazing to the point of insanity if Apple announced on Monday it was out that Friday - that would be a very close announcement at the best of times, but since it would mean the software was shipping the month before everyone was told to expect it, it would be even more ridiculous.

"The month before" sounds a lot sooner than "several days before," and 08/28 is only several days before the month of September.

Maybe Apple is doing what they can to exceed expectations?
post #92 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

You really think all those design and audio/visual shops using PPC computers will just throw them away to use Snow Leopard because it only costs $29?? LOL!

Of course not, they're going to upgrade their intel Macs, the PPC machines will become backup/less used over time at a faster rate than previously.

Not that your design and AV shops are going to have all that much total effect on SL uptake, since they are only a small minority of the current installed base. Intel Macs, according to Apple, are already a majority of the installed working base.

A lot has changed in the Mac market over the past couple of years, in case you hadn't noticed.
post #93 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveH View Post

Not that your design and AV shops are going to have all that much total effect on SL uptake, since they are only a small minority of the current installed base. Intel Macs, according to Apple, are already a majority of the installed working base.

And who do you think buys all those Pro machines and tools?? It's not as small a minority as you characterize.
post #94 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Okay.
There was no mention of exactly when ("by the end of 2007" ) and which models at what time would be transitioned.

There was no exact mention but we had an Apple-set 18 month window to complete the entire transition. The first Intel iMac came out over 3.5 years ago. This mention of three years is from when the last PPC Macs were sold by Apple retail.

But none of that is germane to your original point that these relatively few PPC Mac sales are going to make adoption low. The numbers just don't add up and at only $29 (or $10 for more recent Mac purchases) this will be the fastest adoption Apple has ever had. If will also be the largest adoption simple because there are so many Intel Macs being sold.
post #95 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

There was no exact mention but we had an Apple-set 18 month window to complete the entire transition. The first Intel iMac came out over 3.5 years ago. This mention of three years is from when the last PPC Macs were sold by Apple retail.

But none of that is germane to your original point that these relatively few PPC Mac sales are going to make adoption low. The numbers just don't add up and at only $29 (or $10 for more recent Mac purchases) this will be the fastest adoption Apple has ever had. If will also be the largest adoption simple because there are so many Intel Macs being sold.

Esp. intel macbooks, which since Intel have probably sold more than PPC i/powerbooks ever did.

The main idea is this: if you have an Intel upgrade, if you don't, don't.

This is a win-win. Its a cheap mini update to take advantage of 64 bit. 10.7 will come out in 2 more years (at full price) and then it will be 5 years since PPC. It makes perfect sense.

Have PPC, continue running Leopard. Have Intel, run Snow Leopard.
post #96 of 141
I think it's just over-dramatizing on both sides. On the user-side, Snow Leopard is not *that* big of an advance over Leopard, so PowerPC users will _not_ feel left out in the dust exactly. Do you seriously _require_ Quicktime X for those graphics jobs? If you want to blame anyone forcing your graphics department to exchange PPCs with Mac Pros, it's Adobe you should direct the anger at, since they won't make CS5 for PPC. But I've met enough graphics designers to know that some might just hang on to their PPCs and use CS3 or CS4 (some even CS2 or CS1 and Tiger) for their jobs. It's not like you can't get any work done with those machines and that software. Most companies probably will move _part_ of their machine park to intel machines and have those with Snow Leopard, while the old PowerMacs will still be able to do a lot of work.

But IIRC *every* Mac OS X upgrade in recent years has left some machine generations in the dust. And there _always_ were people complaining about it. Apple has been cutting off support for older Macs in newer Big Cats everytime, and they'll continue to do so. It doesn't mean that your current machine(s) will die an untimely death, it's just a reminder that the computer industry as a whole is moving on, and your computer _will_ be a remnant of times past sooner or later. Apple will, as they did with 10.4 and 10.3 and 10.2 etc., continue to release security updates for Leopard in the time of Snow Leopard, so Leopard still very much _is_ a supported OS and PowerPCs still very much _are_ supported hardware. You have a cutting edge G5? It's not cutting edge anymore and hasn't been for a couple of years. You don't need to replace it now, but you might want to. Or might want to next spring with the übercool Mac Pro 16-core or something. Until then, your Mac's going to be fine.

