Millions of people bought an iMacs in 2005. You are claiming it is their fault? Regardless, Apple has cut them off from upgrades. How can you complain that Microsoft's upgrade path is too complicated when Apple doesn't have one at all for any computer bought before 2006.
Given Vista started shipping on every computer since Jan 2007, people upgrading from XP are mostly people who bought computers earlier than 2006/2007. Again, Apple has cut those users off from upgrades. For everyone 2007 and later, both Microsoft and Apple have great, simliar upgrade paths for there users.
So the discussion is really around no upgrade path (Apple) or one that requires backing up files (Microsoft) for the group of users 2-3+ years out. For everyone else, it is not an issue on either platform.
Aaron
If you have followed Apple for very long you will know that their upgrade path has been unique and bold over the last 10 years. Going from OS9 to OSX and all that followed since has, indeed, left some users behind somewhat. But that has also made it possible for Apple to create the best OS in the world, one so good, in fact, that M$ has been scurrying like crazy to copy and catch up. Most of what you will see in windows7 came from Apple's innovative OSX systems. In the fast world of computers it is a well known fact that a computer and/or it's OS will be outdated, in all likelihood, before you even get to know all of it's capabilities.
That doesn't mean that all computers bought before the shift to intel are now useless ... quite the contrary ... the used mac industry thrives, check out ebay and craigslist ... and the prices fetched by these used macs make it possible for a lot of us to keep up with the changes with ease.
This is not so with PCs, in general, where sometimes the value of a PC is cut in half, or worse, in as little as 6 months. The other point worth making is that upggrading from Tiger (two OS back) is easily done without losing anything. On the windows side it is much harder to go from XP to win7, and that will be a significant problem due to the very large number of pc users who either did not go to vista or even went back to XP. Not the same story at all.
You needed to edit that lame post NEWBEE? What do you add on here but relentless simplistic attacks on me which are neither witty nor intelligent. Back to your barn now.
I had to "dumb it down" so you could understand it, TeckDud. No need to thank me, tho, I got your best interest at heart.
First: they didn't offer that option to Vista users but to people who were frightened to buy a Vista machine because they never tried Vista. And second: it tells me that you have to form your own opinion.
Of course they never offered it to someone who ALREADY BOUGHT .... but they had to offer it to GET PEOPLE TO BUY! Now do you understand. Please say yes so I won't be awake all night worrying about you.
Do you ever post anything that is acutally on topic? Everytime I see you post you are just following around other members trying to insult them. For someone that says they are 68 you act like you are 13.
Its pathetic you cant do anything but insult people.
It's only the trollers that tick me off ... stop trolling, I'll stop replying. simple.
Of course they never offered it to someone who ALREADY BOUGHT .... but they had to offer it to GET PEOPLE TO BUY! Now do you understand. Please say yes so I won't be awake all night worrying about you.
Important point you are missing is that downgrade was/is available only for business oriented PCs. You can downgrade only Vista Business and Vista Ultimate. Vista Home flavours do not have downgrade option.
Major reason for that is that IT departments in many companies feared they cannot upgrade all of their computers to Vista because of various reasons, old hardware and legacy software being most common ones. Some of them could have Vista on new machines while keeping XP on older ones (or those running legacy software not happy with Vista), but IT departments are lazy by default and will avoid complications such as supporting 2 different platforms at the same time (which is likely one of the major reasons why OSX has such poor penetration into business market).
Microsoft had option to keep selling such clients XP on new machines (which was still generating money and making hardware manufacturers happy by letting them sell new hardware to business clients) or not to sell XP at all which would cause them not to mke any profit, as well as hardware manufacturers since clients would keep on using old hardware with old XP installs for prolonged period.
So Microsoft decided to make some money and keep Dell, HP and others happy. Hardly a surprise.
Vista home users had no choice but to use their Vista installs. That would not be bad at all - Vista is definitely better code than XP - haven't MS let OEMs to screw up things by baptising every computer "Vista Capable". Yes, 512Mb Celeron notebook can run Vista, but capable it is not. At the end, that backfired and helped creating such negative public opinion on Vista.
Millions of people bought an iMacs in 2005. You are claiming it is their fault? Regardless, Apple has cut them off from upgrades.
Aaron
It doesn't matter. The market hardly even noticed. You've got people in a recession forking out for Macs, handing Apple record quarters. And it looks like Apple's about to have another one come Monday.
The PowerPC upgrade issue is a non-issue. It has had zero impact on Apple's growth and will be even more irrelevant as time goes on. The PowerPC issue lives and dies on Apple fansites where a minority still care about it. It has no real basis in reality except the "reality" dreamed up on these forums.
It is clearly discussed on Apple's site and I had the same issue with my wife's brand new Epson printer.
Reason why I made the comment to Teckstud, he should have his Apple Software update on auto mode.
Yeah, but I had a similar experience with my Lexmark printer, (about a year old). Through several updates, the Mac drivers from Lexmark NEVER worked with the printer. That is until about two months before SL came out. Their latest updated driver finally worked. But then I upgraded to SL and the SL drivers didn't work either. About two or three weeks later Lexmark came out with their own drivers for SL and thankfully I can print to that printer again.
Perhaps it will do Apple a lot of good to lose for awhile. Get their focus off supporting the Washington socialists who one day will just decide to take over their business in the name of the people.
Millions of people bought an iMacs in 2005. You are claiming it is their fault? Regardless, Apple has cut them off from upgrades. How can you complain that Microsoft's upgrade path is too complicated when Apple doesn't have one at all for any computer bought before 2006.
Given Vista started shipping on every computer since Jan 2007, people upgrading from XP are mostly people who bought computers earlier than 2006/2007. Again, Apple has cut those users off from upgrades. For everyone 2007 and later, both Microsoft and Apple have great, simliar upgrade paths for there users.
So the discussion is really around no upgrade path (Apple) or one that requires backing up files (Microsoft) for the group of users 2-3+ years out. For everyone else, it is not an issue on either platform.
Aaron
You can't compare the two that way. Microsoft wasn't trying to move it's OS to a different platform altogether. If Apple continued to support PowerPC, it would hinder their ability to innovate on the Intel platform. Snow Leopard would not have been possible without dropping PowerPC support. Most of the under-the-hood changes were made to increase performance on the Intel architecture. Show Leopard for PowerPC would have been a completely different cat and would have required much more time to release. If Apple's going to continue innovating at their current pace, they can't afford to continue supporting PowerPC. Also, it's not like PowerPC Macs are useless in their current state. They're still better than a Windows PC. I would take a PowerPC Mac over a new Windows machine any day, and I'm sure that will still be true years from now. Personally, I like the work that's being done on the Intel architecture. The power and form factor of Apple's current notebooks would just not be possible with PowerPC.
Important point you are missing is that downgrade was/is available only for business oriented PCs. You can downgrade only Vista Business and Vista Ultimate. Vista Home flavours do not have downgrade option.
Not being a big M$ fan or follower, I was not aware of that, but as I understand it, the corporate side is a huge component of M$ sales, maybe even the largest, so it stands to reason they had no choice but to protect that user group. The main point, as I see it, was that a very large number of potential customers obviously tried it, said no thanks, now get me back to XP. Question: Would some home users not spring for Vista Ultimate just because it's "the best"?
Yes? And why can't you upgrade a 4 year old Mac then?
A four year old Mac would have been released in 2005. This would have meant that (if it was purchased at the beginning of 2005) it would have been eligible for an update to Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, which was released in Spring 2005.
If it was purchased in late 2005 it would have already been running Tiger, but would have been eligible to update to Leopard in 2007.
So in the timeframe between 2005 and today, you could have potentially updated a 2005 Mac with two rounds of new system software, each adding major new functionality.
Similarly all Webkit (Safari) and security updates will be made available to this machine.
So your main bone of contention is that this 2005 machine cannot be upgraded to the late 2009 Snow Leopard? Why is this? Because Apple had to draw a line somewhere.
