ok points taken, i was alwase gonna buy it, but i dont have to like it.
i hope were not paying for pixars fur rendering time in that price, steve should make pixar do more stuff for apple then product box rendering and dowloadable imac shorts. Lets get some of their propriatary software built into osx
I don't think it is reasonable at all. I paid the ed. price for 10.1, but that still means that I basically have to pay twice if I want the upgrade. This, combined with the .Mac charging for email thing is FUBAR.
There is no reason Apple can't have an upgrade option. Granted, it is a big update. But FULL PRICE?
I think a distinction needs to be made...Apple never charges $149.00 for "updates". Updates to the OS are always free (10.1-10.1.5...) Yesterday, if you were to go to the Apple store, and look for an "upgrade" from 10.04 to 10.1 it would have cost you $149.00. That is Apple's price for the full version of the OS. When you pay that for 10.2, you will get a full version of the OS, not just an update CD. Apart from the odd special time, (the first 3 months after 10.1 came out) Apple simply does not make upgrades. It has always been this way, and most likely always will be. the same obnoxious complainers, have been saying the same things on this board since Apple released OS 7.6.2!!!!
I just bought my Mac (my first ever) about 4 weeks ago. Knowing that I'm gonna have to dish out another $130 in a few weeks kind of ticks me off.
I expect this sort of crap from Microsoft, which is one of the reasons I left (lets actually fix some of the bugs and call it an upgrade, then charge for it). I did not expect this from Apple.
I have to admit here that I'm still using OS 9.2.2: my criterion for "going X" was a matur release, which I think OS X 10.2 represents.
I've just pre-ordered Jaguar from the Apple Store for £110 UK, which equates to $172 US. Am I bitching? No. this is what I expect to pay for a full-fledged operating system.
My first Mac (PowerPC 5200, or Performa 5200 in the UK) came with 7.5 (I think!), and I bought OS 8 when it was released. This was steadily upgraded for free until I bought my Cube with OS 9.0.4, which has been steadily upgraded for free.
So, am I just being smug? No: I appreciate the work the early adopters of X have done in taking the OS into the real world and doing real-world work with it. I do believe that you guys should pay less than full-whack for Jaguar.
[quote] but this is a special case with OSX cuz this is the os we were supposed to have in the first place. Even apple admits that the OS was not finnished. <hr></blockquote>
I agree! 10.1 was widely regarded as being that complete OS. That explains why Apple offered it at a special price all the way until Jan/Feb this year. There is really no such thing any more as a "finished" OS. Nobody who is using 10.1 would claim it to be so. We will just need to deal with paying for the upgrades, and getting the updates for free. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
OS 10.1 works quite well. It is better and more finished than any other OS out there. OS 10.2 is not just a bug fix. There are no bugs in 10.1 that are large enough to force you to upgrade. You are upgrading because you want the features in 10.2. That said, It's too expensive.
<strong>OS 10.1 works quite well. It is better and more finished than any other OS out there. OS 10.2 is not just a bug fix. There are no bugs in 10.1 that are large enough to force you to upgrade.
i have a 933 with 512 of ram, and 10.1.3 is still sticky, windows resizing etc. much better than 10 but still not right, thats my only major complaint, and it pisses me off.
Will all of you quit dragging MS into these threads just to try and make current grim situations in the Mac world appear better?!?! My god - GROW UP! And for the record, the WinXP upgrade (which was a complete overhaul - as I mentioned before) was $99 (some got it as low as $79, and $89). If the jaded zealots in this forum are going to constantly diss MS whenever Apple has a fall, at least get your facts straight first. I can not believe how truly clueless some of you are when it comes to Wintel world!
<strong>And for the record, the WinXP upgrade (which was a complete overhaul - as I mentioned before) was $99</strong><hr></blockquote>
Only for the Home edition. You may think it a fair comparison, but the $199 is really more accurate considering the severe disadvantages of the home edition compared to XP Pro.