Snow Leopard _will_ be adopted rather quickly. Apple has had okay-to-good adoption rates for Tiger and Leopard, and Snow Leopard is much cheaper to acquire for all the Macs that have been sold in the past two years *PLUS* all the users that upgraded to Leopard in those two years (I've sold quite a few copies of Leopard and Leopard family pack as well as the Mac Box Set myself in the two years that I've been working as an authorized reseller.)

I've been testing SL for a couple of months (and was a tester for 10.0 onwards) and I'm very happy with the product. If 10A432 is the Golden Master, it's a good GM build. Up there with 10.5.0 and 10.4.0 and certainly much better than 10.3.0 (which was a disaster, btw., with FW drives dying and all that jazz). QTX has no preferences? So what: It's a Quicktime Player for heaven's sake and I'm pretty sure a Quicktime update will arrive as soon as Sep. 9th with the new iTunes... 10.6 has been stable for me since 10A380, basically, and with 10A432 it feels finished. With one or two obvious bugs, yes, but that's like it's always been.
post #97 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

Trolling? Why, because I'm not drooling over the latest blurry photos of fake packaging for Snow Leopard?

If you don't agree with my opinion, then state why. Calling me a troll just makes me stop reading your post right there, because you clearly have nothing worthwhile to contribute when you have to start your post with childish name-calling.

Try reading the rest of the post. Also note that I said it was an example of accidental trolling, not that YOU are a troll. i.e., you started a firestorm unintentionally. Not everyone is gunning for ya.

C
A Conclusion is the place where you get tired of thinking. - Lesicus Stupidicus
Reply
A Conclusion is the place where you get tired of thinking. - Lesicus Stupidicus
Reply
post #98 of 141
I'm going to side with those who say PPC users shouldn't feel abandoned. The changes in the user experience are so minor that Leopard can be considered the PPC version of Snow Leopard. The limitation of not having an Intel processor is a much greater barrier to future uses of their hardware than the changes wrought by Snow Leopard. Ultimately it will be application developers such as Adobe, more than Apple, who decide when the PPC is left behind.
post #99 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

Your comment seems to hinge on the fallacy that if you can’t get the next OS update that you must replace your Mac. Macs do tend to last longer than PCs because point updates and point releases tend to speed up operations while there is no registry and other Windows-like mechanisms that keep slowing the machine down over time. PPC users can run Leopard, will get security updates, app updates for years to come. Snow Leopard has very little new look and the new underpinnings aren’t designed to work for PPC so when it is time to pony up the money for a new Mac those PPC users will benefit from Apple spending more time getting GDC, OpenCL and everything else in Leopard working well.

PS: The last PPC wsa sold from retail 36 months ago yet the announcement of moving to Intel and the first Intel Macs had been going on for some time. Why did these people buy when they knew the Intel versions were coming. Did people actually try to save a buck by buying the old tech in the refurbish section. If so, then I certainly don’t feel for you since you are the ones that put yourself in this position.

Again good points....here is a website that I find helpful you all may or may not know about. It tracks when Apple may upgrade their products based on prior update time frames and whether or not one should buy a machine or wait a little bit for the upgraded machine

http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
post #100 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

You really think all those design and audio/visual shops using PPC computers will just throw them away to use Snow Leopard because it only costs $29?? LOL!

um, yes - not simply for SL, though. we just retired 2 quad core 2.5Ghz Power Macs and bought 2 8-core Mac Pros in order to run the new FCS.
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #101 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celemourn View Post

Try reading the rest of the post. Also note that I said it was an example of accidental trolling, not that YOU are a troll. i.e., you started a firestorm unintentionally. Not everyone is gunning for ya.

Sorry if I misunderstood the intent of your comment. I wasn't really sure what you meant by "accidental" trolling. Thanks for the clarification.
post #102 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen View Post

um, yes - not simply for SL, though. we just retired 2 quad core 2.5Ghz Power Macs and bought 2 8-core Mac Pros in order to run the new FCS.