Also, as Snow Leopard adds very few new user facing features (it does add a few) you are not actually missing out on much new functionality until the next release of OS X, which will likely be 2011 sometime. That's quite a while from 2005.
You may of course miss out on Software optimised for Grand Central Dispatch and Open CL, but if you have a 2005 Mac it may not be multi-core anyway or have a graphics card compatible with Open CL. So even if the software could be upgraded, it is likely the hardware would be behind.
Also, this machine purchased in 2005 is still capable of performing all the operations you wanted it to achieve when you purchased it. Plus the added bonus of some useful features added by Tiger (e.g. Spotlight) and Leopard (e.g. easy backup with Time Machine).
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiAdiMundo
Apple did not support upgrade from PowerPCs and Microsoft did not deliver upgrade from XP to 7. Where is the difference?
Microsoft have never ever done a processor transition in their history of this magnitude. That has been explained before.
If you are going from XP to 7 on a 2005 PC the biggest noticeable benefit will be the graphics provided by the Aero 2D graphical compositing windowing system, which many of the features (Aero Peak, Shake etc.) are built on.
Similar features have been in the Mac since 2001 with Mac OS X. Aqua, Spotlight, Expose came with your 2005 PPC Mac.
So am I. I have both but user mac 90% of the time.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo
Windows 7 will have little or no negative impact on Mac sales. People buy Macs because they want Macs. They want the Apple brand, not just some PC.
Anyway. Go Mac and let's get that tablet on the market. I want that oversize Touch very badly.
No, no, no...
At the time of Vista, Microsoft had to support:
February 2000\tWindows 2000\tNT 5.0.2195\tExtended Support until July 13, 2010[19]\t6
September 2000\tWindows Me\t4.90.3000\tUnsupported\t6
October 2001\tWindows XP\tNT 5.1.2600\tExtended Support until April 8, 2014 for SP3 and July 13, 2010 for SP2. (RTM and SP1 unsupported).\t8
March 2003\tWindows XP 64-bit Edition (IA-64)\tNT 5.2.3790\tUnsupported\t6
April 2003\tWindows Server 2003\tNT 5.2.3790\tCurrent for SP1, R2, SP2 (RTM unsupported).\t8
April 2005\tWindows XP Professional x64 Edition\tNT 5.2.3790\tCurrent\t8
July 2006\tWindows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs\tNT 5.1.2600\tCurrent\t8
November 2006 (volume licensing)
January 2007 (retail)\tWindows Vista\tNT 6.0.6002\tCurrent. Version changed to NT 6.0.6001 with SP1 (February 4, 2008) and to NT 6.0.6002 with SP2 (April 28, 2009).\t8
July 2007\tWindows Home Server\tNT 5.2.4500\tCurrent\t8
February 2008\tWindows Server 2008\tNT 6.0.6002\tCurrent. Version changed to NT 6.0.6002 with SP2 (April 28, 2009).\t8
October 2009 [20]\tWindows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2\tNT 6.1.7600\tRTM
So now all they are doing is getting rid of XP,
It;s a known fact that numerous I.T. departments will upgrade from XP to Windows 7.
No corprate companies updated to Vista, zero.
Now having tried Vista as well as Windows 7, 7 is much faster and can use older hardware than Vista could, so they have done something correct with the coding. Plus they will no longer have to support a dozen operating systems, just Win 7, Vista (hardly any), Server 03and 08 which will also be replaced with Windows 7 server.
Windows 7 will be huge and since most workers will have it at their office, they won;t think twice about getting a new machine with Windows 7 and if the COURIER NOTE PAD is REAL, this means for the first time, like Apple, Microsoft will have 100% control over their hardware and this will be a game changer.
Now, let's take a look at Apple, coming from an Apple fan himself:
They dropped .mac and went with something that looks like windows with mobile me
and when released, remember the nightmare trying to support somthing that was not theirs, Exchange? It was a nightmare yet MSFT has to do this with thousands of software and support. The windows CERTIFIED normally means, in addition to the company paying MSFT, but also means there will be no problems.
Dropped the word computer from their name, catering to consumers more than pro's.
Apple 1 to 1 support used to be part of Apple Genius support which got you faster service, plus the 1 to 1 trainers used to know Shake, Final Cut Pro, Logic, Motion, et-cetera, now all they know (TRAINERS) is iLife and most of the customers are iPhone and Vista switchers who want to learn how to send a e-mail attachment, sad really.
Used to have Mac Pro PPC machines at $1400 plus most iMacs had Matte so you would find them in many design studios.
Apple released a Macbook that once had a 171% openGL rating that did NOT affect gamers but did allow ussers to run MOTION, a few weeks later, released an update which dropped it all the way down to 71%, affecting only the Pro users, or ProSumers, those who kept them afloat BEFORE the iPhone.
Apple then released a faster GPU Macbook, but this time it didn't have FIREWIRE, again, a slap on the faces of the Pro USERS.
Fanboyz, who are the JOBS CAN DO NO WRONG stated over and over it was a SPACE issue with the lack of Firewire. Of course, they were prooved wrong with the newer Macbook that had FIREWIRE and BETTER GPU. Boy did that quiet the fan boys.
Is still under the impression that the PRO MARKET will be hurt if they release a machine that could do a lot, quad or 8 core i7 machines, eating away at Mac Pro machines when the truth is, Gamers alone= more sales then MUSIC and VIDEO combined. once again, has it wrong.
Then you have the enthusiast video editor who cannot afford a Mac Pro and why should they? The Mac Pro uses ON PURPOSE ECC memory and SERVER CPU'S, this is INSANE, this is supposed to be a work station, not a server as it's made with server parts.
Has yet to release a mid range machine like they did just a few years ago.
Avid/Digi design, the owners of Avid and Pro-Tools, saw the writing on the wall and purchased the company M-Audio, which sells millions in PRO SUMER hardware, has yet to realize that if they released a mid range machine that had quad/octo i7 cores, not only would gamers buy these machines (REMEMBER, the sales are larger then MUSIC and VIDEO COMBINED), they would be purchased by PROsumer Musicians, Editors, Teachers, Start up producers, as well as all PRO users as they would have these machines as back up.
Presently, call Sumphony Video in Burbank that teaches Final Cut but mostly AVID.
They, as well as many companies I have been to such as Bravo, and other MAC users, that this school switched to PC servers as it gave more bang for the buck, especially when rendering, and Apple has yet to fill that gap either.
Has made a lot of mistakes but to think that anything other than their Mac Pro, are all MOBILE PARTS, thinks that Windows is going to be a flop at a time when MMS just came out on the iPhone, Tethering is not allowed (unless jailbroken), and that all macbook pro's except the 17" no longer have express slots..(NEEDED VERY MUCH BY AUDIO/VIDEO USERS as it takes the load off the CPU), is a scam as you can no longer buy a 13/15 as a Pro machine.
This is just ONE example of an express card, makes all the older machines worth more actually for pro or prosumer users.
Should not force users to spend several thousand dollars for a MBP or a SERVER WORKSTATION, crap, even Ô TV still doesn't have DVR, why not? Because they want you to BUY the episodes from iTunes, not record them, same reason FLASH is NOT on the iPhone, Google "REAL REASON FLASH IS NOT ON iPhone" and you will get dozens of hits talking about Apple feeling threating by FLASH APPS and VIDEO as then you could (example), watch ABC LOST SEASON 1, ALL, 2, ALL, 3, ALL, 4, ALL and most of 5, but again, would rather have you spend the money on iTunes.
Windows 7 is going to be HUGE and updated everywhere and now that they have the $29 teacher/educator special pricing, it will be that much bigger as everyone wants a legit copy and I find it ironic that in one APPLE INSIDER story, where they spoke of Apples SNOWS pricing vs MSFT, how quickly they forgot about the $129 price.
Is Apple going to fall of the face of the earth, of course NOT, but will Windows 7 and possibly the new Courier make a difference? Yes, huge. As every company in the world that still uses XP will update and everyone know's a teacher or two that will have them buy a copy of Windows 7 for $29 dollars.
