Why will Jag be free? ...adoption rates

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
<a href="http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0207/15.osxmarketing.php"; target="_blank">MacCentral Article</a>



For months, we have been back and forth over the question of Jag's cost. Now this article (orig in WallStreet Journal) is saying the 2 major developers are not happy w/OSX's adoption rate.



Whether or not they are blowing smoke is another story, but the article points to one of the major reasons 10.2 should be free (or $20 for CD)...adoption.



OSX defines everything Apple has been and will be doing. Until it is accepted as THE MacOS, Apple will be living a double life and developers will be hesitant to cut all ties w/the installed base of Classic users. In short, an OSX user is worth more to Apple than the revenue an upgrade might bring in.



Jag will be free because Apple needs to convert the masses to OSX.



BTW, that M$ quip was probably a reaction to the 'Switch' campaign.



[ 07-15-2002: Message edited by: Keda ]</p>
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 54
    I would really LIKE it to be free. I chocked up $25 for the 10.1 upgrade and will feel royally ripped off if 10.2 does the same to me. Then again, unlike M$...Apples x.x.x upgrades actually add features and fix bugs, not just patch hundreds of small security holes and install the latest spyware...
  • Reply 2 of 54
    defiantdefiant Posts: 4,876member
    [quote]Originally posted by Keda:

    <strong>... BTW, that M$ quip was probably a reaction to the 'Switch' campaign.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    huh ?
  • Reply 3 of 54
    It wont be free but should be. 10.2 is closer to what the public beta should have been, years late. If Apple has any respect for it's customers, which it doesn't, they wont charge for 10.2 to make up for the crappy OS X so far.
  • Reply 4 of 54
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
  • Reply 5 of 54
    Adobe?
  • Reply 6 of 54
    hotboxdhotboxd Posts: 125member
    Adobe Mac sales are up 31% from last year.



    MS and Corel aren't selling because their products suck and are too expensive. It's certainly not Apple's fault.



    [ 07-15-2002: Message edited by: hotboxd ]</p>
  • Reply 7 of 54
    keyboardf12keyboardf12 Posts: 1,379member
    [quote] MS and Corel aren't selling because their products suck and are too expensive. It's certainly not Apple's fault. <hr></blockquote>



    well said. i mean correl of all developers. geeze.



    PS&gt; word is still a little slow mr. browne.
  • Reply 8 of 54
    kedakeda Posts: 722member
    For the sake of argument, we can forget that this article was ever written or that any developers are complaining about the adoption rates.



    Instead, ask yourselves this: Which does Apple need more money or users?



    I say users, because they will bring money. Despite the fact that past upgrades were in the $85 range, I don't think it would be wise for Apple to follow precedent here. Apple needs all Mac users to run OSX full-time. Only then will the stop being in a transition period.



    Jag is the update that will allow people to use X full time. I'm pretty much there, but I am the exception. I have been using this thing since PB, so the quirks that exist now are nothing compared to how it was a year ago. But I know a few people who ran out and bought OSX, but then decided it wasn't up to par w/9 and never finished the switch. These are the people that Apple needs.



    According to the article, Apple claims that 10% of its users have made the leap to OSX. Wow, thats pretty low. I do believe OSX is reaching 'critical mass,' but there is a long way to go.



    Right now Apple needs 'switchers'...from Windoze and OS9.
  • Reply 9 of 54
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by scott_h_phd:

    <strong>It wont be free but should be. 10.2 is closer to what the public beta should have been, years late. If Apple has any respect for it's customers, which it doesn't, they wont charge for 10.2 to make up for the crappy OS X so far.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Shut up, Scott.
  • Reply 10 of 54
    scott f.scott f. Posts: 276member
    Sure... let's make everything free...



    No one FORCED you to upgrade to an "infant" operating system... no one twisted your arm to be an early adopter... for crying out loud... when will some of you stop your pervassive belly-aching.



    Apple doesn't *OWE* you ANYTHING!!!



    Apple needs to generate revenue just like EVERY company does. Development on Jaguar utilized (and still IS utilizing) major development resources and that COSTS them money.



    10.1 was FREE... I walked right in and picked it up and walked out.



    All updates have been free...



    Now you're gonna cry because you want this MAJOR release and improvement to be free ALSO...? Why...?



    WHY should it be free...? Just because the OS isn't what YOU want it to be yet...? Then you should have waited until it's where you want it and THEN purchase dit... wait for 10.3 or 10.4... do whatever you want... but please... stop acting as if you are ENTITLED to a free upgrade.



