A full refund for Vista would have been more appropriate!
Also, it is IMHO a topic for this forum. I, like many others, run Parallels and VMWare to test work on other platforms and I shelled out for a real Vista and run Betas of 7 as well as XP Pro. I am not a Widoze troll and I appreciate some low level coverage of such things.
I was making a qualitative statement a well. As in, as a Mac user, I wouldn't even take it for free.
But from a purely dollars-and-cents perspective, I'd agree, it's a fair price for an operating system.
I type this on a Mac and I find OS X to be far more intuitive - I was amazed when I switched - but I try to take balanced view. I work in enterprise computing and OS X anything doesn't get a look in. I use AIX, Solaris, Windows and eek z/OS every day.
To be truly explosive, Apple need to get their foot in the enterprise door. A lot of people spend 40 hours a week working Windows and when they go to buy a computer for most people it's a natural choice to buy Windows. Not a bad thing in itself but there are probably better choices out there as you yourself experience every day. It has been said the Apple are happy with their 10% market share but I'm not so sure.
Trouble is I don't think Apple have the infrastructure at the moment to support an enterprise push. They couldn't give a flying fuck about Java, for a start. This kind of thing is the nuts and bolts of enterprise. Objective C/Cocoa/etc is, frankly, a distraction in the enterprise space.
I've also given up being inflammatory here. There's no point. No matter how good a point you can make, there's will always be an emotive response which clouds the original point being made.
I type this on a Mac and I find OS X to be far more intuitive - I was amazed when I switched - but I try to take balanced view. I work in enterprise computing and OS X anything doesn't get a look in. I use AIX, Solaris, Windows and eek z/OS every day.
To be truly explosive, Apple need to get their foot in the enterprise door. A lot of people spend 40 hours a week working Windows and when they go to buy a computer for most people it's a natural choice to buy Windows. Not a bad thing in itself but there are probably better choices out there as you yourself experience every day. It has been said the Apple are happy with their 10% market share but I'm not so sure.
Trouble is I don't think Apple have the infrastructure at the moment to support an enterprise push. They couldn't give a flying fuck about Java, for a start. This kind of thing is the nuts and bolts of enterprise. Objective C/Cocoa/etc is, frankly, a distraction in the enterprise space.
I've also given up being inflammatory here. There's no point. No matter how good a point you can make, there's will always be an emotive response which clouds the original point being made.
It really doesn't seem that Apple is interested in that sort of enterprise push with OS X, no matter how good their Xserves are.
What they're looking at is getting the iPhone into that sector, with THAT version of OS X. And it looks very, very promising.
I've also given up being inflammatory here. There's no point. No matter how good a point you can make, there's will always be an emotive response which clouds the original point being made.
If you said snow was white and coal was black you'd get emotional replies. Some people get their jollies being argumentative. (Here we go, Eskimos see 256 shades of white ... Eskimos?? You mean Inuit! Coal.. Lignite or Anthracite? What about blind Inuit you insensitive bastard! I paint my coal white!)
Just thought I'd add my $.02 cents on this one. People are lambasting Microsoft for their "exorbitant" pricing (really not, if you pre-order) in regards to Windows 7. But really, if you stop to consider the opposite, what will the true cost of acquiring Snow Leopard be (or the true cost of any version of OS X, for that matter)? Unlike Windows 7, which can be installed on both PCs and Macs, Snow Leopard will only run on Macs. So, for any non-Mac user, the real cost of "upgrading" per say is much, much more because you must buy Apple's hardware (and the costs for OS X are woven into the pricing), and that typically runs over $1000 and way more if you want Apple's top tier configurations. I find it funny how people here always like to point out (in Apple's favor) how you can't adequately compare the value between a Microsoft notebook and an Apple notebook because doing so is like comparing apples to oranges (software company vs. software + hardware company). Well, the same goes for their respective OS's. You can't adequately compare the cost of "upgrading" between the two. In the end, the prices Microsoft has laid out for Windows 7 are pretty good. I'll be upgrading from XP, will probably even pre-order it for a mere $50, and then not install it until the initial quirks are ironed out in the fall time.
I don?t see this as a gamer changer. Mac OS X has always been lower priced than retail copies of the higher-end versions of Windows. I don?t think most of that makes a difference to majority of Windows users who typically buy a new PC with an OEM version of Windows pre-installed. I think the Mac adoption rate will be about the same and MS will still be making huge profits for years to come.