[quote] Will all of you quit dragging MS into these threads just to try and make current grim situations in the Mac world appear better?!?! My god - GROW UP! And for the record, the WinXP upgrade (which was a complete overhaul - as I mentioned before) was $99 (some got it as low as $79, and $89). If the jaded zealots in this forum are going to constantly diss MS whenever Apple has a fall, at least get your facts straight first. I can not believe how truly clueless some of you are when it comes to Wintel world! <hr></blockquote>
As much as I hate to say it, he is 100% correct. Aside from the whole "Win 98SE" fiasco, MS has NEVER charged a penny for anything short of a FULL system upgrade. That said, to be honest, I think a lot of the problem here is that it is being called 10.2. From what I have seen, the new features and bug fixes could EASILY qualify it as an OS 10.5 release. People would find that much easier to swallow, I suspect... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
Okay, so the Win XP upgrade for the cheesy Home Edition is $99, but the Professional Edition is $199. Bear in mind that is only for an upgrade; you'd still have to have the installation disks from a previous version. Also Win XP isn't a "major overhaul". It's basically Windows 2000 with a few interface modifications (re: OS X rip-offs).
Only for the Home edition. You may think it a fair comparison, but the $199 is really more accurate considering the severe disadvantages of the home edition compared to XP Pro.</strong><hr></blockquote>XP Home and XP Pro are identical OSs. The only difference is that the Pro version has more networking capabilities which the average home user will never need. Severe disadvantages?! Do tell.
[quote] I think a lot of the problem here is that it is being called 10.2. <hr></blockquote>
Someone mentioned this yesterday. They said that NeXt would make major releases w/a single decimal point (10.2) and minor releases w/double decimals (10.1.5). This seems to be the method Apple is using. If this is the case, I expect 10.5 would be almost 2years off.
Well, I'm not happy about about having to pay full price. I think it would have been fair to extend an upgrade offer to all current users.
A friend of mine recently 'switched.' I think it was a month or two ago, so he is not eligible for the up-to-date. Welcome to Macintosh.
[quote]Originally posted by Dennis the Phantom Menace:
<strong><rant>
Okay, so the Win XP upgrade for the cheesy Home Edition is $99, but the Professional Edition is $199. Bear in mind that is only for an upgrade; you'd still have to have the installation disks from a previous version. Also Win XP isn't a "major overhaul". It's basically Windows 2000 with a few interface modifications (re: OS X rip-offs).
</rant></strong><hr></blockquote>I rest my case with this comment. Yes, a complete overhaul going from Win 98/Me to XP - which is exactly what the home user did - so you're wrong. Oh please, the home edition is not cheesy, it's the same exact OS as Pro with the exception of the above. Agreed, Windows 2000 to XP Pro was a less severe upgrade, but it added a ton of multimedia capabilities to an OS that had very little.
Once again, thank you! You saved me from having to post. As long as you don't need to join a domain, and don't care about the "Remote desktop" feature and a few other **MINOR** networking things, it is an identical OS.
Comments
US Edu price: $69
UK edu price: £70!
£70 = $110!
anf then none of the features in Sherlock 3 are going to work in the UK, as usual, and iphoto's prints features probably wont work.....
i hope were not paying for pixars fur rendering time in that price, steve should make pixar do more stuff for apple then product box rendering and dowloadable imac shorts. Lets get some of their propriatary software built into osx
There is no reason Apple can't have an upgrade option. Granted, it is a big update. But FULL PRICE?
[ 07-17-2002: Message edited by: warpd ]</p>
<strong>the same obnoxious complainers, have been saying the same things on this board since Apple released OS 7.6.2!!!!
[ 07-17-2002: Message edited by: warpd ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
but this is a special case with OSX cuz this is the os we were supposed to have in the first place. Even apple admits that the OS was not finnished.
[ 07-17-2002: Message edited by: Ti Fighter ]</p>
I expect this sort of crap from Microsoft, which is one of the reasons I left (lets actually fix some of the bugs and call it an upgrade, then charge for it). I did not expect this from Apple.
I've just pre-ordered Jaguar from the Apple Store for £110 UK, which equates to $172 US. Am I bitching? No. this is what I expect to pay for a full-fledged operating system.