The only help I see getting is if they release a mid range sub $999 headless quad/octo machine based on the i7 and stop worrying about the minuscule sales that the Mac Pro's make.
Time for marketing to get it together.
My past titles:
National Marketing and Promotional Director, Composer for Trailers, Studio Manager for very famous composer, Director of Artist Relations, Sound Designer, I.T. Professional mostly MACS, PR, (ala Publicity which Apple gets a lot of free due to the ON PURPOSE HYPE/LEAKS, and Business Affairs, reading contracts and determining royalties.
If you have followed Apple for very long you will know that their upgrade path has been unique and bold over the last 10 years. Going from OS9 to OSX and all that followed since has, indeed, left some users behind somewhat. But that has also made it possible for Apple to create the best OS in the world, one so good, in fact, that M$ has been scurrying like crazy to copy and catch up. Most of what you will see in windows7 came from Apple's innovative OSX systems. In the fast world of computers it is a well known fact that a computer and/or it's OS will be outdated, in all likelihood, before you even get to know all of it's capabilities.
That doesn't mean that all computers bought before the shift to intel are now useless ... quite the contrary ... the used mac industry thrives, check out ebay and craigslist ... and the prices fetched by these used macs make it possible for a lot of us to keep up with the changes with ease.
This is not so with PCs, in general, where sometimes the value of a PC is cut in half, or worse, in as little as 6 months. The other point worth making is that upggrading from Tiger (two OS back) is easily done without losing anything. On the windows side it is much harder to go from XP to win7, and that will be a significant problem due to the very large number of pc users who either did not go to vista or even went back to XP. Not the same story at all.
The article, and my point was that when people promote Mac as better than PCs b/c XP->Windows 7 has extra steps (including backing up). That is better than having no option to upgrade at all. This isn't a conversation on which operating systems do users prefer or how much better a Mac resells for than a PC. It is about having an upgrade path verse none at all. And in that area - Mac fails compared to a PC. For other conversations, resale, or adoption of prior OS, Mac wins. But that isn't the point of the article, nor my comments.
You can't compare the two that way. Microsoft wasn't trying to move it's OS to a different platform altogether. If Apple continued to support PowerPC, it would hinder their ability to innovate on the Intel platform. Snow Leopard would not have been possible without dropping PowerPC support. Most of the under-the-hood changes were made to increase performance on the Intel architecture. Show Leopard for PowerPC would have been a completely different cat and would have required much more time to release. If Apple's going to continue innovating at their current pace, they can't afford to continue supporting PowerPC. Also, it's not like PowerPC Macs are useless in their current state. They're still better than a Windows PC. I would take a PowerPC Mac over a new Windows machine any day, and I'm sure that will still be true years from now. Personally, I like the work that's being done on the Intel architecture. The power and form factor of Apple's current notebooks would just not be possible with PowerPC.
I agree with most of what you are saying. Apple is doing very interesting this with the Intel architexture and I am glad they switched over. It was very important and valueable for users.
But this is a different topic. Executives at Apple cannot come out and mock Microsoft for their upgrade path for users who bought XP in 2001-2006, when Apple themselves has NO upgrade path. Again, I agree with Apple's decisions to do this. But it gives them no legs to stand on either when critizing Microsoft's upgrade path. Sorry - but they need to poke at a different problem because they have no crediability in this one.
Upgrade path always beats no upgrade path - when talking about upgrade paths.
February 2000\tWindows 2000\tNT 5.0.2195\tExtended Support until July 13, 2010[19]\t6
September 2000\tWindows Me\t4.90.3000\tUnsupported\t6
October 2001\tWindows XP\tNT 5.1.2600\tExtended Support until April 8, 2014 for SP3 and July 13, 2010 for SP2. (RTM and SP1 unsupported).\t8
March 2003\tWindows XP 64-bit Edition (IA-64)\tNT 5.2.3790\tUnsupported\t6
April 2003\tWindows Server 2003\tNT 5.2.3790\tCurrent for SP1, R2, SP2 (RTM unsupported).\t8
April 2005\tWindows XP Professional x64 Edition\tNT 5.2.3790\tCurrent\t8
July 2006\tWindows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs\tNT 5.1.2600\tCurrent\t8
November 2006 (volume licensing)
January 2007 (retail)\tWindows Vista\tNT 6.0.6002\tCurrent. Version changed to NT 6.0.6001 with SP1 (February 4, 2008) and to NT 6.0.6002 with SP2 (April 28, 2009).\t8
July 2007\tWindows Home Server\tNT 5.2.4500\tCurrent\t8
February 2008\tWindows Server 2008\tNT 6.0.6002\tCurrent. Version changed to NT 6.0.6002 with SP2 (April 28, 2009).\t8
October 2009 [20]\tWindows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2\tNT 6.1.7600\tRTM
So now all they are doing is getting rid of XP,
It;s a known fact that numerous I.T. departments will upgrade from XP to Windows 7.
No corprate companies updated to Vista, zero.
Now having tried Vista as well as Windows 7, 7 is much faster and can use older hardware than Vista could, so they have done something correct with the coding. Plus they will no longer have to support a dozen operating systems, just Win 7, Vista (hardly any), Server 03and 08 which will also be replaced with Windows 7 server.
Windows 7 will be huge and since most workers will have it at their office, they won;t think twice about getting a new machine with Windows 7 and if the COURIER NOTE PAD is REAL, this means for the first time, like Apple, Microsoft will have 100% control over their hardware and this will be a game changer.
Now, let's take a look at Apple, coming from an Apple fan himself:
They dropped .mac and went with something that looks like windows with mobile me
and when released, remember the nightmare trying to support somthing that was not theirs, Exchange? It was a nightmare yet MSFT has to do this with thousands of software and support. The windows CERTIFIED normally means, in addition to the company paying MSFT, but also means there will be no problems.
Dropped the word computer from their name, catering to consumers more than pro's.
Apple 1 to 1 support used to be part of Apple Genius support which got you faster service, plus the 1 to 1 trainers used to know Shake, Final Cut Pro, Logic, Motion, et-cetera, now all they know (TRAINERS) is iLife and most of the customers are iPhone and Vista switchers who want to learn how to send a e-mail attachment, sad really.
Used to have Mac Pro PPC machines at $1400 plus most iMacs had Matte so you would find them in many design studios.
Apple released a Macbook that once had a 171% openGL rating that did NOT affect gamers but did allow ussers to run MOTION, a few weeks later, released an update which dropped it all the way down to 71%, affecting only the Pro users, or ProSumers, those who kept them afloat BEFORE the iPhone.
Apple then released a faster GPU Macbook, but this time it didn't have FIREWIRE, again, a slap on the faces of the Pro USERS.
Fanboyz, who are the JOBS CAN DO NO WRONG stated over and over it was a SPACE issue with the lack of Firewire. Of course, they were prooved wrong with the newer Macbook that had FIREWIRE and BETTER GPU. Boy did that quiet the fan boys.
Is still under the impression that the PRO MARKET will be hurt if they release a machine that could do a lot, quad or 8 core i7 machines, eating away at Mac Pro machines when the truth is, Gamers alone= more sales then MUSIC and VIDEO combined. once again, has it wrong.
Then you have the enthusiast video editor who cannot afford a Mac Pro and why should they? The Mac Pro uses ON PURPOSE ECC memory and SERVER CPU'S, this is INSANE, this is supposed to be a work station, not a server as it's made with server parts.
Has yet to release a mid range machine like they did just a few years ago.
Avid/Digi design, the owners of Avid and Pro-Tools, saw the writing on the wall and purchased the company M-Audio, which sells millions in PRO SUMER hardware, has yet to realize that if they released a mid range machine that had quad/octo i7 cores, not only would gamers buy these machines (REMEMBER, the sales are larger then MUSIC and VIDEO COMBINED), they would be purchased by PROsumer Musicians, Editors, Teachers, Start up producers, as well as all PRO users as they would have these machines as back up.