Came across this interesting article the other day.
Though it is mostly accusation, it is true that Microsoft's cash reserve has been steadily going down. If there is anything the recent financial crisis has told us it's that you can't believe a big company can't go down overnight.
It is worth every penny. I have 5 Macs and one Dell. Can't wait to upgrade the Dell to Win7. I also run boot camp on one of my MacBooks and have Win7 RC on that now. I have to say, coming from a Mac guy, it is worth every penny. It IS NOT Vista SP3 as some say. It is stable as h3ll and I highly recommend it to all my Windows friends.....right after they tell me they won't switch to Mac.
For all the other Mac people out there just bashing MS and saying Windows is crap...get a life. Windows and MacOS have come so far in the past 5 years. They both are great.
LOLZ. Because I haven't heard that one a thousand times.
I did a comparison between the prices of upgrades between OS X an XP->Vista->7
If you had bought a PC or a Mac and somehow managed to hold on to it since 2001, then these are the numbers.
Each dot release, plus the initial version of OS X was rolled out at 129.99. If we include Snow Leopard at $29, then if you remained current, you would have paid $809.
XP Pro Retail was $299, Vista Ultimate Upgrade was $219, and 7 Upgrade will also be $219. That makes $737.
In that wildly hypothetical situation, you paid $70 (10%) more owning OS X than you did the current flavour of Windows.
To make it more realistic, say you upgraded your hardware once. That would knock out one purchase of the operating system directly. OS X - $679, Windows - $519. The difference is marked.
If you upgraded twice which is more likely, then I would suspect another $130 knocked off OS X, but unlikely that you could save yourself another upgrade under Windows. OS X $549, Windows $519.
The point to be made is that Microsoft in a relative sense isn't really gouging their customers. It looks pretty even to me.
I was hoping someone (less lazy than me) will come up with such comparison. Thanks!
I'd just add that MS is getting all their income from software, while Apple is using nice software to sell good looking but underpowered, overpriced hardware with almost obligatory issues for first releases of every new hardware generation... and that hardware is where their major profit is.
And still, their software is more expensive.
There are things I don't like with MS, but pricing is not really among them.
But you are forgetting the time you wasted minding/installing the bloated Windows/DOS software, waiting and tolerating the MS customer service agent who was bathing in the Ganges during your calls, and the triple clicking you had to do to resize a window. That all adds up to several hundred thousand dollars!
And how much does it add for people with ongoing display problems on MacBook Pro, freezing iMacs and all other "it just works - not!" issues..?
My congratulations, by the way - you have managed to squeeze fair amount of pure, uncontrollable hatred, nice dose of racism, hefty serving of nonsense and utter lack of basic math knowledge in one very short post. Keep on.
If you said snow was white and coal was black you'd get emotional replies. Some people get their jollies being argumentative. (Here we go, Eskimos see 256 shades of white ... Eskimos?? You mean Inuit! Coal.. Lignite or Anthracite? What about blind Inuit you insensitive bastard! I paint my coal white!)
LOL! This made me laugh
Quote:
Originally Posted by OskiO
It is worth every penny. I have 5 Macs and one Dell. Can't wait to upgrade the Dell to Win7. I also run boot camp on one of my MacBooks and have Win7 RC on that now. I have to say, coming from a Mac guy, it is worth every penny. It IS NOT Vista SP3 as some say. It is stable as h3ll and I highly recommend it to all my Windows friends.....right after they tell me they won't switch to Mac.
For all the other Mac people out there just bashing MS and saying Windows is crap...get a life. Windows and MacOS have come so far in the past 5 years. They both are great.
The man speaks truth.
Here's what I see in this thread over and over: People who have no idea what they're talking about, repeating the misinformation fed to them by other people who have no idea what they're talking about.
Everyone on these forums always bashes Vista, but I have YET to meet a person who actually has issues with Vista. Vista is a decent operating system. I've never had a SINGLE CRASH with vista.
Windows 7 is NOT a Vista service pack. It's an entirely new operating system deserving of a new name. The fact is, people here are simply running out of ammunition for bashing MS in these types of discussions, and they'll repeat moronic statements about Vista over and over, no matter what is told to them.
I read through everything, and there hasn't been a single statement made here that would have me second guess buying Windows 7 even in the slightest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133
And how much does it add for people with ongoing display problems on MacBook Pro, freezing iMacs and all other "it just works - not!" issues..?