  • Reply 11 of 54
    kedakeda Posts: 722member
    [quote] No one FORCED you to upgrade to an "infant" operating system... no one twisted your arm to be an early adopter... for crying out loud... when will some of you stop your pervassive belly-aching.



    Apple doesn't *OWE* you ANYTHING!!!

    <hr></blockquote>



    Im not sure who all this aggression is directed at, but I hope its not me. But, since I am the one who mentioned using OSX since PB, I guess it is.



    Go back and read. I'm not advocating a free 10.2 because I have a dependency on Apple. I think this would be the best strategic move for them to make right now. Apple needs users...period.



    Even though scott_h_phd is everyones favorite villain, he does have a point. Apple released an OS in its infancy (ok, maybe pre-school). Many early adopters found that they could not use OSX in a pro environment and went back to 9. Although most major apps are out for OSX, there was never a flood(more like a steady trickle), so many people are still waiting to move to OSX.



    I am responsible for all the Macs in my division. The more 10.2 costs, the less likely it is that we will be upgrading soon. I am running OSX on my Mac, but I would NEVER install it on all of my machines now. It just isn't ready. We have people who are long-time mac users, but not very technical. They want to get work done, not deal w/a quirky system (why they use Macs after all). I can only assume that I am not the only one in this position.



    Apple needs to take a play from the 'street pusher'...get 'em hooked, then charged. The thing is, many aren't hooked.
  • Reply 12 of 54
    scott f.scott f. Posts: 276member
    [quote]Originally posted by Keda:

    <strong>



    Im not sure who all this aggression is directed at, but I hope its not me. But, since I am the one who mentioned using OSX since PB, I guess it is.



    Go back and read. I'm not advocating a free 10.2 because I have a dependency on Apple. I think this would be the best strategic move for them to make right now. Apple needs users...period.



    Even though scott_h_phd is everyones favorite villain, he does have a point. Apple released an OS in its infancy (ok, maybe pre-school). Many early adopters found that they could not use OSX in a pro environment and went back to 9. Although most major apps are out for OSX, there was never a flood(more like a steady trickle), so many people are still waiting to move to OSX.



    I am responsible for all the Macs in my division. The more 10.2 costs, the less likely it is that we will be upgrading soon. I am running OSX on my Mac, but I would NEVER install it on all of my machines now. It just isn't ready. We have people who are long-time mac users, but not very technical. They want to get work done, not deal w/a quirky system (why they use Macs after all). I can only assume that I am not the only one in this position.



    Apple needs to take a play from the 'street pusher'...get 'em hooked, then charged. The thing is, many aren't hooked.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    FYI - Tone and inflection get lost in ASCII text. There was no aggression intended... just frustration.



    I can understand your position (and NO... the original reply was not intended for you... or ANYONE in particular) but it still comes down to business. If you cannot afford to upgrade all your machines, then that is a shame... but it should not be Apple's responsibility to make sure it is economically feasible for YOU or any one to upgrade... they need to make their decision based on THEIR goals and objectives... not ours. (although they probably DO weigh in overall customer needs).



    My reply (even though I used a LOT of "caps" to emphasize) was not out of anger... just frustration of hearing (reading) over and over in this and other threads how much *some* people think Apple *owes* them something for purchasing their wares.



    That's life. I have been an unfortunate victim of circumstance ever since I got INTO computers... but I don't find total fault in the manufacturers. I was one of the many thousands of people who bought a IIvx just ONE WEEK before they introduced a much faster and much cheaper Centris model... In my computer history... I can list dozens of purchases that became instantaneously obsolete.



    That's the way it goes. (to no one person in specific): "Stop complaining and get over it."



    - I mean that in a loving and nurturing way...

  • Reply 13 of 54
    elderlocelderloc Posts: 146member
    Idea OS 10.2 is free full install to a people with macs. All you pay is the shipping, this will help people convert hell it's free.



    Flood the market with the software like MS'es IE and they will get used to using it.
  • Reply 14 of 54
    scott f.scott f. Posts: 276member
    [quote]Originally posted by Elderloc:

    <strong>Idea OS 10.2 is free full install to a people with macs. All you pay is the shipping, this will help people convert hell it's free.



    Flood the market with the software like MS'es IE and they will get used to using it.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Free to all Mac owners...? As opposed to what...? Non-Mac users can't use OSX.. so essentially, we're back to "Give it away for free".