I, too, will be replacing two PPC Macs in our own small shop this Fall. My comments were about large companies that use Macs, like those big ad/marketing firms, and audio/visual studios in NYC and L.A. While they replace hardware as they can, they don't upgrade the OS until they can do so on all their computers. So, while they may be getting new computers, they will be installing Tiger or Leopard, not Snow Leopard, as long as they have a significant number of PPC Macs in use.

I don't know how anyone can think the adoption of SL will be similar to that of Tiger or Leopard when there are lots of PPC Macs still in use. It will be more gradual, especially in big companies. It will be faster than OS9 to OSX, but, not like Tiger to Leopard. The only people buying new Macs every 2-3 years are individuals with disposable income, and there are fewer and fewer of people who can afford to do that anymore. I think this has something to do with the $29 upgrade price Apple wisely set.
post #103 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

But none of that is germane to your original point that these relatively few PPC Mac sales are going to make adoption low.

Ok, But the adoption rate is not germane to any of my posts.
If you are going to respond to a post, at least respond to what was posted.
I made no mention or reference to any adoption rate.
post #104 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

If you are going to respond to a post, at least respond to what was posted.
I made no mention or reference to any adoption rate.

Mea culpa. For some reason I got you confused with Trajectory.
post #105 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

Mea culpa. For some reason I got you confused with Trajectory.

No worries here.
Some people get off in their own perception/argument, they neglect what they are actually responding to.
It happens.
post #106 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

I, too, will be replacing two PPC Macs in our own small shop this Fall. My comments were about large companies that use Macs, like those big ad/marketing firms, and audio/visual studios in NYC and L.A. While they replace hardware as they can, they don't upgrade the OS until they can do so on all their computers. So, while they may be getting new computers, they will be installing Tiger or Leopard, not Snow Leopard, as long as they have a significant number of PPC Macs in use.

I don't know how anyone can think the adoption of SL will be similar to that of Tiger or Leopard when there are lots of PPC Macs still in use. It will be more gradual, especially in big companies. It will be faster than OS9 to OSX, but, not like Tiger to Leopard. The only people buying new Macs every 2-3 years are individuals with disposable income, and there are fewer and fewer of people who can afford to do that anymore. I think this has something to do with the $29 upgrade price Apple wisely set.

I think you are using a mistaken impression to reach a false conclusion, and you aren't comprehending what was written in response. Even if we assume all Macs up to six years old are still in use, there are at least twice as many Intel Macs in use than there are PPC Macs. If we assume an average of 4.5 years if service life, then there are probably about four times as many Intel Macs in use as there are PPC Macs in use. What you would have to assert is that 20% of users are going to counterbalance the $29 upgrade price. That is stretching it.

Another thing is that big companies really aren't a big portion of Apple's business.

It seems to me that if these major a/v/ad/marketing companies are any good, the additional productivity from new hardware performance combined with new software productivity features should easily pay for the cost of the upgrade. The cost of the hardware and software is chump change compared to the cost of the person that's operating it.
post #107 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post

. However, most businesses need that legacy support and MS Windows business oriented OS means that they they have to support legacy HW and code.

Yup, I can virtualize Windows XP on my Mac very similar to how Microsoft does it for Windows 7

Quote:
Apple will never be able to get a substantial foothold in the business sector as long as they are quick to drop legacy support and dont allow 3rd-party PC makers to license their OS.

Quite frankly, Apple has more legacy support then the PC manufacturers. Try getting a driver that works with later service packs for hardware more then 2 years old. It's hit and miss at best. OS licensing is a red herring - even in government it's not an issue.

The variety of hardware in the PC universe is more a curse then a blessing - the sheer effort in managing it all wastes significant resources. Seriously, how many different video cards, hard drive controllers and network controllers do you really need? If I order 500 PC's from Dell - all the same model - I could get three or more different video cards/chips in my order depending on what Dell sources at the time. Some vendors are better - for a price you can guarantee with them that the hardware throughout the life of your contract will be the same - but as soon as you do that the PC's "price advantage" starts to evaporate real quick. For all the posturing in these forums, Apple really is quite price competitive once you get out of the garbage/disposable computer bin.