My congratulations, by the way - you have managed to squeeze fair amount of pure, uncontrollable hatred, nice dose of racism, hefty serving of nonsense and utter lack of basic math knowledge in one very short post. Keep on.
If you ask me, it seems pretty obvious you've come here to troll...
Quote:
Funny... I've done nothing of the sort. Just stating that I think Appleinsider should stick to Apple. And that the people who like Apple should be more respectful of their competition. (And vice versa. I don't want to see an MS site go on about Apple's shortcomings, and I don't want to see their community bash Apple either. Sadly, it happens on both fields)
The trolls are the ones who get arrogant about their beliefs in the companies they support. Kinda like Politics too... and those are always so filthy.
Actually people are more pragmatic in politics. This hatred feels more comparable to extreme religious blindness...
I was hoping someone (less lazy than me) will come up with such comparison. Thanks!
I'd just add that MS is getting all their income from software, while Apple is using nice software to sell good looking but underpowered, overpriced hardware with almost obligatory issues for first releases of every new hardware generation... and that hardware is where their major profit is.
And still, their software is more expensive.
There are things I don't like with MS, but pricing is not really among them.
Underpowered?
Underpowered to do what, exactly?
Seems to run everything I trow at it pretty fast. Easily meets the requirements of Final Cut Studio, for example. And Macs are often used in very video/sound intensive work.
Here's what I see in this thread over and over: People who have no idea what they're talking about, repeating the misinformation fed to them by other people who have no idea what they're talking about.
Everyone on these forums always bashes Vista, but I have YET to meet a person who actually has issues with Vista. Vista is a decent operating system. I've never had a SINGLE CRASH with vista.
Windows 7 is NOT a Vista service pack. It's an entirely new operating system deserving of a new name. The fact is, people here are simply running out of ammunition for bashing MS in these types of discussions, and they'll repeat moronic statements about Vista over and over, no matter what is told to them.
I read through everything, and there hasn't been a single statement made here that would have me second guess buying Windows 7 even in the slightest.
LMFAO! You guys are spot on today!
If I liked Vista, I'd continue to use it.
We're only exposed to Vista and other flavours of Windows on a daily basis. Who do you think fixes Windows for friends and family? Mac users.
And people here ARE ENTIRELY JUSTIFIED in their skepticism of Windows 7 or for that matter, ANY Microsoft product announcement, given their absolutely abysmal track record over the past 8 years. Which includes XP. If that was MS' best of all-time, I shudder to think what their worst might be.
If you look at what Apple has been cranking out since 2001, you'd think MS was standing still.
All the Windows beta testers praised Vista to the heavens before its release - it's as if they took their brains out of their heads. And the whole Longhorn botch-job fell flat on its faced when it hit the shelves.
Except when you consider what you get for $500, the value of Vista really doesn't add up. Paying out cash for frustration. Not good value. Paying out cash for Tiger, Leopard, worth it I would say.
Vista has great value for me. More stable, more secure than XP. Better looking, better (if not much different) interface. And going to 64-bit Vista finally let me have 8GB of RAM without sacrificing any of 32-bit applications I was using before upgrade.
Vista was frustrating in it's early stage (more due to 3rd party support, but still), and also for over-optimistic people trying to run it comfortably on 1GB (or less) Celeron notebooks and desktops. Everyone else - and, coincidently, everyone I know - is more than happy with Vista.
Seriously, if the whole "underpowered" argument revolves around running games, then that's hardly an argument. Games are not, nor have ever been (since OS X) a selling-point for Macs. They're not meant for gaming.
And frankly this whole "underpowered" issue turns up only on these Mac forums, in one small corner of the internet, and it doesn't even represent the forum majority.
Snow Leopard upgrade/"maintenance release" is priced well for a improvement of a otherwise perfectly working Leopard.
The problem is Windows 7 upgrade is 10x the price of the Snow Leopard upgrade and it fixes something that shouldn't have been broken in the first place.
I know this is the wrong site to bitch, but Microsoft should be giving Windows 7 away for free for Vista users as way not to have to support two operating systems at once.
Just integrate it with Microsoft update and send it out.
Done.
Of course if Microsoft had a brain they would just license OS X and go back to making Office.
Fortunately for MSFT shareholders, you aren't in charge of pricing. I'm fairly certain Microsoft will continue its dominant market position despite charging for this upgrade.
