To call him an a-hole suggest he's getting to you. The price of Snow Leopard is certainly a pale imitation of the price of Win 7. I'll just assume the article is joke, the guy is an MS stock holder, or it's John C. Dvorak writing under a pseudonym.
Don't listen to people most of whom has no software engineering experience or know-how. Go out and get yourself a new copy of Snow Leopard. And for $29? That's less than 1hr phone call to tech support from any PC manufacturer. Most of these reporters do not know the difference between CPU and GPU.
Read the AP thingy. quite elaborate, but shilling for the competition, without any context whatsoever. You are reading all about SL when suddenly,
Wow! Amazing! Incredible! MS is da best! And why you ask? Because SL improvements are "under the hood", and worse!, SL won't run in PowerPCs, as if they cared! Most of the improvements of SL could only be noticeable in Intel chips, so why bother with PPCs at all? Why, because then you can make lines like these:
Ah! Check mate Apple! Wegottchyou on da run!
I wouldn't mind a lower price of macs at all
So wait, Windows 7 is just a prettier version of Vista and they didn't do much of anything under the hood??!?!?! (sarcasm
In all honesty - if you asked me which I would pay more for I'd pay for under the hood stuff before just getting something pretty. I think Apple has in the past done a good job at giving both camps enough of a reason to upgrade and they knew this one wouldn't get the eye candy crowd so they priced is super-low. MS, however, is apparently OK with charging full price for something that's only going to satisfy the "oo, it's pretty" camp.
MS, however, is apparently OK with charging full price for something that's only going to satisfy the "oo, it's pretty" camp.
That's not exactly fair or accurate, Windows 7 is easier to use and faster than Vista. Let's be fair. It's not worth the price though, it should have been a special price considering Vista. They should have offered Vista users a $29 upgrade price.
As a long-time Mac and OS X user I applaud Apple for Snow Leopard, finally a product aimed to solve all those little annoying issues such as the Keychain.
I wouldn't go to the Wall Street Journal for a review on the new Mercedes E550. I would go to Autoblog or Car and Driver for that.
I just don't understand why people are getting all hot and bothered about what some newspapers are saying about Snow Leopard, no matter how prominent they are. If I want Mac-related info, I go to Apple Insider, TUAW or Mac Rumors.
The problem is that while people like us will do that and the websites we typically read give much fairer comparisons of the operating systems, the average person is going to be reading from a source such as the AP or Wall Street Journal and if they happen to be considering a Mac, then the Associated Press just told them it was kinda dumb. It sometimes makes me cringe how many people get their tech news from CNET (which has a hard-on for Microsoft more than is healthy), where you can find reviews of Psystar clones praising how they're sticking it to Apple and them complaining that the $29 fee for Snow Leopard is too much and blog posts from Don Reisinger about yet another made up reason he has come to hate Apple, yet thinks they should license out their software and become Microsoft.
Sadly, there are more stupid people in the world than intelligent ones and it's just fatiguing seeing media outlets use such uninformed reviewers to preach nonsense to the already uninformed.
It's not fair all that was upgraded was the UI. Win 7 is faster than Vista too. Let's be fair. It's not worth the price though, it should have been a special price considering Vista.
They did have special pricing a few months ago. I bought Windows 7 Home Premium upgrade for my wife's laptop for $50 from Amazon. Most PC guys took advantage of that promotion and are awaiting the October release date.
To be fair, those reviews are targeting the general consumer who likely doesn't give a *&^% about underhood crap -- just look at them, they're all from newspapers. Their readers want to see immediate benefits (i.e. eye candy, new features, etc.).
If you want a technical review, wait for Apple Insider and others.
Are you trying to say that, compared to "eye candies", dramatic detail improvements, speed improvements and more spaces are not immediate benefits users appreciate in day-to-day life? On top of that, what is your definition of new features?
They did have special pricing a few months ago. I bought Windows 7 Home Premium upgrade for my wife's laptop for $50 from Amazon. Most PC guys took advantage of that promotion and are awaiting the October release date.
Had. It shouldn't have been a deal. It should be the actual price.