Presently, call Sumphony Video in Burbank that teaches Final Cut but mostly AVID.
They, as well as many companies I have been to such as Bravo, and other MAC users, that this school switched to PC servers as it gave more bang for the buck, especially when rendering, and Apple has yet to fill that gap either.
Has made a lot of mistakes but to think that anything other than their Mac Pro, are all MOBILE PARTS, thinks that Windows is going to be a flop at a time when MMS just came out on the iPhone, Tethering is not allowed (unless jailbroken), and that all macbook pro's except the 17" no longer have express slots..(NEEDED VERY MUCH BY AUDIO/VIDEO USERS as it takes the load off the CPU), is a scam as you can no longer buy a 13/15 as a Pro machine.
This is just ONE example of an express card, makes all the older machines worth more actually for pro or prosumer users.
Should not force users to spend several thousand dollars for a MBP or a SERVER WORKSTATION, crap, even Ô TV still doesn't have DVR, why not? Because they want you to BUY the episodes from iTunes, not record them, same reason FLASH is NOT on the iPhone, Google "REAL REASON FLASH IS NOT ON iPhone" and you will get dozens of hits talking about Apple feeling threating by FLASH APPS and VIDEO as then you could (example), watch ABC LOST SEASON 1, ALL, 2, ALL, 3, ALL, 4, ALL and most of 5, but again, would rather have you spend the money on iTunes.
Windows 7 is going to be HUGE and updated everywhere and now that they have the $29 teacher/educator special pricing, it will be that much bigger as everyone wants a legit copy and I find it ironic that in one APPLE INSIDER story, where they spoke of Apples SNOWS pricing vs MSFT, how quickly they forgot about the $129 price.
Is Apple going to fall of the face of the earth, of course NOT, but will Windows 7 and possibly the new Courier make a difference? Yes, huge. As every company in the world that still uses XP will update and everyone know's a teacher or two that will have them buy a copy of Windows 7 for $29 dollars.
The only help I see getting is if they release a mid range sub $999 headless quad/octo machine based on the i7 and stop worrying about the minuscule sales that the Mac Pro's make.
Time for marketing to get it together.
My past titles:
National Marketing and Promotional Director, Composer for Trailers, Studio Manager for very famous composer, Director of Artist Relations, Sound Designer, I.T. Professional mostly MACS, PR, (ala Publicity which Apple gets a lot of free due to the ON PURPOSE HYPE/LEAKS, and Business Affairs, reading contracts and determining royalties.
But this is a different topic. Executives at Apple cannot come out and mock Microsoft for their upgrade path for users who bought XP in 2001-2006, when Apple themselves has NO upgrade path. Again, I agree with Apple's decisions to do this. But it gives them no legs to stand on either when critizing Microsoft's upgrade path. Sorry - but they need to poke at a different problem because they have no crediability in this one.
Upgrade path always beats no upgrade path - when talking about paths.
Every Mac released has had an upgrade path? Almost every release of OS X has run better than the previous version and added exciting new features.
No credibility? Why, it's not like Apple six years of bungling to ship an OS with advanced graphics, instant search etc.
Then spent another 3 years getting the performance right for "low end" (1GB RAM) hardware.
Apple has steadily incremented their OS steadily over the years, adding useful features each time (spotlight, expose, time machine, spaces etc.), to which many users (of PPC and intel machines alike) have been able to upgrade and use.
A Windows XP machine, purchased in, say 2006 (pre Vista - maybe one of those "Vista ready" specials which couldn't actually run Vista) would have precisely zero these modern features (search, modern graphics) OS X customers have been enjoying for years.
So who exactly is treating their customers better?
If you brought a Mac between 2001 and 2006, you could likely upgrade to one or more of:
2001 Mac OS X 10.1 Puma
2002 Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar
2003 Mac OS X 10.3 Panther (this was when support for machines from 1998 ran out)
2005 Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger
2007 Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard (867MHz G4 or better)
2009 Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard (intel core duo or better)
No offence, but I think there is an also lot of revisionism going on here...!
Apple no credibility... Microsoft, champion of the upgrade path....
Every Mac released has had an upgrade path? Almost every release of OS X has run better than the previous version and added exciting new features.
No credibility? Why, it's not like Apple six years of bungling to ship an OS with advanced graphics, instant search etc.
Then spent another 3 years getting the performance right for "low end" (1GB RAM) hardware.
Apple has steadily incremented their OS steadily over the years, adding useful features each time (spotlight, expose, time machine, spaces etc.), to which many users (of PPC and intel machines alike) have been able to upgrade and use.
A Windows XP machine, purchased in, say 2006 (pre Vista - maybe one of those "Vista ready" specials which couldn't actually run Vista) would have precisely zero these modern features (search, modern graphics) OS X customers have been enjoying for years.
So who exactly is treating their customers better?
If you brought a Mac between 2001 and 2006, you could likely upgrade to one or more of:
2001 Mac OS X 10.1 Puma
2002 Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar
2003 Mac OS X 10.3 Panther (this was when support for machines from 1998 ran out)
2005 Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger
2007 Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard (867MHz G4 or better)
2009 Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard (intel core duo or better)
No offence, but I think there is an also lot of revisionism going on here...!
Apple no credibility... Microsoft, champion of the upgrade path....
I am not sure I understand your point. Do you just cut and paste these things?
The article quotes Apple VPs as mocking the Microsoft XP upgrade path - when Apple themselves have no upgrade path of their own, to Snow Leopard from any computer bought before 2006. That means Puma, Jaguar, Panther, and and some Tiger purchased computers cannot upgrade to Apple's latest operating system.
Regardless if Apple added search or advanced graphics to their operating system and when - they still have no upgrade path for Macs bought before 2006. And like I mentioned many times before, I understand and agree with "why" they are doing this.
But it leaves Apple Executives no legs to stand on when mocking Microsoft's upgrade path for pcs bought around this same time frame (2001-2006) to their latest release. What say you about this topic, the topic of the article, the topic of my comments? Not about search features, graphics advancements, and vista capatible complaints.
Let's not have more of the same copy/paste discussions where you avoid the topic at hand and instead take cheap shots at unrelated topics.
I didn't think I was being that abstract and thought my points were fairly clear. But clearly not clear enough. I don't think I made cheap shots, not do I think my points are unrelated.
I am not sure I understand your point. Do you just cut and paste these things?
The article quotes Apple VPs as mocking the Microsoft XP upgrade path - when Apple themselves have no upgrade path of their own, to Snow Leopard from any computer bought before 2006. That means Puma, Jaguar, Panther, and and some Tiger purchased computers cannot upgrade to Apple's latest operating system.
Regardless if Apple added search or advanced graphics to their operating system and when - they still have no upgrade path for Macs bought before 2006. And like I mentioned many times before, I understand and agree with "why" they are doing this.
But it leaves Apple Executives no legs to stand on when mocking Microsoft's upgrade path for pcs bought around this same time frame (2001-2006) to their latest release. What say you about this topic, the topic of the article, the topic of my comments? Not about search features, graphics advancements, and vista capatible complaints.
Let's not have more of the same copy/paste discussions where you avoid the topic at hand and instead take cheap shots at unrelated topics.
See my prevoois post, as people just are not getting it.
They are taking Win 7 to lightly. I.T. will upgrade, it's been years of XP and now finally someting that works out of the box. With Vista I had to wait a year for driver to finally come out, win 7, it just worked, ala, veryMAC like.
Again, I use MAC 90% o the time.
The what the #$@$ was that was how Apple has gone from Pro to all Consumers and failed to release anything for the midrange even though its 10,000 to 1 times larger.
They losing billions in sales.
Do not Take Vista lightly, if the Courier is true, then its game, set, match as this means MSFT's first time computer with 100% control. Win 7 is going to be very large indeed.
Comments
Millions of people bought an iMacs in 2005. You are claiming it is their fault? Regardless, Apple has cut them off from upgrades. How can you complain that Microsoft's upgrade path is too complicated when Apple doesn't have one at all for any computer bought before 2006.
