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
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.
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.
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.
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.
. 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 don?t 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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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!
Comments
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/
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.
Sorry if I misunderstood the intent of your comment. I wasn't really sure what you meant by "accidental" trolling. Thanks for the clarification.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
. 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
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 don?t 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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
That will, unfortunately, dramatically slow down the adoption of Snow Leopard and any software designed to run only with SL.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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!