I think the new integration with Exchange and Active Directory in SL is going to start raising some eyebrows - maybe not in large organizations (or at least not on a large scale for a while), but it will certainly start making an impact in the small and medium business (SMB) marketplace. Apple has a pretty good plan - ride the iPhone into the enterprise. A frontal assault on MS is fruitless at this point. However you can introduce people to the Apple "secret sauce" - tight hardware and software integration for a seamless experience. While they don't really emphasize it (much to my annoyance) if you do ever attend one of their corporate enterprise roadshow events, you will find that Apple has quite the plan for integrating Mac's in the enterprise. I can't wait to go back this year and see what Snow Leopard adds.
post #108 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

And who do you think buys all those Pro machines and tools?? It's not as small a minority as you characterize.

In all of FY06 Apple sold 5.3 million Macs where only some of them were PPC Macs.

They have since sold 24.1 million Intel Macs (until June 27).
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #109 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic_Al View Post

Ultimately it will be application developers such as Adobe, more than Apple, who decide when the PPC is left behind.

They already have. Adobe's coming releases won't support PPC.
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #110 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sk8MusicLife64 View Post

Looks legit to me, but Apple isn't known to let something slip like that. This is the equivalent to somebody buying an iPod Touch and opening the box to find a camera. Apple takes too many precautions. But it still does look legit. I wish he took a screenshot of the "About This Mac", and the System Profiler.

Sure they do. They dropped in iLife '09 DVDs into new Mac purchases before it was officially released.
post #111 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

You really think all those design and audio/visual shops using PPC computers will just throw them away to use Snow Leopard because it only costs $29?? LOL!

It's funny. I come across business owners with this kind of mindset all the time. They seem to think that they don't have to replace their hardware like everyone else. And then they can't figure out how they can't turn a profit, and they're working longer hours than everyone else.

Hello?

Fine, let them muddle through with obsolete kit. They're exactly the kind of penny-pinching business owners who wouldn't buy Snow Leopard for $29 even if it was Universal. Fuck'em. I'm not being kept in the Stone Age because they're idiots.
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #112 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

That will, unfortunately, dramatically slow down the adoption of Snow Leopard and any software designed to run only with SL.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

You really think all those design and audio/visual shops using PPC computers will just throw them away to use Snow Leopard because it only costs $29?? LOL!

You are completely wrong. First of all, Intel Macs have been around for three years. They didn't come out yesterday. All software developed today is for Intel, rarely will you find a new software product that is designed for PowerPC. Apple has sold more Intel Macs per quarter than they ever sold any PowerPC Macs. Snow Leopard will run on all Intel Macs that have been released, so there is plenty of upgrade potential for the private sector, especially since SL is more optimized for Intel by dumping old PowerPC code.

Design and AV shops that are using Macs for their business DO NOT run the latest software programs or OS X (at least not right away). They concentrate on software stability, not running out and buying the latest software just because it is released. They cannot afford to install new software just because it hit the streets since it can pose a risk to shut down their entire operation. Same reason why any company doesn't run out and buy new software just because it came out (especially any type of Windows program).

People don't dispose of computers just because a new OS comes out. They dispose of them when the software they are running is no longer productive for them. So if a design studio runs great with Power Mac G5's they could care less about Snow Leopard, or the price.
post #113 of 141
I predict, at the upgrade price and the rate of new Macs sold (which would be high despite the economy), by the end of 2010 the adoption of Snow Leopard will be probably "the best ever rate of adoption" or something like that.
post #114 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Yeah, because unlike PC users, Mac users replace their computers every 2-3 years.
Oh wait. Not having to replace a computer every couple years has always been one of the "benefits" of owning a Mac, isn't it?

Err... you don't need to replace a Mac to upgrade the OS, except for Snow Leopard and PPC Macs in which case you can still use Leopard and not upgrade to Snow Leopard.

In other words, Macs can still go a solid 3+ years before starting to think about replacement.