Additionally, there are a number of significant improvements. One of the coolest is the multi-touch support. I guarantee it is a little buggy at first, but I think that alone will pull many customers in.
Fortunately for MSFT shareholders, you aren't in charge of pricing. I'm fairly certain Microsoft will continue its dominant market position despite charging for this upgrade.
Additionally, there are a number of significant improvements. One of the coolest is the multi-touch support. I guarantee it is a little buggy at first, but I think that alone will pull many customers in.
Windows 7 is warmed-over Vista.
And there would be nothing wrong with that, except for the fact that it's trying to fix on what should have been fine in the first place, after 5+ years of development.
Windows users have essentially been getting the shaft since 2001.
Seriously, if the whole "underpowered" argument revolves around running games, then that's hardly an argument. Games are not, nor have ever been (since OS X) a selling-point for Macs. They're not meant for gaming.
something important? SOMETHING IMPORTANT? DUDE! I can't believe you just said that to me. You and I... We wouldn't make it as friends IRL ;P
Ok, but honestly, the plain honest truth is whatever you can do with a Mac, I can do with a PC (albeit not as smoothly in some cases.) Actually, I may be wrong in that statement. What I probably should say is, anything I would NEED to do with a Mac, I can do on a PC. Add to the fact that I love gaming (left4dead anyone? PM me) and I'm a system builder, and you can see why I haven't gone the way of the mac just yet (and I'm not bashing osx.)
With Vista, I never really saw a need to upgrade. I use it at work, I have no qualms with it whatsoever, but when it came down to it, I always tell people if they have XP, save your money. If you're looking for a PC and the one you want only comes with Vista, don't fret, it's not bad. Windows 7, on the other hand, is something I'll jump on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Windows 7 is warmed-over Vista.
And there would be nothing wrong with that, except for the fact that it's trying to improve on what hould have been fine in the first place, after 5+ years of development.
It's statements like this that are completely ignorant and exactly what I spoke to above. Shame on you.
I will say, the problems I saw people had with Vista mainly stemmed from third party drivers. Microsoft put beta copies of vista out there long enough that these vendors could write popper drivers, but a lot of them were lazy about it. You'd be surprised at companies that took their time and F'd up. Creative? The sound card company... They were a main cause of system crashes because their drivers were just complete crap.
It's a shame really. Vista isn't a bad operating system, in fact I feel confident in going as far as saying it's a GOOD operating system, but little things at it's launch gave it a bad rep, and companies like Apple pushed that as far as they could. People who never used Vista before were saying they'd give it 0 out of 10 lol.
Seems to run everything I trow at it pretty fast. Easily meets the requirements of Final Cut Studio, for example. And Macs are often used in very video/sound intensive work.
Underpowered compared to current hardware being offered in general. Quad Cores are mainstream for some time already, yet there still isn't any quad core Mac beside Mac Pro.
I have no doubts they are running fast enough - heck, my almost ancient AMD 64 X2 in my old box is still running most tasks in perfectly acceptable manners - but they would run significantly faster on i7 or at least C2Q.
Comments
Also, it is IMHO a topic for this forum. I, like many others, run Parallels and VMWare to test work on other platforms and I shelled out for a real Vista and run Betas of 7 as well as XP Pro. I am not a Widoze troll and I appreciate some low level coverage of such things.
Alright, fair enough.
I was making a qualitative statement a well. As in, as a Mac user, I wouldn't even take it for free.
But from a purely dollars-and-cents perspective, I'd agree, it's a fair price for an operating system.
I type this on a Mac and I find OS X to be far more intuitive - I was amazed when I switched - but I try to take balanced view. I work in enterprise computing and OS X anything doesn't get a look in. I use AIX, Solaris, Windows and eek z/OS every day.
To be truly explosive, Apple need to get their foot in the enterprise door. A lot of people spend 40 hours a week working Windows and when they go to buy a computer for most people it's a natural choice to buy Windows. Not a bad thing in itself but there are probably better choices out there as you yourself experience every day. It has been said the Apple are happy with their 10% market share but I'm not so sure.
Trouble is I don't think Apple have the infrastructure at the moment to support an enterprise push. They couldn't give a flying fuck about Java, for a start. This kind of thing is the nuts and bolts of enterprise. Objective C/Cocoa/etc is, frankly, a distraction in the enterprise space.
I've also given up being inflammatory here. There's no point. No matter how good a point you can make, there's will always be an emotive response which clouds the original point being made.