My first Mac (PowerPC 5200, or Performa 5200 in the UK) came with 7.5 (I think!), and I bought OS 8 when it was released. This was steadily upgraded for free until I bought my Cube with OS 9.0.4, which has been steadily upgraded for free.
So, am I just being smug? No: I appreciate the work the early adopters of X have done in taking the OS into the real world and doing real-world work with it. I do believe that you guys should pay less than full-whack for Jaguar.
But not free. Apple isn't a charity.
<strong>I could careless about the 129$ price tag. I get it for 69$ with my education discount.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I can get it for $69 too, but it just pisses me off that we need to pay full price.
I agree! 10.1 was widely regarded as being that complete OS. That explains why Apple offered it at a special price all the way until Jan/Feb this year. There is really no such thing any more as a "finished" OS. Nobody who is using 10.1 would claim it to be so. We will just need to deal with paying for the upgrades, and getting the updates for free. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
[ 07-17-2002: Message edited by: Eupfhoria ]</p>
<strong>OS 10.1 works quite well. It is better and more finished than any other OS out there. OS 10.2 is not just a bug fix. There are no bugs in 10.1 that are large enough to force you to upgrade.
[ 07-17-2002: Message edited by: Eupfhoria ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
i have a 933 with 512 of ram, and 10.1.3 is still sticky, windows resizing etc. much better than 10 but still not right, thats my only major complaint, and it pisses me off.
<strong>And for the record, the WinXP upgrade (which was a complete overhaul - as I mentioned before) was $99</strong><hr></blockquote>
Only for the Home edition. You may think it a fair comparison, but the $199 is really more accurate considering the severe disadvantages of the home edition compared to XP Pro.
As much as I hate to say it, he is 100% correct. Aside from the whole "Win 98SE" fiasco, MS has NEVER charged a penny for anything short of a FULL system upgrade. That said, to be honest, I think a lot of the problem here is that it is being called 10.2. From what I have seen, the new features and bug fixes could EASILY qualify it as an OS 10.5 release. People would find that much easier to swallow, I suspect... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
[ 07-17-2002: Message edited by: warpd ]</p>
Okay, so the Win XP upgrade for the cheesy Home Edition is $99, but the Professional Edition is $199. Bear in mind that is only for an upgrade; you'd still have to have the installation disks from a previous version. Also Win XP isn't a "major overhaul". It's basically Windows 2000 with a few interface modifications (re: OS X rip-offs).
</rant>
<strong>
Only for the Home edition. You may think it a fair comparison, but the $199 is really more accurate considering the severe disadvantages of the home edition compared to XP Pro.</strong><hr></blockquote>XP Home and XP Pro are identical OSs. The only difference is that the Pro version has more networking capabilities which the average home user will never need. Severe disadvantages?! Do tell.
Someone mentioned this yesterday. They said that NeXt would make major releases w/a single decimal point (10.2) and minor releases w/double decimals (10.1.5). This seems to be the method Apple is using. If this is the case, I expect 10.5 would be almost 2years off.
Well, I'm not happy about about having to pay full price. I think it would have been fair to extend an upgrade offer to all current users.
A friend of mine recently 'switched.' I think it was a month or two ago, so he is not eligible for the up-to-date. Welcome to Macintosh.
<strong><rant>
Okay, so the Win XP upgrade for the cheesy Home Edition is $99, but the Professional Edition is $199. Bear in mind that is only for an upgrade; you'd still have to have the installation disks from a previous version. Also Win XP isn't a "major overhaul". It's basically Windows 2000 with a few interface modifications (re: OS X rip-offs).
</rant></strong><hr></blockquote>I rest my case with this comment. Yes, a complete overhaul going from Win 98/Me to XP - which is exactly what the home user did - so you're wrong. Oh please, the home edition is not cheesy, it's the same exact OS as Pro with the exception of the above. Agreed, Windows 2000 to XP Pro was a less severe upgrade, but it added a ton of multimedia capabilities to an OS that had very little.