Don't like the pricing on Jagwire? Do something about it!

whyatt thrashwhyatt thrash
Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
Tell Apple how you feel! It's not reasonable for current OS X users to pay full price for an upgrade that finally makes the system usable. If Apple can't figure that out for themselves, then we have to tell them...



Remember, enough angry customers can make a difference (think Adobe InDesign 1.0-1.5).



<a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/"; target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/</a>;



[ 07-19-2002: Message edited by: Whyatt Thrash ]</p>

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    stevesteve Posts: 523member
    Sigh...



    10.1.5 isn't usable? Please. Jaguar adds more features in a single update than we've ever seen before in the Mac OS.



    [ 07-19-2002: Message edited by: Jon Rubinstein ]</p>
  • Reply 2 of 12
    4fx4fx Posts: 258member
    I have found that most tasks in X do alright comparatively to OS9. But I still have to boot in 9 to play Warcraft III because it plays soooo much faster, even on a brand new high end iMac G4.



    I think thats what he means by saying "usable"...
  • Reply 3 of 12
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    [quote]Originally posted by 4fx:

    <strong>I have found that most tasks in X do alright comparatively to OS9. But I still have to boot in 9 to play Warcraft III because it plays soooo much faster, even on a brand new high end iMac G4.



    I think thats what he means by saying "usable"...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Then he doesn't understand the meaning of the word usable, may I suggest 'optimal'.
  • Reply 4 of 12
    4fx4fx Posts: 258member
    [quote]Originally posted by serrano:

    <strong>



    Then he doesn't understand the meaning of the word usable, may I suggest 'optimal'.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    When the game skips and slows down considerably I would call that realistically unusable. Yes, it can be used, but not very well at all. OS9 isnt even "optimal", most games including WC3, play faster under windows(compared with same speed processors)
  • Reply 5 of 12
    mount_my_floppymount_my_floppy Posts: 913member
    Play better under windows with the same speed processor or relative processor speed. I find it hard to believe a pc with sdram and a 100MHz bus and an 800MHz processor would play warcraft any better then the mac is os 9. I have a dual 533 and i find no problem with warcraft what so ever. How much ram do you have in your imac
  • Reply 6 of 12
    shillforsteveshillforsteve Posts: 16member
    [quote]Originally posted by Whyatt Thrash:

    Tell Apple how you feel! It's not reasonable for current OS X users to pay full price for an upgrade that finally makes the system usable. If Apple can't figure that out for themselves, then we have to tell them.. <hr></blockquote>



    Darn. I thought from the subject you had a good link to a juarez site where I could pick up WinXP.



    [ 07-22-2002: Message edited by: shillforsteve ]</p>
  • Reply 7 of 12
    shillforsteveshillforsteve Posts: 16member
    [quote]



    Then he doesn't understand the meaning of the word usable, may I suggest 'optimal'.<hr></blockquote>





    Actually since "usable" was the original word used I'd hesitate to put another word, "optimal," which has a different meaning, into someone else's mouth.



    System 1.0/Finder 1.0 (they had different version numbers in those days) worked rather well with MacWrite 1.0 and MacPaint 1.0. Of course there's always System 6.08 (they simplified the nomenclature) which many considered both more usable and optimal when compared to System 7.01 which was a real dog.



    I believe the second post, however, points out that 10.1 and updates thereafter which have been eminently "usable" for most of us, can continue to be if we so choose, and I would hope that if we elect to purchase 10.2 (I have) it won't be the final story on OSX.



    I hope that is both usable and optimal on the day it ships but I also hope that Apple is working on 10.2.1.
  • Reply 8 of 12
    pbg4 dudepbg4 dude Posts: 1,611member
    [quote]Originally posted by Mount_my_floppy:

    <strong>Play better under windows with the same speed processor or relative processor speed. I find it hard to believe a pc with sdram and a 100MHz bus and an 800MHz processor would play warcraft any better then the mac is os 9. I have a dual 533 and i find no problem with warcraft what so ever. How much ram do you have in your imac</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Don't forget the iMac's CPU has to decode and produce sound while on a PC that is offloaded to the soundcard. This is an important factor when comparing framerates and such.



    So, yes, I would expect a PC with the same specs as an iMac will play the game faster / better than the iMac.
  • Reply 9 of 12
    noahjnoahj Posts: 4,503member
    Don't like thr pirce, at least you can get it cheaper than $129 from Amazon.com thorugh a $50 mail in rebate. $79 is not too bad.
  • Reply 10 of 12
    whyatt thrashwhyatt thrash Posts: 421member
    [quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:

    <strong>Don't like thr pirce, at least you can get it cheaper than $129 from Amazon.com thorugh a $50 mail in rebate. $79 is not too bad.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Read the coupon. Only U.S residents are legible for the rebate. As if that's not all, the pricing on Jaguar where I live ain't 129$, but closer to 150$.



    Sure, it might be worth it for a significant speed-increase of the system (that's why I'd be buying it), but should I be buying Steve Jobs a DVD-player for removing debug code?
  • Reply 11 of 12
    alberightbackalberightback Posts: 7member
    up here in "chilly" Canada, it'll cost almost $230 bones after tax so it ain't the sweetest deal when you consider that we early adopters shelled out the bling bling for the beta and then 10.0 Final.



    The Solution? simple...git yo friends together and all chip in for ONE steekin copy and burn that mofo till the burna cahn't burn no mo!!!



    uh huh uh huh! call it piracy...call it whatchu want...us po folk up here call it 'stickin it to tha man!!"



    (pass me some weed yo...)
  • Reply 12 of 12
    quaremquarem Posts: 254member
    I don't understand the big deal that they are charging for 10.2. Anyone that bought 10.0 did so knowing what they where getting, or should have at least. I got what I paid for when I bought 10.0, got a free update to 10.1, which is quite usable even on a iBook. So to say that Apple owes you 10.2 for free, when YOU dedcided to buy an OS you think is unusable is ludicrous.



    If you ever made an application to sell I think your veiws on piracy would be radically different. Pirateing is STEALING and it hurts the developers and the consumer base when developers stop producing as much software for the Mac OS because sales suck. If it's not worth it for you don't buy it!
Sign In or Register to comment.