I type this on a Mac and I find OS X to be far more intuitive - I was amazed when I switched - but I try to take balanced view. I work in enterprise computing and OS X anything doesn't get a look in. I use AIX, Solaris, Windows and eek z/OS every day.
To be truly explosive, Apple need to get their foot in the enterprise door. A lot of people spend 40 hours a week working Windows and when they go to buy a computer for most people it's a natural choice to buy Windows. Not a bad thing in itself but there are probably better choices out there as you yourself experience every day. It has been said the Apple are happy with their 10% market share but I'm not so sure.
Trouble is I don't think Apple have the infrastructure at the moment to support an enterprise push. They couldn't give a flying fuck about Java, for a start. This kind of thing is the nuts and bolts of enterprise. Objective C/Cocoa/etc is, frankly, a distraction in the enterprise space.
I've also given up being inflammatory here. There's no point. No matter how good a point you can make, there's will always be an emotive response which clouds the original point being made.
It really doesn't seem that Apple is interested in that sort of enterprise push with OS X, no matter how good their Xserves are.
What they're looking at is getting the iPhone into that sector, with THAT version of OS X. And it looks very, very promising.
I've also given up being inflammatory here. There's no point. No matter how good a point you can make, there's will always be an emotive response which clouds the original point being made.
If you said snow was white and coal was black you'd get emotional replies.
I don?t see this as a gamer changer. Mac OS X has always been lower priced than retail copies of the higher-end versions of Windows. I don?t think most of that makes a difference to majority of Windows users who typically buy a new PC with an OEM version of Windows pre-installed. I think the Mac adoption rate will be about the same and MS will still be making huge profits for years to come.
Came across this interesting article the other day.
http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/26/...009-ugly-part/
Though it is mostly accusation, it is true that Microsoft's cash reserve has been steadily going down. If there is anything the recent financial crisis has told us it's that you can't believe a big company can't go down overnight.
For all the other Mac people out there just bashing MS and saying Windows is crap...get a life. Windows and MacOS have come so far in the past 5 years. They both are great.
LOLZ. Because I haven't heard that one a thousand times.
I did a comparison between the prices of upgrades between OS X an XP->Vista->7
If you had bought a PC or a Mac and somehow managed to hold on to it since 2001, then these are the numbers.
Each dot release, plus the initial version of OS X was rolled out at 129.99. If we include Snow Leopard at $29, then if you remained current, you would have paid $809.
XP Pro Retail was $299, Vista Ultimate Upgrade was $219, and 7 Upgrade will also be $219. That makes $737.
In that wildly hypothetical situation, you paid $70 (10%) more owning OS X than you did the current flavour of Windows.
To make it more realistic, say you upgraded your hardware once. That would knock out one purchase of the operating system directly. OS X - $679, Windows - $519. The difference is marked.
If you upgraded twice which is more likely, then I would suspect another $130 knocked off OS X, but unlikely that you could save yourself another upgrade under Windows. OS X $549, Windows $519.
The point to be made is that Microsoft in a relative sense isn't really gouging their customers. It looks pretty even to me.
I was hoping someone (less lazy than me) will come up with such comparison. Thanks!
I'd just add that MS is getting all their income from software, while Apple is using nice software to sell good looking but underpowered, overpriced hardware with almost obligatory issues for first releases of every new hardware generation... and that hardware is where their major profit is.
And still, their software is more expensive.
There are things I don't like with MS, but pricing is not really among them.
But you are forgetting the time you wasted minding/installing the bloated Windows/DOS software, waiting and tolerating the MS customer service agent who was bathing in the Ganges during your calls, and the triple clicking you had to do to resize a window. That all adds up to several hundred thousand dollars!
And how much does it add for people with ongoing display problems on MacBook Pro, freezing iMacs and all other "it just works - not!" issues..?
My congratulations, by the way - you have managed to squeeze fair amount of pure, uncontrollable hatred, nice dose of racism, hefty serving of nonsense and utter lack of basic math knowledge in one very short post. Keep on.
If you said snow was white and coal was black you'd get emotional replies.
LOL! This made me laugh
It is worth every penny. I have 5 Macs and one Dell. Can't wait to upgrade the Dell to Win7. I also run boot camp on one of my MacBooks and have Win7 RC on that now. I have to say, coming from a Mac guy, it is worth every penny. It IS NOT Vista SP3 as some say. It is stable as h3ll and I highly recommend it to all my Windows friends.....right after they tell me they won't switch to Mac.