Given Vista started shipping on every computer since Jan 2007, people upgrading from XP are mostly people who bought computers earlier than 2006/2007. Again, Apple has cut those users off from upgrades. For everyone 2007 and later, both Microsoft and Apple have great, simliar upgrade paths for there users.
So the discussion is really around no upgrade path (Apple) or one that requires backing up files (Microsoft) for the group of users 2-3+ years out. For everyone else, it is not an issue on either platform.
Aaron
If you have followed Apple for very long you will know that their upgrade path has been unique and bold over the last 10 years. Going from OS9 to OSX and all that followed since has, indeed, left some users behind somewhat. But that has also made it possible for Apple to create the best OS in the world, one so good, in fact, that M$ has been scurrying like crazy to copy and catch up. Most of what you will see in windows7 came from Apple's innovative OSX systems. In the fast world of computers it is a well known fact that a computer and/or it's OS will be outdated, in all likelihood, before you even get to know all of it's capabilities.
That doesn't mean that all computers bought before the shift to intel are now useless ... quite the contrary ... the used mac industry thrives, check out ebay and craigslist ... and the prices fetched by these used macs make it possible for a lot of us to keep up with the changes with ease.
This is not so with PCs, in general, where sometimes the value of a PC is cut in half, or worse, in as little as 6 months. The other point worth making is that upggrading from Tiger (two OS back) is easily done without losing anything. On the windows side it is much harder to go from XP to win7, and that will be a significant problem due to the very large number of pc users who either did not go to vista or even went back to XP. Not the same story at all.
You needed to edit that lame post NEWBEE? What do you add on here but relentless simplistic attacks on me which are neither witty nor intelligent. Back to your barn now.
I had to "dumb it down" so you could understand it, TeckDud. No need to thank me, tho, I got your best interest at heart.
First: they didn't offer that option to Vista users but to people who were frightened to buy a Vista machine because they never tried Vista. And second: it tells me that you have to form your own opinion.
Of course they never offered it to someone who ALREADY BOUGHT .... but they had to offer it to GET PEOPLE TO BUY! Now do you understand. Please say yes so I won't be awake all night worrying about you.
Do you ever post anything that is acutally on topic? Everytime I see you post you are just following around other members trying to insult them. For someone that says they are 68 you act like you are 13.
Its pathetic you cant do anything but insult people.
It's only the trollers that tick me off ... stop trolling, I'll stop replying. simple.
Of course they never offered it to someone who ALREADY BOUGHT .... but they had to offer it to GET PEOPLE TO BUY! Now do you understand. Please say yes so I won't be awake all night worrying about you.
Important point you are missing is that downgrade was/is available only for business oriented PCs. You can downgrade only Vista Business and Vista Ultimate. Vista Home flavours do not have downgrade option.
Major reason for that is that IT departments in many companies feared they cannot upgrade all of their computers to Vista because of various reasons, old hardware and legacy software being most common ones. Some of them could have Vista on new machines while keeping XP on older ones (or those running legacy software not happy with Vista), but IT departments are lazy by default and will avoid complications such as supporting 2 different platforms at the same time (which is likely one of the major reasons why OSX has such poor penetration into business market).
Microsoft had option to keep selling such clients XP on new machines (which was still generating money and making hardware manufacturers happy by letting them sell new hardware to business clients) or not to sell XP at all which would cause them not to mke any profit, as well as hardware manufacturers since clients would keep on using old hardware with old XP installs for prolonged period.
So Microsoft decided to make some money and keep Dell, HP and others happy. Hardly a surprise.
Vista home users had no choice but to use their Vista installs. That would not be bad at all - Vista is definitely better code than XP - haven't MS let OEMs to screw up things by baptising every computer "Vista Capable". Yes, 512Mb Celeron notebook can run Vista, but capable it is not. At the end, that backfired and helped creating such negative public opinion on Vista.
Millions of people bought an iMacs in 2005. You are claiming it is their fault? Regardless, Apple has cut them off from upgrades.
Aaron
It doesn't matter. The market hardly even noticed. You've got people in a recession forking out for Macs, handing Apple record quarters. And it looks like Apple's about to have another one come Monday.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/17373...all_logic.html
The PowerPC upgrade issue is a non-issue. It has had zero impact on Apple's growth and will be even more irrelevant as time goes on. The PowerPC issue lives and dies on Apple fansites where a minority still care about it. It has no real basis in reality except the "reality" dreamed up on these forums.
It is not Teckstud fault, since Apple/Epson have released via Software update the new printer drivers for Epson for SL.
see link: http://www.apple.com/downloads/macos...cosxv1061.html
It is clearly discussed on Apple's site and I had the same issue with my wife's brand new Epson printer.
Reason why I made the comment to Teckstud, he should have his Apple Software update on auto mode.
Yeah, but I had a similar experience with my Lexmark printer, (about a year old). Through several updates, the Mac drivers from Lexmark NEVER worked with the printer. That is until about two months before SL came out. Their latest updated driver finally worked. But then I upgraded to SL and the SL drivers didn't work either. About two or three weeks later Lexmark came out with their own drivers for SL and thankfully I can print to that printer again.
Perhaps it will do Apple a lot of good to lose for awhile. Get their focus off supporting the Washington socialists who one day will just decide to take over their business in the name of the people.
Nut.
Millions of people bought an iMacs in 2005. You are claiming it is their fault? Regardless, Apple has cut them off from upgrades. How can you complain that Microsoft's upgrade path is too complicated when Apple doesn't have one at all for any computer bought before 2006.
Given Vista started shipping on every computer since Jan 2007, people upgrading from XP are mostly people who bought computers earlier than 2006/2007. Again, Apple has cut those users off from upgrades. For everyone 2007 and later, both Microsoft and Apple have great, simliar upgrade paths for there users.
So the discussion is really around no upgrade path (Apple) or one that requires backing up files (Microsoft) for the group of users 2-3+ years out. For everyone else, it is not an issue on either platform.
Aaron
You can't compare the two that way. Microsoft wasn't trying to move it's OS to a different platform altogether. If Apple continued to support PowerPC, it would hinder their ability to innovate on the Intel platform. Snow Leopard would not have been possible without dropping PowerPC support. Most of the under-the-hood changes were made to increase performance on the Intel architecture. Show Leopard for PowerPC would have been a completely different cat and would have required much more time to release. If Apple's going to continue innovating at their current pace, they can't afford to continue supporting PowerPC. Also, it's not like PowerPC Macs are useless in their current state. They're still better than a Windows PC. I would take a PowerPC Mac over a new Windows machine any day, and I'm sure that will still be true years from now. Personally, I like the work that's being done on the Intel architecture. The power and form factor of Apple's current notebooks would just not be possible with PowerPC.
Important point you are missing is that downgrade was/is available only for business oriented PCs. You can downgrade only Vista Business and Vista Ultimate. Vista Home flavours do not have downgrade option.
Not being a big M$ fan or follower, I was not aware of that, but as I understand it, the corporate side is a huge component of M$ sales, maybe even the largest, so it stands to reason they had no choice but to protect that user group. The main point, as I see it, was that a very large number of potential customers obviously tried it, said no thanks, now get me back to XP. Question: Would some home users not spring for Vista Ultimate just because it's "the best"?
Yes? And why can't you upgrade a 4 year old Mac then?
A four year old Mac would have been released in 2005. This would have meant that (if it was purchased at the beginning of 2005) it would have been eligible for an update to Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, which was released in Spring 2005.
If it was purchased in late 2005 it would have already been running Tiger, but would have been eligible to update to Leopard in 2007.
So in the timeframe between 2005 and today, you could have potentially updated a 2005 Mac with two rounds of new system software, each adding major new functionality.
Similarly all Webkit (Safari) and security updates will be made available to this machine.
So your main bone of contention is that this 2005 machine cannot be upgraded to the late 2009 Snow Leopard? Why is this? Because Apple had to draw a line somewhere.