In fact, there are four options (this is from Windows 7, but Vista is similar) for installing Windows Updates:
Install updates automatically
Download updates but let me choose when to install them
Check for updates but let me choose whether to download and install them
Never check for updates
Sounds like user error to me
Well, it's always user error, of course. But no dialog has ever popped up giving me these options, so I appear to be using the default settings. And the way it works on my installation is: if I'm playing a game that takes over the screen, there's no user interaction asked or required. The installer simply goes about its business and reboots me, once again with no intervention. If I can see the desktop, there's a subtle dialog that appears in the lower right corner, which appears and then goes away on its own, giving me the opportunity to postpone.
This is actually very like Microsoft's design principles. There are many options, but you have to KNOW where they are, because they lack the well-designed discoverability that characterizes Apple's software.
That's not exactly fair or accurate, Windows 7 is easier to use and faster than Vista. Let's be fair. It's not worth the price though, it should have been a special price considering Vista. They should have offered Vista users a $29 upgrade price.
But how did they make it easier and faster? (Honest question) From everything I've seen and heard it's faster because they took superfluous crap out and made the GUI less intrustive (hence the easier to use part). If that's not right please let me know but, like I said, from everything I've read 7 is really just what Vista was supposed to be rather than something worthy of a whole new name and pricing structure.
To call him an a-hole suggest he's getting to you. The price of Snow Leopard is certainly a pale imitation of the price of Win 7. I'll just assume the article is joke, the guy is an MS stock holder, or it's John C. Dvorak writing under a pseudonym.
If I recall it correctly, Microsoft did not announce the pricing of Windows 7 before WWDC so how could the pricing of Snow Leopard be an imitation of the pricing of Windows 7?
Comments
Here's an A-hole critic who really takes the cake! http://www.pcworld.com/article/17078...windows_7.html
To call him an a-hole suggest he's getting to you. The price of Snow Leopard is certainly a pale imitation of the price of Win 7. I'll just assume the article is joke, the guy is an MS stock holder, or it's John C. Dvorak writing under a pseudonym.
If you want a technical review, wait for Apple Insider and others.
On that topic: How come AI does not have a review yet? Didn't you guys get an advance copy?!
Is every name from the big cat family now used up?
Lion, Cougar?
Go out and get it!
Read the AP thingy. quite elaborate, but shilling for the competition, without any context whatsoever. You are reading all about SL when suddenly,
Wow! Amazing! Incredible! MS is da best! And why you ask? Because SL improvements are "under the hood", and worse!, SL won't run in PowerPCs, as if they cared! Most of the improvements of SL could only be noticeable in Intel chips, so why bother with PPCs at all? Why, because then you can make lines like these:
Ah! Check mate Apple! Wegottchyou on da run!
I wouldn't mind a lower price of macs at all
So wait, Windows 7 is just a prettier version of Vista and they didn't do much of anything under the hood??!?!?! (sarcasm
In all honesty - if you asked me which I would pay more for I'd pay for under the hood stuff before just getting something pretty. I think Apple has in the past done a good job at giving both camps enough of a reason to upgrade and they knew this one wouldn't get the eye candy crowd so they priced is super-low. MS, however, is apparently OK with charging full price for something that's only going to satisfy the "oo, it's pretty" camp.
Lion, Cougar?
Cougar is just going to be an old OS (10.1) repackaged in a shiny (sexy) box that begs for you to install it!
Does "snow leopard" still come with the built in 'burst into flames now' mode that every other apple product comes with?
No, they decided to leave it out in the end. Was touch and go though.
Cougar is just going to be an old OS (10.1) repackaged in a shiny (sexy) box that begs for you to install it!
Does the box come with a tramp stamp?
MS, however, is apparently OK with charging full price for something that's only going to satisfy the "oo, it's pretty" camp.
That's not exactly fair or accurate, Windows 7 is easier to use and faster than Vista. Let's be fair. It's not worth the price though, it should have been a special price considering Vista. They should have offered Vista users a $29 upgrade price.
