10.3: Will we pay full price?
When 10.3 rolls around, do you think we will pay full price? Don't mistaken this thread for bitching--I am completely happy to fork over $130 for Jaguar, and can justify every dime spent on it. If Apple continues with its yearly X release, should we pay a hundred and thirty smackers in August 2003 for all the latest goodies?
Apple's branding model has changed. It can be said that the decimal has moved one place to the right. We used to pay for entire numeric upgrades to the Mac OS, but with X, we now pay for point upgrades, albeit at much slower intervals. One user pointed out that the move from 10 to 11 could take as long as 1 to 9 did.
Jobs said that the underlining technologies that have become available since 10.0 onward has allowed them to progress at amazing speeds. These point releases aren't just improvements, but rather new operating systems, creating gaps like the one from 7 to 8. Paying a yearly cost each time a new operating system release approaches in August really isn't so bad--you are getting the full version, with no lame "upgrade" restrictions, and Microsoft charges almost DOUBLE for this and uses the same annual tactics. Thoughts?
(And yes, I know there's already a plethora of threads out there, but tossing it into the amalgamated madness of "APPL IZ CHARGIN FOR iTOOLS OH GOD I AM LIEK GOING TO DELL.COM RITE NOW!" and "SH!T, DAWG, 10.2 SUXX CUZ MY iBOOK DUNT GOT QUARTS EXTREEM!" would have easily allowed this post to get swallowed up, unnoticed.)
[ 07-18-2002: Message edited by: Jon Rubinstein ]</p>
Apple's branding model has changed. It can be said that the decimal has moved one place to the right. We used to pay for entire numeric upgrades to the Mac OS, but with X, we now pay for point upgrades, albeit at much slower intervals. One user pointed out that the move from 10 to 11 could take as long as 1 to 9 did.
Jobs said that the underlining technologies that have become available since 10.0 onward has allowed them to progress at amazing speeds. These point releases aren't just improvements, but rather new operating systems, creating gaps like the one from 7 to 8. Paying a yearly cost each time a new operating system release approaches in August really isn't so bad--you are getting the full version, with no lame "upgrade" restrictions, and Microsoft charges almost DOUBLE for this and uses the same annual tactics. Thoughts?
(And yes, I know there's already a plethora of threads out there, but tossing it into the amalgamated madness of "APPL IZ CHARGIN FOR iTOOLS OH GOD I AM LIEK GOING TO DELL.COM RITE NOW!" and "SH!T, DAWG, 10.2 SUXX CUZ MY iBOOK DUNT GOT QUARTS EXTREEM!" would have easily allowed this post to get swallowed up, unnoticed.)
[ 07-18-2002: Message edited by: Jon Rubinstein ]</p>
Comments
<strong>(And yes, I know there's already a plethora of threads out there, but tossing it into the amalgamated madness of "APPL IZ CHARGIN FOR iTOOLS OH GOD I AM LIEK GOING TO DELL.COM RITE NOW!" and "SH!T, DAWG, 10.2 SUXX CUZ MY iBOOK DUNT GOT QUARTS EXTREEM!" would have easily allowed this post to get swallowed up, unnoticed.)
[ 07-18-2002: Message edited by: Jon Rubinstein ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
LOL!
If Apple calls the next major upgrade 10.3, then, yes, I believe they will and should charge for it.
[ 07-18-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
<strong>I just wonder, if a "small" .x-upgrade have got 150 new features, how many new features and refinements does a large X.-upgrade have?</strong><hr></blockquote>You've totally missed the point.
It's just a name.
Jaguar *does* have enough features and fixes to be called OS 11, but Apple wants to hold on to the X moniker as long as it can.
A: unknown
next?
<strong>I just wonder, if a "small" .x-upgrade have got 150 new features, how many new features and refinements does a large X.-upgrade have?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well the last large X. upgrade added unix, preemptive multitasking, and protected memory.
<strong>You've totally missed the point.
It's just a name.
Jaguar *does* have enough features and fixes to be called OS 11, but Apple wants to hold on to the X moniker as long as it can.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You've totally missed my point.
I know it's just a name, and that Jaguar does have enough features to add a 1 to the 10, but still, Apple chose not to. Why?
Do they have a new definition of what a X.-upgrade should be, as in, it it has to be truely revolutionary? (Like OS 10.0)
johnsonwax made a little point.
however, I have no belief in that they will try to repeat a 9 - 10-upgrade in many years, but what will the difference be between a X.-upgrade and a .x-upgrade?
If you agree with me, then Apple will probably continue to charge $129 until the recession is over, then maybe go back to $99 full versions and $19 s+h upgrades.
Barto
<strong>Cheeter to Puma and Puma to Jaguar are in the same ball-park IMHO.</strong><hr></blockquote>
well, more or less. remember, when Cheetah was out, everybody bitched and screamed about that the OS was unusable (I paid $129 for an OS I can't use, and I'll not pay $129 more to be able to do that and etc. whinewhine), and very few people switched. they had to release something that would make people use OS 10, and they couln't exactly jump from X to XI. Then they released Puma, and people actually found out that they could use the OS, it was fast enough, had features enough and applications were starting to pop out from everywhere. People are now waiting for the upgrade that will make the OS they use better.
(damned, I forgot what to say, maybe I'll edit later)
<strong>Well this won't be so much of an issue because as OSX get's better people will be less likely to upgrade if their current Macs are running fine. This means paid updates will need more features to entice macians to upgrade. The road get's a little tougher for Apple and sweeter for us!</strong><hr></blockquote>
We are in rough agreement. Part of the reason that 10.2 is so different from 10.1.x is that there was so much to do at the beginning. It seems that 10.2 will be so good that many of us would be happy using it for a couple of years unless some really killer app comes out for 10.3 in which case we'll be happy to cough up the cash.
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>I think you all miss something here. Almost all of you have friends that are teachers, kids that go to school, college friends, etc. Well, they can get OS X.2 for 69 dollars. So if you do that for both X.2 and X.3 then you would have spent about the same as for one 129 one. Think about it.
Lemon Bon Bon</strong><hr></blockquote>
Which is fine by my- I luuuuv saying that I run OS TEN and not 9 or 8 or windoz 2000 or stupid XP.
Starfleet is totally right about the decimal point being shifted over one place. It's clearly a major upgrade. (I still think $129 is too much -- it should be $99. Hopefully that will return when and if Apple is in more secure financial shape.)
The really smart, fun thing about this new naming scheme (if it works for 10.2 sales and Apple keeps it) is that is it
- allows Apple to keep their Ten / "X" branding
- allows for cool names each upgrade
- allows for a lot of play and variation of the X logo
Personally, I'm looking forward to future velvet-cloaked, titantium-sheathed, lightning-crackling Xes to come.
For one thing: it's damn aggressive.
They're released major upgrades every 6-10 months, and that seems to be the plan for the future.
The new 10.x upgrade seems to equal about to a .8 of earlier OS development. More than .5 but just short of 1.0. Go figure.
[ 07-18-2002: Message edited by: Hobbes ]</p>
I except that I will never be satisfied, because Mac systems inspire me to do more. But when I do become satisfied, I won't care...I'll be dead.