Also, as Snow Leopard adds very few new user facing features (it does add a few) you are not actually missing out on much new functionality until the next release of OS X, which will likely be 2011 sometime. That's quite a while from 2005.
You may of course miss out on Software optimised for Grand Central Dispatch and Open CL, but if you have a 2005 Mac it may not be multi-core anyway or have a graphics card compatible with Open CL. So even if the software could be upgraded, it is likely the hardware would be behind.
Also, this machine purchased in 2005 is still capable of performing all the operations you wanted it to achieve when you purchased it. Plus the added bonus of some useful features added by Tiger (e.g. Spotlight) and Leopard (e.g. easy backup with Time Machine).
Apple did not support upgrade from PowerPCs and Microsoft did not deliver upgrade from XP to 7. Where is the difference?
Microsoft have never ever done a processor transition in their history of this magnitude. That has been explained before.
If you are going from XP to 7 on a 2005 PC the biggest noticeable benefit will be the graphics provided by the Aero 2D graphical compositing windowing system, which many of the features (Aero Peak, Shake etc.) are built on.
Similar features have been in the Mac since 2001 with Mac OS X. Aqua, Spotlight, Expose came with your 2005 PPC Mac.
As a Mac user
So am I. I have both but user mac 90% of the time.....
Windows 7 will have little or no negative impact on Mac sales. People buy Macs because they want Macs. They want the Apple brand, not just some PC.
Anyway. Go Mac and let's get that tablet on the market. I want that oversize Touch very badly.
No, no, no...
At the time of Vista, Microsoft had to support:
February 2000\tWindows 2000\tNT 5.0.2195\tExtended Support until July 13, 2010[19]\t6
September 2000\tWindows Me\t4.90.3000\tUnsupported\t6
October 2001\tWindows XP\tNT 5.1.2600\tExtended Support until April 8, 2014 for SP3 and July 13, 2010 for SP2. (RTM and SP1 unsupported).\t8
March 2003\tWindows XP 64-bit Edition (IA-64)\tNT 5.2.3790\tUnsupported\t6
April 2003\tWindows Server 2003\tNT 5.2.3790\tCurrent for SP1, R2, SP2 (RTM unsupported).\t8
April 2005\tWindows XP Professional x64 Edition\tNT 5.2.3790\tCurrent\t8
July 2006\tWindows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs\tNT 5.1.2600\tCurrent\t8
November 2006 (volume licensing)
January 2007 (retail)\tWindows Vista\tNT 6.0.6002\tCurrent. Version changed to NT 6.0.6001 with SP1 (February 4, 2008) and to NT 6.0.6002 with SP2 (April 28, 2009).\t8
July 2007\tWindows Home Server\tNT 5.2.4500\tCurrent\t8
February 2008\tWindows Server 2008\tNT 6.0.6002\tCurrent. Version changed to NT 6.0.6002 with SP2 (April 28, 2009).\t8
October 2009 [20]\tWindows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2\tNT 6.1.7600\tRTM
So now all they are doing is getting rid of XP,
It;s a known fact that numerous I.T. departments will upgrade from XP to Windows 7.
No corprate companies updated to Vista, zero.
Now having tried Vista as well as Windows 7, 7 is much faster and can use older hardware than Vista could, so they have done something correct with the coding. Plus they will no longer have to support a dozen operating systems, just Win 7, Vista (hardly any), Server 03and 08 which will also be replaced with Windows 7 server.
Windows 7 will be huge and since most workers will have it at their office, they won;t think twice about getting a new machine with Windows 7 and if the COURIER NOTE PAD is REAL, this means for the first time, like Apple, Microsoft will have 100% control over their hardware and this will be a game changer.
Now, let's take a look at Apple, coming from an Apple fan himself:
They dropped .mac and went with something that looks like windows with mobile me
and when released, remember the nightmare trying to support somthing that was not theirs, Exchange? It was a nightmare yet MSFT has to do this with thousands of software and support. The windows CERTIFIED normally means, in addition to the company paying MSFT, but also means there will be no problems.
Dropped the word computer from their name, catering to consumers more than pro's.
Apple 1 to 1 support used to be part of Apple Genius support which got you faster service, plus the 1 to 1 trainers used to know Shake, Final Cut Pro, Logic, Motion, et-cetera, now all they know (TRAINERS) is iLife and most of the customers are iPhone and Vista switchers who want to learn how to send a e-mail attachment, sad really.
Used to have Mac Pro PPC machines at $1400 plus most iMacs had Matte so you would find them in many design studios.
Apple released a Macbook that once had a 171% openGL rating that did NOT affect gamers but did allow ussers to run MOTION, a few weeks later, released an update which dropped it all the way down to 71%, affecting only the Pro users, or ProSumers, those who kept them afloat BEFORE the iPhone.
Apple then released a faster GPU Macbook, but this time it didn't have FIREWIRE, again, a slap on the faces of the Pro USERS.
Fanboyz, who are the JOBS CAN DO NO WRONG stated over and over it was a SPACE issue with the lack of Firewire. Of course, they were prooved wrong with the newer Macbook that had FIREWIRE and BETTER GPU. Boy did that quiet the fan boys.
Is still under the impression that the PRO MARKET will be hurt if they release a machine that could do a lot, quad or 8 core i7 machines, eating away at Mac Pro machines when the truth is, Gamers alone= more sales then MUSIC and VIDEO combined. once again, has it wrong.
Then you have the enthusiast video editor who cannot afford a Mac Pro and why should they? The Mac Pro uses ON PURPOSE ECC memory and SERVER CPU'S, this is INSANE, this is supposed to be a work station, not a server as it's made with server parts.
Has yet to release a mid range machine like they did just a few years ago.
Avid/Digi design, the owners of Avid and Pro-Tools, saw the writing on the wall and purchased the company M-Audio, which sells millions in PRO SUMER hardware, has yet to realize that if they released a mid range machine that had quad/octo i7 cores, not only would gamers buy these machines (REMEMBER, the sales are larger then MUSIC and VIDEO COMBINED), they would be purchased by PROsumer Musicians, Editors, Teachers, Start up producers, as well as all PRO users as they would have these machines as back up.
Presently, call Sumphony Video in Burbank that teaches Final Cut but mostly AVID.
They, as well as many companies I have been to such as Bravo, and other MAC users, that this school switched to PC servers as it gave more bang for the buck, especially when rendering, and Apple has yet to fill that gap either.
Has made a lot of mistakes but to think that anything other than their Mac Pro, are all MOBILE PARTS, thinks that Windows is going to be a flop at a time when MMS just came out on the iPhone, Tethering is not allowed (unless jailbroken), and that all macbook pro's except the 17" no longer have express slots..(NEEDED VERY MUCH BY AUDIO/VIDEO USERS as it takes the load off the CPU), is a scam as you can no longer buy a 13/15 as a Pro machine.
This is just ONE example of an express card, makes all the older machines worth more actually for pro or prosumer users.
http://www.uaudio.com/products/uad/uad2sl/index.html
Should not force users to spend several thousand dollars for a MBP or a SERVER WORKSTATION, crap, even Ô TV still doesn't have DVR, why not? Because they want you to BUY the episodes from iTunes, not record them, same reason FLASH is NOT on the iPhone, Google "REAL REASON FLASH IS NOT ON iPhone" and you will get dozens of hits talking about Apple feeling threating by FLASH APPS and VIDEO as then you could (example), watch ABC LOST SEASON 1, ALL, 2, ALL, 3, ALL, 4, ALL and most of 5, but again, would rather have you spend the money on iTunes.
Windows 7 is going to be HUGE and updated everywhere and now that they have the $29 teacher/educator special pricing, it will be that much bigger as everyone wants a legit copy and I find it ironic that in one APPLE INSIDER story, where they spoke of Apples SNOWS pricing vs MSFT, how quickly they forgot about the $129 price.
Is Apple going to fall of the face of the earth, of course NOT, but will Windows 7 and possibly the new Courier make a difference? Yes, huge. As every company in the world that still uses XP will update and everyone know's a teacher or two that will have them buy a copy of Windows 7 for $29 dollars.