What do you expect? It's from PC Magazine. Do you really expect that Apple Insider would sing the praises of Windows 7 if they were reviewing it?
If AI were to do a review of Windows 7 it would HAVE to be done by Prince McLean. I'd expect no less
My point is, know your source.
I wouldn't go to the Wall Street Journal for a review on the new Mercedes E550. I would go to Autoblog or Car and Driver for that.
I just don't understand why people are getting all hot and bothered about what some newspapers are saying about Snow Leopard, no matter how prominent they are. If I want Mac-related info, I go to Apple Insider, TUAW or Mac Rumors.
The problem is that while people like us will do that and the websites we typically read give much fairer comparisons of the operating systems, the average person is going to be reading from a source such as the AP or Wall Street Journal and if they happen to be considering a Mac, then the Associated Press just told them it was kinda dumb. It sometimes makes me cringe how many people get their tech news from CNET (which has a hard-on for Microsoft more than is healthy), where you can find reviews of Psystar clones praising how they're sticking it to Apple and them complaining that the $29 fee for Snow Leopard is too much and blog posts from Don Reisinger about yet another made up reason he has come to hate Apple, yet thinks they should license out their software and become Microsoft.
Sadly, there are more stupid people in the world than intelligent ones and it's just fatiguing seeing media outlets use such uninformed reviewers to preach nonsense to the already uninformed.
It's not fair all that was upgraded was the UI. Win 7 is faster than Vista too. Let's be fair. It's not worth the price though, it should have been a special price considering Vista.
They did have special pricing a few months ago. I bought Windows 7 Home Premium upgrade for my wife's laptop for $50 from Amazon. Most PC guys took advantage of that promotion and are awaiting the October release date.
To be fair, those reviews are targeting the general consumer who likely doesn't give a *&^% about underhood crap -- just look at them, they're all from newspapers. Their readers want to see immediate benefits (i.e. eye candy, new features, etc.).
If you want a technical review, wait for Apple Insider and others.
Are you trying to say that, compared to "eye candies", dramatic detail improvements, speed improvements and more spaces are not immediate benefits users appreciate in day-to-day life? On top of that, what is your definition of new features?
They did have special pricing a few months ago. I bought Windows 7 Home Premium upgrade for my wife's laptop for $50 from Amazon. Most PC guys took advantage of that promotion and are awaiting the October release date.
Had. It shouldn't have been a deal. It should be the actual price.
In fact, there are four options (this is from Windows 7, but Vista is similar) for installing Windows Updates:
Install updates automatically
Download updates but let me choose when to install them
Check for updates but let me choose whether to download and install them
Never check for updates
Sounds like user error to me
Well, it's always user error, of course. But no dialog has ever popped up giving me these options, so I appear to be using the default settings. And the way it works on my installation is: if I'm playing a game that takes over the screen, there's no user interaction asked or required. The installer simply goes about its business and reboots me, once again with no intervention. If I can see the desktop, there's a subtle dialog that appears in the lower right corner, which appears and then goes away on its own, giving me the opportunity to postpone.
This is actually very like Microsoft's design principles. There are many options, but you have to KNOW where they are, because they lack the well-designed discoverability that characterizes Apple's software.
That's not exactly fair or accurate, Windows 7 is easier to use and faster than Vista. Let's be fair. It's not worth the price though, it should have been a special price considering Vista. They should have offered Vista users a $29 upgrade price.
But how did they make it easier and faster? (Honest question) From everything I've seen and heard it's faster because they took superfluous crap out and made the GUI less intrustive (hence the easier to use part). If that's not right please let me know but, like I said, from everything I've read 7 is really just what Vista was supposed to be rather than something worthy of a whole new name and pricing structure.
To call him an a-hole suggest he's getting to you. The price of Snow Leopard is certainly a pale imitation of the price of Win 7. I'll just assume the article is joke, the guy is an MS stock holder, or it's John C. Dvorak writing under a pseudonym.
If I recall it correctly, Microsoft did not announce the pricing of Windows 7 before WWDC so how could the pricing of Snow Leopard be an imitation of the pricing of Windows 7?