For all the other Mac people out there just bashing MS and saying Windows is crap...get a life. Windows and MacOS have come so far in the past 5 years. They both are great.
The man speaks truth.
Here's what I see in this thread over and over: People who have no idea what they're talking about, repeating the misinformation fed to them by other people who have no idea what they're talking about.
Everyone on these forums always bashes Vista, but I have YET to meet a person who actually has issues with Vista. Vista is a decent operating system. I've never had a SINGLE CRASH with vista.
Windows 7 is NOT a Vista service pack. It's an entirely new operating system deserving of a new name. The fact is, people here are simply running out of ammunition for bashing MS in these types of discussions, and they'll repeat moronic statements about Vista over and over, no matter what is told to them.
I read through everything, and there hasn't been a single statement made here that would have me second guess buying Windows 7 even in the slightest.
And how much does it add for people with ongoing display problems on MacBook Pro, freezing iMacs and all other "it just works - not!" issues..?
My congratulations, by the way - you have managed to squeeze fair amount of pure, uncontrollable hatred, nice dose of racism, hefty serving of nonsense and utter lack of basic math knowledge in one very short post. Keep on.
LMFAO! You guys are spot on today!
If you ask me, it seems pretty obvious you've come here to troll...
Funny... I've done nothing of the sort. Just stating that I think Appleinsider should stick to Apple. And that the people who like Apple should be more respectful of their competition. (And vice versa. I don't want to see an MS site go on about Apple's shortcomings, and I don't want to see their community bash Apple either. Sadly, it happens on both fields)
The trolls are the ones who get arrogant about their beliefs in the companies they support. Kinda like Politics too... and those are always so filthy.
Actually people are more pragmatic in politics. This hatred feels more comparable to extreme religious blindness...
I was hoping someone (less lazy than me) will come up with such comparison. Thanks!
I'd just add that MS is getting all their income from software, while Apple is using nice software to sell good looking but underpowered, overpriced hardware with almost obligatory issues for first releases of every new hardware generation... and that hardware is where their major profit is.
And still, their software is more expensive.
There are things I don't like with MS, but pricing is not really among them.
Underpowered?
Underpowered to do what, exactly?
Seems to run everything I trow at it pretty fast. Easily meets the requirements of Final Cut Studio, for example. And Macs are often used in very video/sound intensive work.
Underpowered?
Underpowered to do what, exactly?
GAMES!
pew pew pew
LOL! This made me laugh
The man speaks truth.
Here's what I see in this thread over and over: People who have no idea what they're talking about, repeating the misinformation fed to them by other people who have no idea what they're talking about.
Everyone on these forums always bashes Vista, but I have YET to meet a person who actually has issues with Vista. Vista is a decent operating system. I've never had a SINGLE CRASH with vista.
Windows 7 is NOT a Vista service pack. It's an entirely new operating system deserving of a new name. The fact is, people here are simply running out of ammunition for bashing MS in these types of discussions, and they'll repeat moronic statements about Vista over and over, no matter what is told to them.
I read through everything, and there hasn't been a single statement made here that would have me second guess buying Windows 7 even in the slightest.
LMFAO! You guys are spot on today!
If I liked Vista, I'd continue to use it.
We're only exposed to Vista and other flavours of Windows on a daily basis. Who do you think fixes Windows for friends and family? Mac users.
And people here ARE ENTIRELY JUSTIFIED in their skepticism of Windows 7 or for that matter, ANY Microsoft product announcement, given their absolutely abysmal track record over the past 8 years. Which includes XP. If that was MS' best of all-time, I shudder to think what their worst might be.
If you look at what Apple has been cranking out since 2001, you'd think MS was standing still.
All the Windows beta testers praised Vista to the heavens before its release - it's as if they took their brains out of their heads. And the whole Longhorn botch-job fell flat on its faced when it hit the shelves.
Except when you consider what you get for $500, the value of Vista really doesn't add up. Paying out cash for frustration. Not good value. Paying out cash for Tiger, Leopard, worth it I would say.
Vista has great value for me. More stable, more secure than XP. Better looking, better (if not much different) interface. And going to 64-bit Vista finally let me have 8GB of RAM without sacrificing any of 32-bit applications I was using before upgrade.