The only help I see getting is if they release a mid range sub $999 headless quad/octo machine based on the i7 and stop worrying about the minuscule sales that the Mac Pro's make.
Time for marketing to get it together.
My past titles:
National Marketing and Promotional Director, Composer for Trailers, Studio Manager for very famous composer, Director of Artist Relations, Sound Designer, I.T. Professional mostly MACS, PR, (ala Publicity which Apple gets a lot of free due to the ON PURPOSE HYPE/LEAKS, and Business Affairs, reading contracts and determining royalties.
Just something to think about.
Peace all.
If you have followed Apple for very long you will know that their upgrade path has been unique and bold over the last 10 years. Going from OS9 to OSX and all that followed since has, indeed, left some users behind somewhat. But that has also made it possible for Apple to create the best OS in the world, one so good, in fact, that M$ has been scurrying like crazy to copy and catch up. Most of what you will see in windows7 came from Apple's innovative OSX systems. In the fast world of computers it is a well known fact that a computer and/or it's OS will be outdated, in all likelihood, before you even get to know all of it's capabilities.
That doesn't mean that all computers bought before the shift to intel are now useless ... quite the contrary ... the used mac industry thrives, check out ebay and craigslist ... and the prices fetched by these used macs make it possible for a lot of us to keep up with the changes with ease.
This is not so with PCs, in general, where sometimes the value of a PC is cut in half, or worse, in as little as 6 months. The other point worth making is that upggrading from Tiger (two OS back) is easily done without losing anything. On the windows side it is much harder to go from XP to win7, and that will be a significant problem due to the very large number of pc users who either did not go to vista or even went back to XP. Not the same story at all.
The article, and my point was that when people promote Mac as better than PCs b/c XP->Windows 7 has extra steps (including backing up). That is better than having no option to upgrade at all. This isn't a conversation on which operating systems do users prefer or how much better a Mac resells for than a PC. It is about having an upgrade path verse none at all. And in that area - Mac fails compared to a PC. For other conversations, resale, or adoption of prior OS, Mac wins. But that isn't the point of the article, nor my comments.
Let's try and stay on topic.
You can't compare the two that way. Microsoft wasn't trying to move it's OS to a different platform altogether. If Apple continued to support PowerPC, it would hinder their ability to innovate on the Intel platform. Snow Leopard would not have been possible without dropping PowerPC support. Most of the under-the-hood changes were made to increase performance on the Intel architecture. Show Leopard for PowerPC would have been a completely different cat and would have required much more time to release. If Apple's going to continue innovating at their current pace, they can't afford to continue supporting PowerPC. Also, it's not like PowerPC Macs are useless in their current state. They're still better than a Windows PC. I would take a PowerPC Mac over a new Windows machine any day, and I'm sure that will still be true years from now. Personally, I like the work that's being done on the Intel architecture. The power and form factor of Apple's current notebooks would just not be possible with PowerPC.
I agree with most of what you are saying. Apple is doing very interesting this with the Intel architexture and I am glad they switched over. It was very important and valueable for users.
But this is a different topic. Executives at Apple cannot come out and mock Microsoft for their upgrade path for users who bought XP in 2001-2006, when Apple themselves has NO upgrade path. Again, I agree with Apple's decisions to do this. But it gives them no legs to stand on either when critizing Microsoft's upgrade path. Sorry - but they need to poke at a different problem because they have no crediability in this one.
Upgrade path always beats no upgrade path - when talking about upgrade paths.
At the time of Vista, Microsoft had to support:
February 2000\tWindows 2000\tNT 5.0.2195\tExtended Support until July 13, 2010[19]\t6
September 2000\tWindows Me\t4.90.3000\tUnsupported\t6
October 2001\tWindows XP\tNT 5.1.2600\tExtended Support until April 8, 2014 for SP3 and July 13, 2010 for SP2. (RTM and SP1 unsupported).\t8
March 2003\tWindows XP 64-bit Edition (IA-64)\tNT 5.2.3790\tUnsupported\t6
April 2003\tWindows Server 2003\tNT 5.2.3790\tCurrent for SP1, R2, SP2 (RTM unsupported).\t8
April 2005\tWindows XP Professional x64 Edition\tNT 5.2.3790\tCurrent\t8
July 2006\tWindows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs\tNT 5.1.2600\tCurrent\t8
November 2006 (volume licensing)
January 2007 (retail)\tWindows Vista\tNT 6.0.6002\tCurrent. Version changed to NT 6.0.6001 with SP1 (February 4, 2008) and to NT 6.0.6002 with SP2 (April 28, 2009).\t8
July 2007\tWindows Home Server\tNT 5.2.4500\tCurrent\t8
February 2008\tWindows Server 2008\tNT 6.0.6002\tCurrent. Version changed to NT 6.0.6002 with SP2 (April 28, 2009).\t8
October 2009 [20]\tWindows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2\tNT 6.1.7600\tRTM
So now all they are doing is getting rid of XP,
It;s a known fact that numerous I.T. departments will upgrade from XP to Windows 7.
No corprate companies updated to Vista, zero.
Now having tried Vista as well as Windows 7, 7 is much faster and can use older hardware than Vista could, so they have done something correct with the coding. Plus they will no longer have to support a dozen operating systems, just Win 7, Vista (hardly any), Server 03and 08 which will also be replaced with Windows 7 server.
Windows 7 will be huge and since most workers will have it at their office, they won;t think twice about getting a new machine with Windows 7 and if the COURIER NOTE PAD is REAL, this means for the first time, like Apple, Microsoft will have 100% control over their hardware and this will be a game changer.
Now, let's take a look at Apple, coming from an Apple fan himself:
They dropped .mac and went with something that looks like windows with mobile me
and when released, remember the nightmare trying to support somthing that was not theirs, Exchange? It was a nightmare yet MSFT has to do this with thousands of software and support. The windows CERTIFIED normally means, in addition to the company paying MSFT, but also means there will be no problems.
Dropped the word computer from their name, catering to consumers more than pro's.
Apple 1 to 1 support used to be part of Apple Genius support which got you faster service, plus the 1 to 1 trainers used to know Shake, Final Cut Pro, Logic, Motion, et-cetera, now all they know (TRAINERS) is iLife and most of the customers are iPhone and Vista switchers who want to learn how to send a e-mail attachment, sad really.
Used to have Mac Pro PPC machines at $1400 plus most iMacs had Matte so you would find them in many design studios.
Apple released a Macbook that once had a 171% openGL rating that did NOT affect gamers but did allow ussers to run MOTION, a few weeks later, released an update which dropped it all the way down to 71%, affecting only the Pro users, or ProSumers, those who kept them afloat BEFORE the iPhone.
Apple then released a faster GPU Macbook, but this time it didn't have FIREWIRE, again, a slap on the faces of the Pro USERS.
Fanboyz, who are the JOBS CAN DO NO WRONG stated over and over it was a SPACE issue with the lack of Firewire. Of course, they were prooved wrong with the newer Macbook that had FIREWIRE and BETTER GPU. Boy did that quiet the fan boys.
Is still under the impression that the PRO MARKET will be hurt if they release a machine that could do a lot, quad or 8 core i7 machines, eating away at Mac Pro machines when the truth is, Gamers alone= more sales then MUSIC and VIDEO combined. once again, has it wrong.
Then you have the enthusiast video editor who cannot afford a Mac Pro and why should they? The Mac Pro uses ON PURPOSE ECC memory and SERVER CPU'S, this is INSANE, this is supposed to be a work station, not a server as it's made with server parts.
Has yet to release a mid range machine like they did just a few years ago.
Avid/Digi design, the owners of Avid and Pro-Tools, saw the writing on the wall and purchased the company M-Audio, which sells millions in PRO SUMER hardware, has yet to realize that if they released a mid range machine that had quad/octo i7 cores, not only would gamers buy these machines (REMEMBER, the sales are larger then MUSIC and VIDEO COMBINED), they would be purchased by PROsumer Musicians, Editors, Teachers, Start up producers, as well as all PRO users as they would have these machines as back up.