    In your scenario... who WOULD pay...?
  • Reply 15 of 54
    evoevo Posts: 198member
    As far as I know, Apple has NEVER charged for an x.2 update, they only charge for x.0 and x.5 updates. Why do you guys think Apple will charge for 10.2? It's just another +.1 update, which Apple has never charged for. Did Mac OS 9.2 cost money? Nooooo... If Apple WAS going to charge for this update, they would call it Mac OS 10.5. I expect it to be free.
  • Reply 16 of 54
    kedakeda Posts: 722member
    I know this subject has been discussed b4...I understand how it can be frustrating to hear the same thing over and over. No Problem.



    Because of the article, I was trying to approach this issue from a different angle. I have no contact w/the developer community so I dont know what the general opinion is. But, if there is a perception that Apple is dragging its feet w/regards to OSX adoption, then this could be an answer.



    Who would pay costs 10.2 upgrades? Apple.



    Who would benefit? Apple.



    What is the benefit? W/in a very small amount of time(&lt;1month), all or most of the current users will be running 10.2. If they charge, the upgrade cycle could stretch out over several months for the same amount of users...momentum lost.



    Apple claims to be on schedule, but I think they are a bit behind. Remember the clock? Well there's SJ saying 'I don't feel tardy.'



    Just for clarity...If Apple charges, I will NEVER USE A MAC AGAIN!!. Get the f' out, of course I will. The truth is, I will upgrade to Jag regardless (which is why Apple could charge) and I will continue to use Macs. But I think Apple should forego the short term profit in order to expedite the adoption of Jag and build momentum for OSX.
  • Reply 17 of 54
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    The thing we're trying to tell is whether Apple is following its "Classic" version numbering or the NeXT-type version numbering. Major versions in NeXT/OpenStep were .x releases, like .1 amd .2, but the Classic Apple version numberings is that only .5 and .0 releases are the major ones. So how does Apple regard 10.2? I think judging by the pre-releases that 10.2 is a major upgrade. Of course, unless it makes the bed and serves afternoon tea, some will consider it only a minor upgrade.



    I can see every reason why Apple would be smart to give out 10.2 for "free." But when your hardware isn't selling, upgrades are another potential source of critical revenue. They have to figure out how to get a critical mass to adopt OS X, and how to get more money rolling in at the same time.
  • Reply 18 of 54
    scott f.scott f. Posts: 276member
    [quote]Originally posted by eVo:

    <strong>As far as I know, Apple has NEVER charged for an x.2 update, they only charge for x.0 and x.5 updates. Why do you guys think Apple will charge for 10.2? It's just another +.1 update, which Apple has never charged for. Did Mac OS 9.2 cost money? Nooooo... If Apple WAS going to charge for this update, they would call it Mac OS 10.5. I expect it to be free.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    As far as I can tell... Apple isn't calling it 10.2... *WE* are. Apple simply refers to it as "Jaguar" on their website. I have NO IDEA what number the actual release is gong to be... but with all the new features and improvements, it far exceeds a "point release".
  • Reply 19 of 54
    mcqmcq Posts: 1,543member
    I can certainly see Apple charging a nominal fee for Jaguar, say $20-$30. However, the only thing that could prompt them to make it free is the "Switchers". Maybe it's just me, but if I were a switcher, I'd be irritated to have just bought a system within the last month or two, and then hear Apple charging for a "point" upgrade. My guess is that most switchers are consumers, and after paying for a system, they have to spend more money just to upgrade? Just a thought. Yeah, I think they should also make it free to help speed up adoption rates. Will they? Don't know, but I won't mind a fee as long as it's under $30.
  • Reply 20 of 54
    scott f.scott f. Posts: 276member
    [quote]Originally posted by MCQ:

    <strong>I can certainly see Apple charging a nominal fee for Jaguar, say $20-$30. However, the only thing that could prompt them to make it free is the "Switchers". Maybe it's just me, but if I were a switcher, I'd be irritated to have just bought a system within the last month or two, and then hear Apple charging for a "point" upgrade. My guess is that most switchers are consumers, and after paying for a system, they have to spend more money just to upgrade? Just a thought. Yeah, I think they should also make it free to help speed up adoption rates. Will they? Don't know, but I won't mind a fee as long as it's under $30.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    But don't you think Apple has enough brains to scale it's promotion like MOST software companies do...?



    Purchased within 90-Days: FREE!

    Purchased within 6-Months: $29

    Over 6-Months or full install: $99



    (just pulling figures out my a$$ on that one... but you get the idea.
Sign In or Register to comment.