Vista was frustrating in it's early stage (more due to 3rd party support, but still), and also for over-optimistic people trying to run it comfortably on 1GB (or less) Celeron notebooks and desktops. Everyone else - and, coincidently, everyone I know - is more than happy with Vista.
GAMES!
pew pew pew
Oh.
I thought it was something important.
Seriously, if the whole "underpowered" argument revolves around running games, then that's hardly an argument. Games are not, nor have ever been (since OS X) a selling-point for Macs. They're not meant for gaming.
And frankly this whole "underpowered" issue turns up only on these Mac forums, in one small corner of the internet, and it doesn't even represent the forum majority.
Snow Leopard upgrade/"maintenance release" is priced well for a improvement of a otherwise perfectly working Leopard.
The problem is Windows 7 upgrade is 10x the price of the Snow Leopard upgrade and it fixes something that shouldn't have been broken in the first place.
I know this is the wrong site to bitch, but Microsoft should be giving Windows 7 away for free for Vista users as way not to have to support two operating systems at once.
Just integrate it with Microsoft update and send it out.
Done.
Of course if Microsoft had a brain they would just license OS X and go back to making Office.
Fortunately for MSFT shareholders, you aren't in charge of pricing. I'm fairly certain Microsoft will continue its dominant market position despite charging for this upgrade.
Additionally, there are a number of significant improvements. One of the coolest is the multi-touch support. I guarantee it is a little buggy at first, but I think that alone will pull many customers in.
Fortunately for MSFT shareholders, you aren't in charge of pricing. I'm fairly certain Microsoft will continue its dominant market position despite charging for this upgrade.
Additionally, there are a number of significant improvements. One of the coolest is the multi-touch support. I guarantee it is a little buggy at first, but I think that alone will pull many customers in.
Windows 7 is warmed-over Vista.
And there would be nothing wrong with that, except for the fact that it's trying to fix on what should have been fine in the first place, after 5+ years of development.
Windows users have essentially been getting the shaft since 2001.
Oh.
I thought it was something important.
Seriously, if the whole "underpowered" argument revolves around running games, then that's hardly an argument. Games are not, nor have ever been (since OS X) a selling-point for Macs. They're not meant for gaming.
something important? SOMETHING IMPORTANT? DUDE! I can't believe you just said that to me. You and I... We wouldn't make it as friends IRL ;P
Ok, but honestly, the plain honest truth is whatever you can do with a Mac, I can do with a PC (albeit not as smoothly in some cases.) Actually, I may be wrong in that statement. What I probably should say is, anything I would NEED to do with a Mac, I can do on a PC. Add to the fact that I love gaming (left4dead anyone? PM me) and I'm a system builder, and you can see why I haven't gone the way of the mac just yet (and I'm not bashing osx.)
With Vista, I never really saw a need to upgrade. I use it at work, I have no qualms with it whatsoever, but when it came down to it, I always tell people if they have XP, save your money. If you're looking for a PC and the one you want only comes with Vista, don't fret, it's not bad. Windows 7, on the other hand, is something I'll jump on.
Windows 7 is warmed-over Vista.
And there would be nothing wrong with that, except for the fact that it's trying to improve on what hould have been fine in the first place, after 5+ years of development.
It's statements like this that are completely ignorant and exactly what I spoke to above. Shame on you.
I will say, the problems I saw people had with Vista mainly stemmed from third party drivers. Microsoft put beta copies of vista out there long enough that these vendors could write popper drivers, but a lot of them were lazy about it. You'd be surprised at companies that took their time and F'd up. Creative? The sound card company... They were a main cause of system crashes because their drivers were just complete crap.
It's a shame really. Vista isn't a bad operating system, in fact I feel confident in going as far as saying it's a GOOD operating system, but little things at it's launch gave it a bad rep, and companies like Apple pushed that as far as they could. People who never used Vista before were saying they'd give it 0 out of 10 lol.
Underpowered?
Underpowered to do what, exactly?
Seems to run everything I trow at it pretty fast. Easily meets the requirements of Final Cut Studio, for example. And Macs are often used in very video/sound intensive work.
Underpowered compared to current hardware being offered in general. Quad Cores are mainstream for some time already, yet there still isn't any quad core Mac beside Mac Pro.
I have no doubts they are running fast enough - heck, my almost ancient AMD 64 X2 in my old box is still running most tasks in perfectly acceptable manners - but they would run significantly faster on i7 or at least C2Q.