Presently, call Sumphony Video in Burbank that teaches Final Cut but mostly AVID.
They, as well as many companies I have been to such as Bravo, and other MAC users, that this school switched to PC servers as it gave more bang for the buck, especially when rendering, and Apple has yet to fill that gap either.
Has made a lot of mistakes but to think that anything other than their Mac Pro, are all MOBILE PARTS, thinks that Windows is going to be a flop at a time when MMS just came out on the iPhone, Tethering is not allowed (unless jailbroken), and that all macbook pro's except the 17" no longer have express slots..(NEEDED VERY MUCH BY AUDIO/VIDEO USERS as it takes the load off the CPU), is a scam as you can no longer buy a 13/15 as a Pro machine.
This is just ONE example of an express card, makes all the older machines worth more actually for pro or prosumer users.
http://www.uaudio.com/products/uad/uad2sl/index.html
Should not force users to spend several thousand dollars for a MBP or a SERVER WORKSTATION, crap, even Ô TV still doesn't have DVR, why not? Because they want you to BUY the episodes from iTunes, not record them, same reason FLASH is NOT on the iPhone, Google "REAL REASON FLASH IS NOT ON iPhone" and you will get dozens of hits talking about Apple feeling threating by FLASH APPS and VIDEO as then you could (example), watch ABC LOST SEASON 1, ALL, 2, ALL, 3, ALL, 4, ALL and most of 5, but again, would rather have you spend the money on iTunes.
Windows 7 is going to be HUGE and updated everywhere and now that they have the $29 teacher/educator special pricing, it will be that much bigger as everyone wants a legit copy and I find it ironic that in one APPLE INSIDER story, where they spoke of Apples SNOWS pricing vs MSFT, how quickly they forgot about the $129 price.
Is Apple going to fall of the face of the earth, of course NOT, but will Windows 7 and possibly the new Courier make a difference? Yes, huge. As every company in the world that still uses XP will update and everyone know's a teacher or two that will have them buy a copy of Windows 7 for $29 dollars.
The only help I see getting is if they release a mid range sub $999 headless quad/octo machine based on the i7 and stop worrying about the minuscule sales that the Mac Pro's make.
Time for marketing to get it together.
My past titles:
National Marketing and Promotional Director, Composer for Trailers, Studio Manager for very famous composer, Director of Artist Relations, Sound Designer, I.T. Professional mostly MACS, PR, (ala Publicity which Apple gets a lot of free due to the ON PURPOSE HYPE/LEAKS, and Business Affairs, reading contracts and determining royalties.
Just something to think about.
What... the...hell... was... that?
But this is a different topic. Executives at Apple cannot come out and mock Microsoft for their upgrade path for users who bought XP in 2001-2006, when Apple themselves has NO upgrade path. Again, I agree with Apple's decisions to do this. But it gives them no legs to stand on either when critizing Microsoft's upgrade path. Sorry - but they need to poke at a different problem because they have no crediability in this one.
Upgrade path always beats no upgrade path - when talking about paths.
Every Mac released has had an upgrade path? Almost every release of OS X has run better than the previous version and added exciting new features.
No credibility? Why, it's not like Apple six years of bungling to ship an OS with advanced graphics, instant search etc.
Then spent another 3 years getting the performance right for "low end" (1GB RAM) hardware.
Apple has steadily incremented their OS steadily over the years, adding useful features each time (spotlight, expose, time machine, spaces etc.), to which many users (of PPC and intel machines alike) have been able to upgrade and use.
A Windows XP machine, purchased in, say 2006 (pre Vista - maybe one of those "Vista ready" specials which couldn't actually run Vista) would have precisely zero these modern features (search, modern graphics) OS X customers have been enjoying for years.
So who exactly is treating their customers better?
If you brought a Mac between 2001 and 2006, you could likely upgrade to one or more of:
2001 Mac OS X 10.1 Puma
2002 Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar
2003 Mac OS X 10.3 Panther (this was when support for machines from 1998 ran out)
2005 Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger
2007 Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard (867MHz G4 or better)
2009 Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard (intel core duo or better)
No offence, but I think there is an also lot of revisionism going on here...!
Apple no credibility... Microsoft, champion of the upgrade path....
Every Mac released has had an upgrade path? Almost every release of OS X has run better than the previous version and added exciting new features.
No credibility? Why, it's not like Apple six years of bungling to ship an OS with advanced graphics, instant search etc.
Then spent another 3 years getting the performance right for "low end" (1GB RAM) hardware.
Apple has steadily incremented their OS steadily over the years, adding useful features each time (spotlight, expose, time machine, spaces etc.), to which many users (of PPC and intel machines alike) have been able to upgrade and use.
A Windows XP machine, purchased in, say 2006 (pre Vista - maybe one of those "Vista ready" specials which couldn't actually run Vista) would have precisely zero these modern features (search, modern graphics) OS X customers have been enjoying for years.
So who exactly is treating their customers better?
If you brought a Mac between 2001 and 2006, you could likely upgrade to one or more of:
2001 Mac OS X 10.1 Puma
2002 Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar
2003 Mac OS X 10.3 Panther (this was when support for machines from 1998 ran out)
2005 Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger
2007 Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard (867MHz G4 or better)
2009 Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard (intel core duo or better)
No offence, but I think there is an also lot of revisionism going on here...!
Apple no credibility... Microsoft, champion of the upgrade path....
I am not sure I understand your point. Do you just cut and paste these things?
The article quotes Apple VPs as mocking the Microsoft XP upgrade path - when Apple themselves have no upgrade path of their own, to Snow Leopard from any computer bought before 2006. That means Puma, Jaguar, Panther, and and some Tiger purchased computers cannot upgrade to Apple's latest operating system.
Regardless if Apple added search or advanced graphics to their operating system and when - they still have no upgrade path for Macs bought before 2006. And like I mentioned many times before, I understand and agree with "why" they are doing this.
But it leaves Apple Executives no legs to stand on when mocking Microsoft's upgrade path for pcs bought around this same time frame (2001-2006) to their latest release. What say you about this topic, the topic of the article, the topic of my comments? Not about search features, graphics advancements, and vista capatible complaints.
Let's not have more of the same copy/paste discussions where you avoid the topic at hand and instead take cheap shots at unrelated topics.
I am not sure I understand your point. Do you just cut and paste these things?
The article quotes Apple VPs as mocking the Microsoft XP upgrade path - when Apple themselves have no upgrade path of their own, to Snow Leopard from any computer bought before 2006. That means Puma, Jaguar, Panther, and and some Tiger purchased computers cannot upgrade to Apple's latest operating system.
Regardless if Apple added search or advanced graphics to their operating system and when - they still have no upgrade path for Macs bought before 2006. And like I mentioned many times before, I understand and agree with "why" they are doing this.
But it leaves Apple Executives no legs to stand on when mocking Microsoft's upgrade path for pcs bought around this same time frame (2001-2006) to their latest release. What say you about this topic, the topic of the article, the topic of my comments? Not about search features, graphics advancements, and vista capatible complaints.
Let's not have more of the same copy/paste discussions where you avoid the topic at hand and instead take cheap shots at unrelated topics.
See my prevoois post, as people just are not getting it.
They are taking Win 7 to lightly. I.T. will upgrade, it's been years of XP and now finally someting that works out of the box. With Vista I had to wait a year for driver to finally come out, win 7, it just worked, ala, veryMAC like.
Again, I use MAC 90% o the time.
The what the #$@$ was that was how Apple has gone from Pro to all Consumers and failed to release anything for the midrange even though its 10,000 to 1 times larger.
They losing billions in sales.
Do not Take Vista lightly, if the Courier is true, then its game, set, match as this means MSFT's first time computer with 100% control. Win 7 is going to be very large indeed.
˚∆¬˚∆µ≤¬
What... the...hell... was... that?
Someone was wrong on the internets.