Ironically, with Windows 7, PCs actually will run it alright even if up to 3 years old... Assuming no driver issues, which... of course, is a whole 'nother bag of sh*te.
post #115 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

I'm not saying Apple should support older hardware in the new OS, I'm just saying that adoption of the new OS will be slow because there's a lot of legacy hardware out there being used by large companies on which the new OS won't run. It won't be as slow as OS9 was, but, it will be slower than Tiger to Leopard.

And most people think you are full of it. I guess you don't read the previous posts. Apple has sold more Intel Macs each quarter than they ever sold PowerPC Macs. There are more Intel Macs out in the wild than you think. Considering Apple has a small share of the market, that share of companies using Macs is even smaller. Tiger to Leopard didn't offer much. However, Intel Mac owners will want SL because it dumps outdated code for a more optimized OS, which is what people do want. Mac OS X sales have never been tracked by company adoption, because almost all companies in the world use Windows. The majority of Mac OS X sales are in the private sector.
post #116 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Owl View Post

Funny how the disk label is in english while the installer is in some sort of Japanese.

Have you ever installed OS X before? The first screen allows you to pick the LANGUAGE you want to run. Duh! Apple no longer sells localized copies of the OS for specific languages. Where have you been?
post #117 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post

It makes me wonder sometimes if there is ever any review here. And this is not the first time.

If I really have a good proof and a good lead, would I broadcast it with such crappy photos? For an online site that considers itself an expert in technology, has it ever asked how easy it is to photoshop? Look at the artistic renditions of the iTablet or whatever you want to call it, they are so beautiful, so real but the artists never presented them as such.

And the images provided are not even good ones. And you accepted them as proofs?

But forget the photos as proofs. Do you really think Apple would release it first in Japan and with a mini at that?

Come on, do you even think critically? If you did, would you even publish this? The more tragic part is a similar lack of critical thinking among some readers here -- accepting articles like this as real news?

I understand that there are days when you do not have enough articles to justify the site; but you have some readers who seem to take the time to write more critically and thoughtfully. Why not invite them, and perhaps pay them to write -- to increase the number of credible contents and perhaps the quality of contents?

This is called a RUMOR site. Their main goal is to post bullshit stories, along with a mix of some real ones. They enjoy seeing how gullible people are to believe this stuff, and then comment on it. If you are looking for journalistic integrity, this is not the place for you.
post #118 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

Snow Leopard still has Rosetta as a voluntary install... Although Windows still supports crap as far back as Windows ME, they have dropped support for 98 and their hardware support only goes back a few years. Even though Snow Leopard only supports Intel Macs, it runs much better on older Intel hardware than Windows Vista can ever possibly dream of.

Windows XP Pro SP3 still gives me a compatibility option for Windows 95! So their crap goes back even further!
post #119 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevenfeet View Post

You might be surprised by the hardware some people in the business cling to. I have a friend who's been a pro photographer for over 30 years and in addition to the Intel Macs and PPC PowerMac G5s he has, he still has two Powermac 9600s running Mac OS 8.6 and Photoshop 4 IN PRODUCTION. What amazes me is that the old SCSI drives in those machines seem to be bulletproof. I can't see modern SATA drives ever lasting 13 years.

Great point. Just because something new comes out, doesn't mean you actually need it. My LC 575 with a 33 MHz 68040 processor (Mac OS 7.6.1) loads Word 5.1 faster than my iMac G5 2.1 GHz loads Word 2004. Both Macs can print to my HP LaserJet 6MP over an AppleTalk/Ethernet bridge. The LC 575 also runs Photoshop 2.5.1 quite well too.
post #120 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

The announcement of going to Intel was made on the same day Apple released the 1st intel (iMac iSight - 10 Jan 2006)
Apple announced and released the PPC iSight iMac only three months before it was discontinued and replaced by the Intel.

Wrong. Apple announced the move to Intel during WWDC 2005, 6 months before they released the first Intel Mac (and that Intel Mac was released 6 months ahead of the original plan). Apple even offered an Intel Development Mac (A Pentium 4 living in a Power Mac G5 tower) to software developers so they can start writing for Intel before the new Intel Macs even arrived.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple Mac mini purchase claimed to ship with Snow Leopard disc